The paper 'Human Resource Management of Contingent Workers ' is a great example of a Business Case Study. Human resource management is one of the most important methods that have been developed in the 21st century to ensure that the production process is carried out in an efficient and economic manner through the minimal usage of resources. There have been a number of resources that have been developed over the years to ensure that these are implemented in the most effective manner possible. In the following paper, there shall be conducted a detailed discussion on the usefulness of the Unitarian approach towards human resource management of contingent workers by organizations.
This will help ensure that both the approaches are studied and a well-informed conclusion is drawn. The unitarist approach to the management of human resources is most commonly found in American based companies, and it is most familiar to the American continent. This viewpoint was first developed from the liberal theory and is based on this ideology of liberalism and individualism. The main emphasis that is laid under this form of human resource management is on the individual and the individual needs of the individuals.
This is the basis of this form of strategic management of the human resource by the organization that adopts it. The unitarist approach believes that all individuals are unique and work in accordance with their own understanding. They believe in the autonomy of the individual and that all individuals are rational human beings (O’ Neill, A & Jabri, M 2007). It draws upon the fact that each individual hails from a different background, and thus the needs of each individual are different.
Thus, to ensure that the workers work at their most efficient there has to be ensured that the human resources manage each as a separate individual unit. This allows for the whole system to function smoothly, where if one individual is not functioning properly, then it can be dealt with in a singular manner without involving the whole workforce (Piderit, S 2000).
Barry D 1997: Strategy Retold, Towards a narrative view of strategic discourse, Academy of Management Review, Vol 22, No 2, pp 429-52.
Curran, CJ 2009, ‘Taking an organization to the next level,’ OD Practitioner, vol. 41, no. 4, pp.12-17
Daly, F, Teague, P & Kitchen, P 2003, ‘Exploring the role of internal communication during organizational change’, Corporate Communications, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 153-163, (Online ProQuest).
Festing M 1997, International HRM strategies in multinational corporations, Management international Review, January 1997
Finlay-Robinson, D 2009, ‘Practitioner comment: What's in it for me? The fundamental importance of stakeholder evaluation,’ Journal of Management Development, vol. 28, no. 4, pp.380-388
Martin, Beaumont P, Pate J, A Process Model of Strategic HRM/LR Change in MNCs: The Case of AT&T and NCR in the U.K, pp 143-167
Mintzberg H 1994, Strategic Planning, The rise and fall of strategic planning, pp 458, 1994, Free Press
O’Neill, A & Jabri, M 2007, ‘Legitimation and group conversational practices: implications for managing change,’ Leadership & Organization Development Journal, vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 571-600
Piderit, S 2000, ‘Rethinking resistance and recognizing ambivalence: a multidimensional view of attitudes toward an organizational change,’ Academy of Management Review, vol. 25, no. 4, pp.783-794
Wilkinson A 1988, Empowerment, theory and practice, Personnel Review, Vol 27, No 1, pp 40-56.