Human Relation vs Human Resources Essay Example

Mainwaring's research in 1982 (p. 74) emphasized that when more focus is given to the social needs of the employees, their drive towards work significantly improves, thereby boosting productivity. These needs encompass financial support, work autonomy, fringe benefits along with other duties and services done in favor and representation of the workers. Contrary to the impact of work ambiance and monetary compensation, Mayo suggested that paying heed to employees leads to heightened productivity, a concept also referred as Hawthorne studies (Miller 2006).

The Hawthorne studies, however, revealed numerous shortcomings in its methodology, leading to the development of revised approaches to personnel issues within numerous organizations (Wood 2004). Some academics dispute Mayo's conclusions, considering that Mayo disregarded the effect of work conditions and financial incentives on performance control. Among these academics is Abraham Maslow, who contradiced Mayo's studies while emphasising on the necessity of satisfying an employee’s range of needs. Over several years, Maslow formulated his Hierarchy of Needs as a comprehensive theory of human motivation (Miller 2006).

Maslow pioneered the idea that motivation stems from human's effort to fulfil an escalating sequence of needs - physiological, safety, social, esteem, and self-actualisation (Forster 2005, p. 164). A worker aims to fulfil all the Hierarchy of Needs, hence as one need is met, the subsequent one becomes more critical. This validates that individual needs significantly impact their performance and interaction within their workplace. Presently, several companies, particularly in the sales sector, are putting considerable effort into inspiring their employees to enhance their performance.

The Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of AirAsia, Tony Fernandes, implemented an unconventional management approach in 2009 to inspire his employees. The methods included encouraging a free exchange

of ideas, mandating casual attire for everyone including top executives such as the CEO and General Manager, and instituting an open-plan office for better communication. Additionally, an efficient intranet system was established which enables forums and debates (TonyFernandesblog.com 2010). As a result, AirAsia's employees feel a strong sense of belonging and security. This corresponds with the first three tiers of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs which cover physiological needs (fundamental necessities like salary and job), safety requirements (a favourable working atmosphere), and social needs (sense of affiliation).

This incentive will directly affect both employees and production. Baldoni (2005, p. 59) states that Herzberg and his colleagues adapted Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs model into a fresh theoretical framework, segregating motivation into two groups: intrinsic elements pertaining to the person and extrinsic elements associated with the work environment. Herzberg's Motivation-Hygiene theory emerged from both a deductive analysis of job satisfaction literature and an inductive review of employee feedback on job aspects that contribute to job satisfaction and dissatisfaction (Miller 2006).

The focus of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs approach revolves around what motivates individuals in general aspects of life. Conversely, Herzberg concentrates more on formulating a different tactic by examining specific motivators linked to work and job satisfaction (Herzberg, Mausner & Snydeman 2009, p. 6). The expansion of extensive lists of these motivators and hygiene factors has been influenced by Herzberg's Motivation-Hygiene theory (Miller 2006). As per Miller (2006), a few key motivational factors include responsibility, accomplishment, acknowledgment, challenging tasks, and occupational advancement.

Hygiene factors such as physical working conditions, remuneration, benefits, company protocols, and the quality of technical supervision (Miller 2006) play an integral role in the satisfaction of employees, according

to Herzberg. Removing these factors may lead to discontentment in workers. Successful work performance relies heavily on how adequately these motivator and hygiene factors are balanced. Costco, a US retail corporation, is known for its remarkable loyalty, which contributes to maintaining the company's profitability (Leberecht 2010).

Ensuring employee contentment fosters better performance, leading to increased longer-term profitability for the organisation (Leberecht 2010). While it is unlikely to dispute that human relation methods can significantly boost an organisation's performance monitoring, they can also bring about some undesirable effects. Central to these theories of human relations is the satisfaction of employees' individual needs in relation to their work performance. Consequently, this focus on individualism could inadvertently lead to the collapse of teamwork and social cohesion.

For example, theories by Maslow and Herzberg highlight the use of rewards as a motivating factor for employees. As a result, employees are urged to excel individually to earn the assigned incentives and acknowledgment. This kind of competitive encouragement can advantage the overall profit-making of the company. However, it may promote individualism, resulting in "working alone" culture within the workplace. This implies that individuals must compete amongst themselves to accomplish objectives.

Smyth (2010) noted that during competition, people often disregard the adverse effects on others and manage to justify their potentially harmful actions, as they are all vying for the same goal. This propels a 'survival of the fittest' mentality. However, this competitive mindset poses two persistent issues; firstly, it tends to transform every interaction into a potential conflict, as those you meet may seize any opportunity to challenge you. Secondly, it hinders the possibility of receiving aid from others, as everyone is perceived as

a competitor (Smyth 2010).

Much like in a corporate environment, employees are encouraged to push themselves to stand out and succeed, which can lead to increased stress and subsequently, a decline in social interaction. This strain can trigger what Taylor referred to as 'rate busting', a phenomenon that disrupts settled work quotas and exhibits misplaced keenness for a creditor's cause (Rock 1973, p. 182). In an organization's management sphere, human resource development recognizes the significance of traditional methods, particularly those driven by human relations in the organisational process (Miller 2006).

Marsick and Watkins (1990) posited that human resources development involves specific activities aimed at enhancing an individual's skills, knowledge, and abilities for the betterment of a company. This approach contrasts with the traditional one by viewing employees as contributors of both intellectual and physical work (Miller 2006). Consequently, human resources managers employ various development strategies to tap into the full potential of the employees.

The accomplishment of business excellence necessitates the inclusion of human resources management in an organisation's overall strategic management approach (Hartel et al. 2006). The strategic management process revolves around long-term planning and chiefly comprises the formulation and execution of organisational strategy (Hartel et al. 2006). For numerous human resource professionals, all development initiatives inherently assume a strategic importance, particularly if they are aimed at managerial roles or are linked to actions that typically correlate with effective performance.

Indeed, there are certain theoretical discussions that aid in demystifying and organizing the connection between developmental procedures and strategic management. Take, for example, Henri Fayol's management elements that outline the five stages of integration between developmental initiatives and business strategy, while Max Weber's bureaucratic theory highlights the repercussions

of implementing a straightforward authority hierarchy (Miller 2009). Classical management principles such as those proposed by Weber and Fayol emphasize human aspects where these may not suit an organizational structure.

A framework for organizational structure was developed by Rensis Likert, emphasizing the concepts of supportive relationships, staff involvement, and intersecting work groups (Miller 2006). This theory, named the Four Management System, identifies four quintessential leadership styles implemented in various organizations, namely System One: dictatorial-authoritative, System Two: kind-hearted-authoritative, System Three: consultative participation, and System Four: pure participation (Miller 2006).

The four types of systems have distinct differences in aspects like motivational stimuli, communication, decision making, setting of objectives, regulation, structure of influence and performance (Miller 2006). System One, also referred to as 'exploitative-authoritative', closely aligns with the traditional bureaucracy theory where the employer possesses the decision-making power and employees are expected to adhere to the management's directives. On the other hand, System Two, known as 'benevolent-authoritative', incorporates rewards as motivating factors. Although decisions are still enforced, there is a somewhat patronizing interest displayed towards employees as individuals.

System Two closely resembles System One, but it doesn't integrate the clear objective of taking advantage of employees. Nevertheless, the managerial approach in this system remains autocratic, based on the employer's belief that it is 'beneficial for the employees' (Miller 2006). As cited in an article (NZ Herald 2009), a high-ranking manager at Westpac voiced concerns that some employees were assigned unattainable sales targets, which was meant to encourage better performance. However, this strategy backfired and resulted in lower performance levels than previously experienced.

The negative consequences of exerting emotional pressure on employees can be clearly illustrated with this example. Such a situation

can result in destructive communication and a decline in work performance. Management styles like System Three and System Four exhibit more faith in their employees by involving them in the decision-making process (Miller 2006). Specifically, System Three, being a 'participative consultative' approach, features a heightened level of communication compared to System One and Two. It makes sure to consult the employees and take their views into account before making any organization-related decisions (Miller 2006).

System Four, also referred to as the 'participative' system, is a model in which every member of the organization is involved in decision-making processes and objectives are determined by entire work groups (Miller 2006). Recognized as the most effective system, it fosters widespread communication and cultivates positive attitudes among staff members while simultaneously creating an atmosphere of mutual trust and communal responsibility towards the organization's objectives.

Cisco's CEO, John Chamber, posits that adopting a democratic approach in the workplace offers superior potential for long-term organisational growth compared to a command-and-control structure. This democratic model fosters collaboration by involving individuals in decision-making processes and fostering creativity (Blodget 2009). Moreover, apart from Likert's Four Management System, the managerial grid by Blake and Mouton is another well-regarded behavioral viewpoint in human resource management.

Blake and Mouton's managerial grid serves as an instrumental guide to educate managers about leadership styles that boost organizational productivity and competency while also promoting job satisfaction and creativity among individual employees (Miller 2006). In this grid, leaders are evaluated based on two primary factors: their attention to production and their attention to people (Clegg, Kornberger ; Pitsis 2005, p. 235).

Blake and Mouton categorized five typical management styles. The first is Impoverished management, characterized

by minimal attention towards people and production. The second is Country Club management that displays a high concern for people but a low emphasis on production. Third, Authority-compliance management, exhibits high production priority with lesser attention to people. Team management, the fourth style, shows high regard for both people and production. Lastly, Middle-of-road management maintains a balanced focus on individuals and production (Miller 2006).

Miller (2006) asserts that the optimal strategy for obtaining organisational objectives is through team management, which cooperatively harnesses the skills and dedication of competent, content individuals. A prime example of this approach is Google Inc., which places significant emphasis on their employees, with the belief in workforce satisfaction yielding high productivity (Howell 2009). This practice at Google Inc. aligns with Blake and Mounton’s Managerial Grid which emphasizes that team management equates to high productivity and a pronounced focus on employees.

Management of teams helps foster a work environment built on trust and respect, which ultimately results in high job satisfaction, motivation, and productivity (mindtools.com 2010). While human relations and human resources theories have distinct features in scholarly terms, they share multiple similarities when it comes to effective management practices. This mutual ground lies in understanding the needs of employees as part of societal interaction and performance regulation. The approaches taken by human resources tend to lean more towards leadership and management systems that connect with theories of human relations.

The approach of human relations serves as a conventional method in guiding the progress of human resources. Wexley (1991) asserts that to initiate human resource development, the needs of employees, akin to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, must be evaluated to assure effective strategy execution. Tory

(2009) notes that Asda, a leading UK-based retail chain selling food, clothing, toys, and other general merchandise, employs a reward system and acknowledgement plan to motivate favourable behaviour amongst its employees, proving to be successful.

Communication is an essential tool for an organisation to articulate new concepts, products and strategies. Miller (2006) posited that optimising communication about fresh ideas can augment both organisational effectiveness and individual goal accomplishment. Alongside communication, trust also plays a pivotal role in an organisation's success, as it enables the effective coordination of human resources to execute its business plan (McAllister 1995, p.25). Trust can be described as the degree to which an individual trusts the words, actions and judgements of another (McAllister 1995, p.25). One type of interpersonal trust within organisations is hierarchical trust, centred on the relationship between superiors and subordinates. Dirks and Ferrin (2002) argued that the distribution of power is akin to the concept proposed in workplace democracy; it fosters a top-down trust relation that can significantly impact an employee's workplace morale. Managers who have insufficient trust in their subordinates can often cast a negative influence on their workers' attitudes. Conversely, companies like Google Inc. and Cisco exemplify the benefits of effective communication and ample trust towards employees, as evidenced by their impressive profit margins.