HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT

Human Resource Development

Human Resource Development

Introduction

Commonly, an organisation's culture is defined from an integrative perspective where it is believed to consist of those beliefs, assumptions, values, norms, artefacts, symbols, actions, and language patterns shared by all members (Alvesson 2002, 23-44). In this view, culture is thought to be an acquired body of knowledge where the common interpretation and understanding of shared meanings among members give the organisation its identity and its members a sense of identity. An integrative approach assumes clarity and organisation-wide consensus among members and discounts ambiguity.

However, organisational culture can also be viewed from at least two other perspectives. A differentiation perspective takes a more decentred view. The analysis centres not on the whole, but rather on consensus as it is arrived at only within the boundaries of subcultures, which often conflict with each other. Outside the confines of the subcultures, ambiguity and inconsistency exist organisation-wide (e.g., where members may say one thing and do another). A fragmentation approach discounts consensus and consistency or inconsistency as defining characteristics of culture and focuses on ambiguity as the essence of culture. Here, agreement and disagreement are constantly changing and no stable organisation-wide or subculture consensus exists.

Within organisational culture, performance appraisal (PA) is used as a measurement tool for evaluating individual performance and intended to improve the performance and productivity of workers, as Redman, Snape, Thompson & Ka-Ching Yan (1999). In their research they defined as the process of identifying, observing, measuring, and developing human resources in organizations to meet employee and organizational goals. Although Redman, Snape, Thompson & Ka-Ching Yan could not defined its particular boundary within the frame work of HRM. But their contribution brought a dual change in PA culture.

Culture as a Symptom

Organisational cultures have many manifestations, including formal policies and practices that are written down in company handbooks, informal norms like cooperation or competition, espoused or enacted values, stories, rituals, dress norms, and even the effects of architecture or interior furnishings on how people interact at work (Schein 2004, 11-19). Culture is the underlying patterns of meaning associated with these manifestations. The meanings of cultural manifestations can be interpreted in a variety of ways, depending on the interests of the employee or researcher doing the interpretation.

Organisational culture research has often had a covert or explicit managerial bias, ignoring or devaluing the views of organisational members who disagree with the claims and values of top managers. Critical organisational culture scholars have done the opposite, often focusing on the views of lower level employees, interpreting results in ways that tacitly or explicitly ignore or discredit managerial employees' opinions and preferences. A third group of cultural scholars adheres to traditional claims of research objectivity, denying that their results reflect any political ideology or serve the interests of one group rather than another. (Many would disagree, arguing that objective neutrality is impossible to attain.) Politically relevant differences between managerial, critical, and ostensibly neutral organisational culture research represent a vector that cross-cuts differences in theoretical ...