Management Analysis Paper

Management Analysis Paper

Task: Differentiate between workforce management and strategic human resource management
It is inevitable to ignore the fact that the evolution of technology has transformed the modern-day workplace. As such, subsequent elements about management have also proportionally changed to fit the current competitive environment. As a way to make sure that they have the edge over others, most organizations have adopted strategic maneuvers that adhere to quality management. Quality is the second aspect that follows innovation. For a new firm, delivering unique products that embrace outstanding quality fosters substantial growth. However, to establish the much-required quality, appropriate human resource management (HRM) tactics are required. The core value of HRM is manifested in its ability to find the right people who can meet organizational targets. Guided by the fact that adherence to quality by production companies has been around for more than 100 years, the agenda is to strike a difference between traditional HRM and modern-day strategic HRM as applied by entities to maintain high-quality assurance.
Workforce Management (Traditional HRM)
Workforce management is defined by two fundamental aspects, recruiting and training. In an explorative study by Wei and Wang (2012), traditional HRM is much invested in an organization finding the right people as determined by the available positions and equipping them through orientation (training) to fit position requirements.

Studies concerning workforce management show that the human capital is only limited to factors such educational qualification, skill base, and work experience (Iles, Chuai & Preece, 2010). With regards to organizational performance, traditional HRM gives more emphasis to training. This particular factor is supported by Zhao and Du (2012) who indicate that orientation of people is considered a greater component of workforce management. In furthering their analysis, Zhao and Du (2012) indicate that employees’ salaries in the traditional HRM regime are based on individual performance. In general, the conceptualization of Wei and Wang (2012) of staffing and training underlies core aspects of traditional HRM. According to Evans and Lindsay (2014), all these factors highlight the short-term planning approach supported by traditional HRM.
Strategic HRM
When a firm enters a highly competitive operational environment where exceptional management is required, traditional HRM becomes of less significance. As such, the tool of choice, strategic HRM, can offer resolutions for long term development. According to Wei and Wang (2012), strategic HRM not only embraces work traditional HRM but also puts into perspective the future growth initiatives of an entity. It indicates that strategic HRM does not discard the traditional factors of recruiting and training, but rather goes further ahead to develop strategies on how the human resource, and the organizational culture, can be linked into propelling an entity towards the desired destination (Marler & Fisher, 2013). For organizations to thrive amidst the constant threat of competition, new dimensions on how the human resource will contribute towards implementation and sustenance of a strategic advantage are required. Further insights are provided by Arthur and Boyles (2007) who go ahead to mention five great components that are needed in strategic HRM. The factors mentioned include but, are not limited to policies, programs, and practices. Thus, strategic HRM has undergone what Festing and Eidems (2011) term as constant adaptation and development from the traditional HRM dispensation.
Comparison
With regards to Workforce Management, Evans and Lindsay (2014) show that there is a clear difference between traditional HRM and the modern-day strategic HRM. The above synoptic discussion covering each model shows that the main difference emanates from the ability of strategic HRM to embrace long-term growth planning. Traditional HRM is simple and does not factor in any future perspectives. The main activity as recognized by Wei and Wang’s comparative study is that, once people have been employed, their skills are developed and used for goal achievement in their respective organizations. While strategic HRM embraces all these traditional aspects, plans concerning competitive edge implementation initiatives are given much consideration. According to Evans and Lindsay (2014), workforce management is transactional while strategic HRM is transformational. As such, the order of transaction is different. Recruiting employees is mostly outsourced under strategic HRM. People involved in recruiting are different from the training staff. In addition to this, strategic HRM’s superiority is manifested when it concentrates on strengthening the relationship with both internal and external stakeholders. Strategic HRM embraces systematic tools while extrapolating adaptive ways of motivating employees as opposed to the traditional reward system of salary increment.
Conclusion
By comparing between the two models of HRM, it is evident why more businesses are moving towards the strategic approach. The superiority of strategic HRM is manifested by its ability to factor in long-term growth initiatives. In the technologically-defined competitive economic environment, business without strategy is a recipe for failure. As such, to remain focused on delivering quality, effective workforce management is a necessary prerequisite. The effectiveness of the workforce is a short cut towards quality assurance, which as scrutinized by Evans and Lindsay (2014), maintains a competitive edge. In summary, for organizations to remain viable in the current harsh environment, strategic HRM is the only way to go.

References
Arthur, J. B., & Boyles, T. (2007). Validating the human resource system structure: A levels-based strategic HRM approach. Human Resource Management Review, 17(1), 77-92.
Evans & Lindsay (2014): Chapters 1, 2, & 4
Festing, M., & Eidems, J. (2011). A process perspective on transnational HRM systems—A dynamic capability-based analysis. Human Resource Management Review, 21(3), 162-173.
Iles, P., Chuai, X., & Preece, D. (2010). Talent management and HRM in multinational companies in Beijing: Definitions, differences and drivers. Journal of World Business, 45(2), 179-189.
Marler, J. H., & Fisher, S. L. (2013). An evidence-based review of e-HRM and strategic human resource management. Human Resource Management Review, 23(1), 18-36.
Wei, B., & Wang, Y. (2012). The Need of a HRM Change from Traditional to Strategic with Organizational Transition: A Case Study of a Swedish High-Speed-Growth Company. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:536653/FULLTEXT01.pdfZhao, S., & Du, J. (2012). Thirty-two years of development of human resource management in China: Review and prospects. Human Resource Management Review, 22(3), 179-188.