HRM At Work: Student notes
Chapter 6: Staffing and Resourcing the Organisation
Chapter overview
This chapter introduces and discusses themes that are central to HRM. It offers an overview
of human resource planning, as well as a more detailed description of, and analysis and
advice on, the recruitment and selection process. The chapter reviews the recruitment and
selection cycle in its entirety, from resource planning through to the selection decision. It
emphasises the notion of cost-effectiveness as well as the links between resourcing and other
aspects of HRM.
The chapter begins with discussion of human resource planning, and the related topics of
labour turnover and employee retention. After examining the view that planning is less
relevant in a more chaotic competitive context, the chapter introduces four reasons why
human resource planning is still important: it enables linkages between business and HR
plans, it allows for better control of staffing costs, it enables organisations to create the right
skills mix, and it allows for profiling of employees to meet equal opportunities criteria. The
chapter then discusses three issues relating to hard HRP: forecasting future demand,
forecasting internal supply, and forecasting external supply. Forecasting future demand can
be done through objective or subjective measures. Forecasting internal supply involves
discussion of how to calculate labour turnover, and two measures are described (the base rate
of turnover, or wastage, and a more sensitive measure – the stability rate). Forecasting
external supply involves discussion of the local labour market and national labour market.
There then follows a discussion of job and role analysis, defined as ‘the process of collecting,
analysing and setting out information about the content of jobs in order to provide the bases
for a job description and data for recruitment, training, job evaluation and performance
management’ (Armstrong, 1999). This leads to an examination of job descriptions, person
specifications and competency frameworks, and the chapter then moves on to analyse
recruitment methods. These are classified in four broad categories: internal recruitment
(generally use of the internal labour market), closed searches (eg word-of-mouth recruitment,
use of external contacts), the responsive approach (interviewing casual callers or former
applicants, or placing notices outside factories or offices when there are vacancies), and open
searches (advertising, use of the Internet). The discussion of selection methods does not cover
the whole range of methods, choosing rather to analyse important criteria (practicability,
sensitivity, reliability, validity) and focusing on two of the most commonly-used methods
(different forms of interviews; selection testing – psychometric tests, personality tests), as
well as introducing the idea that there are different ways of looking at the selection process –
these four paradigms are: social exchange, scientific rationality, socialisation, and socially
constructive reality.
Chapter objectives
After studying this chapter, you should be able to:
 undertake the main aspects of the recruitment and selection process
 implement, operate and evaluate cost-effective processes for recruiting and retaining the
right calibre of staff in your own organisation
 contribute to the design, implementation and evaluation of selection decisions
And you should understand and be able to explain:
 the links between human resource planning, recruitment and selection and other aspects
of HRM
 the nature of the recruitment process and its principal components
 the major advantages and disadvantages of the most important selection methods, and
their contribution to organisational effectiveness.
Chapter outline
HR planning, labour turnover and employee retention
This section charts the decline of HR planning but proposes that it remains critically
important, particularly given ongoing skills shortages and the rapidity of change, and an
analysis of methods is presented.
Job and role analysis
The importance of accurate job and role analysis is examined in this section, together with
analysis of methods in terms of sophistication, cost, convenience and acceptability.
Job descriptions, person specifications and competency frameworks
Each of these tools for recruitment and selection is evaluated.
Recruitment methods
The different methods used by employers to recruit are compared and contrasted. Closed
searches, word of mouth, links to schools, etc, recruitment agencies, speculative applications,
advertisements, JobCentre Plus are all means that are analysed.
Choosing the best selection methods
There is a wide range of methods used for selection. Here, the most common tools are
evaluated in terms of accuracy in particular circumstances. These include interviews
(traditional, structured, competency-based and telephone), tests (ability, literacy/numeracy,
skills, online), questionnaires, and assessment centres.
Differing paradigms of selection
There is a range of competing definitions and paradigms in relation to selection, and three of
them are considered in detail: social exchange, scientific rationality, and socially constructed
reality.
Conclusions
Selection is all too often given too much focus in relation to the other processes involved in
staffing and resourcing. However, all of the processes involved are important, and should be
given equal weight. For example, without effective recruitment practices there would be a
limited range of applicants.
Feedback on mini-questions
Do you believe HR planning is worthwhile in your organisation (or one with which you
are familiar)?
What do you see as the organisational benefits of spending time making plans about
future employment projections?
A shorthand way of thinking about human resource planning is that it is about getting the
right people in the right place at the right time. What makes HR planning different from
manpower planning or staffing is that the definition of ‘the right people’ incorporates the
commonsense view that they should be appropriately trained, experienced and qualified, but
goes further in saying that they should also be properly committed. So planning becomes
more than an efficiency measure – ie getting the right numbers – it also involves considering
effectiveness. If you subscribe to the idea that it is legitimate to think of people as resources,
then planning how to deploy those resources is the most basic and the most important
element of managing people. There are four main sets of reasons as to why it is worthwhile to
carry out HR planning: it encourages links between HR plans and business strategy; it allows
control over staffing costs; it enables employers to get the most beneficial mix of skills; and it
allows for monitoring of equal opportunity initiatives. Examples of mismanaged HR planning
is provided by some of the train-operating companies – some of which have been having to
cancel one in every nine trains owing to a shortage of drivers, leading to fines of up to £2
million imposed by the rail regulator. To try to recruit more drivers they increased the salary
for drivers dramatically so that other jobs (train managers) became relatively far worse-paid.
This led to industrial action. You may well be able to cite other examples.
Examine the set of figures above, as well as other data, and prepare a brief paper
outlining the implications of this for the following:
1 a recruitment agency specialising in secretarial and administrative work
2 government departments overseeing the training of care workers and
teachers
3 a careers adviser who is providing advice for school leavers or university
graduates on future jobs.
Answers to each in turn:
1
A large increase in demand is anticipated for secretarial and administrative work. This
may be difficult to source from within organisations and, especially if demand for this
kind of work is variable at organisational or departmental level, it probably makes sense
to buy this in from an agency. There may be sense in trying to develop partnerships with
some big employers so that the agency is seen as the employer of choice, and rates of pay
and other conditions of employment may have to improve in order to secure loyal and
committed staff.
2
Similar points arise in relation to this group of workers because demand is predicted to
rise by approximately one million workers in each of these categories. But here there may
be sense – given the fact that pay rates are set nationally – in trying to improve conditions
locally and to get workers to identify with their local employer. Efforts may have to be
made to recruit from overseas, although there is now increased activity by US employers
to recruit teachers and health-care professionals who have been trained in the UK. This
brings the question of training into sharper relief because there are concerns that highquality staff may be poached either by private-sector employers or by organisations based
in other countries.
3
Decisions about future careers have to be made with a clear awareness of the future
demand for jobs, and it is no good embarking on a career for which supply far outstrips
demand without being fully informed about future opportunities. The data show a clear
reduction in demand for a range of occupations – skilled workers, agricultural staff and
various aspects of elementary work – and a rise in demand for caring/teaching and other
professional, administrative and sales work. On the other hand, there is a danger that not
enough people will be trained up to work in declining areas, so opportunities may actually
be available in the short term. Of course, these figures are merely predictions, and they
may be disrupted by major shocks to the system.
Have labour turnover rates changed recently?
What factors might help to explain this? What impact might this have on an
organisation?
You can find more information from CIPD or IRS surveys to update the figures quoted
here.
You may like to explore information on labour turnover within a particular industry or sector.
As well as the two sources cited in the question, the Institute for Employment Studies carries
out research in different industries. Alternatively, you may yourself have experience within a
particular organisation where data on levels of turnover is available over time. The preceding
paragraphs in the chapter outline two ways of theorising about labour turnover (economics
school, and psychological school) and you should be able to adopt each of these theoretical
approaches in explaining variations in turnover rates at an aggregated level. Perhaps the most
convincing explanation would come in terms of the economic school – namely, that in times
of relative prosperity, when the labour market is buoyant, alternative opportunities are
plentiful and thus staff turnover increases. This is particularly so for public-sector workers
because during times of economic prosperity one of the benefits traditionally associated with
public-sector work – namely, job security – is less of an issue in choosing an employer.
Explanations of higher rates of turnover can be derived from the psychological school,
although these are likely to be more speculative and not to apply in all sectors. One example
might be that there is now a revised social contract and, given the demise of such ideas as a
job for life, overall levels of organisational commitment and loyalty are likely to be lower,
thus people feel less normative or moral commitment – in simple terms, ‘The company won’t
look after me, so I should look out for myself.’ This sits well alongside a growing body of
evidence to suggest that traditional notions of career are outmoded in a context of greater
employment ‘flexibility’. It is worth noting that the labour market or economic account may
be better suited to explaining overall base rates of turnover, whereas psychological accounts
may be better suited to understanding individuals’ decisions to leave in a particular context.
Recently there has been considerable interest in the concept of employer branding (eg
Martin and Beaumont, 2003; Suff, 2006a). Do a search from sources such as IRS
Employment Review or People Management to find out more about this.
Then, bearing in mind the factors listed above, make notes on what your organisation
(or one with which you are familiar) might do to increase its attractiveness to job
applicants.
Employer branding is a concept that has become popular over the last few years, driven to a
large extent by employers seeking high-quality employees in a tight labour market situation.
It draws upon ideas from marketing where a close fit between the image of the firm and the
type of workers employed is expected. At one level, this is hardly new, as students of
psychology will know through the notion of person–organisation fit, or in HRM where some
writers talk about alignment between organisational goals and worker commitment. The idea
behind it is that there should be a link between mission statements, advertising, web pages,
products, etc, such that the same message is being conveyed through each of these media. In
some cases it could relate to firms which try to major on innovation, or fun at the workplace,
or even corporate responsibility. Of course, branding does not stop the minute the individual
joins the organisation, but has to be continually reinforced through induction, performance
review, communications, and training and development.
There is a danger too that branding can be portrayed as a neutral or positive concept, but you
should be aware that there is also a darker side to the notion. This is the idea that branding is
something that indicates who the person is employed by (much like branding cattle on a
ranch), or that workers should always follow corporate goals without questioning their
desirability or impact. Branding could be seen as an intrusion into people’s personal lives as
well.
Do job descriptions still exist in your organisation or one with which you are familiar?
If detailed job descriptions still exist, how well do they work?
If they have been abandoned, has it led to greater autonomy or greater stress?
One way to approach this question is to consider what exactly is included in a job description.
This should be: title, location, reporting requirements, responsibilities, purpose, terms and
conditions, requirements (mobility, performance criteria) and miscellaneous duties. In one
sense a level of detail in each of these areas is useful for potential employees to assess
whether they wish to pursue that job. This is significant because a major cause of turnover is
the unrealistic expectations of employees. Additionally, detail may delineate responsibilities
and authority, and this can offer greater clarity in decision-making. On the other hand, having
an overly specific and detailed job description is inconsistent with ideals of greater flexibility,
empowerment, involvement or, more loosely, the idea that people should work ‘beyond
contract’. Deciding whether or not detailed job descriptions are valuable would therefore
involve an appreciation of the organisational culture and broader HR goals. For example, if
the organisational culture and industry context suit ‘proactive problem-solving’ (eg a clientfacing role), this would seem consistent with broad-brush outlines of responsibilities rather
than detailed job descriptions. By way of contrast, if the role entailed consistently following
well-established procedures in order to ensure fairness (as is the case for many jobs in the
civil service), then full detail may well be helpful – particularly for new incumbents who
need carefully specified descriptions of duties and responsibilities. In either case, an
inappropriate job description could cause stress. In the first instance where it was overly
proscriptive, employees could feel hamstrung; in the second instance where it was
insufficiently clear or ambiguous, employees could feel set adrift.
Before moving on to the next part of this chapter, on competency frameworks, analyse
the two plans in the box above in a little more detail. Focus in particular on the
specifications that are used, explain what they are looking for and assess how easily and
effectively these can be measured.
What are the major shortcomings of these approaches?
You are asked to consider the weaknesses of the person specification frameworks
summarised. Clearly, there is a need to set criteria against which candidates may be
measured, or the selection process is likely to be very difficult. Person specifications focus on
the human attributes thought necessary to carry out the job, describing the kind of person
considered to be successful in that job. The main criticism of traditional person
specifications, however, is that they rely heavily on personal judgements of the human
qualities associated with effective performance, and upon inferences about the personal
qualities that might underpin behaviour. They are therefore not socially or politically neutral.
Some of the categories used are also now dubious. Questions related to domestic
commitments, mobility and family support, for example, as outlined in Rodger’s seven-point
plan, are now likely to be considered unethical, inappropriate, and potentially discriminatory.
Another disadvantage is that the requirements may be overstated, which can lead to
difficulties in finding candidates, and may also mean that new recruits are dissatisfied when
they find their talents are not used.
Although person specifications are still widely used, it is likely to be in combination with
competency-based frameworks that emphasise job competencies rather than personal
qualities. These are discussed in more detail in the next section.
After reading the information above, talk it through with your colleagues and friends,
drawing on your own personal experience. Do you think that it makes commercial
sense to focus so much on attitudes rather than technical skills?
If you are annoyed about a product do you feel that your irritation can be overcome just
because someone listens attentively to your complaint?
Is it ethically or morally right that people should be excluded from jobs in a clothes
shop on the basis of their looks or from a call centre on the basis of their accent?
Consider these issues in relation to person specifications and competency frameworks.
This question draws on research into ‘aesthetic labour’. However, selection based at least
partly on how one looks or sounds is not new – hence the importance of first impressions in
an interview situation, and the requirement in many European countries for a photograph to
be attached to application forms. In many jobs appearance has always been important – for
example, flight attendants or sales assistants in upmarket boutiques. Similarly, how one
sounds has been central to the recruitment of many call centre personnel, with a preliminary
telephone interview screening out candidates who are deemed not to have an appropriate
telephone manner.
The main point, however, is that there is a need for a combination of a suitable personality
and technical skills. A well-spoken customer service agent must also have good product
knowledge in order to answer queries successfully, because charming staff can only
compensate for poor service so much. You may be able to discuss your own experiences of
service encounters in airports and train stations, or unsatisfactory telephone calls with contact
centre agents.
You are asked also to discuss whether it is morally or ethically right that accent or appearance
may be used as discriminating factors in the selection process. Is it right that a good candidate
should be rejected on the basis of a strong regional accent or because he or she is overweight?
In particular, there are arguments that it can lead to social exclusion of applicants deemed not
to look or dress ‘right’, and there is the risk that this could mean that otherwise capable
candidates from less privileged backgrounds may find it more difficult to secure certain types
of employment.
Debate with your colleagues the justification for employing ‘word-of-mouth’
recruitment methods. Consider both the performance and the ethical implications of this
approach.
As one of the pros (or ‘closed searchers’) you would emphasise the benefits of using this
method. As one of the antis (or ‘open searchers’) you would point out the limitations of this
method. The preceding paragraph in the chapter summarises both cases well, although you
should be able to think of more reasons than are listed briefly here, particularly if you have in
mind a particular organisation. In each camp there are performance and professional
implications. Briefly, points for the pros are: the quality of candidates provided, cost, lowintensity selection, the likelihood of fit in terms of organisational culture and the likelihood of
reinforcing organisational culture. Points for the antis are: such methods may lead to illegal
and unethical practice, may stabilise organisational culture (thereby making implementing
change more difficult), may exaggerate existing imbalances in race, gender and disability,
may thwart attempts to manage diversity, and are likely to reduce variety within the
organisation (diversity) leading to lower potential for creativity and original thinking.
Whichever group you belong to, you could prepare a case perhaps in the form of a list of
arguments. Representatives from pros and antis could then present their arguments in turn.
It is likely that the use of e-recruitment is set to grow even more. Do you feel that this is
positive trend?
Now that you have read the text of this box, analyse the pros and cons of e-recruitment.
IRS Employment Review and the CIPD’s People Management contain regular features on
recruitment methods, including e-recruitment, and you should refer to the latest analysis. The
main advantages and disadvantages of e-recruitment are set out in the box, but try to use your
own experiences to contribute to this debate. You would no doubt agree that e-recruitment is
a positive trend and one that will continue to expand as firms address the main disadvantages
– and you might then wish to consider how those disadvantages can be overcome.
Consider two interviews – one you think was well handled and one that was poorly
handled – in which you have taken part, either as an interviewer or as an applicant.
Describe the reasons for the differences between them.
What can you learn from this to improve the validity of interviews as a selection
device?
It is likely that you have had experience of an interview process. Even if you are not currently
working, you are likely to have undergone a selection process in which an interview was a
key element – perhaps in the course of obtaining part-time work, or in applying to a
university. Although it is difficult to separate the management of the interview from its final
result, try not to rate how well the interview was handled on its outcome. In other words, you
should not necessarily count an interview in which you were unsuccessful as one that was
therefore poorly handled. Nor, of course, can you assume that because you might have
performed poorly in an interview the interviewer was necessarily at fault. After all, a
successful interview is commonly the result of both parties’ contributing effectively to the
process, which implies that there is degree of responsibility with the interviewee as well as
with the interviewer. This makes sense because candidates are selecting potential future
employers just as the employer is selecting future employees. Interviews are often criticised
for being unreliable, poor indicators of future success, and poor at discriminating between
different candidates. This is not a function of the method or technique. The selection process
is complex, and even the most sophisticated methods are far from perfect. Interviews are
more likely to be successful if they are integrated with other methods, but also if they are
properly planned and conducted by trained staff who are adequately prepared.
Which selection techniques would you advise using for the appointment of
1 a worker in a call centre?
2 a chef in a busy restaurant?
3 a research scientist?
Justify your answers.
There is no right answer to this question. However, it is likely that using a particular
combination of selection techniques will be more effective than choosing a candidate by
chance or from a simple inspection of his/her CV. The criteria needed to assess the value of a
single method of selection, or a battery of selection tests/methods, are fourfold: practicability
(method has to be acceptable, cost-effective); sensitivity (ability to discriminate between
candidates based on ability to do the job); reliability (would produce consistent results); and
validity (the outcomes are a function of criteria relevant to the job). In terms of the three
different occupations assessed above, it is likely that a potential call centre worker will be
most effectively assessed by a simulation exercise (perhaps role-playing the part of the
customer and testing his/her response), given that this will form the core part of the work. In
the case of a chef, most people will be aware from watching TV programmes of the sort of
work that this role entails. Clearly, technical skills are paramount, as is the ability to innovate
as required. But there are also other skills needed – eg an ability to lead and inspire other
team members, to work under extreme pressure and to be reliable. Traditional selection
methods – such as an interview – would probably fail to draw out what is required. It would
be much better to rely on reviews by critics of their previous restaurant work and an exercise
in menu planning and delivery. Depending on the nature of the work (project-based, working
alone), it may be comparatively easy to select a research scientist, even though he/she is
likely to be doing the most complicated work. This is because there will already be clear
performance indicators, and a good indicator of the kind of work this person has done in the
past – eg relevant publications, conferences. This information can be obtained by reading the
CV. It should certainly be easier to tell even from a cursory interview whether a candidate in
this post knew what he/she was talking about, provided that the interview was conducted by a
fellow research scientist.
Can selection decisions ever be truly objective tests of a person’s suitability for
employment?
This is a somewhat philosophical question that if you are not careful may prompt a rather
discursive answer. Try to bear in mind that even when people strive to remain ‘scientific’, or
impartial, bias can insinuate itself at many stages in even the most technically sophisticated
selection process. It is perhaps easier to say what kind of selection processes would not be
objective than it is to say what type of process would be truly objective. For example, if
managers select on the basis of one interview because they believe they are a good judge of
character, that is highly subjective. Whenever a process involves judgement, it can be said to
rest on opinion, and it will in some sense be subjective. What makes the case of a person
selecting because ‘she/he is a good judge of character’ the epitome of subjectivity is that it is
one person’s judgement, only one method is being used, the selection criterion is vague or
impossible to define, and candidates have no idea what is expected of them. Presumably,
then, more objective selection (that still allows for judgement) would involve more than one
person (multirater), more than one method, with clear criteria and a more transparent process.
It is worth mentioning that even completely objective methods can be unfair where they bear
no relation to the ability to do the job. For example, where a selection criterion for doing a
job was ‘candidates must be over 35’, this might be objective and transparent – although it
would not be fair if age were irrelevant to doing the job.