Why Human Resource Development Is a Powerful Vehicle to Empower Employees - Coursework Example

Human Resource Development (HRD) is a Powerful Vehicle to Empower Employees Words: 2,552 Human resource development Human resource development is a function of human resource management that deals with improving employee and organizational performance (Grieves, 2003). The human resource development aims at developing employee skills, ability, talent and knowledge in a given field. According to Werner & DeSimone (2009) literature, it argues out that though human resource development does not necessarily improve performance, it boosts employee satisfaction, which directly reduces employee turnover. Human resource development can take different forms, which can be as simple as routine employee meetings, on-the-job training, one-on-one couching with management or vocational education (Grieves, 2003). Human resource development is a broad function that creates awareness to the employees on things that affect organization internally or externally. For example, an organization can invite government revenue agency representative to enlighten employees on filing of tax returns. The information will benefit the organization as the accounts and finance department will be able to reduce penalties due to the late or wrong filing of the tax returns (Werner & DeSimone, 2009; Grieves, 2003). Individuals will also likely to reduce tax default due to better awareness of how the tax system works. Therefore, HRD acts as a powerful vehicle in empowering employees in an organization. According to Werner & DeSimone (2009), performance describes the means by which a firm achieves its organizational goals. The measure of performance can take a different form depending on the variable. On the other hand, human resource development increases Company’s cost of operation since it requires additional resources like hiring of facilitators and time spent (Werner & DeSimone, 2009). The cost-benefit analysis is critical in determining whether the organization can carry out human resource development effectively in relation to performance. Human resource development targets the improvement of the employee and organizational performance in achieving predetermined objectives (Werner & DeSimone, 2009). Therefore, organizations should embarked on human resource development if it can be proven that the benefits outweigh the cost involved.Some scholars argued out that improvement of performance has no defined measure linking to human resource development, and hence makes it impossible to relate performance and human resource development (Joy-Matthews, Megginson & Surtees, 2004; Grieves, 2003; Lombardozzi, 2007). The review looks into various literatures with regard to human resource development as a means of empowering employees or not. According to Boxall, Purcell & Wright (2007) research, it takes human resource development as a means of establishing an employee-organizational-employee relationship. The recent development in the labour market has lead to increase implementation of human resource development as a means of creating a psychological contract between the organization and its employees (Boxall, Purcell & Wright, 2007). The dynamics in the human resource sector shows that job insecurity amongst employees has increased. Unlike the past, employers of today are unable to, or are unwilling to guarantee job security in their contract (Boxall, Purcell & Wright, 2007). Therefore, the author puts forth the notion that the company uses human resource development as a way of enticing employees to work in the organization despite the non- guarantee of their contracts being renewed but not as a vehicle of empowering employees (Boxall, Purcell & Wright, 2007). In contrary Bebenroth & Kanai (2011) argues that human resource development do empowers employees by making them employable in other firms in case the company does not renew their contract. Also, human resource development ensures that employees may be able to enjoy the new responsibilities that come with continuous human resource development (Bebenroth & Kanai, 2011). According to Marie Ryan & Derous (2016), recruitment and selection process dwell on the potential employee merits, which entails trainings attended, education level, experience and position from previous employment. Therefore, human resource development ensures that employee gets new job scope or responsibilities in the current job and for future openings (Marie Ryan & Derous, 2016). The author advocates that the organization’s role in human resource development is not only a way of benefiting the organization from increased productivity but also assist the employee in career development (Marie Ryan & Derous, 2016). The notion that human resource development as a psychological contract between employees and organization faces various challenges. Cappelli (2000) disapproves use of HRD as a vehicle of empowerment since it proves to be a challenge to the organization in the self-fulfillment of the employee towards his or her career path. Human resource development may shape employees attitude to manage instead of being managed by the organization (Cappelli, 2000). The ‘protean career’ as stated by Cappelli (2000), is as a result of the shift from conventional organizational professionalism. Consequently, the standard of success in human resource development is not measured by external success factors such as promotion or salary increment, but internally and psychologically success achieved. According to Marie Ryan & Derous (2016), critique human resource development as a disadvantageous to the organization but is an advantage to the employee. The employee is able to take on greater responsibilities through empowerment received from the training and development provided by the organization. Baruch (2001), critique human resource development has a factor of improving the employability of employee. The author argues that the ability of the individual to acquire competencies required in the labor market determined his or her employability (Baruch, 2001). Also, employability depends on various factors that include occupational group, geographical position and industry (Baruch, 2001). Employability also depends on the age of the employee. For example, older workers tend to have less job changes, less years in the job market, and not expect promotions. Younger employees, on the other hand, have more years in the workforce, places more importance on human resource development as they would want to have promotions and have the ability of changing jobs (Baruch, 2001). Younger employees may prefer working in teams since it creates a more exciting working environment, thus relieving them from boredom. However, human resource department needs to develop a human resource development program that favors the young and old or isolates individual based on age to achieve a greater outcome in using HRD as a vehicle in empowering employees (Baruch, 2001). For example, younger employees require exciting and new approaches to accomplishing specific tasks since they are expected to learn things at a faster pace (Baruch, 2001). Older employees, on the other hand, require a human resource development program that incorporates experience and transitions to new approaches as the older employees may be slower in grasping new concepts. Older employees require time in taking in new concepts, which enables them to perfect their performance (Marie Ryan & Derous, 2016). The failure to understand the participants of the human resource development program can result in boredom, or pressure due to straining during learning and development process failure to attain HRD goal as a vehicle of employee empowerment (Baruch, 2001). Therefore, McGoldrick, Stewart & Watson (2001), disagree to the concept that human resource development as a contract of future employability of employee but support well tailored HRD program as a vehicle of empowering employees. The factors affecting employability of an individual does not entirely depend on human resource development function (McGoldrick, Stewart & Watson, 2001). Therefore, empowerment of employee depends on employee motivation and personal condition rather than entirely on human resource development function (McGoldrick, Stewart & Watson, 2001). According to Baruch (2001) literature, he proposes that to overcome challenges of psychological contract in human resources development organization needs to develop a system of encouraging older employees to take more responsibilities to achieve HRD development goal as a vehicle of employee empowerment. The motivation acts as a catalyst in overcoming fear of failure or the inability to compete with younger educated employees (Traynor, 1988). The managers and supervisors play a central role in ensuring that employees appreciate and gain from human resource development program implemented by the organization (Traynor, 1988). They ensure that all employees are provided at the same level of human resource development support, a healthy organization culture is required to support the development of employees through continuous learning. This is mentioned by Bhattacharyya (2009) as a means of improving employee level of association, job satisfaction, effectiveness, and efficiency within the organization. The major goal of each employee is career development thus acts as a vehicle of empowerment. Therefore, availing opportunity for the employee to continuous learning in his/her area of interests boost morale and productivity thus acting as a vehicle of empowering employee. Bhattacharyya (2009) elaborates that the empowered employee is easily noticed from his/her quality and level of productivity. Also, with satisfied employees, the organization receives few or no employee disputes due to better understanding which clear definition of responsibilities within the organization (Bhattacharyya, 2009). Human resource development is proven to support organizational culture dynamics when it is able to change with employees demand. Bebenroth & Kanai (2011) argues that failure to incorporate good practices in human resource development within the organization will result in duplication of duties, unethical practices, lack of equity or unfair remuneration and other employee compensation programs. Therefore, lack of human resource development in an organization increases stress, conflict and turnover of the employee. The management of the adverse impact due to lack of human resource development has a greater effect on empowering employee than improving organization performance (Bebenroth & Kanai, 2011). Also, uncontrolled conflict reduces firm’s productivity since more time used in solving the disagreement between employees thus enabling employee to empower themselves (Joy-Matthews, Megginson & Surtees, 2004). Boxall, Purcell & Wright (2007) argues out that human resource development has a multidisciplinary nature making its definition involved. Holliger (1994) shows the separate aspect of human resource development from training and development. Moreover, human resource development focuses on a set of advanced dependent outcome. Therefore, McGoldrick, Stewart & Watson (2001) defines human resource development to comprise of career and organizational development, and training and development. The author acknowledges the contribution of informal education as a source of learning to employees (McGoldrick, Stewart & Watson, 2001). The learning develops employee scope of knowledge and skills, thus improving effectiveness and efficiency. Human resource development ensures that employee employability increases in the labor market when the need arise. The above factors improve employee confidence, reduce stress, and stability in the workplace (McGoldrick, Stewart & Watson, 2001). The review concludes in McGoldrick, Stewart & Watson (2001) book advocates that human resource development is essential since it acts as an empowerment tool. Conversely, other authors mentioned that the purpose of human resource development in the focuses on learning as compared to performance. They assume that inducing or withdrawing learning to employees directly impact the performance of the organization rather an improvement of the employee welfare thus not of view that HRD acts as a vehicle of empowering employees. According to Holliger (1994), empowerment is defined as “broached a set of doctrines stating that the source of all human misery is ignorance, especially superstition. Only knowledge, reason and science can destroy ignorance and fear and help improve the human condition”. The definition brings out HRD as a vehicle of empowering employees. The modernist and postmodernist critiqued Hollinger by developing their interpretation of human resource development. Firstly, Hollinger divided description of human resource development regarding ethos and dogma. The author interprets empowerment dogma in the course of doctrinal elements that human rationality based on the belief that balanced universal qualities, human growth, happiness, and knowledge. Hancock & Tyler (2001) provides a definition of employee empowerment as “confidence in the ability of human reason to provide an understanding of the world, and faith in the capacity of people to use this knowledge subsequently to improve it”. Therefore, both literatures acknowledge that attitude and knowledge employee is linked as a source of empowerment that arises from HRD. The postmodern literature challenges dogma as a blind belief (Hollinger, 1994). On the contrary, postmodern philosophers elaborate empowerment regarding ethos in pursuant of providing critical analysis of human resource development philosophies (Hancock & Tyler, 2001). The postmodern philosophers define empowerment as a way of finding meaning on rejected traditions, myths and customs taken casually due to human reasons. The postmodern philosophy represents human resource development as a way of releasing people from the oppression of time (Hancock & Tyler, 2001). The human resource development frees employees from previous thoughts and beliefs that as a way of accomplishing organizational goals. Therefore, HRD plays a great role as a vehicle of empowering employees by freeing them from oppression of time. According to Hollinger (1994), it provides core characteristics of human resource development is seen in modern philosophy as universal knowledge, human growth, scientific techniques and human reason. The human resource development adoptions attribute to the increase of science and technology in various organizations (Hollinger, 1994). The human resource dynamics stimulated great results on economic growth due to increased productivity. Therefore, the economic growth supports the postmodern ideology of human resource development as a vehicle of employee empowerment. Those supporting human resource development viewed human resource development with optimisms as a vehicle of improving employee lifestyle with scientific techniques, capitalistic values, and technology. Consequently, Bebenroth & Kanai (2011) argues that learning and gaining of new knowledge is a continuous process that will stay throughout an individual’s life and thus, seconding modern theory in equating human resource development as a human need that does not get satisfied (Bebenroth & Kanai, 2011). Nevertheless, forces from scientific methods, capitalism and technology also have their own disagreements. The empowerment did not necessarily have a positive impact on the employee but increased instances of exploitation and denial of worker’s rights (Bhattacharyya, 2009). Thus, human resource development is mainly characterized as tension and confusion in this instance thus disagreeing in view that HRD acts as a tool of empowering employees. The dynamics of the labour market has led to increased adoption of employee development as a source of competitive edge in attracting and retaining employees (Boxall, Purcell & Wright, 2007). Their human resource elements have undergone various dynamics, which include employee poaching and mobility of workers from one firm to another. The company can introduce entirely paid vocational education for its employee as a means of increasing its labor supply or reducing employee turnover (Boxall, Purcell & Wright, 2007). Therefore, Grieves (2003) put forth the view that increased adoption of employee development does not necessarily involve employee empowerment. The firm can use this strategy as a means of retaining or attracting highly skilled employee to join the company (Dessler & Teicher., Dessler & Teicher, 2004). In conclusion, various literatures supporting human resource development as a crucial tool in empowering employees points out diverse views. The reasons for human resource development include increased employability, reduced human resource turnover, achievement of employee career path, and improve job satisfaction, and personal growth required in dealing with day to day issues associated with an organization or personal life. Literature against the human resource development, on the other hand, argues that the learning and development practice is more linked to organizational performance than the growth of individual employee. Also, human resource development is vested on company needs to remain competitive in labor market other than empowering employee. Therefore, in summary, review of the literature shows that human resource development acts as a vehicle of empowering employee, but linked to the ability of the employee to gain competence, and at the same time, taking into consideration the organization’s motives and structure put in place for HRD program. Reference: Baruch, Y. (2001). Employability: a substitute for loyalty?.Human Resource Development International, 4(4), 543-566. Bebenroth, R., & Kanai, T. (2011). Challenges of human resource management in Japan. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Bhattacharyya, D. (2009). Human resource development. Mumbai: Himalaya Pub. House. Boxall, P., Purcell, J., & Wright, P. (2007). The Oxford handbook of human resource management. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cappelli, P. (2000). Managing without commitment. Organizational Dynamics, 28(4), 11-24. Dessler & Teicher., Dessler, G., & Teicher, J. (2004). Recruitment & selection. Frenchs Forest, N.S.W.: Pearson Education Australia. Gasper, D. (2007). Human rights, human needs, human development, human security. The Hague: ISS. Grieves, J. (2003). Strategic human resource development. London: Sage Publications. Hancock, P., & Tyler, M. (2001). Managing Subjectivity and the Dialectic of Self-Consciousness: Hegel and Organization Theory. Organization, 8(4), 565-585. Hollinger, R. (1994). Postmodernism and the social sciences. Thousand Oaks, Calif. [u.a.]: Sage. Joy-Matthews, J., Megginson, D., & Surtees, M. (2004). Human resource development. London: Kogan Page. Lombardozzi, C. (2007). Avoiding Malpractice in HRD . . .Five Imperatives for HRD Professionals in Organizations. Human Resource Development Review, 6(2), 208-216. Marie Ryan, A., & Derous, E. (2016). Highlighting Tensions in Recruitment and Selection Research and Practice. International Journal Of Selection And Assessment, 24(1), 54-62. McGoldrick, J., Stewart, J., & Watson, S. (2001). Theorizing human resource development. Human Resource Development International, 4(3), 343-356. Traynor, J. (1988). Ellie Brubaker, Working with the Elderly: A Social Systems Approach, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, Beverly Hills, California, 1987, 215 pp., ISBN 0 8039 2590 5. Ageing And Society, 8(04), 458. Werner, J., & DeSimone, R. (2009). Human resource development. Mason OH: South-Western Cengage Learning. Read More