HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

From Personnel Management to Human Resource Management



From Personnel Management to Human Resource Management

Introduction

This discussion will elaborate on the emergence of the modern field of Human Resource Management to personnel management. In order to do so adequately, the discussion will give extensive relevance to the particulars of personnel management that distinguished it from Human Resource Management. In addition, the discussion will also highlight the dimensions that necessitated the evolution of management practices.

Discussion

In order to adequately understand the evolution of personnel management that brought the world Human Resource Management, it is imperative to begin by shedding light on the foundations that constitute the concept (Zickiene & Dasevskiene, 2009; Bilgin, 2007). Personnel management is preceded by a time when there was no concept of Human Resource Management altogether; and the management of employee affairs was handled almost entirely by the accounts department which would monitor employee attendance (Merkevicius & Uturyte-Vrubliauskiene, 2008; Ling-Hsiu & Shang-Ping, 2009). Other employee affairs were managed by the supervisors and other senior management personnel who would address issues as they cropped up. There was no pro-active approach and a fully reactionary perspective was utilized in which employee affairs were considered to be matters that were of no priority within the walls of the organization (Bredin & Soderlund, 2007; Brannon, Kemper, Heier-Leitzell & Stott, 2010). Employees were responsible for the degree to which they were engaged in the organization and the dedication with which they did their work - without any accountability of the employer's role in the scenario.

However, as organizations began to grow larger towards around the 17th century, it became necessary to establish separate offices with personnel hired for the management of employee affairs (De Vos, Dewettinck & Buyens, 2009; Carniene & Vienazndiene, 2007). Personnel management however, still remained largely unrecognized since the management of employee affairs was considered to be an issue that was of no primary importance. Policies made around that time were designed to concentrate entirely on the performance of the employees with little to no relevance being given to matters such as motivation, training, compensation and other such matters (Heery, 2008; Chalofsky, 2007). Employees were generally subjected to on-the-job training through apprenticeship and mentor programs that were largely unregulated and unguided. It was a time when the profit figures were all that mattered to the management (Sturges, Conway & Liefooghe, 2010; Wright, 2008).

As organizations grew larger, the temporary desks that were established for the management of employee affairs became permanent and employers began to realize the organization's improved performance when employee issues were addressed adequately (Taplin & Winterton, 2007; Brio, Fernández & Junquera, 2007). As the temporary desks became permanent, personnel management took root. Establishing personnel management departments enabled organizations to invest into employee development, motivation and training in order to drive employees towards improved performance - the result of which became evident in the fundamental priority that remained unchanged: higher profit figures (Carmeli, 2008; Landeta, Barrutia & Hoyos, 2009).

At this phase, personnel management was essentially a term that served as ...