The HRM Models

There are a good number of models that have been postulated by various
scholars to describe the HRM concept.

However, as shall be seen these various models either fall under the soft or the
hard approach of HRM.
The Harvard Model

The Harvard Model was postulated by Beer et al (1984) at Harvard
University.

The authors of the model also coined it the map of HRM territory.

The Harvard model acknowledges the existence of multiple stakeholders
within the organization.

These multiple stakeholders include shareholders various groups of
employees, government and the community at large.

The recognition of the legitimacy of these multiple stakeholders renders this
model a neo - pluralist model.

This model emphasizes more on the human/soft side of HRM.

Basically this is because this model emphasizes more on the fact that
employees like any other shareholder are equally important in influencing
organizational outcomes.

In fact the interest of the various groups must be fused and factored in the
creation of HRM strategies and ultimately the creation of business strategies.
Stakeholder
Interests
HR Strategy
i) Employee influence
ii) Human Resources flows
iii) Reward system
iv) Work systems
Situational Interests
i) Workforce type
ii) Business strategy
iii) Management philosophy
iv) Labour market
HR Outcomes
i) Commitment
ii) Congruence
iii) Competence
iv) Costs
Long-term
consequences
i) Organizational
effectiveness
ii) Individual wellbeing
iii) Societal wellbeing
Source : Beer et al (1984 : 16)

A critical analysis of the model shows that it is deeply rooted in the human
relations tradition.

Employee influence is recognised through people motivation and the
development of an organization culture based on mutual trust and team work.

The factors above must be factored into the HR strategy which is premised on
employee influences, HR flows, reward system etc.

The outcomes from such a set up are soft in nature as they include high
congruence, commitment, competencies etc.

The achievement of the crucial HR outcomes has got an impact on long term
consequences, increased productivity, organizational effectiveness which will
in turn influence shareholder interests and situational factors hence making it
a cycle.

It is thus important to note that the Harvard model is premised on the belief
that it is the organization’s human resources that give competitive advantage
through treating them as assets and not costs.
The Michigan/Matching Model

The Michigan model was propounded by Fombrun Tichy and Devanna (1984)
at the Michigan Business School.

They also named this model a matching model of HRM.

Precisely, the matching aspect of this model demonstrates that the model is
inclined towards the harder side of HRM.

This is because the matching model emphaizes more on “tight fit” between the
HR strategy and the buisness strategy.

NB It demands that available human resources must be matched with jobs in
the organization.

The HR strategy must be highly calculative in terms of the quantity of the
human resources required to achieve the objectives enshrined in the business
strategy.

Business strategy takes the central stage in this model hence human resources
are taken like any other resource which must be fully utilised together with the
other resoruces to achieve organizational objectives.

(Evans and Lorange, 1989) argue that the Michigan model is based on the
“product market logic” which demands that to gain high profits labour
must be obtained cheaply, used sparingly, developed and exploited fully.
The Matching Model of HRM
Political Forces
Economic
Forces
Cultural Forces
Business
Strategy
Organizational
Structure
HR
Strategy
Devanna (1984)

The point of departure in the Michigan Model is the pre-eminence and predominance of a business strategy, which must strictly be achieved by the
available resources regardless of whether, they are able to do so or not.

In fact the business strategy must be achieved through minimum labour costs
enhanced by structural re-organization, Performance Related Pay and staff
reduction.
The Guest Model
The Guest model was propounded by David Guest in 1987.

This model is a fusion of aspects that resemble both a hard and a soft
approach of HRM.


1.
Guest proposes 4 crucial components that underpin organizational
effectiveness.
These 4 crucial components are: Strategic Integration

This is the ability of organizations to maintain a fit between the HRM strategy
and the business strategy. In other words, there must be congruence between
business strategy and the HR strategy for the organization to achieve its goals.

Strategic integration shows the harder side of the Guest Model.

This is precisely because human resources are treated in a similar manner like
any other resource with the prime goal of achieving business objectives.

Thus there are implications of labour exploitation.
2. Flexibility

Flexibility is basically concerned with the ability of the organization and its
people to adapt to the changing business and work environment and to the
capacity to manage innovation.

Flexibility can be numeric, functional, pay, distancing.

Flexibility carries both connotations of hard and soft HRM.

Hard HRM for example can be seen through numeric flexibility where
employees are employed only when their production is required and when
their labour is not required they are discharged.

This can be exemplified through seasoned work.

Flexibility can also show the soft side of HRM through the same example
given above.

Flexibility in this case is not only concerned with the need to achieve business
objectives but also the need to treat its employees as fairly as possible.
3. High Commitment

This is concerned with the need to have both behavioural commitment, which
is the ability to go an extra mile, and attitudinal commitment, which is
reflected through a strong identification with the organization.
4. Quality
Quality is based on the assumption that provision of high quality goods and services
results from a quality way of managing people.
Organizational Effectiveness
Strategic Integration
High Commitment
Quality
Flexibility
Tutorial
Using David Guest (1987)’s Model and John Storey (1989)’s model of HRM: Critically
demonstrate your understanding of Hard and Soft HRM.
Model by John Sorey (1989)
John Storey emerged to be one of the strongest proponents of HRM as a completely
different discipline from the preceding disciplines embraced by the TPM approach.

He believed that HRM is a holistic approach with a set of interrelated policies
with an ideological and philosophical underpinning.

Because of these ideological and philosophical aspects, HRM does not only
stand distinctively outstanding from TPM but also emerges to be a much more
humane approach to employment management.

The model by John Storey is based on four aspects.
1.
Beliefs and Assumptions

The model is premised on the notion that HRM is based on a set of beliefs and
assumptions, which makes it a distinctive approach.

Fundamentally it is believed that it is the human resource among all the other
factors of production, which gives the difference.

Successful organizations are distinguished from the rest by the capabilities
and commitment of the people who work for them.

It is therefore imperative that the human resource ought to be treated with
great care and nurtured as valuable assets.

Finally it is believed that the employment relationship is based on
commitment and not compliance.
2.
Strategic Qualities
HRM is further distinguished by the fact that it is strategic in nature and
therefore requires the attention of senior management and top executives.

The above-mentioned assumption stems from the 1st belief that the human
resource is the most important source of competitive advantage.

HR Policies are too important to be a product of prescribed best professional
practice only. In fact they must be sensitive to the demands of the competitive
business environment, business strategy and the HR strategy.
3.
Role of Line Managers

Line managers have a very important role to play in people management.

It is clear from the HRM philosophy that people management is too important
to be left to operational personnel specialists.

Fundamentally, the importance of line managers is seen through the strong
link that exists between them and their respective subordinates or employees.
4.
Key Levers
1. There is a strong belief that culture management is important than managing
Procedures and systems.

This is primarily important because culture management brings consensus on
overall organizational values, beliefs and assumptions.

Culture management is also believed to be essential in flexibility and
commitment.
ii)
Integrated action on all HRM policies
iii)
Restructuring and job redesign to allow developed responsibility and
empowerment.