Understanding Human Resource Management
Feel free to download this sample term paper to view our writing style, or use it as a template for your own paper. If you need help writing your assignment, click here!
| Assignment Type | Term Paper |
|---|---|
| Subject | Human Resource Management |
| Academic Level | Undergraduate |
| Format | Harvard |
| Length | 4 pages |
| Word Count | 1,361 |
Need Some Help Writing your Paper?
We offer custom written papers starting at $32 / page. Your will get a completely custom-written paper tailored to your instructions, with zero chance of plagiarism.
Document Preview:
Case Study: CAPCO
Organisational Structure
The organisational structure that is suitable for Capco is one that is flat. As noted by Hatch and Cunliffe (2013), a flat organisational structure is one in which there is a less tightly defined hierarchy, and in which individuals at all levels of the organisation are empowered to make decisions within their work area. This approach aligns with Capco’s commitment to individuality, integrity and openness in the work environment, and to share information across all levels of the company.
A flat organisational structure is one in which there are few layers of decision making as well. In more hierarchical firms, when a decision is made it often needs to travel between managers, directors, and even up to those in positions of power over the entire organisation. This means that time can be lost in the process, and employees may not feel as if they have a say in the way that the company does its business. Capco, as a flat structured organisation, uses regular forums as a means to disseminate information about developments in the business and to gain feedback from the team as a whole. This indicates that they are willing to share leadership functions across all areas of the firm.
As a whole, a flat organisational structure can be seen to be more entrepreneurial than the average firm, as noted by Brazeal, Schenkel and Kumar (2014). This is because of the fact that flat organisations such as Capco are likely to encourage organisational factors such as creative self-efficacy as well as leader-member exchange. In other words, each level of the firm is able to develop knowledge creation strategies that will lead to sustained innovation over the long term. Capco is therefore at the forefront of such efforts.
Employee Motivation
The span of control in an organisation is its social context and how it moderates human behaviours, an example being that “the social exchange between the leader and his/her followers may become less engaging when s/he has a large span of control as compared to a narrow span of control” (Gumusluoglu, Karakitapoğlu-Aygün and Hirst, 2013, p.2270). In other words, the social-exchange relationships between the employee and those working with them, and those in charge of their work, will have an effect on motivation because of the fact that it can influence how, when, and why an individual feels social pressure, responsibility, or interest in working. At Capco, there is likely to be a narrow span of control, and therefore a higher level of motivation in the firm. This is because the firm engages employees at all levels to share their ideas and contribute, and to socialise together with others in the business.
In terms of hierarchy, when there is a strict vertical hierarchy that is composed of established and set relational networks, people are likely to feel restricted to the communication channels that are created by the firm through reporting relationships (Turner and Pennington, 2015). When these communication channels are open, as they are at Capco, people are more likely to speak and act as they see fit, and are therefore more likely to have more fluid and nuanced relational networks. These are two different means by which to create a social structure in a firm. Motivation is, however, more likely to occur in an open organisation rather than one that is constrained by a hierarchy (Turner and Pennington, 2015). What this suggests is that employees at Capco are more likely to be motivated to work by the social framework that is in place at their firm than by another set of organisational values, namely a hierarchical set, that restricts communication and innovation in knowledge sharing.
Management Styles
The management style that Capco has is a democratic one. The democratic approach to management is one that emphasises the importance of input from team members and “is beneficial in planning because the input that gained from people, especially those that actually implement the plan, it will become “reality-based” and it minimises the chance of leaving something out that is critical to an objective” (Boykins, Campbell, Moore, and Nayyar, 2013, p.8). This aligns with the approach at Capco because of the firm’s commitment to employee creativity in order to provide tailored solutions for its clients. The company allows its employees to engage in innovative, entrepreneurial and team driven solution development, and this is made possible by a communication and leadership approach that supports new ideas coming to the forefront from among the ranks, rather than from the top down in the firm.
The democratic approach to management influences management activities because it creates the impetus to listen as well as to lead (Kocher, Pogrebna and Sutter, 2013). Instead of the focus being on those at the top of the company, in terms of responsibility and pay, the focus is on how every employee is a part of a team dedicated to providing the best possible outcomes for its clients. This means that there must be a constant stream of feedback in both directions, and that employees need to be given the opportunity to create solutions quickly and easily in response to customer needs. Managers at a firm such as Capco therefore need to be flexible and adaptable themselves, so that there is a focus on positive outcomes rather than on following orders.
HRM Functions
As an HRM function, Performance Management is a means by which to tie expected outcomes to organisational needs and resources (Conte and Gintoft, 2005). Team objectives, as well as individual and group preparation and training, knowledge management and succession planning, and team and manager responsibilities and accountability are all a part of this process. Each of these corporate needs must be measured on a regular basis in order to ensure that there is a process in place to review and refine company goals, objectives, and means of doing business. At Capco, this is achieved through the firm’s regular forums, as well as through their communication processes to disseminate information about developments in the business and ask for feedback from employees.
As an HRM function, Reward Management is therefore aligned with performance management. The company is an entrepreneurial one, so it is assumed that the performance management process will tie into company financial statistics as well as a rewards systems for employees. Capco is likely to provide its employees with financial incentives for a job well performed and tied to goals and firm strategies, as well as bonuses or other financial incentives that are linked to meeting client expectations and driving up the business. It is likely that, in this firm, because of its team orientation, that financial incentives are tied to an internal team’s performance rather than to that of an individual, but both kinds of incentives may be offered at the company. It is important for firms to be transparent about the way that they plan to provide such incentives and bonuses so that employee motivation remains high for all of the members of the team, and so that there is social support for retaining a high level of incentive for the future.
References
Boykins, C., Campbell, S., Moore, M. and Nayyar, S., 2013. An empirical study of leadership styles. Journal of Economic Development, Management, IT, Finance, and Marketing, 5(2), p.1.
Brazeal, D.V., Schenkel, M.T. and Kumar, S., 2014. Beyond the organizational bounds in CE research: Exploring personal and relational factors in a flat organizational structure. Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 19(2), p.78.
Conte, J.M. and Gintoft, J.N., 2005. Polychronicity, Big Five personality dimensions, and sales performance. Human Performance, 18(4), pp.427-444.
Gumusluoglu, L., Karakitapoğlu-Aygün, Z. and Hirst, G., 2013. Transformational leadership and R&D workers' multiple commitments: Do justice and span of control matter? Journal of Business Research, 66(11), pp.2269-2278.
Hatch, M.J. and Cunliffe, A.L., 2013. Organization Theory: Modern, Symbolic And Postmodern Perspectives. Oxford University Press.
Kocher, M.G., Pogrebna, G. and Sutter, M., 2013. Other-regarding preferences and management styles. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 88, pp.109-132.
Turner, T. and Pennington III, W.W., 2015. Organizational networks and the process of corporate entrepreneurship: How the motivation, opportunity, and ability to act affect firm knowledge, learning, and innovation. Small Business Economics, 45(2), pp.447-463.
Organisational Structure
The organisational structure that is suitable for Capco is one that is flat. As noted by Hatch and Cunliffe (2013), a flat organisational structure is one in which there is a less tightly defined hierarchy, and in which individuals at all levels of the organisation are empowered to make decisions within their work area. This approach aligns with Capco’s commitment to individuality, integrity and openness in the work environment, and to share information across all levels of the company.
A flat organisational structure is one in which there are few layers of decision making as well. In more hierarchical firms, when a decision is made it often needs to travel between managers, directors, and even up to those in positions of power over the entire organisation. This means that time can be lost in the process, and employees may not feel as if they have a say in the way that the company does its business. Capco, as a flat structured organisation, uses regular forums as a means to disseminate information about developments in the business and to gain feedback from the team as a whole. This indicates that they are willing to share leadership functions across all areas of the firm.
As a whole, a flat organisational structure can be seen to be more entrepreneurial than the average firm, as noted by Brazeal, Schenkel and Kumar (2014). This is because of the fact that flat organisations such as Capco are likely to encourage organisational factors such as creative self-efficacy as well as leader-member exchange. In other words, each level of the firm is able to develop knowledge creation strategies that will lead to sustained innovation over the long term. Capco is therefore at the forefront of such efforts.
Employee Motivation
The span of control in an organisation is its social context and how it moderates human behaviours, an example being that “the social exchange between the leader and his/her followers may become less engaging when s/he has a large span of control as compared to a narrow span of control” (Gumusluoglu, Karakitapoğlu-Aygün and Hirst, 2013, p.2270). In other words, the social-exchange relationships between the employee and those working with them, and those in charge of their work, will have an effect on motivation because of the fact that it can influence how, when, and why an individual feels social pressure, responsibility, or interest in working. At Capco, there is likely to be a narrow span of control, and therefore a higher level of motivation in the firm. This is because the firm engages employees at all levels to share their ideas and contribute, and to socialise together with others in the business.
In terms of hierarchy, when there is a strict vertical hierarchy that is composed of established and set relational networks, people are likely to feel restricted to the communication channels that are created by the firm through reporting relationships (Turner and Pennington, 2015). When these communication channels are open, as they are at Capco, people are more likely to speak and act as they see fit, and are therefore more likely to have more fluid and nuanced relational networks. These are two different means by which to create a social structure in a firm. Motivation is, however, more likely to occur in an open organisation rather than one that is constrained by a hierarchy (Turner and Pennington, 2015). What this suggests is that employees at Capco are more likely to be motivated to work by the social framework that is in place at their firm than by another set of organisational values, namely a hierarchical set, that restricts communication and innovation in knowledge sharing.
Management Styles
The management style that Capco has is a democratic one. The democratic approach to management is one that emphasises the importance of input from team members and “is beneficial in planning because the input that gained from people, especially those that actually implement the plan, it will become “reality-based” and it minimises the chance of leaving something out that is critical to an objective” (Boykins, Campbell, Moore, and Nayyar, 2013, p.8). This aligns with the approach at Capco because of the firm’s commitment to employee creativity in order to provide tailored solutions for its clients. The company allows its employees to engage in innovative, entrepreneurial and team driven solution development, and this is made possible by a communication and leadership approach that supports new ideas coming to the forefront from among the ranks, rather than from the top down in the firm.
The democratic approach to management influences management activities because it creates the impetus to listen as well as to lead (Kocher, Pogrebna and Sutter, 2013). Instead of the focus being on those at the top of the company, in terms of responsibility and pay, the focus is on how every employee is a part of a team dedicated to providing the best possible outcomes for its clients. This means that there must be a constant stream of feedback in both directions, and that employees need to be given the opportunity to create solutions quickly and easily in response to customer needs. Managers at a firm such as Capco therefore need to be flexible and adaptable themselves, so that there is a focus on positive outcomes rather than on following orders.
HRM Functions
As an HRM function, Performance Management is a means by which to tie expected outcomes to organisational needs and resources (Conte and Gintoft, 2005). Team objectives, as well as individual and group preparation and training, knowledge management and succession planning, and team and manager responsibilities and accountability are all a part of this process. Each of these corporate needs must be measured on a regular basis in order to ensure that there is a process in place to review and refine company goals, objectives, and means of doing business. At Capco, this is achieved through the firm’s regular forums, as well as through their communication processes to disseminate information about developments in the business and ask for feedback from employees.
As an HRM function, Reward Management is therefore aligned with performance management. The company is an entrepreneurial one, so it is assumed that the performance management process will tie into company financial statistics as well as a rewards systems for employees. Capco is likely to provide its employees with financial incentives for a job well performed and tied to goals and firm strategies, as well as bonuses or other financial incentives that are linked to meeting client expectations and driving up the business. It is likely that, in this firm, because of its team orientation, that financial incentives are tied to an internal team’s performance rather than to that of an individual, but both kinds of incentives may be offered at the company. It is important for firms to be transparent about the way that they plan to provide such incentives and bonuses so that employee motivation remains high for all of the members of the team, and so that there is social support for retaining a high level of incentive for the future.
References
Boykins, C., Campbell, S., Moore, M. and Nayyar, S., 2013. An empirical study of leadership styles. Journal of Economic Development, Management, IT, Finance, and Marketing, 5(2), p.1.
Brazeal, D.V., Schenkel, M.T. and Kumar, S., 2014. Beyond the organizational bounds in CE research: Exploring personal and relational factors in a flat organizational structure. Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 19(2), p.78.
Conte, J.M. and Gintoft, J.N., 2005. Polychronicity, Big Five personality dimensions, and sales performance. Human Performance, 18(4), pp.427-444.
Gumusluoglu, L., Karakitapoğlu-Aygün, Z. and Hirst, G., 2013. Transformational leadership and R&D workers' multiple commitments: Do justice and span of control matter? Journal of Business Research, 66(11), pp.2269-2278.
Hatch, M.J. and Cunliffe, A.L., 2013. Organization Theory: Modern, Symbolic And Postmodern Perspectives. Oxford University Press.
Kocher, M.G., Pogrebna, G. and Sutter, M., 2013. Other-regarding preferences and management styles. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 88, pp.109-132.
Turner, T. and Pennington III, W.W., 2015. Organizational networks and the process of corporate entrepreneurship: How the motivation, opportunity, and ability to act affect firm knowledge, learning, and innovation. Small Business Economics, 45(2), pp.447-463.