The paper "The Relationship between Reward Management and Organization Performance" is a great example of management coursework. In the past twenty years, some development has been prepared in the examination of the relationship between HRM and Performance. However, progress has been modest on the balance. This is shown in the rather mixed and cautious conclusions from various writers. Some have indicated that the conceptual and empirical work relevant to the contribution of Human Resource Management (HRM) to organizational performance and competitive advantage has progressed enough to suggest the role of human resource is crucial.
Similarly, Paauwe (2004) conclude that HRM activities produce the HRM outcomes which influence the performance of the firm. However, there are other writers who conclude that HR practices are weakly related to firm performance. Organizations have been carrying out several assessments to gauge the effectiveness of the performance of employees. For the assessments of employee performance to be effective, it is important that the performance of the group be measured as well as the performance of the individual. In this paper, we are going to analyze the relationship between HRM activities and employee performance.
Performance assessment refers to the formal evaluation of an employee’ s contribution to the organization. Evaluations of employee performance are used to make management decisions. These decisions include rewards, promotion, demotions as well as terminations and job assignments (Burke, and Cooper, 2005 p. 19). HRM as an enabler of strategic options (Paauwe’ s view) According to the research conducted, the presumption of employees serves to focus unambiguous concentration on the aspects that assist in shaping the structures of HR practices in modern associations. This involves deviating from an elite apprehension with average procedures of performance, such as efficiency, sales and earnings, to a wider description that considers performance in terms of, for example, of elasticity/ agility and legality along with a variety of characteristics of worker well-being like approval, strain, health and safety, in addition to job security.
The implementation of such a wider viewpoint demands to correct the at-times biased functionalist, administrative as well as unitarist move which has exemplified the greatest part of HRM and performance investigating of the last two decades. Thus some writers have viewed successful policy execution as the fundamental intervening variable linking the HR planning and performance.
Particularly, rather than linking the HR strategy to a single market setting policy, they give emphasis to the connection between tactical business procedure and the HR planning. Paauwe views HRM as an enabler or facilitator for an entire variety of tactical options. This means that the HR architecture’ s main objective is to develop human resources with a sufficient degree of flexibility or adaptability to implement a variety of strategic options. This calls the employees very keen to learn as well as exhibit a prepared readiness to change as well as to be flexible and adaptable.
This can only be possible if the needs of employees are well taken care of by the organization in addition to making sure that they are treated fairly and due consideration for their well-being. Thus the HRM should be founded on added value as well as moral values by combining economic with relational rationality. Merging economic with relational rationality refers to the establishment of sustainable as well as dependable relations with both interior and exterior participants founded on standards of justice and legality.
The HRM should view the potential of employees as organizational assets. In other words, HRM should function successfully at three organizational levels: operational, managerial and strategic (long term). The transformation of HRM should result in the inclusion of functions at a strategic level in addition to expanding managerial level activities. The role of human resources managers as enablers includes strategic business partner, employee advocate, diversity manager, maintainer of organizational culture, facilitator of organizational change, as well as an internal consultant (Ferris, Rosen, and Barnum, 1995 p.
Armstrong, M., Murlis, H. and Group, H. 2007. Reward management: a handbook of remuneration strategy and practice. London, Kogan Page Publishers
Bratton, J. and Gold, J.2001. Human Resource Management: Theory and Practice. UK, Routledge.
Burke, R.J. and Cooper, C.L. 2005. Reinventing human resource management: challenges and new directions. UK, Routledge.
Burke, W.W., Lake, D.G. and Paine J.W. 2008. Organization Change: A Comprehensive Reader. CA, John Wiley and Sons
Ehnert, I. 2009. Sustainable Human Resource Management: A Conceptual and Exploratory Analysis from a Paradox Perspective. NY, Springer.
Ferris, G.R., Rosen, S.D. and Barnum, D.T 1995. Handbook of human resource management. Oxford, Wiley-Blackwell.
Heneman, R.L. 2002. “Strategic reward management: design, implementation, and evaluation”. IAP.
Kandula 2006Performance Management. PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd.
Loosemore, M., Dainty, A. and Lingard, H. 2003. Human resource management in construction projects: strategic and operational approaches. NY, Taylor & Francis.
Micklitsch, C.N. and Ryan-Mityling, T.A. 1996. “Physician Performance Management: Tool for Survival and Success”. Englewood, Medical Group Management Assn.
Morris, M.H. 1998. Entrepreneurial intensity: sustainable advantages for individuals, organizations, and societies. Westport, Greenwood Publishing Group.
Paauwe J. 2004. HRM and performance: achieving long-term viability. Oxford, Oxford University Press.