Havard model

HRM is generally considered to be either Hard or Soft where hard HRM is quantitative, calculative and treats people as a factor of production (an object). Soft HRM on the other hand draws from the Human Resource school of thought which treats people as strategic resources who can provide an organisation with strategic flexibility through being committed, innovative and working in a team so as to achieve a competitive advantage.
The Harvard Model is considered to be more soft in nature because it views individuals as potential assets or human assets rather than variable costs.

[pic]

The Harvard map of HRM
A large part of this section in Human Resource Management, 4th edition is devoted to the Harvard 'map' of HRM. This is probably the most seminal model of HRM and has had a major influence on academic debate on the subject.
'We noted that the Harvard Business School generated one of the most influential models of HRM. The Harvard interpretation sees employees as resources. However, they are viewed as being fundamentally different from other resources - they cannot be managed in the same way. The stress is on people as human resources. The Harvard approach recognizes an element of mutuality in all businesses, a concept with parallels in Japanese people management, as we observed earlier. Employees are significant stakeholders in an organization. They have their own needs and concerns along with other groups such as shareholders and customers.'
The Harvard Map or model outlines four HR policy areas: 1. Human resource flows - recruitment, selection, placement, promotion, appraisal and assessment, promtion, termination, etc. 2. Reward systems - pay systems, motivation, etc. 3. Employee influence - delegated levels of authority, responsibility, power 4. Work systems - definition/design of work and alignment of people. Which in turn lead to the 'four C's' or HR policies that have to be achieved: • Commitment • Congruence • Competence • Cost effectiveness
Point to consider
* Beer et al themselves did not consider that the four 'Cs' represented all necessary criteria. Why not? What else could be considered?
HRM policies and their consequences
Beer et al (1984) proposed that long-term consequences (both benefits and costs of human resource policies should be evaluated at three levels: individual, organizational and societal. These in turn should be analyzed using the four Cs.
Point to consider
* Although central to the Harvard Map, 'stakeholder theory' has a much wider scope than HRM and has largely been developed outside the HR literature. At first sight, it is a simple notion - those parties or groups that have an interest in the firm. But more critical attention reveals a concept that is not easy to define and that is also exposed to a number of political, ethical and other agendas. How would right- and left-wing politicians regard stakeholders? Similarly, senior managers and trade unionists, etc.

Contemporary model

The classic models are insufficient, and so have been refined or replaced by new ideas. The general goal of the chapter is to demonstrate that development may be more difficult to accomplish than has been previously understood.
Contemporary models of development attempt to incorporate one or more of the following ideas: • Problems of coordination among agents • Increasing returns to scale • Finer divisions of labor • New economic ideas of information • Learning by doing • Imperfect competition, such as monopolistic competition [pic] [pic]
Several particular types of models are discussed. These include endogenous growth models such as Roemer's model, and coordination failure models such as the "Big Push" model and Kremer's O-Ring theory.
After a general introduction, the chapter begins with a discussion of "new" growth theory (or endogenous growth models). The text motivates this discussion by considering the shortcomings of Solow's growth model, in which technological progress is exogenously determined. In the Roemer model, technological change is endogenously determined: economy wide capital stock affects industry-wide output (that is, increasing returns to scale may exist). This model, unlike the Solow model, can explain persistent economic growth. Several criticisms of Romer's model are presented.
The chapter continues on to describe and discuss models that posit that underdevelopment is the result of economic agents' failures to coordinate with each other. In such models, multiple equilibria are possible, and economies can be stuck in a "bad" equilibrium. In such cases, government intervention may be required to move the economy to a preferable equilibrium. For example, in an underdeveloped area industrialization may fail to occur because firms are reluctant to locate in places where workers do not possess the requisite skills. Workers in that have no incentive to acquire such skills, since no employment opportunities exist. The text presents a diagram explaining the concepts of multiple equilibria and coordination failure. Rosenstein-Rodan's "big push" model is described and presented diagrammatically as an example.
Several other multiple equilibria problems are then discussed. These include inefficiencies associated with incumbency, and behavior and societal norms. Linkages between industries are also discussed, as are the relationships between multiple equilibria, economic growth and income inequality.
Kremer's O-ring model is presented as a final example of coordination failure. In these models, workers of similar skill levels tend to work together (that is, high-skill workers tend to match up, and low-skill workers also work with other low-skill workers). This creates the possibility that an economy can be caught in a low production quality 'trap.' Production bottlenecks are also possible outcomes.
The human-resources model used by many hospitality firms centralizes HR functions in the human-resources department. One consequence of such centralization is that inefficiencies arise because HR decisions are being made by distant third parties who may not be familiar with the specifics of each situation. Rather than centralize HR-related decisions, the most effective model of a human-resources function is to support line managers in their own execution of personnel functions.

The model of HR department-asconsultant puts decision making in its most effective location-with the manager on the job. The HR function then becomes one of supporting the managers by providing training and information. The following are examples of how this model works in various HR functions.

• Recruitment: Departments should be responsible for determining and justifying staffing levels, while HR suggests sources for obtaining applicants and assists in developing appropriate interviewing methods, as well as pay attention to legal requirements.

• Compensation Salary administration can be managed by line departments by using technology that provides managers with the data and analytical tools that they need. HR facilitates the gathering of competitive data.

• Training: Specific training should come from the line department, which also evaluates the new employee's performance. HR's role is to help create the training materials, train the trainers, and implementing a monitoring system.

• Company policies: In place of hard-andfast rules, involve line managers in the process of determining flexible operating concepts based on company values and principles.

• Organizational structure: Flattening the organizational structures to give line managers the flexibility and authority to make decisions. Self-managed work teams may supplant supervisory interventions and allow so that employees set the tone and monitor the behavior of their teams.

As the study of consumer behavior evolved into a distinct discipline newer approaches were offered to describe and explain what influenced consumer behavior. These contemporary views are quite different from previous models because of their concentration on the decision process that consumers engage in when deliberating about products and services. Therefore, contrary to the economic models emphasis is placed on the mental activity that occurs before, during and after purchases are made.
A second distinguishing characteristic of contemporary models is their extensive borrowing from material developed in the behavioral sciences. In fact, most of the variables discussed in these models were originally identified in the fields of psychology and sociology.
A large number of contemporary consumer models have been developed varying considerably in terms of their sophisticated precision, domain and scope. However, due to space limitations only a few of the more widely quoted models will be reviewed here.
Nicosia Model:
Francesco Nicosia was one of the first consumer behavior modelers to shift focus from the act of purchase itself to the more complex decision process that consumers engage in about products and services. He presented his model in a flow chart format, resembling the steps in a computer program. Also, all variables are viewed as interacting with none being inherently dependent or independent. Thus, the model describes a circular flow of influences where each component provides input to the next,
The model is viewed as representing a situation where a firm is designs communications (ads, products etc) to deliver to consumers and consumer responses will influence subsequent actions of the firm. Generally as shown in the Figure the model contains four major components or fields (1) the firm’s attributes and outputs or communication and the consumer’s psychological attributes, (2) the consumers’ search for and evaluation of the firm’s output and other available alternatives, (3) the consumer’s motivated act of purchase and (4) the consumer’s storage or use of the product. Nicosia assumes that the consumer is seeking to fulfill specific goals and that initially there is no history between the consumer and the firm so no positive or negative predispositions toward the firm exists in the consumer’s mind.
As shown in the figure the firm produces some type of communication that the consumer is exposed to. Attributes of the message and the consumer determine the nature of the consumer’s exposure to it and its influence on him. One consequence is that the message will influence the consumer’s attitude towards the brand. This attitude is the input to field two.
The consumer will probably become motivated to gain information at this point, and search activity is likely to occur. Some search activity will involve searching internal memory for relevant information about the communication. External search may also occur, where the consumer visits stores, reads etc. This is likely to lead to evaluation. If the consumer processes relevant information and begins to favor the firm’s brand he will be motivated towards it. If nothing intervenes, this motivation is likely to lead to shopping activity and purchase of the brand. At this point a number of outcomes can occur. One outcome is that the firm receives feedback and another is that the consumer’s attitude towards the brand may change because he gains experience with the product during its storage and use. This product experience is feedback to the consumer’s predispositions .
Model evaluations:
Our review of the Nicosia models has been brief and quite general. However, it is sufficient to appreciate that the model was developed from the author’s massive review of existing literature relevant to consumer behavior. In that regard, it stands as one of the pioneering attempts to consolidate knowledge about consumers. It focuses on the conscious deliberative decision making behavior of consumers, it was also pioneering as was the viewpoint that the act of purchase is only one stage in the more important ongoing decision process of the consumer. The model also contributed the funnel approach which views consumers as moving from general product knowledge towards specific brand knowledge and from a passive position to an active state which is motivated towards a particular brand.

Contingency theory

Contingency theory is a class of behavioral theory that claims that there is no best way to organize a corporation, to lead a company, or to make decisions. Instead, the optimal course of action is contingent (dependent) upon the internal and external situation. Several contingency approaches were developed concurrently in the late 1960s.

They suggested that previous theories such as Weber's bureaucracy and Taylor's scientific management had failed because they neglected that management style and organizational structure were influenced by various aspects of the environment: the contingency factors. There could not be "one best way" for leadership or organization.

Historically, contingency theory has sought to formulate broad generalizations about the formal structures that are typically associated with or best fit the use of different technologies. The perspective originated with the work of Joan Woodward (1958), who argued that technologies directly determine differences in such organizational attributes as span of control, centralization of authority, and the formalization of rules and procedures. Some important contingencies for companies are listed below : 1. Technology 2. Suppliers and distributors 3. Consumer interest groups 4. Customers and competitors 5. Government 6. Unions Gareth Morgan in his book Images of Organization describes the main ideas underlying contingency in a nutshell:

▪ Organizations are open systems that need careful management to satisfy and balance internal needs and to adapt to environmental circumstances ▪ There is no one best way of organizing. The appropriate form depends on the kind of task or environment one is dealing with. ▪ Management must be concerned, above all else, with achieving alignments and good fits ▪ Different types or species of organizations are needed in different types of environments [pic]
Fred Fiedler's contingency model focused on a contingency model of leadership effectiveness. This model contains the relationship between leadership style and the favorableness of the situation. Situational favorableness was described by Fiedler in terms of three empirically derived dimensions

1. The leader-member relationship, which is the most important variable in determining the situation's favorableness 2. The degree of task structure, which is the second most important input into the favorableness of the situation 3. The leader's position power obtained through formal authority, which is the third most important dimension of the situation
Situations are favorable to the leader if all three of these dimensions are high. That is, if the leader is generally accepted and respected by followers(first dimension), if the task is very structured (second dimension), and if a great deal of authority and power are formally attributed to the leader's position (third dimension), then the situation is favorable.

William Richard Scott describes contingency theory in the following manner: "The best way to organize depends on the nature of the environment to which the organization must relate".[1] The work of other researchers including Paul Lawrence, Jay Lorsch, and James D. Thompson complements this statement. They are more interested in the impact of contingency factors on organizational structure. Their structural contingency theory was the dominant paradigm of organizational structural theories for most of the 1970s. A major empirical test was furnished by Johannes M Pennings who examined the interaction between environmental uncertainty, organization structure and various aspects of performance.

Structural contingency theory is just one form of contingency theory applied in corporate and other workplace environments. Since structural contingency theory does not depend on a rigid set of rules to manage employees, organizations can implement the theory in many different ways, all of which depend on the same central idea.

Contingency Theory

A contingency theory is a type of behavior theory. In general, a contingency theory operates under the idea that organization and leadership should be approached according to the needs of the individual situation. In other words, there is no single best method of leadership, because different leadership styles and organizational methods will work better in different workplace situations. In order for a working body to achieve its maximum potential, leaders must determine the best management method for the individual situation.

Structural Contingency Theory

A contingency, whether work-based or otherwise, is a plan of action for dealing with possible outcomes. Contingency theory in the workplace seeks to prevent unwanted conflicts by managing individuals in the most effective way possible. Contingency theory is a broad term that includes different kinds of contingencies, including traditional contingencies, environmental contingencies and demographic contingencies. Structural contingency theory is another type that specifically addresses relationships between individuals within the working body, as they make up the structure of the organization.

In Human Resources

In a general sense, human resources refers to the whole workforce within an organization, and structural contingency theory is concerned with the whole workforce. In a broader sense, human resources can indicate a specific department within the organization that oversees the relationships and interactions of everyone within the organization. This may involve hiring the right people for the right jobs, resolving conflicts, addressing complaints, and dealing with low productivity. These challenges all involve putting structural contingency theory into practice.

The matching model

One of the first explicit statements of the HRM concept was made by the Michigan School (Fombrun et al, 1984). They held that HR systems and the organization structure should be managed in a way that is congruent with organizational strategy (hence the name ‘matching model’).

[pic]

One of the first specific statements of the concept of human resource management came from the Michigan School in 1984. They stated that human resource systems and the structure of an organization should be managed in line with organizational strategy - which is why they refer to it as the matching model. They went on to state that there is a human resource cycle consisting of four generic functions that take place in every organization:

1. Selection - matching the right employees to jobs within the organization. 2. Appraisal - performance management. 3. Rewards - the reward system is imperative to an organizations success, if your employees feel that their efforts are going unnoticed production levels drop. It is one of the most under - utilized managerial tools for driving performance in an organization. Every company should reward short and long term achievements not forgetting that for an organisation to succeed in the future it must perform in the present. 4. Development: developing employees with exemplary qualities.