Essays on General Electrics Top Management Team Case Study

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper 'General Electric’ s Top Management Team' is a perfect example of a management case study. Human resources at General Electric are considered to be the most significant benefits to the organization. Strategic human resource management involves striking a balance between employees’ needs and the company’ s objectives. It involves the integration of human resource strategies, policies and practices with human resource planning, job analysis and design thus committing to the organization values as well as its mission as argued by Cardy & Miller (2003). Human resource management strategy at General Electric Company has been evaluated based on soft and hard approaches.

A soft approach to strategic human resource management at General Electric Company is replicated in the way the employee is being resourceful rather than just being a resource. This has attributed to the gain of various performance parameters like communication, motivation and leadership. This has enhanced commitment and loyalty among its employees thus a great improvement on job satisfaction. The organization’ s hard approach to human resource management refers an employee as a resource or commodity thus equivalent to the company’ s assets. General Electric’ s top management team raises concerns when there is inefficient supply or underperformance with regard to organizational goals.

Therefore, human resource is considered as capital to assist in attaining monetary benefits. A hard approach used at General Electric confirms its business aspects based on significant scheming as well as aiding in a thorough check of its assets. Furthermore, a hard approach has a relation with performance-based incentives, rewards, appraisals and recruitment. The modes of recruitment pattern at General Electric are classified into ethnocentric, polycentric, and geocentric. Ethnocentric mode implies that the companies headquarter is entitled to make all the major decisions to be adopted by its subsidiaries on the provision of the necessary inputs.

Polycentric mode refers to a situation where the subsidiary performs the major task of running the business following directives from a local employee. This is due to the consideration that the headquarter doesn’ t have adequate information on local area activities. Finally, geometric mode refers to the use of a set of skilled managers appointed from the company’ s different branches. This enables the company to tap diverse knowledge to be applied at various working levels as argued by Arthur (1994). The company’ s recognition and reward system reflect its goodwill and attitude towards motivating its employees as well as showing its intention and organizational culture as a whole.

General electric’ s remuneration system is linked to the performance of its staff. However, considering the varied international environment, different economic systems, changing institutional and political phenomena, and varied development levels make it difficult to attain an even method for comparison as illustrated by Thompson, et al, (1992). Analysis of performance appraisals determines employees to undergo training, demotion, promotion, those to be retained or fired.

General Electric’ s human resource policies emphasize imparting the right skills thus achieve set goals by focusing on employees’ growth and personality development within the company thus greatly improving employee efficiency. The company invests sufficient funds on a yearly basis towards the development and training of workers thus up to date with emerging technologies. However, when it deems very necessary e. g. during times of economic recession general electric adopts cost-cutting measures which involve reducing working staff, pay freeze, and appointing employees on cheap contracts.

Based on my case study,

References

Arthur, J 1994, Effects of human resource systems on manufacturing performance and turn over, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 37, no.3, pp. 670-687.

Byars, W & Rue, L 2003, Human Resource Management. In: Human Resource Management, McGraw-Hill, New York.

Cardy, R & Miller J 2003, Technology: Implications for the HRM. In D. Stone (Ed.) Advances in human performance and cognitive engineering (pp.99-117), Elsevier Science, Oxford.

Fine, S. & Cronshaw, S 1999, Functional job analysis: A foundation for human resources management. Erlbaum, New Jersey.

Schermerhorn, Hunt & Osborn 1997, Performance Management and Rewards. [Book]. Organizational Behavior, Cengage learning, New York, pp.116-126.

Thompson, A & Jr. Strickland, A 1992, Strategic Management – Concepts and Cases, Von Hoffman Press, London, pp. 265-68.

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us