Personnel management vs hrm

As we shall see below, the empirical evidence is that the adoption of HRM in practice has been incomplete when compared to theoretical models. These can include interviewing, hiring, handling drug testing, overseeing payroll and maintaining employee files, assigning parking spaces, and handling benefits enrollment, expense reimbursement and terminations.

Substantial survey evidence shows the adoption of a range of new practices which reflected HRM ideas: The HR department monitors this as part of personnel management.

In addition to having a more significant role in determining the strategic direction of the company as well as employee development, strategic HRM business objectives align with the organization's goals. For example, performance-related payment systems on the one hand seem to represent an individualisation of the employment relationship, whereas the promotion of team involvement — eg quality circles and total quality management TQM — represent the opposite Gallie et al, ; pp6—7.

Residual expectations Minimising cost of human resources?. Nor does it remove the need for HR specialists, but these people are just that — highly specialised, technical experts who act as consultants, either internally in the case of larger organisations, or externally eg as a specialised bureau service used by line mangers as required.

In essence this saw all work as inevitably being exploitative of workers. An ideal type is formed by simplifying the description of complex reality to accentuate its most important features and ignore less relevant ones, so that what is really vital about the subject under study can be identified and understood.

It is a traditional approach of managing employees which focuses on adherence to policies and rules of organization. Training and development, reward and performance management systems are all important here. It has been described by Armstrong ; p. References Legge, Karen The unitarist nature of HRM would seem to discourage the formation of a pluralist organisational culture, but in practice there have been examples where HRM has been successfully adopted within a previously pluralist culture while maintaining the pluralist style of collective bargaining in employee relations.

What is the Strategic Human Resources Role. Human resource management remains integrated with corporate strategy and takes a proactive approach to align the workforce toward achievement of corporate goals.

Personnel Management v/s Human Resource Management

It reflected the predominantly Taylorist1 organisation of work, which in turn had developed to exploit the technology available for the mass production of industrial goods.

On the other hand, even non-radical critics have pointed out that the specific practices associated with HRM are actually rather varied in nature, even in the theoretical models, and some have questioned whether they really can be regarded as aking up a coherent approach to the management of people.

Table 2 on page 16 contrasts theoretical PM with theoretical HRM along a number of key characteristics. We can assume that the UK is not unique in this, and that giving due weight to local cultural and contextual factors, similar changes in the management of people have been happening worldwide in the developed and developing economies.

Personality or competency tests, although used less frequently, had gained in importance in the search for greater objectivity in selection, even though their validity and reliability continued to be subjects of debate.

In conclusion, the differences between these two terms have to be viewed through the prism of people management through the times and in context of the industry that is being studied. This is a matter of degree, however, since all HRM models stress the importance of taking a strategic view of the human resource, but in the Harvard model, for example, the link to business strategy is implied rather than explicit.

These experts say that the two terms — HRM and Personnel management — have no difference in their meaning, and can be used interchangeably. Unreconstucted finance managers sometimes viewed PM in similar terms albeit negatively as an unnecessary cost on the organisation.

These models were characterised by lowor semi-skilled work, close supervision, pay being linked to quantity of output, and — at least in mass-production industries — assembly-line technologies in which the pace of work was controlled by machine.

General managers are increasingly involved directly in all of the first three types of objectives. As we will discuss in some detail in the following section, it makes sense to talk of two paradigms in people management: We will first discuss the evolution of each of these paradigms.

Critics would not agree. It sets programs to screen and develop talent into leadership roles. So there should be no real conflict of interest between these groups.

For instance, while the personnel management approach concerns itself with a reactive performance appraisal process, human resource management approach has a more comprehensive and proactive performance management system that aims to correct performance rather than make a report card of past performance.

Well, there are many experts who have come up with many differences between the two. It also led to management taking an interest in organising and providing skills training.

Personnel management is concerned with planning, job analysis, recruitment and performance appraisal along with training and compensation management. This strategic and philosophical context of human resource management makes it more purposeful, relevant, and more effective compared to the personnel management approach.

Personnel Management is basically an administrative record-keeping function, at the operational level. Personnel Management attempts to maintain fair terms and conditions of employment, while at the same time, efficiently managing personnel activities for individual departments etc.

It is assumed that the outcomes from providing justice and achieving efficiency in the management of personnel.

Difference between Personnel Management & HRM

Personnel Management v/s Human Resource Management January 28, By businesstopia In an organization, a group of people (employers and employees) work together with a common motive i.e.

to achieve their organizational goal, which is only possible when efforts of all the people in the organization are efficiently managed. HRM vs Personnel management. Some say that there are no basic differences between Human Resource Management and Personnel management. These experts say that the two terms – HRM and Personnel management – have no difference in their meaning, and can be used interchangeably.

Personnel management and human resource management are both involved in managing the members of an organization and engage in similar activities, including staffing, job analysis, planning. Personnel Management vs. Hrm Essay. Personnel Management (PM) and Human Resources Management (HRM) is not new to most of the organization today - Personnel Management vs.

Hrm Essay introduction. In fact, PM and HRM commonly confused by most of us. In other words, the transition of the traditional Personnel Management (PM) practices to the modern concept of Human Resource Management (HRM) seems inevitable considering today’s challenges.

Personnel management vs hrm
Rated 4/5 based on 31 review
Difference between Personnel Management & HRM