Essays on International and Comparative Human Resource Management Assignment

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper " International and Comparative Human Resource Management" is a wonderful example of a Management Assignment. The main reason why EBMC applies the polycentric approach is due to the assumption that there exists a difference in the countries it operates in. This implies then that every subsidiary in the countries it operates has to locally develop perfectly outlined practices under the supervision of local managers (Treven, 2001: 177-189). Though this approach has worked in favor of EBMC, there exist a number of benefits and drawbacks, which are discussed below. Advantages of Polycentric Staffing Approach Involvement of low labor costs: Running a subsidiary in a hosting company requires the presence of skilled and knowledgeable employees who are mostly recruited from a host country.

EBMC is likely to benefit through this approach as this will decrease labor costs. Hiring expatriate managers proves to be very expensive for MNEs (Dutta, 2010: 397). Here, EBMC utilizes the functional flexibility mode, developed in the Atkinson's labor flexibility model (1985). By hiring local employees who are multi-skilled to top managerial positions, EBMC will be able to remain functional, despite the changes in the product market and technology.

Such employees manage to facilitate quick and smooth deployment between activities and tasks, thereby, reducing costs of hiring an expatriate. Increases the acceptance of the company by the local community: A foreign company that is operated by a local manager has higher chances of being accepted by the local community than one operated by an expatriate. Maximizes available options in the local community: Local managers are able to understand their local environment more than an expatriate. This implies that local managers working for EBMC will work effectively since they understand the political viewpoints and cultural values of the local community. Companies are recognized as players in the development of the economy: For EBMC to succeed in foreign countries, it is important to have the company recognized.

This can be achieved by taking part in development initiatives in the community. Using local managers, EBMC is likely to identify areas to offer support, which adds value, thus bringing recognition and praise. This is a good way to build trust from local citizens. Disadvantages of a Polycentric Staffing Approach It provides difficulty in balancing global and local priorities: When it comes to addressing issues of priority, a company could face major problems if it is detached from its subsidiaries.

To maintain balance in such a scenario, EBMC should ensure that its managers both locally and internationally are able to transfer knowledge in an effective manner and resolve issues without getting into conflict. Inability to recruit Professionals: As a result of competition across the market divide, finding and recruiting skilled professionals has been a daunting task for most MNEs, including EBMC.

This has been caused by the scarcity of a skilled workforce, which can run the subsidiary in its interest. Available literature reveals that there is a high demand for talent, hence creating scarcity (Teargarden, 2008: 190-202). Cultural Differences: Cultural differences provide great challenges to human resource management. The attitude of workers; social values, beliefs, et cetera, are some of the factors that affect industrial relations, productivity, and loyalty towards the firm.

References

Anderson, J. 1983. The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Artkinson, J. 1985. ‘The Changing Corporation.’ In New Patterns of Work, ed. D. Clutterbuck,

Aldershot, UK: Gower, pp. 13-34.

Bird, A., & Dunbar, R. 1991. Getting the job done over there: Improving expatriate

productivity. National Productivity Review, Spring, 145-156.

Bjorkman, I., Barner-Rasmussen, W., & Li, L. 2004. Managing knowledge transfer in MNCs: The

impact of headquarters control mechanisms. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(5): 443-455.

Dutta, B, International Business Management (Text and Cases), First Edition, New Delhi, pp.

397.

Ghoshal, S., & Bartlett, C.A. 1988. Creation, adoption, and diffusion of innovations by subsidiaries of

multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(3): 365-388.

Gupta, A.K., & Govindarajan, V. 1994. Organizing for knowledge flows within MNCs.

International Business Review, 3: 443-457.

Hakanson, L., & Nobel R. 2001. Organizational characteristics and reverse technology transfer.

Management International Review, 41(4): 395-420.

Harvey, M.G. 1985. The executive family: An overlooked variable to international

assignments. Columbia Journal of World Business, 20(1), 84-92.

Harvey, L., & Anderson, J. 1996. Transfer of declarative knowledge in complex information

processing domains. Human-Computer Interaction, 11(1): 69-96.

Harzing, Anne-Wil & Pinnington, Ashly 2011, International human resource management, 3rd

ed, SAGE, Los Angeles ; London

Kogut, B., & Zander, U. 1993. Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the

multinational corporation. Journal of International Business Studies, 24(4): 625-646.

Kogut, B., & Zander, U. 1996. What do firms do? Coordination, identity, and learning.

Organization Science, 7(5): 502-518.

Kiesler, S., & Cummings, J. 2002. What do we know about proximity and distance in work

groups? A legacy of research. In P. Hinds & S. Kiesler, Distributed work. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 37-80.

Kirkman, B.L., Rosen, B., Tesluk, P.E., & Gibson, C.B. 2004. The impact of team empowerment

on virtual team performance: The moderating role of face-to-face interaction. Academy of

Management Journal, 47(2): 175-192.

Morley, M.J. 2003. The management of expatriates: contemporary developments and future

challenges. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18(3).

McEvily, S.K., & Chakravarthy, B. 2002. The persistence of knowledge-based advantage: An

empirical test for product performance and technological knowledge. Strategic Management Journal, 23(4): 285-305.

Rugman, A., & Verbeke, A. 2001. Subsidiary-specific advantages in multinational enterprises.

Strategic Management Journal, 22(3): 237-250.

Subramanian, M., & Venkatraman, N. 2001. Determinants of transnational new product

development capability: testing the influence of transferring and deploying tacit overseas knowledge, Strategic Management Journal, 22 (4): 359-378.

Teagarden, M.B, Meyer, J and Jones, D. (2008) Knowledge – sharing among high-tech MNCs

in China and India : Invisible barriers, best practices and next steps. Organizational Dynamics, 37 ( 2) : 190- 202.

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