Models of Human resource Management

In general, the key components of HRM are well explained and illustrated by a variety of models that have been periodically provided by various writers and researchers. These models give HRM practices originality and offer a basic knowledge of the HRM idea, which serves as the foundation for the current theoretical investigation. It successfully and efficiently handles all human resource-related tasks, producing a knowledgeable and motivated workforce that is eager to meet organizational objectives. Environmental factors are the most important variables in HRM models, which means that HRM cannot be implemented in an empty environment.

There are 7 HRM models,
1.      Matching model of Fomburn, Tichy and Devanna
2.      The Harvard Model
3.      The Guest Model
4.      The Warwick Model
5.      The Storay Model
6.      Best Practice Model
7.      Patterson’s Model

In these models of Human Resource management, here we are discussing about the main four models oh HRM.

The Matching Model of Fomburn, Trichy and Devanna

According to this concept, organizational structure and the HR system should be managed in a way that complements organizational strategy. This is the initial, most basic model that explains the nature and importance of the main HR activities in an analytical framework. This model, which was created in 1984, only highlights four functions and how they are related to one another. It is anticipated that these four essential elements of human resource management would increase organizational effectiveness.

The main four functions are:
1.      Selection
2.      Appraisal
3.      Development
4.      Rewards

Figure 1 - The Fomburn Model

The hard parts of HRM and their relationship to HRM activities are highlighted by the Michigan model (Devanna et al., 1984). It acknowledges that human resources ought to be managed similarly to other resources, meaning they ought to be developed, acquired inexpensively, and demoralized extensively. The institutional strategy can be improved overall by using this model, which makes it evident how an efficient HR system and institutional framework work together. To improve the institution's general reputation, the model clarifies to staff members that adequate HR systems and organizational strategies are the only ways to do so.

This approach is insufficient because it only pays attention to a small number of HRM functions while ignoring other facets of human resource management. The approach falls short of providing a clear framework for measuring the institution's human resource system. The model is not all-inclusive; that is, it does not address every aspect of the HR system in every company or organization.

The Harvard Model

At the University of Harvard, Beer et al. (1984) proposed the Harvard Model. According to Beer et al. (1984), The organization's human resources are under pressure to adopt a wider, more strategic, and all-encompassing viewpoint. This has made it necessary to manage people from a "longer-term" perspective and to view them as potential assets rather than just a variable cost. The foundation of the framework is the idea that general managers must adopt a perspective on how they want to see people participating in and developed by the company, as well as what HRM policies and practices may help them accomplish these objectives, in order to address the issues with historical personnel management. Without a central philosophy or a strategic vision, which are only available from general managers, HRM is likely to continue as a collection of autonomous tasks, each with its own set of customs and guidelines (Armstrong, 2003).

 

Figure 2 - The Harvard Model

Huczynnski and Buchanan (2001) and Loosemore et al. (2003) stated that, the necessary connection between "SHRM decisions, the business environment, and an organization's performance" was made possible by the Harvard Model. It offered a more transparent system model of how stakeholders and contextual circumstances limit the impact of SHRM policy on other organizational functions.

The Advantages of Harvard Model

 
a)      It places a strong emphasis on choice and is not influenced by environmental or situational predictability.
b)      It proposes a blending of both product-market and socio-cultural logics, recognizing a wide range of contextual factors on management's choice of strategy.
c)      It broadens the scope of HRM by incorporating "employee influence," work organization, and the related issue of managerial style.
d)      It encompasses acknowledgment of many stakeholder interests.
e)      It acknowledges that there are important "trade-offs," either overtly or covertly, between the interests of different interest groups and owners.

The Guest Model

David Guest first presented this concept in 1997. The fourth edition of Alan Price's Human Resource Management serves as its foundation. This model made the assumption that an HR executive would start operations with some guaranteed rules that appeal to particular practices and that, once implemented, would lead to conclusions. These effects are tied to financial rewards and behavioural performance.

Six logical factors are classified in David Guest's (1989, 1997) Human Resource Management paradigm.
1)      HRM Strategy
2)      HRM Practices
3)      HRM Outcomes
4)      Behaviour outcomes
5)      Performance outcomes
6)      Financial outcomes 

Figure 3 - The Guest Model

The model, which has been one of the most well-known HRM models to date, has several purposes. Executives can have a systematic and transparent understanding of the company with the use of this analytical instrument, which is the model. The organizations are further assisted by this model in comprehending the deficiencies in the human resource system and how to promptly close them. The model provides a clear explanation of the different dimensions that are employed in the overall process of evaluating human resource management.

All human resource management settings are not addressed by the approach. The models must be made more inclusive in order to be operational at all levels and capable of measuring HRM from both an employee and a customer perspective.

The Warwick Model

The majority of the initial conceptual advances of the HRM idea took place inside an American context, which was one of the primary obstacles in their conceptual development.
A perspective of the unique cultural context that exists in many countries was necessary for approaches taken outside of this context. In contrast to the Harvard models, the Warwick Model was developed by Hendry and Pettigrew (1990) at the University of Warwick's Centre for Corporate Studies and Change and reflects European management practices.

The model, which essentially consists of five interconnected components, reflects the open system theory of organizational thinking and enables an investigation of the effects of external influences on an organization's internal operations.

Figure 4 - The Warwick Model

The Warwick model's investigation into HRM was based on five components:
1)      The Outside Context -  It is a complete set of the macro environmental elements, including the political, technological social, and economic elements.
2)      The Inner Context - That refers to all of the organizational micro environmental factors, including task technology, business output, politics, culture and structure.
3)      Business Strategy Content - The elements, such as goals, goods, strategy, and tactics that make up a company's business strategy.
4)      The HRM Context - The function, definition, structure and results of HR.
5)      The HRM Content - It is on matters like work systems, employee interactions, reward systems and HR work flow.

The Warwick Model's primary advantage is its ability to recognize and categorize important environmental effects on HRM. The model maps the link between external and environmental variables to investigate how HRM reacts to changes in the surroundings. Organizations will unavoidably experience performance and development if they are able to correctly align the internal and external surroundings. The lack of a distinct feedback loop between internal HR procedures and external business outputs is the model's main drawback. Rather, feedback loops have to filter through multiple contexts, which muddles them and makes it harder to determine which inputs lead to which consequences (Romford, 2021).

References 

Agyepong S., Fugar F.D.K. and Tuuli M.M. (2010), ‘The Applicability of the Harvard and Warwick Models in the Development of Human Resource Management Policies of Large Construction Companies in Ghana’, Procs West Africa Built Environment Research (WABER), 525-534. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341057141 _The_Applicability_of_the_Harvard_and_Warwick_Models_in_the_Development_of_Human_Resource_Management_Policies_of_Large_Construction_Companies_in_Ghana (Accessed 6th April, 2024)

Javed S., Ahmed N. and Anjun D. (2019), A Critical Review of the Various Human Resource Management Practices, Models and Their Applications in Higher Educational Institution, International Journal of Advanced Research IJAR, 7(5), 1246-1256. Available at:https://ww w.journalijar.com/uploads/631_IJAR-27572.pdf (Accessed 6th April, 2024)

Lapina I., Maurane G. and Leontjeva O. (2013), Human Resource Management Models: Aspects of Knowledge Management and Corporate Social responsibility, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 110, 577-586. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net /publication/270847801_Human_Resource_Management_Models_Aspects_of_Knowledge_Management_and_Corporate_Social_Responsibility   (Accessed 6th April, 2024)

Yuniarsih T. and Sugiharto M.D. (2016), Human Resource Management Model To Create Superior Performance, International Journal of education, 9(1), 74-81. Available at:https: //ejournal.upi.edu/index.php/ije/article/view/3721/pdf (Accessed 6th April, 2024)