This is an analysis of the claim that industrial relation represents the old world while on the other hand the human resource management represents the new world. The author believes that the distinction in an industrial relation and human resource management is not true. The topic to be covered on this paper is the meaning industrial relation and human resource management. The next will be the argument, the facts, and other factors that can prove the argument of the author. A conclusion will end this paper taking into consideration the key that have been discussed all throughout the paper.
DEFINITION
Industrial Relations are also called as labor relations. This is the system wherein the management of the company relates with the workers or the laborers. On the other hand, human resource management is a strategic approach to the conduct of the members of an organization for the achievement of the objectives of the organization.
ANALYSIS
The author does not believe to the argument that industrial relations represent the old world, while human resource management represents the new world. The first reason of the author for that abovementioned argument is that both terms uses or relates to the same interaction of management or the organization to the workers or it members. Hence, in posing that both terms represent different worlds are not correct. The activities in human resource management may include selection, application, and guidance to the members while industrial relations involve also the same. Human resource management can be part of the industrial relation, while the process of industrial relation can also be a part of the human resource management. Furthermore, (1989) stated that through the actors’ pursuit of self-interest, labor markets play a keep role in the establishment of wages, hours and other terms of employment. He further stated that human resource management is essentially the resolution of problems and conflicts of interest through the unilateral action by the employer based on rational calculations or through individual bargaining between the employer and employee.
According to (1989), a review of the literature in industrial relations quickly reveals that industrial relations scholar use a large number of different theoretical constructs in their research. He further stated that an important reason for this diversity is the industrial relations span a number of distinct disciplines, such as economics, organizational behavior, and sociology. On the other hand, as (1998) has stated, human resource management as a means of achieving management objectives becomes clear from an examination of four important goals of effective human resource management. An enterprise policies and practices in these areas have an impact on whether Human resource management contributes to achieving management goals.
The practices of industrial relations involve collective bargaining, which could be the core of an industrial relation whereas human resource management relates to the involvement of the members of an organization in the aspect of whole relation of it.
However, another reason that is considered by the writer is the amount of rapid changes that has been happening in this world. The rapid changes is brought about by the Industrial Revolution, the emergence of modern technology, the internet have given way to the changing of some theories and studies. The application of several theories in the traditional is not necessarily applicable in the industry today.
According to (1998), in the twenty-first (21st) century, we increasingly see a move toward the integration of methods and techniques from widespread disciplines into meta-methodologies for organization change. Methods of change are different some may see change in an organizational culture change, or organizational management change. Hence, the changes are not only in the aspect on how people relate with each other but on the process or theories that will be applicable to them.
Another reason for the emergence of change is the globalization. According to (2008), globalization refers to the process of the intensification economic, political, and cultural relations across international boundaries. It is principally aimed at the transcendental homogenization of political and socio-economic theory across the globe.
The need to understand globalization in the concept of organizational change is important. This means that the amount of independence of one country from the control of another state is not anymore that tight. In relation to the industrial relations and human resource management, the adaptability of an organization as to the way it must conform to globalization means that there is no need to say that the two represents different kind of worlds.
According to the article found in (2008), organizations operate in a global economy that is characterized by greater and more intensive competition, and at the same time, greater economic independence, and collaboration. From this statement, it can be inferred that the organizations have been laying out strategies and techniques that can be used by the organizations. The change in the global economy also dictates the amount of importance of both terms under consideration. The need of the employees or the members of an organization have sudden changes and different types of necessities, hence both the terms are use in an instance wherein the organization will be able to apply strategies which are consistent with what the members needed.
The laws or rules and regulations as to the collective bargaining is defined in the law of states, the laws governing human resources are laid down in a general aspect, which will be the basis of a company in conducting human resource management. According to (2002), organizational decision-making and problem solving, while seemingly a rational process, is also a political process. The process for an organization to take into consideration changes in the world is apparently a decision that will involve a minor prejudice to some of the rights of the employees but can be considered as an application as to what the organization know that can be of help to the organization.
CONCLUSION
Thus, it is right for the author to conclude that industrial relations and human resource management do not differ as to age of the world. The laws governing industrial relations are done in the past years, especially those involving collective bargaining. Nevertheless, the interpretation and the application of such laws are not based to what was the circumstance present in the making of the law but on the actual happening. Hence, old world is not right to be correlated with the old world, because traditionally it may seem but still the application of it is on the present.
On the other hand, the strategies on human resource management may involve the current or modern strategies that are present in the academic books or as to what several authorities may have been proclaimed, but the application of may still deal with the old habits or traditional attitudes of the employees or members of the organizations.
Furthermore, it also necessary to point out industrial relations may involve human resource management and human resource management may involve industrial relations. Both of these two factors are related to the way the management interacts with the members or the employees of the organizations.
Lastly, another factor that should be considered is the fact that both terms applies as to what is apparently present. The participation of both terms to the industry will all depend on what is currently involves. Subjecting both terms to what time it represents means that one precedes the other and the other succeeds the other. However, both are still used in the industry hence such distinction is not right.
REFERENCE:
Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment