Developing and Implementing HR Strategies: 5.2 Specific Objectives
Developing and Implementing HR Strategies: 5.2 Specific Objectives
Developing and Implementing HR Strategies: 5.2 Specific Objectives
5.1 Introduction.
As we begin this topic it is importnat to say that it is one thing to formulate and great HR
strategy, but however, another difficult ball game all together on how to operationalize the
strategy in a way that it meets its objectives. It is common to develop broad and at times
vague statements of strategy but very hard to turn them into actionable and realistic plans.
We will also discuss general considerations to the development process, explore various
propositions and describe the levels of strategic decision- making. Reference will also be
made to the existence of strategic options and choices. This will provide the background
against which the approaches to formulating and implementing HR strategies will be
described.
As we said earlier on, a HR strategy must be integrated to the overall business needs if it is to
add avle the organization. The key business issues that may impact on HR strategies include:
intentions concerning growth or retrenchment, acquisitions, mergers,
divestments,diversification, product/market development;
proposals on increasing competitive advantage through innovation leading
toproduct/service differentiation, productivity gains, improved
quality/customerservice, cost reduction (downsizing);
the felt need to develop a more positive, performance-oriented culture and anyother
culture management imperatives associated with changes in the philosophiesof the
organization in such areas as gaining commitment, mutuality,communications,
involvement, devolution and team-working.
Culture Fit
HR strategies need to be congruent with the existing culture of the organization, or designed
to produce cultural change in specified directions. This will be a necessary factor in the
formulation stage but could be a vital factor when it comes to implementation. In effect, if
what is proposed is in line with ‘the way we do things around here’,then it will be more
readily accepted. There are three approaches that can be used under culture as detailed below
1. The best practice approach
This approach is based on the assumption that there is a set of best HRM practices and that
adopting them will inevitably lead to superior organizational performanceIn accordance with
contingency theory, which emphasizes the importance of interactionsbetween organizations
and their environments so that what organizations dois dependent on the context in which
they operate, it is difficult to accept that there isany such thing as universal best practice.
What works well in one organization willnot necessarily work well in another because it may
not fit its strategy, culture,management style, technology or working practices. But
knowledge of best practice can inform decisions on what practices are most likely to fit the
needs of the organization as long as it is understood why it is best practice.
The best fit approach emphasizes the importance of ensuring that HR strategies are
appropriate to the circumstances of the organization, including its culture, operational
processes and external environment. HR strategies have to take account of the particular
needs of both the organization and its people. For the reasons given above, it is accepted by
most commentators that ‘best fit’ is more important than ‘best practice’.
There can be no universal prescriptions for HRM policies and practices. It all depends. This
is not to say that ‘good practice’, or ‘leading edge practice’ i.e. practice that does well in one
successful environment, should be ignored. ‘Benchmarking’ (comparing what the
organization does with what is done elsewhere) is a valuable way of identifying areas for
innovation or development that are practiced to good effect elsewhere by leading companies.
But having learnt about what works and, ideally, what does not work in comparable
organizations, it is up to the firm to decide what may be relevant in general terms and what
lessons can be learnt that can be adapted to fit its particular strategic and operational
requirements. The starting point should be an analysis of the business needs of the firm
within its context (culture structure, technology and processes). This may indicate clearly
what has to be done.
Thereafter, it may be useful to pick and mix various ‘best practice’ ingredients, and develop
an approach that applies those that are appropriate in a way that is aligned to the identified
business needs. Meanwhile, the search for a contingency or matching model of HRM is also
limited by the impossibility of modeling all the contingent variables, the difficulty of showing
their interconnection, and the way in which changes in one variable have an impact on others.
The problem with the bundling approach is that of deciding which is the best way to relate
different practices together. There is no evidence that one bundle is generally better than
another, although the use of performance management practices and competence frameworks
are two ways that are typically adopted to provide for coherence across a range of HR
activities. Pace the findings of MacDuffie, there is no conclusive proof that in the UK
bundling has actually improved performance.