OU blog

Personal Blogs

Alfred Anate Mayaki

Concerning Sustainable HRM, Ethics and Stakeholder Theory

Friday, 1 Dec 2023, 20:40
Visible to anyone in the world
Edited by Alfred Anate Mayaki, Sunday, 3 Dec 2023, 08:32

Annotating a moderately cited but relevant paper on the above topic by Greenwood and Freeman (2011), the authors point to HRM research as being seen increasingly through the lens of positivism. Positivism encompasses scientific methods of research that are underpinned predominantly by what is quantifiable and what is more measurable. These research approaches are what Greenwood and Freeman refer to as the prevailing epistemological, and theoretical context through which HRM is characterised (2011:271) and a lens which it is consistently framed through, primarily as “explicitly normative”. Furthermore, Dieronitou (2014) argues that the consequences here are that HRM’s positivist approach is “top-down” (in terms of knowledge creation) and “deductive in nature” (2014:6). By top-down, the author implies an emphasis on “ontology” which is prioritised in the author's figurative research “hierarchy” at the expense of what Dieronitou (2014) refers to as research "methodology”. 

HRM is seen by many as both normative and positivist. Positivist frameworks have however been linked to ethics, both in financial ethics (Aragon, 2010) and more so contemporarily through contributions to stakeholder theory and HRM (Greenwood, 2002).

Stakeholder theory when compared by Greenwood and Freeman (2011) to the pluralist industrial relations school (2011:275), is said to have grown in eminence in recent years, which is true. As Ferrary, (2009) argues, HR’s stakeholders are “parties” who possess “resources” that are required by the organisation to exist. Ferrary writes, “the framework of stakeholder analysis enables escape from a purely instrumental approach to HRM and avoids reducing our understanding of conflicts within companies to mere antagonism between employees and employers” (2009:31). It should be noted that Ferrary later cites Durkheim’s century-old text on value creation in the context of organisational studies.

Lastly, I will end on this revelation. In the paragraph entitled “Sustainable HRM: Is it a potential solution?” the CIPD (2019) according to a factsheet defines sustainable HRM as an ethical form of practice and delivery focused overarchingly on internal relationships, employee development, and cooperation. The author argues that sustainable HRM “recognises performance outcomes, that are broader than financial outcomes”. The CIPD’s eleven bullet point definition in this factsheet is surely a small make-peace to what may be a widespread belief that the normative and positivist approaches to HRM research in the literature are pervasive.

Enjoy your weekends.

References

1.     Aragon, G. A. (2010) ‘Normative and Positive Approaches to Financial Ethics’, in Financial Ethics. [Online]. United States: Oxford University Press

2.     Dieronitou, I. (2014) “The Ontological and Epistemological Foundations of Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches to Research”, International Journal of Economics, Commerce and Management, 2(10), pp. 1-17

3.     Ferrary, M. (2009) “A Stakeholder’s perspective on Human Resource Management”, Journal of Business Ethics, 87(1), pp. 31-43 [Online] Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/40294903

4.     Greenwood, M. R. (2002) “Ethics and HRM: A Review and Conceptual Analysis”, Journal of Business Ethics. [Online] 36(3), pp. 261–278

5.     Greenwood, M. and Freeman, R. E. (2011) “Ethics and HRM: The Contribution of Stakeholder Theory”, Business & Professional Ethics Journal, 30(3/4), pp. 269-292

-------------

This post was written by Alfred Anate Mayaki, a student on the MSc in HRM, and was inspired by the work of the CIPD's Ed Houghton (2019) in a factsheet entitled "Sustainable HR: A 'green' fad, or a realistic model for change?"


Tags: CIPD, HRM, ethics, Michelle Greenwood, stakeholders, positivism
Permalink Add your comment
Share post
Alfred Anate Mayaki

Notes on Public Value and Selective Hiring

Thursday, 30 Nov 2023, 21:09
Visible to anyone in the world
Edited by Alfred Anate Mayaki, Friday, 1 Dec 2023, 08:49

As a postgraduate on the MSc in HRM at the Open University Business School, in a 2-part blog post, I took the liberty to summarise the basic premise of EBP with respect to Gifford’s hierarchy and the four types of evidence (Open University 1a, 2023). In my summary of Gifford’s hierarchy, I also critiqued the perspective of academic and practitioner involvement in EBP citing the work of Dr. Carol Gill, an Associate Professor of HRM at Melbourne Business School. In speaking with Dr. Gill, whose work on evidence-based knowledge and management outlines various flaws in practitioner involvement, I was interested to observe the pluralist[1] foundations in existence with respect to HRM.

Because HR’s function is primarily non-client facing, in other words, because its role is fundamentally to operationalise other departments in a manner that optimises outlay and adds value, there are added pressures internally to continuously improve[2] its core offering as a budgeted expense. The setting for this pressure is increasingly a contested showdown between staunch advocates and unwary dissenters to the implementation of EBP. The pluralist debate concerning HR’s value in this respect is principled upon the idea that both quantitative and qualitative research practices can only denigrate HR’s value (Hughes and Hughes, et. al. 2021).

Now, the case for implementing EBP into people management is a relatively recent one, so much so that as recently as October this year an online article was published in People Management (Elder and Nikodem, 2023) which agrees with my blog post on Gill (1998) and her work concerning this thing called an awareness deficit. Elder and Nikodem (2023) state, “there is [perhaps] less awareness of academic evidence” that supports the argument in favour of implementation into HR, stating this lack exists with respect to employee empowerment programs and unconscious bias training initiatives. It should be noted that a perceived lack of awareness is one of the central arguments put forward by Gill (1998).

Discovering the CIPD Professional Map and the value of selective hiring

Vandenabeele and co-authors (2013) build on the work of Moore (1995) who writes on the topic of creating value in the public sector. Their paper states that the concept of strategy as it relates to HRM should be conceptualised more robustly than Moore’s case-study orientation. In the work of Moore, he essentially argues for something referred to as “public-sector production” (1995:53) which Moore explains is a type of public value that is not associated with a “physical good” or “consumed service” but rather created in the mind of the public executive to improve the lives of “particular clients and beneficiaries”. To implement this, Moore notes, in the case of strategic implementation[3] in diversified conglomerates, that because of a nuanced business context, key personnel could develop into, what he calls a “strategic asset” (1995:68).

How does this extract from Moore relate to evidence-based practice and recruitment? Well, firstly, Moore is resonated by Leisink and Steijn (2008) who regard “selective hiring” as part of a bundle of best HR practices (2008:118). Secondly, it supports the case for selective hiring, which is regarded by several labour economists as the artistic translation for Pissarides (2000) and his search and matching formulae (Merkl and van Rens, 2019). Vandenabeele et. al. (2013) point out in their paper what Moore fails to achieve; to define a structural framework that outlines the findings of his extensive study for application in the conglomerate context. Regarding the strategic advantage of key personnel in a conglomerate, the work of Vandenabeele and co-authors is resolved by the CIPD Profession Map (Elder and Nikodem, 2023). The Professional Map sets out what the CIPD call the “international benchmark”.

References

1.     Elder, S.R. and Nikodem, M. (2023) “Considering the application and relevance of evidence-based HR”, People Management, Available at: https://www.peoplemanagement.co.uk/article/1845833/considering-application-relevance-evidence-based-hr [Online] (Accessed on 30 November 2023)

2.     Gill, C. (1998) “Don’t know, don’t care: An exploration of evidence-based knowledge and practice in human resource management”, Human Resource Management Review, 28(2), pp. 013-115

3.     Hughes, J., Hughes, K., Sykes, G., Wright, K. (2021) “Moving from what data are to what researchers do with them: a response to Martyn Hammersley”, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 24(3), pp. 399-400

4.     Learmonth, M. (2008) “Speaking Out: Evidence-Based Management: A Backlash Against Pluralism in Organisational Studies?”, Organization, 15(2), pp. 283-291

5.     Leisink, P. and Steijn, B. (2008) “Recruitment, Attraction and Selection”, chapter in Perry, J. and Hondeghem, A. (eds) ‘Motivation in Public Management: Call of Public Service’, Norfolk: Oxford University Press

6.     Malloch, H. (1997) Strategic and HRM Aspects of Kaizen: A Case Study. New Technology, Work, and Employment. [Online] 12 (2), pp. 108–122.

7.     Merkl, C. and van Rens, T. (2019) “Selective Hiring and Welfare Analysis in Labour Market Models”, Labour Economics, 57(1), pp.117-130

8.     Moore, M. H. (1995) ‘Creating Public Value: Strategic Management in Government’, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press

9.     Open University 1a (2023) “Gifford’s Hierarchy and Carol Gill on the “Knowing and Belief” Gap”, [Online] Available at https://learn1.open.ac.uk/mod/oublog/viewpost.php?post=279019 (Accessed on 24 November 2023)

10.  Pfeffer, J. and Sutton, R. I. (2006) ‘Hard Facts, Dangerous Half-Truths, and Total Nonsense: Profiting from Evidence-Based Management’, Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press

11.  Pissarides, C. (2000) ‘Equilibrium Unemployment Theory’, Second Edition, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press

12.  Vandenabeele, W., Leisink, P. and Knies, E. (2013) ‘Public value cation and strategic human resource management: public service motivation as a linking mechanism’, chapter in Leisink, P., Boslie, P., van Bottenburg, M. and Marie Hosking, D. ‘Managing Social Issues: A Public Values Perspective’, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 37 – 54 [Online] Available at: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781781006962.00010 (Accessed on 30 November 2023)


[1] Here, practitioners should be weary of what some are calling “evidence-based misbehaviour” (Learmonth, 2008) that is, insubordination with good intentions (Pfeffer and Sutton, 2006).

[2] This has been studied extensively in the UK and can be attributed directly to the Japanese management concept known as Kaizen (Malloch, 1997) which has brought forth the modern principles of Lean and Six Sigma as applied to Human Resource Management. One of the most important of these principles is of course, ‘improvement’.

[3] There is also a compelling case for operative implementation.

-----------
This post was written by Alfred Anate Mayaki, a student on the MSc in HRM, and was inspired by a book by Mark H. Moore entitled "Creating Public Value: Strategic Management in Government"

Tags: Carol Gill, Mark Moore, strategy, recruitment, evidence-based practice, CIPD
Permalink
Share post
Alfred Anate Mayaki

A Primer on Board Effectiveness and Diversity

Wednesday, 1 Nov 2023, 08:19
Visible to anyone in the world
Edited by Alfred Anate Mayaki, Sunday, 5 Nov 2023, 12:36

Earlier in the week, I was preparing to write something for Medium, before discovering this Open University online blog space. While I was still drafting the blog, I ran into an old friend of mine who shared an interesting read by Michael O'Dwyer from the Financial Times. I was somewhat concerned, as concerned as she was. Not only about the findings of the survey but about the decision-making processes that must have been taken to arrive at this clearly egregious course of action. What course of action am I referring to? 

I am referring to a preference to hire those with senior-level experience over candidates with diverse backgrounds. This is something I will refer to as an anti-diversity challenge.

An anti-diversity challenge, in my view, is any unfortunate course of action that contradicts the commitment an organisation has previously made towards promoting diversity (in this case, we are speaking of anti-diversity within boards).

Observing the rationale for greater board effectiveness through the lens of diversity

As per the article by Michael O’Dwyer, Spencer Stuart, the executive search firm conducting the study, noted in the firm’s 2023 UK Board Index that in the last 12 months and for the first time, the number of ethnically diverse and female directors in publicly-listed firms had fallen. Why was this the case? Indeed, Spencer Stuart reports that this phenomenon is owed to the fact that boards are seemingly self-perpetuating entities, preferring to hire candidates who have previous experience spearheading publicly listed companies.

We know that to their detriment UK Boards are lacking (somewhat severely) in HR expertise, according to recent CIPD research. But in order to combat this dilemma highlighted in the FT, what approach to board search is needed by listed companies in order to achieve the objective of greater board effectiveness?

Well, we all believe effective boards are competent boards. Right? Effective boards are able to execute their duties with maximum impact and without unnecessary hindrance. As such, the optimal search process should ideally attribute its resources impartially.

According to the FT’s columnist, Michael O’Dwyer, there is a caveat to the underlying findings of the Spencer Stuart Board Index. That caveat is that, despite the disappointing findings of the annual survey, there was an increase in women becoming senior independent directors. A role that is often a “good stepping stone” to the position of board chair.

A worthy caveat. However, this cannot possibly be the kind of workplace we want to work towards in our respective journeys or to promote on behalf of our organisations. Can it?

-------

This post was written by Alfred Anate Mayaki, a student on the MSc in HRM, and was inspired by the work of Stephanie J. Creary (2023) in an MIT Sloan Management Review article entitled, “How Diversity Can Boost Board Effectiveness”.


Tags: board effectiveness, CIPD, research, diversity
Permalink
Share post

This blog might contain posts that are only visible to logged-in users, or where only logged-in users can comment. If you have an account on the system, please log in for full access.

Total visits to this blog: 74726