The predominant axis in the history of strategic analysis has been the search for links between strategic decisions and business performance. Until a few years ago, the existence of significant links between business strategy and human resource management had not been raised. Research on these two dimensions of business reality had followed separate paths and, from the point of view of strategic management, the company's social perspective had been relegated to the background.
The approach traditionally followed in the analysis of human resources has been oriented towards the design of management policies and practices that favor the interests of the company's shareholders, without taking into account the very nature of the asset being studied. The consequence is that most of the studies on this subject have focused on demonstrating the existence of a positive correlation between human resource planning and obtaining superior returns (Fombrum et al., 1984; Dyer, 1985; Nkomo, 1987; Delaney et al., 1989), ignoring other issues such as the influence of worker involvement on the value creation process. So, the literature about it,far from finding empirical evidence of the supposed contributions of human resources to the achievement of a competitive advantage (Lengnick-Hall and Lengnick-Hall, 1988), it has only been able to verify the drawbacks of the application of concrete personnel policies. As a consequence, it is questioned whether human resource management is a variable important enough to achieve a competitive advantage by itself or, if it is simply a variable that needs to be taken into account together with others.As a consequence, it is questioned whether human resource management is a variable important enough to achieve a competitive advantage by itself or, if it is simply a variable that needs to be taken into account together with others.As a consequence, it is questioned whether human resource management is a variable important enough to achieve a competitive advantage by itself or, if it is simply a variable that needs to be taken into account together with others.
The authors attribute this failure to the fact that strategic changes are made in the company that are not accompanied by the necessary changes in the management of human resources so that these strategies are effectively implemented (Adler, 1988), due to excessive focus in technical problems to the detriment of human resources (Majchzak, 1988), and by the development of personnel management models that do not differentiate between generic and specific capital (Huselid, 1995).
In this work, a new perspective is developed to analyze the field of human resources and it is argued that the consequence of the lack of an adequate methodology in this field has meant that:
- Conceptually the links between human resources and business performance have not been well developed and, if there are appropriate measures to assess the impact of human resources on business performance, they have not been adequately formulated.
Thus, we can affirm that human resources can become a source of competitive advantage and that the lack of empirical contrast to date may be due to a poor positioning of efforts to optimize results. In short, in order to obtain profitability in the investments of human resources, it is necessary to promote a change in the traditional paradigm of human resources, passing from its consideration as a mere operational instrument in the organization to its full integration in its distinctive competencies.
Analysis of the problems associated with the study of human resources
You cannot implement human resources policies that contribute satisfactorily to achieving a competitive advantage if you do not start from the conviction that these resources make the difference in business results. However, when analyzing their contribution to achieving a competitive advantage, it is advisable to keep in mind that business maxim that says "you cannot manage what you cannot measure" (Ulrich, 1997). Although studies show that human resources policies increase the involvement of the worker in the company, and that the effectiveness of the organization is superior when the company considers workers as strategic resources (Wright et al.,1998) It is difficult to develop adequate measures to demonstrate that they create added value and also to convince management of the importance of human resources as a key factor in the strategy.
Models have been developed to determine the impact of human resources on the organization. However, the conclusions drawn from them and the behavioral guidelines they offer are often questioned. Thus, we have the models of Schmidt et al. (1979) and later by Boudreau (1991), both based on previous research by Cronbach and Gleser (1965). These works constitute an attempt to estimate, from the management policies of said resources, the contribution of human capital to the creation of value in the company. Its importance is determined by the fact that they demonstrate that the value contributed to the company can be quantified by a specific human resources policy, because:
- They explicitly consider the added value of human resources during the production process, since they are based on the study of increases in productivity before and after said policies. They allow calculating the stock of human capital present in the company during the entry and exit of workers in the same, since the knowledge base in the company is used as a measure of it. They allow separating the value attributable to human resource practices from the absolute value of such resources. They translate the value of human resources programs to units monetary similar to the calculation of the net present value of investments in the company.
In general, these methods are usually based on the study of the variations experienced in the productivity of the labor factor, and more specifically of the human capital as it is a determining factor of it (Koch and McGrath, 1996). However, said utility estimation models (Boudreau, 1991; Schmidt et al., 1979), are questioned for being too complex, assuming certain starting assumptions and the inherent subjectivity of them. They are also criticized because the resulting estimation is usually too optimistic, making managers skeptical about the conclusions obtained and the methods used to obtain them (Wintermantel and Mattimore, 1997). But the rejection of the previously proposed models contrasts with the absence of other more efficient indicators. In fact,reference is usually made in an abstract way to the degree of absenteeism, employee morale or level of commitment to the company. Thus, many companies, aware of the need to search for new indicators, have dedicated a large part of their time to collecting data on worker satisfaction, absenteeism, customer satisfaction and productivity, among others. However, this process lacks an adequate methodology since it is usually poorly structured. It generally does not include measurements, data collection, feedback, information on change of activities and improvement in results (Yeung, 1997). This is coupled with the fact that, once the data is collected, it is not usually shared by the entire organization and, therefore, it does not reach the points where it could be used more efficiently.The result is a lack of motivation not only for those responsible for the investigation, but also for workers, with a view to future information gathering.
In addition to the lack of reliable indicators that allow perceptions to be converted into precise estimates in order to assess the real impact of human resources on the organization, another problem inherent in studying the influence of the human factor on business success has been the methodology itself. applied. After implementing human resource strategies, and obtaining certain results, hypotheses are often raised about the possible interrelationships between human resource policies and overall business performance. If the results are important, it is understood that these really influence success (Boudreau and Ramstad, 1997) and it is planned to maintain the same line of action for the future.The consequence of using inductive reasoning to determine a posteriori which is the most appropriate set of policies for each specific organization (Delaney, 1996; MacDuffie, 1995) is that the results obtained do not serve to make generalizations. In addition, applying the logic of observation and inferences to the field of human resources has additional drawbacks (Miller, 1991):
- It is impossible to generate cases in sufficient numbers to test hypotheses. If the researcher needs to obtain all the necessary information about all the strategic decisions made or that are going to take place, the number of companies that could be studied would be very limited. Observation from the implementation of strategies implies assuming (which is risky) that what has been previously decided is implemented.Applying the study of the strategy to the field of human resources is subject to the same drawbacks as the analysis of the general strategy of the company, with the added complication that it must be studied the dependency between the two.
On the other hand, the human factor can become a source of competitive advantage as long as that importance is assigned a priori. Thus, considering the traditional function of human resources or «administrative dimension» (Golden and Ramanujan, 1985), it is assumed that the human resources department does not take part in strategic decisions. Its role is limited exclusively to administrative tasks (managing personnel payrolls or other accessory plans, for example). The indicators used under this perspective focus on the efficiency with which the personnel carry out the tasks in the company or the cost of hiring. For this purpose, traditional human resources measures are used to obtain historical data on results or level of absenteeism.Their use is explained because they are easily quantifiable and because of their availability. However, the information they provide does not serve to make predictions on which managers can act. Furthermore, performance measures based on accounting data are often criticized because they are vulnerable to differences between methods used. When the integration between the human resources department and the company's management is complete, we are faced with the so-called «integrating dimension» (Golden and Ramanujan, 1985), in which case the human resources department is configured as an active and fundamental part in decision making. This means that the ability to obtain satisfactory results cannot be measured exclusively in terms of efficiency or costs,since these measures do not assess whether the organization is successfully achieving its goals (Wintermantel and Mattimore, 1997).
For this reason, it is necessary to design other indicators of effectiveness, since the results obtained with traditional indicators are irrelevant for management. But, as well as to assess the validity of certain strategies or applied programs, we can calculate profitability or analyze market share, in the case of human resources we do not have a consensus indicator of effectiveness (Boudreau and Ramstad, 1997). The problem of measuring human resources against other financial, marketing or production indicators is that the former are less useful and therefore less accepted to guide decision-making.
Another problem related to the study of human resources is the widespread use of financial capital optimization models that implicitly assume financial capital as the resource to be optimized (Boudreau and Ramstad, 1997). This implies that in contexts of scarce resources, the organization will adopt programs to exclusively maximize the return on invested capital, not optimizing other resources, including human capital. Sometimes, it can even be counterproductive, since prioritizing profit maximization usually entails making redundancies to carry out cost reductions. The problem arises in the long term, when human capital needs cause problems of profitability and performance (Mabon, 1996), together with the negative effects on the image of the organization.Thus, the company that hires and dismisses based on the economic cycle is creating a bad reputation, the consequence of which in the medium and long term is greater difficulty in attracting and retaining qualified workers (Gerhart and Trevor, 1996). Therefore, the indicators related to the human factor do not exclusively represent a technical measure that reflects results, but must also collect information on the prestige, power and image that the company has.They must also collect information on the prestige, power and image that the company holds.They must also collect information on the prestige, power and image that the company holds.
On the other hand, analyzing the contribution of the human factor to value creation is controversial because 1) although it is difficult or impossible to objectively measure their ability to generate wealth, this does not mean that they are not valuable and, 2) the process of value creation is subject to rent appropriation problems. The explanation rests on the following two arguments:
- The agency theory (Jensen and Meckling, 1976) argues that the agent does not always act according to the interests of the principal, hence the possibility of generating both individual and collective actions by company personnel or the threat of Loss of specific human capital implies a limit when it comes to generating and using human resources, as well as the possibility of appropriating the added value that they generate. Property rights are not well defined (Grant, 1991). The company does not own people in the same way that it owns patents and physical assets (Kamoche, 1996), this coupled with the lack of a clear distinction when generating an income from what is part of the company's technology and what corresponds to human capital,makes it difficult to identify ownership of the income generated (Grant, 1991).
Consequently, if the investment is in specific human capital, the company is exposed to problems of opportunism due to the incomplete nature of labor contracts (holdup problem), which usually causes problems of underinvestment in this type of asset, which leads to medium term to a deterioration in the market value of the company (Bronars and Deere, 1993). However, the difficulty of appropriating the income generated by workers is not necessarily negative. If companies undertake certain productive activities, it is because they can appropriate the income associated with them. In the same way, individuals will provide their services if they can appropriate the benefits generated by their abilities (Kamoche, 1996). It,according to Castanias and Helfat (1991) it is an incentive to generate higher incomes in the case of managers, and according to Kamoche (1996) also in the rest of specific capital in the company. In such a way that, with the objective of appropriating the income generated, workers will demonstrate greater effort and performance, which will mean greater increases in value.
Finally, we will refer to the problems associated with traditional productivity indicators. Productivity measures generally rest on certain output indicators per employee. They are useful in terms of data collection and development, and are also easily understandable and comparable between companies, but they are not appropriate, due to:
- The complexity associated with determining the value created by workers. To measure productivity, specific measures can be used for each sector, thus, in financial services, productivity can be measured based on the number of transactions per employee and, in the manufacturing sector, based on units produced by each employee. However, in certain cases, as managers and professionals, it is problematic to determine the output of each worker, since it is difficult to pinpoint the value created in the organization in certain situations, such as the introduction of a design or the adoption of a strategic plan. The productivity of the human factor can be measured in these circumstances based on the ideas generated and implemented,since the probability of a successful innovation is greater the more ideas and knowledge the company develops (Cohen and Levinthal, 1990). Problems related to costs. In the event that the output obtained by each worker could be accurately determined, as in an assembly line, it may happen that the efficiency achieved by the remuneration based on performance is lost when incurring control and verification costs (Besanko et al., nineteen ninety six). And it can also be added that, in general, with any of the methods used, the benefits obtained may not offset the costs associated with obtaining such information (Lengnick-Hall and Lengnick-Hall, 1988). This is not always objective data because may be influenced by other indicators.A worker in a technology-intensive company may have a high output, but this does not mean that he has greater capabilities, or that he is more committed to the company, which is a fundamental question in order to achieve good results. Productivity measures they do not measure the ability of a team of workers to propose and implement solutions and therefore do not translate easily into actions for management. Ultimately, they can be considered ends, but not means. An increase in productivity is not sustained over time when workers fear that it will mean a surplus of personnel that should be dismissed (Locke, 1995). So,High productivity is not sustained in the long term if the company does not create a framework for sustained development of that productivity through other policies such as promoting job security.
In short, we observe that the measures used to date to analyze the impact of human resources on the results are based on indicators such as the efficiency in carrying out administrative tasks or, in the cost of hiring, maintaining, training and retaining the personal. But cost-based measures do not measure whether the company has successfully achieved its goals. However, from the above, it is not possible to interpret a rejection of productivity indicators or question their validity. In fact, the empirical evidence suggests that there is a positive contribution of human capital on productivity, since the elasticity produced by it is positive and, moreover, with a considerably greater effect than that attributed in previous works (Serrano, 1996).What we want to show in this work is, as previously stated, that if there are appropriate measures to assess the capacity of human resources as a source of competitive advantage, they have not been adequately formulated, which may lead to misinterpretations.
Therefore, considering the new paradigm of the role of human resources managers, the results indicators should be focused taking into account two fundamental questions: 1) the need to jointly analyze the different policies, since such circumstance allows not only to take advantage of the synergies that occur between them, but also contribute to the improvement of business results (Lengnick-Hall and Lengnick-Hall, 1988), and 2) modify the implicit tendency to design the reward system based on specific activities (number of programs of training performed or number of new contracts, for example) that do not reflect the global impact on the business, and that generate greater difficulty in retaining employees (Sheridan, 1992).
New approaches in the strategic analysis of human resources
The human resources function, from the new perspective applied, has the following objectives: 1) to develop a knowledge base, 2) to create utility for employees, clients, and shareholders and 3) to promote improved results. The organization must simultaneously achieve these goals so that this function is efficiently evaluated. However, the problem arises because companies are not able to integrate and combine different sources of information and, therefore, determine which are the crucial aspects on which to influence to generate value in the organization as a whole. We will separately analyze the relevance of each one of them.
A. Development of a knowledge base
Human capital in the company is normally acquired through experience and training by others who already have the required training. The accumulation of human capital is characterized by the existence of diseconomies of time compression (Dierickx and Cool, 1989) associated with investment in human resources, that is, the benefit obtained by a systematic investment in these resources results in greater productivity increases. that if said investment is punctual, since the benefits of training and promotion accumulate over time.
The evidence that superior cognitive ability is an attribute that follows a normal distribution among the population (Jenson, 1980), together with the existence of a high correlation between performance and knowledge base (Snow and Snell, 1992), assumes that individuals with superior abilities are valuable and scarce. If we add to this that the know-how of the workers is one of the main pillars of obtaining a sustainable competitive advantage, the importance of committing more resources in training becomes evident. The result is an increase in the specificity of the worker's skills, while decreasing the possibility that other companies may use those same workers in different contexts. These specific and non-transferable skills create added value in the company,but they can be instantly lost if key employees leave the company (Gómez-Mejía et al., 1997). In order to increase the quantity and quality of the know-how stock, the company must, first of all, promote learning by doing, since the tendency to subcontract results in a reduction of the core of the company's competitive advantage (Hall, 1993). Second, promoting worker involvement in the company through policies such as contingent pay (Pfeffer, 1998), since this increases the predisposition to acquire new knowledge and skills, and encourages the existence of initiative on the part of workers (Pfeffer, 1994). And third, to develop retention policies for qualified workers (Huselid, 1993),or reaching collusion agreements between companies to avoid labor mobility (Cappelli and Sing, 1992). The objective of this is to prevent the loss of capital that a company suffers if a worker separates from it, and to avoid having to hire a worker with lower productivity, due to their lack of specific skills (Becker, 1962).
As previously stated, the capacity of a business is usually valued through the ability to manage capital and generate added value, so it is implicitly assumed that capital is the resource to be maximized. The emphasis placed on maximizing the value of each share attributes a preponderant role to efficiency measures such as market value or earnings per share, and increases the importance of obtaining economies of scale and making high capital investments. This has led to the abandonment of other objectives, especially those related to human resources, basically because companies have been unable to demonstrate the profitability of their investments in human capital (Wintermantel and Mattimore, 1997). This is the specific case of training:Under almost no circumstances can its consequences or effectiveness be measured. It could be subjected to a profitability calculation, but said analysis is complex, if not impossible to carry out, since its effects are only observed over time and, in addition, must be evaluated from the perspective of the progress of the business in its set by constituting part of a whole.
The result is that it is successful companies that invest in training (Capelli & Singh, 1992), almost as an act of faith due to their conviction that there is a connection between personnel management and benefits (Pfeffer, 1998), without considering account the context in which such knowledge will be developed. When designing its personnel selection and training policies, the company must set the objective of creating a knowledge base, since future challenges in the organization require flexibility and adaptability on the part of workers, circumstances that only manifest themselves in groups with superior cognitive skills, always bearing in mind that the skills acquired by workers are not useful to other companies, since in this case they would be subsidizing competitors (Becker, 1964).
B. Wealth creation for employees, customers and shareholders
A company creates wealth when it achieves a competitive advantage that allows it to generate income above the opportunity cost of resources or, in other words, increases the value of the shareholders. However, business success is also conditioned by the demands of other groups with interests in it: clients and workers. The strategic models supported by such a principle are not new; in fact, they have been used in strategic thinking for many years (Freedman, 1985). However, they have been recently modified (Kaplan and Norton, 1992, 1993), due to the need to propose a model that effectively values the impact of human resources on the organization. This model is built on the logic that the company must satisfy the requirements of three groups: investors,clients and workers. Investors require financial performance measured in any variety of ways but aiming for economic benefits, market value and cash flow. Customers look for quality and services, which can be measured through market share, customer loyalty, customer retention capacity, and other customer-focused indicators. And workers want the company to be a safe and healthy place, personal fulfillment, or personal self-fulfillment, aspects that can be measured by the actions of employees and the organization.They can be measured through market share, customer loyalty, customer retention capacity and other indicators focused on customers. And workers want the company to be a safe and healthy place, personal fulfillment, or personal self-fulfillment, aspects that can be measured by the actions of employees and the organization.They can be measured through market share, customer loyalty, customer retention capacity and other indicators focused on customers. And workers want the company to be a safe and healthy place, personal fulfillment, or personal self-fulfillment, aspects that can be measured by the actions of employees and the organization.
If a company's results are associated with investments in human resources programs, it is necessary to analyze whether the superior performance is cause or effect, or in any case, what part of the superior performance corresponds to investments in human resources. Boudreau and Bergman (1991) interpret that there is a feedback loop in which value is generated. In this way, said value generation process must be analyzed following a circular path in which the results are at the same time informative inputs that impact on the ability of human resources to become a source of competitive advantage. Thus, starting from the consideration of the human factor as a strategic resource, if policies are developed that promote the commitment, involvement and satisfaction of the worker in the company,This will result in an improvement for the shareholders, through the increase in the share price (which is generated by the perception of the shareholders about the good work of the company), and in the customers, by offering a higher quality product. and at a more competitive price.
B. 1. Relations with shareholders
In this section we will analyze whether the signal that a company that enjoys a good image in the management of human resources emits to the market supposes a change in the perceptions of the shareholders and investors that may affect the company through a modification in the price. thereof (Hannon and Milkovich, 1996). This issue is particularly important if management's primary objective is to increase shareholder value.
The analysis of the effectiveness of human resources policies based on the interpretation of the signals that are sent to the market suffers from an empirical contrast, however, the studies assume the fact that companies that enjoy a higher reputation tend to attract to more qualified workers, which translates into increases in the knowledge base, generation of greater benefits and the achievement of a competitive advantage (Boudreau, 1988). There are basically two theoretical foundations on which this statement is based: the efficient markets hypothesis (Fama, 1970) together with the signaling theory (Spence, 1974).
The signaling theory (Spence, 1974), affirms that, in the absence of appropriate and complete information, decision-makers rely on observable factors or signals as substitutes for it. The signals that a company emits to the market, such as having adequate and efficiently managed human resources policies, serve to reduce the limited rationality of the market and stakeholders. The market efficiency hypothesis (Fama, 1970), maintains that the information issued by the company has an immediate and predictable effect on the company's price, and therefore, will reflect the perceptions of investors about the future profitability of the organization based on such information.
The acquisition of human capital has many characteristics in common with the acquisition of other strategic factors. Thus, managers face the problem of selecting the correct inputs in a situation of uncertainty (Amit and Schoemaaker, 1993). The information necessary to predict the future productivity of a worker is normally unavailable and only manifests when the decision to hire is made and that person is already in the company (Koch and McGrath, 1996). In this way, the most productive applicants are interested in undertaking certain actions to signal, even if inaccurately, their potential. The company, for its part, must signal its "good work" in managing its human resources in order to create a good job option for potential applicants,since workers with greater intellectual capital choose the company where they want to work (Drucker, 1997; Bowen and Siehl, 1997).
In this way, a signal emission current is created between the company and the workers. On the one hand, job applicants spend resources on education and training to signal their ability to the company, and the company, in turn, must invest in human capital training to send favorable signals to the market. This favors the creation of a reputation for the company, the result of which is the generation of incentives to attract workers with greater capabilities that will increase the stock of knowledge, while having more adequate personnel will reduce its turnover. In short, having a human resources policy that is interpreted positively by the market implies, not only achieving the objective of efficiently managing resources,but also benefit from the reputation that is created.
However, we should not ignore the fact that interpreting the signals that a company emits is the least controversial because it is a matter of perceptions, and therefore the analysis of the effectiveness of human resources policies must be complemented with others. more objective indicators. In fact, Abowd, et al. (1990) claim that an announcement of layoffs and restructuring can generate negative expectations for shareholders if they are perceived by the market as a financial crisis. However, subsequent studies (Lee, 1997) confirm that the market may interpret a restructuring announcement as a positive sign that the company is facing its problems, although this perception may be erroneous since, sometimes,a restructuring may simply result from the imitation of the leader's strategy by a follower (Haveman, 1993).
However, the literature in this regard seems to confirm at least the cause-effect relationship between human resources policies and changes in the company's price in the market. This seems evident from the moment in which the existence of significant differences in the price of a company is verified when it carries out reactive or proactive, permanent or temporary, small or large, individual or serial restructuring (Lee, 1997).
B.2. Relationships with customers
The systems of employee involvement in the company generate value for customers. Thus, remuneration based on performance implies an increase in productivity (Murray and Gerhart, 1998), which will be reflected in a more competitive price of the company's products (Ornatowski, 1998), an improvement in results, lower costs labor and an increase in product quality (Murray and Gerhart, 1998). This is coupled with the fact that, if the workers feel identified with the company, they will develop specific capacities for the job, which are associated with higher levels of productivity (Castanias and Helfat, 1991).
However, organizations not only create value through the product they market, but also through the exchange of information and knowledge generated in these relationships. Intangible assets such as reputation and image can emerge from these. This occurs when company personnel interact with customers, creating a set of relationships that constitute the so-called "relational capital" of the company (Saint-Onge, 1996). Often communication networks are developed between key workers and the rest of the company staff, even with end consumers. From this may emerge a network of relationships that is difficult to duplicate and which can form the basis for creating a competitive advantage. And, although these relationships are too complicated to carry out a rigorous analysis of them,it is reasonable to think that the knowledge and confidence that develop over time have value only within this context (Becker, 1964). This coupled with the fact that such circumstances are difficult to identify and duplicate on the part of competitors makes this advantage sustainable (Barney, 1991).
The organization must bear in mind that, the creation and dissemination of knowledge are intangible activities that cannot be supervised or forced by the company, they only take place when individuals cooperate voluntarily, hence the relevance of designing a set of management policies. of the human resources that involve them with the objectives of the company.
C. Encourage improvement in results
There is no empirical evidence sufficiently contrasted to reveal the true capacity of human resources to generate superior returns. However, we can refer to a series of investigations that have collected significant results in this regard. Thus, in Ostroff's study (1995) about the effects of an improvement in the quality of human resource practices on the performance of the company, four fundamental indicators for the performance of the business are analyzed: market value, value accounting, productivity, and sales. In this analysis, companies are grouped into four groups defined according to the quality of the policies applied, and the value of such parameters is compared. So,A substantial increase in all values is observed when comparing the results relative to those companies considered worst in their human resources management with those that stand out for their excellence in designing employee involvement strategies in the company.
The effectiveness of the organization is superior when the company considers workers as strategic resources (Wright et al., 1998) and develops human resource policies that involve the worker in the company. This is observed in the studies carried out on American companies that show that they obtain better returns when they combine flexible production, work teams, extensive training programs, and the application of contingent wages (Huselid, 1995; MacDuffie, 1995). Similar conclusions are drawn from a study on performance in the banking sector (Delerey and Doty, 1996) in which a positive correlation was observed between job security and profitability, confirming that specific capital retention policies in the company carry an additional benefit:it makes the company's staff adopt a long-term vision of their work, which results in an improvement in the company's results. It is also proven that if a company creates a culture and a pleasant environment for its workers, it will not have to invest resources in security and control, in addition to reducing absenteeism at rates below the sector average (Hartnett, 1996).
Schneider and Bowen (1985) observed that human resource policies influenced workers' attitudes and that this in turn was correlated with greater customer satisfaction. Ulrich et al. (1991) managed to establish relationships between stability of workers in the company and customer satisfaction. Tornow and Wiley (1991) found that worker satisfaction in their job position was related to measures of overall business performance.
Worker involvement policies in the company help to increase trust among employees, facilitate the predisposition to acquire new knowledge and skills, and encourage initiative by workers (Pfeffer, 1994) in addition to net increases in value, fruit of an increase in (Hannon and Milkovich, 1996):
- The stock of knowledge in it, since the hiring of the best candidates for each position is favored, The volume of sales in the market, as a result of an improvement in relations with customers, The company's price, since The share price is a function of the estimated value of the company's future earnings, reflecting investors' perceptions of the organization's profitability.
4. Conclusions
The underlying idea of the value generation process described above is that, in order to base obtaining a competitive advantage in human resources, one should not seek the achievement of objectives in isolation, but rather maximize the overall result of a series of linked objectives. The organization must be aware that human resources policies are not exclusively aimed at increasing productivity and generating short-term benefits. A broader vision should be promoted, in which 1) the generation of a long-term knowledge base, 2) the increase in value of the company as a whole and 3) the recruitment of qualified workers, are configured as partial goals but interrelated, implying a global improvement of the business. The company must therefore assume,that they are investments that generate synergies and whose results are observable in the long term and, therefore, the life cycle that follows must not be interrupted as a consequence of financial crises. Consequently, the optimization models that advise disinvesting in this type of asset to maximize capital returns are in clear contradiction with the new perspective applied to the study of the human factor as a strategic resource.Optimization models that advise disinvesting in this type of asset to maximize capital returns are in clear contradiction with the new perspective applied to the study of the human factor as a strategic resource.Optimization models that advise disinvesting in this type of asset to maximize capital returns are in clear contradiction with the new perspective applied to the study of the human factor as a strategic resource.
Bibliography:
- ABOWD, JM, MILKOVICH, GT, HANNON, JM (1990): «The effects of human resource management decisions on shareholder value» Industrial and Labor Relations Review, vol. 43, pp. 203-236.ADLER, PS (1988): «Managing flexible automation«. California Management Review, vol. 30, 3, pp. 34-56.AMIT, R., SCHOEMAKER, PJH (1993): «Strategic assets and organizational rent» Strategic Management Journal, vol. 14, pp. 33-46.BARNEY, JB (1991): "Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage" Journal of Management, vol. 17, pp. 99-120.BECKER, GS (1962): "Investment in human capital: a theoretical analysis" Journal of Political Economy, vol. 70, pp. 9-49 BECKER, GS (1964): Human Capital. National Bureau of Economic Research, New York.BESANKO, D., DRANOVE, D., SHANLEY, M. (1996): Economics of strategy. Wiley BOUDREAU, JW (1988): Utility analysis.In L. Dyer and G. Holder (Eds.), Human Resource Management: Evolving roles and responsibilities. Washington: Bureau of National Affairs, vol. 1, pp. 1-186 BOUDREAU, JW (1991): Utility analysis for decisions in human resource management. In Dunnette, MD and Hough, LM (eds.). Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (2naed.). Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologist Press, vol. 2, pp. 621-745.BOUDREAU, JW, BERGMAN, RL (1991): «Using performance measurement to evaluate strategic human resource decisions: Kodak´s experience with profit sharing» Human Resource Management, fall, 393-410.BOUDREAU, JW, RAMSTAD, PM (1997): "Measuring intellectual capital: Learning from financial history" Human Resource Management, vol. 36, 3, pp. 343-356.BOWEN DE, SIEHL, C. (1997): «The future of human resource management: March and Simon (1958) revisited» Human Resource Management Journal, vol. 36, 1, pp. 57-64.BRONARS, SG, DEERE, DR (1993): «Unionization, incomplete contracting, and capital investment» Journal of Business, Vol. 66, 1.CAPPELLI, P., SINGH, H. (1992): Integrating strategic human resources and strategic management. In D. Lewin, OS Mitchell, & P.Sherer (Eds.), Research frontiers in industrial relations and human resources: pp. 165-192. Madison, WI: Industrial Relations Research Association.CASTANIAS, RP, HELFAT, CE (1991): "Managerial resources and rents" Journal of Management, vol. 17, pp. 155-177.COHEN, WM, LEVINTAHL, DA (1990): «Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation» Administrative Sciences Quaterly, vol. 35, pp. 128-162.CRONBACH, LJ, GLESER, G. (1965): Psychological tests and personnel decisions. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. DELANEY, JT (1996): Unions, human resource innovations, and organizational outcomes. Advances in Industrial and Labor relations.DELANEY, JT, LEWIN, D., ICHNIOWSKI, C. (1989): HR policies and practices in American firms. US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor-Management Relations and Cooperative Programs,BLMR 173. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Officer.DELEREY, JE, DOTY, H. (1996): «Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource management: Test of Universalistic, contingency, and configurational performance predictions» Academy of Management Journal, vol. 39, pp. 820.DIERICKX, I., COOL, K. (1989): «Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage» Management Science, 35, pp. 1504-1511 DRUCKER, PF (1997): Toward the new organization. Leader to Leader (San Francisco; Josey Bass).DYER, L. (1985): Strategic human resources management and planning. In Rowland, K. and Ferris, GR (eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management. JAI.FAMA, EF (1970): «Efficient capital markets: A review of theory and empirical work«. Journal of Business Research, vol 27, pp. 27-34.FOMBRUN, CJ, TICHY, NM, DEVANNA,MA (1984): «A framework for strategic human resource management». New York. Wiley.FREEDMAN, E. (1985): Strategic Management: A stake-holder approach. Boston, MA: Pitman.GERHART, B., TREVOR, CO (1996): "Employment variability under different managerial compensation systems" Academy of Management Journal, vol. 39, 6, pp. 1692-1712.GOLDEN, KW, RAMANUJAM, V. (1985): «Between a dream and a nightmare: On the integration of the human resource management and strategic planning processes». Human Resource Management, vol. 24, pp. 429-452.GOMEZ-MEJÍA, LR (1992): «Structure and process of diversification, compensation strategy, and firm performance» Strategic Management Journal, vol. 13, 5, pp. 381-397.GÓMEZ-MEJÍA, LR, BALKIN, DB, CARDY, RL (1997): Human resources management. Prentice Hall. Madrid GRANT, RM (1991):"The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: Implications for strategy formulation" California Management Review, vol. 33, 3, pp. 114-135.HALL, R. (1993): «Intangible resources and capabilities» Strategic Management Journal, vol. 14, pp. 607-618.HANNON, JM, MILKOVICH, GT (1994): «The effect of human resource reputation signals on share prices: An event study» Human Resource Management, vol. 35, pp. 405-424.HARTNETT, M. (1996): «Men's wearhouse tailors employee support programs» Stores, pp 47.HEBINIAK, LG, JOYCE, WF (1985): «Organizational adaptation: Strategic choice and environmental determinism» Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 30, pp. 336-346.HUSELID, MA (1995): «The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity, and corporate financial performance» Academy of Management Journal, vol. 38,3, pp. 635-672. JENSEN, MC, MECKLING, WH (1976): "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency cost and ownership structure" Journal of Financial Economics, vol. 3, 14, pp. 305-360.JENSON, AR (1980): Bias in mental testing. New York: The Free Press.JOHNSON, WH (1998): «An integrative taxonomy of intellectual capital: Measuring the stock and flow of intellectual capital components in the firm» Paper Presented in 2Measuring the stock and flow of intellectual capital components in the firm »Paper Presented in 2Measuring the stock and flow of intellectual capital components in the firm »Paper Presented in 2naWorld Congress on the Management of Intellectual Capital, Hamilton, Ontario.KAMOCHE, K (1996): «Strategic human resource management within a resource-capability view of the firm» Journal of Management Studies, vol. 33. 1, pp. 213-233.KAPLAN, RS, NORTON, DP (1992): "Putting the balanced scorecard to work" Harvard Business Review, vol. 5, pp. 134-147.KOCH, MJ, MCGRATH, RG (1996): "Improving labor productivity: human resource management policies do matter" Strategic Management Journal, vol. 17, 335-354.LENGNICK-HALL, CA, LENGNICK-HALL ML (1988): "Strategic human resource management: A review of the literature and a proposed typology" Academy of Management Review, vol. 13, 3, pp. 454-470 LEE, PM (1997):"A comparative analysis of layoff announcements and stock price reactions in the United States and Japan" Strategic Management Journal, vol. 18, pp. 879-894.LOCKE, RH (1995): The transformation of industrial relations? A Cross-National review. In Kirsten S. Wever and Lowell Turner (eds.) The Comparative political Economy of Industrial relations (Madison, WI: Industrial Relations Research Association).MABON, H. (1996): «The cost of downsizing in an enterprise with job security». Journal of Human Resource Costing and Accounting, vol. 1, pp. 35-62.MACDUFFIE, JP (1995): "Human resource bundles and manufacturing performance: Organizational logic and flexible production systems in the world auto industry" Industrial and Labor Relations Review, vol. 48, pp. 197-221.MAJCHZAK, A. (1988): The human side of factory automation. San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.MILLER, P. (1991): «Strategic human resource management: An assessment of progress» Human Resource Management Journal, 1, 4, pp. 23-39.MURRAY, B., GERHART, B. (1998): «An empirical analysis of skill-based program and plant performance outcomes» Academy of Management Journal, vol. 41, 1, pp. 68-78.NKOMO, SM (1987): «Human resource planning and organization performance: An exploratory analysis». Strategic Management Journal, vol. 8, 4, pp. 387-392.ORNATOWSKI, GK (1998): "The end of Japanese-style human resource management?" Sloan Management Review, vol. 2, pp. 73-84.OSTROFF, C. (1995): «Human Resource Management: Ideas and trends in personnel» June 21, Issue number 356, CCH Incorporated.PFEFFER, J. (1994): Competitive advantage through people. Boston, MA: Harvard business School Press. PFEFFER, J. (1998):"Seven practices of successful organizations" California Management Review, vol. 40, 2, pp. 96-123.SAINT-ONGE, H. (1996): «Tacit knowledge: The key to strategic alignment of intellectual capital» Strategy and Leadership, vol. 2, pp. 10-14.SCHMIDT, R., HUNTER, J., PEARLMAN, K. (1979): «Assessing the economic impact of personnel programs on workforce productivity» Personnel Psychology, vol. 35, pp. 333-347. SCHNEIDER, B., BOWEN, D. (1985): "Employee and customer perceptions of service in banks: Replication and extension" Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 70, pp. 423-433.SERRANO, L. (1996): «Indicators of human capital and productivity» Journal of Applied Economics, vol. 4, 10, pp. 177-190.SHERIDAN, JE (1992): «Organizational culture and employee retention» Academy of Management Journal, vol. 35, pp. SNOW, C., SNELL, S. (1992):"Staffing as strategy" In Schmidt, N. and Borman, W. (eds.) Personnel Selection, vol. 4. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. SPENCE, AM (1974): Marketing signaling: informational transfer in hiring and related screening processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. TORNOW, W., WILEY, J. (1991): "Service quality and management practices to organizational level measures of performance" Personnel Psychology, vol. 36, pp. 27-48.ULRICH, D. (1997): «Measuring human resources: An overview of practice and a prescription for results» Human Resource Management, vol. 36, 3, pp. 303-320.ULRICH, D., HALBROOK, R., MEDER, D., STUCHLIK, M., THORP, S. (1991): «Employee and customer attachment: Synergies for competitive advantage» Human Resource planning, vol. 14, pp. 89-104.WHINTERMANTEL, RE, MATTIMORE, KL (1997): «In the changing world of human resources:matching measures to mission »Human Resource Management, vol. 36, 3, p. 337-342.WRIGHT, PM, MCMAHAN, GC, MCCORMICK, B., SHERMAN, WS (1998): «Strategy, core competence, and HR involvement as determinants of HR effectiveness and refinery performance» Human Resource Management, vol. 37, 1, pp. 17-29.YEUNG, AK (1997): «Introduction: measuring human resource effectiveness and impact» Human Resource Management, vol. 36, 3, pp. 299-301.measuring human resource effectiveness and impact »Human Resource Management, vol. 36, 3, pp. 299-301.measuring human resource effectiveness and impact »Human Resource Management, vol. 36, 3, pp. 299-301.
