Why personnel management is importance

All kinds of policies related to personnel or workforce can be framed out effectively by the personnel manager. He advices the line manager as a staff specialist- Personnel manager acts like a staff advisor and assists the line managers in dealing with various personnel matters.

As a counsellor ,- As a counsellor, personnel manager attends problems and grievances of employees and guides them. He tries to solve them in best of his capacity. Personnel manager acts as a mediator - He is a linking pin between management and workers. He acts as a spokesman - Since he is in direct contact with the employees, he is required to act as representative of organization in committees appointed by government.

He represents company in training programmes. View All Articles. Similar Articles Under - Personnel Management. Not in productivity. Recent figures show a decline in employee productivity for the United States. Not in enthusiastic employee acceptance of new technology, machinery, or equipment in factories, of stripped-down offices, or of efficiency gains in the ever-expanding service industries.

Human resources management seems to be mostly good intentions and whistling in the dark or averting unionization. And the results of the s suggest that we may not even be holding our own. The poor management of the work force in this country is damaging the nation and our standard of living. It is making us uncompetitive with the Japanese and some other Asians, the West Germans, the Swiss, and many others. I do not wish to exaggerate the gloomy aspects of this picture.

A handful of large and certainly many medium-sized and smaller companies appear to have made their work forces into competitive assets. And surely modest progress has occurred nearly everywhere. For the most part, sweatshops are a thing of the past. Workplaces are better lit and ventilated and are generally safer than in the past.

The atmosphere at work is less coldly formal, and decision making more participative. Managers are more aware of feelings and relationships and make fewer overt demands of employees. Regardless, in most companies the results of enlightened people management are simply more comfort, more relaxation, more freedom from pressure, more security, more benefits, and higher pay, not more productivity and loyalty.

Why do so few companies actually make use of the greatest competitive weapon of all—the powerful resources of motivated, energized, cooperative, trusting people?

Few managers need much convincing about the importance of people. Achieving wholehearted cooperation, energy, and commitment from large numbers of employees is difficult, so managers are often unrealistic in their hopes. Concepts concerning the management of large numbers of people often convey contradictory messages to managers.

Critical problems in the corporate management of personnel, such as the place of human resources management HRM in corporate decision making, the role of personnel staff, and a lack of sufficient human resources management know-how at top management levels, remain largely unresolved.

Some management assumptions concerning HRM undermine the efforts of many managers, no matter how well intentioned they may be. Capturing the loyalty of hundreds or thousands of individuals in one business enterprise so that they direct their energies toward the goals of the company is enormously difficult. The goals of the corporation are long-range and general in nature—profit and growth.

But employees usually focus on short time horizons to meet their needs in wages, salaries, working conditions, fair treatment, and promotion. Drawing a connection between these sets of goals is not easy. Their subsequent alienation can subvert the efforts of managers and personnel officers to build morale.

Given that working in a social, industrial operation requires people to give up many freedoms and that groups acting collectively play on that loss of freedom to better their own short-term interests, that the work force is uncommitted should be no surprise.

Seen this way, the fight for a motivated work force is an uphill battle. Short-term economic interests are in clear conflict. Employees see their share of the pie as being cut smaller to serve up larger profits to owners. The antiestablishment seeds sown in the late s and early s are bearing fruit, and more employees than ever are unwilling to subject themselves wholly to an organization or the discipline of a trade, profession, or team.

Given these obstacles to collaboration, that cooperation occurs within the corporate world at all is miraculous. Managers use many different organizational techniques to achieve collaboration and productivity. Researchers can take large credit for the multitude of concepts and tools on hand. They must also, however, accept responsibility for the fact that their different disciplines often conflict and work at cross-purposes. For example, in most companies managers employ four different disciplines to improve employee performance and relations—human relations, labor relations, personnel administration, and industrial engineering.

Since human relations itself includes at least three major schools, six fairly distinct sets of ideas and concepts can be at work in the same organization at the same time. Theories of group behavior deal with social interaction and interpersonal relationships through such tools as theories X and Y and sensitivity training.

The individual behavior school of human relations focuses on individual psychology, leadership, power, authority, responsibility, and the subconscious.

Organizational development goes further and focuses on the need for people to reason together about their common difficulties. Its central belief is that employees can often manage themselves better than managers can. Labor laws, public policy, the economics of wages and costs, demographics and manpower management, collective bargaining, contract administration, and grievances are under the purview of labor relations.

It sees politics at the plant, corporation, union, state, and national levels together with labor laws as keys to any situation. Its stance is usually adversarial and tough—sticking to contract terms, denying exceptions, avoiding precedents, and building a powerful position for bargaining. Activities involved in managing large numbers of people in the aggregate—namely, recruiting, selecting, training, compensating, and developing them—are the province of personnel. This discipline holds that if companies perform those tasks well, they will acquire a set of employees with appropriate motives, habits, and behavior.

Personnel holds that if managers are consistent and apply policies that induce desired behavior, a good climate will result. This school concentrates on designing jobs to fit technology and human capabilities and controlling performance with standards based on industrial engineering studies.

It holds that efficiency and productivity are products of economic rewards and hard-nosed, disciplined supervision. Each of these four schools focuses on acquiring an effective, loyal, and committed group of employees but in very different ways.

My concern is not that disagreement arises among these experts or that they have different approaches to the same problem. I do not think that one school is right and the others wrong, that one is better than another, or that any should be ignored. On the contrary, they all offer ideas and tools that are often very effective, though perhaps not when used at the same time.

Big hat, no cattle. Usually companies do not know how to put these ingredients together in one effective corporate system, for the four schools each offer managers contradictory advice. Two things appear to be missing from the systems.

One is a comprehensive unifying concept. Another is a general manager who can effectively mix and match these necessary ingredients. Unfortunately, such a person is a rare breed. The third set of problems holding back progress toward better people management has to do with the structure of corporations, their size, diversity, and allocation of authority. As corporations grow in size and diversity, the difficulty of managing employee relations increases. Here are some human resource management definitions by authors to iterate the importance of this department.

Ricky W. There are many functions of human resource management that help an organization stay successful. From recruitment and training to managing disputes, maintaining a healthy work-life balance, and all payroll responsibilities, the importance of human resource management in an organization is immense. Human resources management not only helps to keep employees happy and well trained, but it also ensures that the company is working within the guidelines of regulations and solves any liability issues that may arise.

Without a proper human resources management department in an organization, that company is almost guaranteed to fail. More important functions of human resources management include recruitment, training and development, appraisals, job reviews, career planning and development, employee benefits, employee safety, and employee motivation , just to name a few.

Human resources management is so important to organizations because there are many objectives of this department that can drastically improve or negatively affect the organization.

One major objective of human resources management is to drive productivity by ensuring competent employees are hired and remain up to date with training initiatives.

Without proper human resources management at your organization, your departments will have a hard time working together which will cause your business to suffer.