Transferability of Human Resource Management - Essay Example

Transferability of HRM Human resource management is a discipline, which can be learned just like other disciplines. Various organizations use different human resource management strategies. This has the basis on the organization’s culture and the structures that exist in the organization. The strategies used are set to make sure the organization meets the needs of the human resource. This also helps the human resource in an organization be productive. Transfer human resource management strategies takes place across organizations in the same place and across nations. The transfer of the strategies is influenced by various factors. This paper looks at culture and institution structures as two factors that influence the transferability of human resource management across borders. In order to show how these two factors influence the transfer, the paper focuses on research conducted to find out how the two factors have impacted human resource management strategies transfer between China and UK. The paper shows how the two factors have affected the transfer of the strategies between the two countries. On one hand, the paper illustrates on how cultural factors in China have impacted to the transfer of the human resource management strategies to UK. It also explains how the cultural factors in UK have impacted transfers of the HRM to China. The paper also looks at the institution structures in both countries and their contribution to cultural transfer between the two countries. The two countries act as the basis of study on how the two factors influence the transfer of the human resource management strategies even among other nations. If there is development of a management system, which is so effective this is the one that would be applied in the whole world (Adler & Ghadar 1990, p.236-260). This means there is a way by which human resource management can be implemented allover the world. Studies conducted have noted the influence that national difference has on human resource management choice and practices of human resource management across various countries. This influence mostly comes due to the characteristics that the host country has on the management of the subsidiaries. Recent research has paid attention to the influence of the home country on the human resource strategies and practice in subsidiaries in other countries. This is the country of origin effect. However, many of the recent research in regard have a great focus of the distinctions which are there between the national models. They do not explain the effect of the home country on the human resource management choice and strategic choice. Comparative which have been conducted show that there are differences among many countries which makes it difficult for human resource management strategies to be transferred among them The studies focused more on the comparison between China and UK. The studies analysis the influence the cultural and institutions distinctions on the strategies used in the human resource management. According to a study conducted by Easterby-Smith (Bartlett & Ghoshal 1998, p.181-191), identifies significant differences at the level of management levels for instance, selection process, reward assessment and promotions. These distinctions are out of the cultural and institutional differences among the countries. This is what makes it difficult for human resource strategies to be transfred between China and UK (Gray 1998, p. 22). The study also analysis the effect the of the distinct characteristics among the countries of the human resource management approaches which more focus to the Chinese context. (Bartlett & Ghoshal 1998, p.181-191). This paper looks at how national differences affect the transferability of the human resource management. The study reveals that human resource management strategic choice and practices of most companies have characteristics of their country of origin. The need to venture appropriately in the international market helps in shaping human resource management in many companies (Brock & Birkinshaw 2004, p.98-111). This is a requirement brought by the reform that china has taken in its business and economic system. The scope of localization reveals the characteristics that the stages of development of the country of origin. The process of localization also shows some characteristic and influences of the business system in China. For example, there is centralization of control among most of the Chinese companies. The localization process follows an up down process. The human resource managers of the subsidiary companies have little say in decision –making (Child 1994, p. 62-74). There is an argument that the presence of the absorption localization in most of the Chinese multinational companies has support on the view that most of human resource management in multinational companies is becoming more global and becoming more convergent. There are also some other comparative studies of foreign companies venturing in China to do business with the local companies in order understand how how the national culture influence human resource management strategies.. According to a study conducted by Goodall and Warner (Brock & Birkinshaw 2004, p.98-111) on human resource management policies reveals that the traditional policies in human resource management in companies owned by the state companies are less applied in joint ventures companies with the foreign companies (Brock & Birkinshaw 2004, p.98-111). The vast distinctions in culture which exist between China and western countries have complicated the application the of human resource management between the countries. This is according to a study conducted to study the influence of national cultures on organizational and human resource management (Brock & Birkinshaw 2004, p.98-111). The above studies have given analyses the influence of the national characteristics on human resource strategies and transfer in the Chinese context. In the Chinese context, most of the multinational companies’ human resource management strategies are shaped and constrained by the differences that exist among nations. Cultural characteristics and institution characteristics have the most influence in transfer oh human resource strategies. In accordance to the two differences, the paper looks at the human resource management in china and United Kingdom. The paper also looks how nationals cultural and institution characteristics influences the transfer of human resource strategies between the two nations. The comparison will help to find out how far the two factors influence the transfer of the human resource management between the two countries. As I had mentioned above the difference in the national management culture, impedes the transfer of western human resource management strategies into china. Hofstede’s model suggest that china has high culture in power distance. The other characteristic of Chinese culture is that it has a low level of individualism, high in long-term orientation and the culture is moderate in avoidance of uncertainties. The Chinese management culture has respect for hierarchy, oriented towards groups and has more focus on the importance of relationships in the decision-making process. The management also concentrates on conflict avoidance and delegation of all authority to the leader selected. Most decisions are not debated, and it is not correct to challenge leaders in public. The management culture in china also emphasis on equality, avoids conflicts, competition, and emphasis on good relations as the accepted values in work (Hofstede 1997, p.483-493). In recent times, there is change in china from complete collectivism to a mixture of both collectivism and individualism (Child 1994 p. 62-74). The country has also started adapting lower power distance. The managements in many companies have also started adapting individual led management culture. The employees have been given more responsibilities and rights. There is the emphasis of individualism and competitivism but conformity to the rules of the organization is still a rule. Despite this, collectivism is still an integral part of human resource management in many companies. These norms and rules have their foundation in the country’s history and ideologies. These norms and values continue to influence aspects of work behavior and relationships in employment. In contrast to China, values in United Kingdom are more individualistic and high in power distance (Edward & Ferner 2000, p.11-16). In such values, the human resource management practice and strategies are characterized by autonomy by individual and achievement. There is acceptance of uncertainty and risk taking (Edward & Ferner 2000, p.11-16). There is minimization of hierarchy and there is the emphasis of equality. There is also a clear definition of sexual roles. In UK culture, there is admiration of money and male values of assertiveness. There has been also development of a culture of individualism in the UK. It is argued that the traditional employment relations have moved from an adversarial to partnership- model. The power distance in UK has reduced, and the trends are moving towards amore individualism. In UK, the adversarial industrial relation exists. (Edward & Zhang 2002, p23-27). On the other hand, the Chine is changing its strong focus from collectivism to individualism (Child 1994 p. 62-74). In comparison with the UK culture, the Chinese culture has more emphasis on collectivism. There is also great power distance than in UK. There is more conformation to the organization rules and obedience to the supervisor. China also encourages good industrial relations (Braine 1997, p.77-94). Most researchers use the differences to explain why the western human resource practices cannot be transferred to China. For instance, in china there is resistance to pay in relation to performance. This is explained by egalitarian cultural values in China. Since the 1980’s China has adapted to a system which is oriented to market from centrally planned system (Duan, 1995, p.70-72). The change has also led to corporate management systems. The state has relaxed in the control of economic planning which includes planning of the human resource practices. There is more delegation of autonomy to the corporate level in the companies or industries (Child 1994, p. 62-74). The business focuses more on profits rather than administrative functions. The structure of the authority has changed into a structure where the director takes responsibility, which is the structure of the modern enterprises. More responsibility for both business and labor resources is now in the hands of the corporate managers. Human resources mangers have more roles including, planning and strategic roles. More emphasis is put on development and career management. There is no encouragement for the human resource managers to get the required qualifications and experience in market particularly in the western expertise and practice (Child 1994, p. 62-74). Despite the kind of improvements, which has occurred in China, the level of reforms is still very low especially in the enterprises, which are owned by the government. In these enterprises, the government has the responsibility of controlling the financial resources. The organizations have collective responsibility and there is the dual system in the organizations. There is no free labor market established in China. The problem of surplus staff still exists and there are challenges in recruitment and the retention of staff. There is also no freedom in the selection and retention of staff. Most companies in china are still struggling with the historical issues instead of focusing on human resource management as one source of competitive advantage. On the other hand, there is a mature market where the corporate management in UK operates. The UK corporate system is characterized by single line decision making and has a lot of emphasis on individual responsibility. The structures of the management in the organizations are centered. There is no interference by the government in the formulation of business plans. The mangers are the ones who are mandated to make the plans (Warner 1998, p.83-97).There is unity of command and accountability in decision-making process, which starts from the top. UK organizations have great concern for efficiency because of the nature of the administrative authority. The career progression of the employees depends on great performance criteria. There is the movement of corporate management to a market and a more decentralized structure from centrally placed ones (Warner 1998, p.83-97). There is established economy where more business enterprises have started to gain autonomy in production and human resource management. Despite this progress, traditional characteristics still exists. The interference by the government and its departments acts as a hindrance in making the Chinese companies to adopt western human resource management strategies in their operations. The less developed labor market has also contributed to the slow adoption of the western human resource management strategies. (Warner 1998, p.83-97). On the other hand, mature market exists in UK and the government does not interfere in the corporate management in the organizations. The corporate management is more independent economic financial units. The structures are developed to cater for customers and the responsibility of decisions making is done by the mangers without any interference from the government. (Brock & Birkinshaw 2004, p.98-111). In contrast, the Chinese corporate management is struggling with historical issues and still subject to government interference. These differences suggest that the Chinese subsidiaries in the UK have to work very hard to prevent being tied up by their cultural values so that they can be able to adapt to the UK human resource management strategies. There is more autonomy in China enterprises in making decisions on staff issues. Enterprises in China have gained autonomy to make decisions on employment issues in relation to staff (Braine 1997, p.77-94). Despite this autonomy, there is still influence from the government. Market led human resource management has not completely been implemented in Chinese organizations (Braine 1997, p.77-94). According to a research by Wang and Mobley, (Duan 1995, p.70-72) Chinese companies especially those that are owned by the state are still trying to deal with the challenge of surplus labour and focuses reduction of the cost instead of long term business planning and opportunities in employment development (Duan 1995, p.70-72). This has made the human resource management in China not to develop to be part of a corporate competitive strategy. In the UK, arrangement if labour is a corporate responsibility. The labour resources are organized in accordance to business demands and conditions of the market. In UK, employees are protected by trade unions and the government regulations. The government does not interfere in labor arrangements in the country. There is no direct interference by the government in labour arrangements despite the fact that employees in UK are protected by government regulations and by trade unions (Edward & Zhang 2002, p.23-27). Personnel managements in the organizations are responsible for recruitment and selection of employees. They do this in compliance with the employment law and in negotiation with trade unions. Enterprises in the UK have great autonomy in human resource management. The key issue, which the enterprises face, is on how to use labour resources in order to gain competitive advantage. In connection to this, several human resource management strategies have been developed. One of the strategies is the short-term flexible human resource management options. According to a research done (Edward & Zhang 2002, p23-27) this is the most used in human resource management practice. Most personal departments in UK companies have changed their names to human resource management this suggests that they play a great role in corporate management (Roosevelt 2004, p.34). The centrally placed human resource management system in china had two policies that relate to recruitment and reward. There is the egalitarian in the pay system policy and job for life policy (Lu & Bjorkman 1997, p. 614-623). The system gives employees a guaranteed job security, but they are not granted the right to choose a job. According to a research by Zhu and Bension (Lu & Bjorkman 1997, p. 614-623), reward system has been internalized in most of the organizations. There are new flexible ways of payments that have emerged. Lifetime employment has reduced and the nature of the contracts of employees varies. There is also an issue due to the large gap in reward between those at the high and those at the low positions. According to a study by Sun (Lu & Bjorkman 1997, p. 614-623) reveals that the differentials in pay reflects different skills and positions instead of performance. There is corporate responsibility in the UK, which follows the labor market requirements (Stahl 2006 p.36-54). This means that recruitment and remunerations are organized in response to business demands and the labour market conditions. There are policies and processes that are involved in management of labour in UK. These policies guide the process to conform to the requirements of the government legislations concerning recruitment, remuneration and employment contracts. There has also been a rise of schemes related to performance. There are key differences that exist between the two countries. In China the judgment is made in relation to the relation that exists between the peers and the subordinate which is different from UK where judgment is done in accordance to hierarchy (Stahl 2006, p.36-54). UK also focuses on performance and targets while china uses broader criteria. The differences are apparent in staff appraisals.UK organizations use methods that are more scientific. This has made work relatively structured and impersonal. According to a survey by Zhu and Dowling (Stahl 2006, p.36-54), performance appraisal in china is not carried in a systematic way. The above studies conducted on transferability of human resource management strategies across borders show culture and institutional frameworks as the two major factors that influence the process. The two factors have great influence because they incorporate social, political and economical influence. There is a great need for cultural accommodations when it comes to dealing with the above issues. There is also a need for development of knowledge in relation to international trade or business. This would help people from different cultural borders to understand the policies and how other countries undertake their carry out their management of their corporate. This is one way that human resource management strategies can be transferred across borders without a lot of hindrances. References Adler N. & Ghadar, F 1990, Strategic human resource management: a global perspective in human resource management, CRS Press, New York. Bacon, N. & Snell, S 2009, The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management, 1st edition, SAGE Publication, New York. Bartlett, C & Ghoshal, S 1998, Managing across borders: the transitional solution, Century Business, London. Braine, M 1997, ‘Change and continuity in Chinese Employment relationships,’ New Zealand journal of resource management, Vol.22 Brock, D. & Birkinshaw, J 2004, Contemporary issues in multinational strategy and structure, Gabler Verlag publishers, London. Child, J 1994, Management in China during the age of Reform, 1st edition, Cambridge university press, Cambridge. Duan, Y 1995, Management strategies in china multinational enterprises, 1st edition, China Development Press, Beijing. Edward, C. & Zhang, M 2002, The experiences of UK subsidiaries of Chinese MNCs in advancing labour standards, IIRA-CIRA Press, Toronto. Edward T. & Ferner, A 2000, Multinational reverse diffusion and national business systems, Wayne University Press, Detroit. Gray, J 1998, What globalization is not, False Dawn: The delusion of global capitalism, Granta Books, London. Hofstede, G 1997, The business of international business is culture, 1st edition, Wiley & Sons, New York. Lu, Y. & Bjorkman, I 1997, HRM practices in China-Weater joint ventures: MNC, 1st edition, Beijing. Roosevelt, J 2004, International human resource management, 2nd edition, Educational press, Hague. Stahl, G 2006, Handbook of research in international human resource management, 1st edition, Edward Elgar publishing, Massachusetts. Warner, M 1998, Joint ventures vs. State owned enterprises management and human resources in China, Baptist University, Hong Kong. Read More