HRM Models

1. Fombrun, Tichy & Devanna model The Fomburn, Tichy and Devanna model of HRM: The early HRM model developed by Fombrun (1984) emphasizes the interrelatedness and the coherence of human resource management activities. He wrote that three core elements are necessary for firms to function effectively:
• • • Mission and strategy Organization structure Human resource management

HRM cycle: selection, appraisal, development and rewards aim to increase organizational performance

They defined strategy as a process through which the basic mission and objectives of the organization are set, and a process through which the organization uses its resources to achieve its objectives. They also made a distinction between the three levels of managerial work: • • • Strategic levels: policy formulation and overall goal setting Managerial levels: concerned with the availability and allocation of resources to carry out the strategic plan. Operational levels: day-to-day management

But their most important conclusion was that the HR systems and organizational structures should be managed in a way, which is congruent with organizational strategy. This model, however, ignores the stakeholder interests, situational factors and notion of strategic choice.

definition/design of work and alignment of people. 3 Employee influence . appraisal and assessment. Harvard model Harvard Business School generated one of the most influential models of HRM. The Harvard Map or model outlines four HR policy areas: 1 Human resource flows . They have their own needs and concerns along with other groups such as shareholders and customers. responsibility. Employees are significant stakeholders in an organization. as we observed earlier. The Harvard approach recognizes an element of mutuality in all businesses.they cannot be managed in the same way. promotion. The stress is on people as human resources. The Harvard interpretation sees employees as resources. termination. etc. However. placement.2. motivation.delegated levels of authority. Which in turn lead to the 'four C's' or HR policies that have to be achieved: • • • • Commitment Congruence Competence Cost effectiveness .recruitment. selection. they are viewed as being fundamentally different from other resources . a concept with parallels in Japanese people management. 2 Reward systems . systems. power 4 Work systems . etc.

HRM differs from personnel management in the following ways: . was . etc. It also employs a 'flow' approach. seeing strategy underpinning practice. perhaps. 1997) model of HRM has 6 dimensions of analysis: • • • • • • HRM strategy HRM practices HRM outcomes Behaviour outcomes Performance outcomes Financial outcomes The model is prescriptive in the sense that it is based on the assumption that HRM is distinctively different from traditional personnel management (rooted in strategic management. It is idealistic. leading to a variety of desired outcomes. Guest model David Guest's (1989. As defined by this model.). Guest has acknowledged that the concept of commitment is 'messy' and that the relationship between commitment and high performance is (or.3. implicitly embodying the belief that fundamental elements of the HRM approach (essentially those of the Harvard map) such as commitment have a direct relationship with valued business consequences However.given the age of this material) difficult to establish.

. It maps the connections between the outer and inner contexts and explores how HRM adapts to changes in context. Warwick This model extends the Harvard framework.To summarize: 4.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful