This article deals with the importance of the practical treatment of a comprehensive and integrated approach to business management, the knowledge, capacities and values of people understood as human resources.
As part of the Improvement of Labor and Salary Policy and Business Improvement in the country, it is essential to become aware of the need to anticipate and prepare theoretically and practically to seek new ways for the development of human resources in companies and entities, according to the needs of each place and the permanent changes required by the Business Improvement process.
It is especially important at this time to clarify the contents and functions of the Human Resources Department, assuming that the mission is to plan, maintain and develop the resources of the personnel in achieving the strategic objectives set out in each location.
Today, the trend among both our businessmen and academics is to favor system treatment, as well as to carry out human resource management, thinking of people as resources. So, unlike in previous years, the debate is no longer focused so much on whether it is necessary to establish the systems, as on the elements that make them up, or the model to be adopted, and especially on the operation of the system as such; that is, the degree of integration that is achieved from people's resources.
It is about operationalizing what is apparently clear in conception. However, we consider that there may be misunderstandings, or even insufficient clarity about our own conception of the problem.
Regarding «model», understood as an example to be imitated, and the possible doubt as to whether or not we have our own model, we make the following reflection. Our Employment Policy provides certain principles and rules that make it possible to establish, in turn, the principles and procedures for managing human resources in the company. The management of human resources that is carried out in our company can not be behind or in contradiction with the principles established for our society. It is then about putting into practice the principles and procedures established to model the management systems in each company.
The codification of experiences according to certain properties and relationships, the model, and the properties, relationships and attributes treated with a systemic approach at the company level, is the necessary link between model and system. The one does not replace the other; complement each other.
Before entering the object of the article, it is necessary to make some clarifications, as an author, about the terms that are used today, and that are often even used interchangeably and synonymously. One of these is precisely that of leadership and management.
If Management is realization, and the fundamental actions and functions that characterize it express active action and range from diagnosing and planning, to doing or carrying out and controlling, Management means making sense of those actions, based on principles, policies and strategies. It also means hierarchical level.
So they are complements, and to the same extent that management takes up the challenge and creates an environment favorable to the relative autonomy and the necessary decision-making power, it can facilitate or inhibit the actual management of the activity.
Without attributions and faculties that allow to take an active part in the decision making related to the activities in each place, the management can be extraordinarily limited. However, the activity can be directed through pre-established regulations and procedures, without the responses at each moment not necessarily being the most appropriate. It is then about overcoming this state of affairs.
The harmonization of the activities of human resource management and management is essential, to achieve specific responses at any time and place, as required by a process of decentralization and within the framework of relative business autonomy.
In this sense, the most important thing is the conceptual framework that is established and the principles that preside over it, and it should not occur, due to confusion, that the human resources management and the system that is designed work on the basis of rules and procedures Inflexible, without space to manage, and with the danger of bureaucratic orientation basing human resource management on traditional functions.
It is also necessary to remember, and raise awareness, that you can not pretend or propose to do management, waiting for indications from higher levels. But, it is necessary to have clarity and to have elaborated the policies for the management of human resources, which will give meaning to management.
The powers and functions currently given, it is necessary to use them, to continue advancing. If the need to implement and develop the « Workforce Management System « is announced in the General Bases for Business Improvement, it is to seek the best use of the workforce “avoiding excessive centralization and labor regulations that affect this process".
The Ministry of Labor and Social Security and the Institute for Labor Studies and Research (IEIT) have worked to support companies in the application of improvement, preparing compendiums containing the most important Principles and Concepts to take into account to design their own systems, without contradictions with the fundamental elements of a management system, or the conceptual frameworks that some organizations have been working on and introducing, nor with their established policies and procedures, but rather completing them to facilitate their application at the company level that it is where it must be designed, established and developed, and for it to really work with a systemic approach.
A necessary parenthesis, as to whether it is "Human Resource" or "Work Force". It should be remembered that a few decades earlier, an academic debate known as the Cambridge Controversy arose, which sought to differentiate labor and capital from the previous economic and organizational models and theories, as equal inputs to the production process and that were acquired, of course. as merchandise.
So Capital Homogeneity was replaced by Capital Heterogeneity, trying to elevate human labor. But, in practice, human labor is again reduced to the status of accumulative capital, which is why there is so much emphasis on training, and today, on knowledge management, as intangible assets.
This path led in subsequent years to the Theory of Human Capital, and to Intellectual Capital, of which Human Capital is now part. If a resource is any element or factor that gives value to the company or entity, the human resource, without distinguishing people from other resources, or even considering it as a determining factor, does not differ from any other merchandise in market societies.
This is demonstrated by the methods that are proposed today to value intangible assets, and which are based on considering the market value of the company; Successful or best-looking companies?
So, without going into subtleties or semantic questions, the fact is that in a good way, neither is it a labor force, less force every day, neither people as resources, nor intellectual capital valued at market prices, comes to mean for us what really is the human resource; which is the company itself today; are the Values. Capacities, Knowledge, Experiences of people.
The truth is that the name of human resources has spread among us and people are thought of, along with the terms in use in the world. And, it has not only spread, but with this terminology they are called the functional areas that people run in organizations and companies. The same happens with the term or concept of System that we will deal with later.
At this time you should ask yourself some questions and reflect on the answers. The first is What organizational model supports the implementation and development of a systemic approach to managing human resources? What is the possibility that a human resources system is currently being developed in our companies?
To respond, we must necessarily refer, more to the approach or philosophy than to the organizational model that our company follows as a generality. Although it is in frank evolution from administrative, normative, indicative, and functional approaches, and that related to human resources, it is closer to the development of personnel, towards organizational and strategic approaches that allow us to start organizing operational areas and group functions and design strategies., beyond the administrative treatment of the personnel, it is a process that goes slowly, which should not be confused with gradualness when changes are carried out.
It is not enough to do things well, if this does not make sense for the entire organization, and if all the workers do not actively participate, and if they do not perceive that it is beyond the administrative, functional, "mechanistic" approach, in such a way that involve everyone.
It should also be emphasized that although the different approaches are not mutually exclusive and it is most likely that in practice they occur, not sequentially but rather merge, the truth is that the best way to reach higher stages is to plan strategically the steps to achieve. The deficiencies and insufficiencies of a strategic planning of the human resources management and for its own development, has been and is, a constant of the companies.
Some authors point out that strategic planning is a matter of the financial sphere, unaware that human resources activities are also economic, but above all, the necessary strategic projection of human resources, which marks substantial differences with traditional mechanistic and fragmentary organizational approaches.
When dealing with the company with a systemic and strategic approach, there can be no disciplines or activities, neither technical nor social, that seek to “take over” the situation, with actions that can harm and prevent the necessary interdisciplinarity from advancing. In this sense, it is necessary that all actors in the company's “value chain” participate in strategic planning, both the “internal network” and the “user network” and the “supplier network”. Consequently, strategic planning must be done by Human Resources, Finance and Technology, among others.
In our companies, as a general trend, a strategic approach has not yet been reached, which more than supporting other areas and activities and reconciling the different needs and responding with reactive actions, is seen, understood and applied as a set of activities; or more, as processes, with proactive actions, aimed at integrating all other areas and activities, with knowledge by the other functional areas of the instruments and tools specific to the strategic objectives of human resources.
How important is the strategic nature of human resources? The essential difference is that the functions performed by the human resources area are strategic functions to the detriment of the operational ones, there is greater decentralization, and the entire company, that is, all workers " know, can, do and want " to participate in the management. Therefore, we say that this approach coexists with the organizational and functional approach, but the functions are projected, if you want, they are more complex, and go beyond the functional areas and the technicians and specialists dedicated to it.
As an example, the planning of personnel needs is not limited in any way to the calculation of current needs, but must go to a "forecast" of the needs, and not only numerical needs, but "needs" of the worker, and implies an analysis and evaluation of the jobs, in a personalized way, with which planning is already interrelated with organizational aspects.
It is not possible that the functions and powers are decentralized to the level of the managers of the structural organizational units, and not to the level of the heads of the functional areas of these units, or that they are not delegated to them. In this way it is difficult for them to function as "management teams", much less to design or manage strategies. Therefore, this path does not prepare the company for the strategic approach.
The heads of human resources at any level must leave their mission, content and close projection of payroll processors and application of disciplinary or salary measures, and expand their functions, which implies expanding powers so that they can define and determine quality, productivity, efficiency, effectiveness, labor skills and competitiveness of the entity.
It is also not clear many times that in order to provoke and produce the necessary changes, it is not enough to make commitments or implementation schedules, which in addition do not take into account the work to be done, both at the individual level (values, knowledge, abilities, motivations, interests) as at the level of the collectives and the entire company (leadership values, management functions, processes, structure), which enhance or inhibit the readiness for change.
In the Management literature, the use of the term change is profuse to explain the transformations that take place. If there are fewer doubts about the transformations that are taking place, it is not so about the qualitative importance of the consequences. In other words, to what extent current transformations may or may not lead or continue to produce needs for transformations.
It is not for pleasure that the functions of Diagnosing, Planning and Control are proposed as the main ones for an integrated system in the company, such as the Company itself, or the Human Resources System. It must be understood that with the current content of work and functions, integrative models that allow working in a system are not achieved.
Table 1
The objective of the systems is not to catch up, nor to compete with "models" but to improve decision-making focused on the future and reduce uncertainty in business management, internal and external. This, of course, is not achieved by separating the execution of decisions, nor individual and collective responsibility for what is done and how it is done.
Without entering into disquisitions about the “P” as it is usually called, the truth is that the strategic approach should serve for Preveer (appreciation with a certain degree of confidence in the evolution of a trend based on data and hypotheses), which complements with Planning (conception of the desired future organized in a project with specific purposes) and Prospecting (look to the future destined to clarify the present actions).
Of course, this is not easy, and it is not achieved by spontaneous generation, but with a clarity of philosophy, what to do and how to achieve it in practice. The work has to be individual to individual, and taking into account all individualities.
When mentioning Control as a function within a system, it is good to clarify that it cannot be carried out in the same way as before. If faculties are granted, that is, authority is transferred or delegated, policies, principles are established, and procedures are elaborated by the company itself, it means that the role of the different management levels changes qualitatively. The powers and functions given to the company do not exempt it from controls. But, these begin with self-control and feedback, because otherwise controls are multiplied and not because of this they become more effective.
And, authority is transferred precisely to lighten controls. What it is about then is to control the use of the faculties, which starts from analyzing the Objectives, Procedures and Results; is Management Control. It is not a matter of repeating the controls at each level, asking for the same data, information or indicators. The most important control is the one that guarantees the achievement of the company's objectives, and the first interested party is the company itself. It is the way that brings one step closer as possible to what is planned.
There are elements that facilitate the evolution and application from the functional and organizational approaches to the strategic and systemic approach to human resources. The Business Improvement stimulates and demands the definition of the vision, the mission and the elaboration of the strategic objectives. This means that, more in the short-term than in the long-term, the company's own organizational conception cannot continue to be based on the job or on traditional functions, that is, low-profile, poorly integrated. It is essential to evolve towards integrated functions and with the vision of the company as an organizational unit. (see table 2)
Table 2
For years, IEIT researchers with field work in a group of companies, which made it possible to carry out multiple experiments, verified the low degree of integration of the business organization, fundamentally referring to the elements of the work system. It was an alert for companies to prepare to face new ways of organization, because otherwise they were not in the best situation to start an improvement process.
It is not surprising, nor to continue verifying what is known, since the lack of integration is inherent to the functional and operational, departmental organization, to the extreme division of labor existing in our companies according to the prevailing philosophy in our country, and in much of the world until yesterday.
The stages do not have to be forced, but it is necessary to elaborate and propose particular strategies in each place according to the existing situation, to reach degrees of greater integration, that is, those that represent the systems. Otherwise, neither financial management nor commercial management, nor technological or knowledge management, can provide the expected results in today's conditions. Controls will also be partial, fragmented and incomplete, forcing controls to be made from controls to controls.
A System, in this case, the human resources system, by the very definition of a system, cannot function and be sustained on the basis of a predetermined organization at the job level. A system is a higher level to reach, since it differs substantially from any set of elements. A system built like human resources is made up of elements between which a certain set of relationships is established. The starting point is the "whole" as the synthesis of the parts, and it works as such not in itself, but by the people who form it.
The possibilities of application of the human resources system is determined by the need, understanding and knowledge of those who work daily in the functional areas of agencies and companies, that the mission, content and functions of human resources should evolve to provide responses at the level of the "business system", each day more comprehensive and integrated, which will allow: the implementation of new organizational and management forms, the implementation of quality management systems and new technologies.
Operationally, it is essential for any subsequent step that companies make an accurate diagnosis of their current state. To seek a harmony of values between people and the company, it is necessary to know both people and the organization, satisfy them, provide them with a clear vision, develop adequate specific policies, rules and procedures, minimum specifications and information necessary for reflection. and action of each person and of the whole. Always keep in mind that the essence of any system of direction and management of human resources are the principles that support it.
Table 3
In summary, we are in a process of transition and changes towards more comprehensive approaches, as part of the Business Improvement process. The functional approach has not been surpassed, much less has the strategic approach to human resources been reached as a general trend, neither in the country nor in the world.
To speak of a "post-human resource" approach as some authors have recently referred, to emphasize people and their values, and their participation that complements and does not contradict administrative provisions, as opposed to functional and administrative approaches, and more recently to that of human resources management, it is necessary to overcome philosophies, principles and even technical and technological concepts, but above all, practices. It is not possible to speak of "organizational values" in developed capitalist societies when in practice values are established against people.
Values that correspond to the needs and interests of workers that are reflected in the leadership and management of human resources. How to speak of values that go against the benefit of the workers, and the employment is considered as a privilege, and in some parts as a rare privilege.
How to do it if the participation of workers in decisions at the level of collectives or at the level of companies in developed capitalist societies, which was advocated a few decades ago, today are considered "subversive practices" by some ideologues, under the protection of neoliberal policies.?
So is it a matter of jumping to a “post human resources” stage to reach an agreement or to avoid it?
If the “post human resources” approach means agreement of the parties, humans ”, then yes, it is necessary to move there. But, "value valuation" is just as important then as it is for today's more functional and organizational approaches to human resources. The problem is not solved, as some authors claim, valuing personnel only for their training, capabilities and contributions to the organization, at the market price of the company.
Due to the way in which the valuation of intangible assets is conceived today, Capital Homogeneity is not exceeded, nor does it favor the “formation of values” of individuals or organizations.
For this reason, we insist on the wide and active participation of workers, as an instrument of business management and direction, capable of overcoming traditional stages and approaches, valuing people as individuals and as part of groups. In the same measure, it will stop being less administrative and more comprehensive.
It is not necessary to wait for a “post human resources” stage, nor to marvel at its possible magic, but rather to “work” on the “organizational culture”, the “individual and collective values”, “new integral organizational forms”.
On the other hand, it is also essential to privilege the social disciplines that deal with these problems, overcoming the "maximization" of the technical disciplines, which far from approaching the necessary trans-functionality and interdisciplinary work, distances it.
In our society, the active and effective participation of workers is a sine qua non condition, as an element of decision in the processes, as an element of the organizational culture, so that the direction and management of human resources is considered that of all workers.
Bibliography
- Alhama, RB; Alonso, FA; Cuevas, RC; Business Improvement. Realities and Challenges. Social Sciences Publishing House, Havana, 2001. Well, 1998; «Strategic Management Model by competencies», Internet, Knowledge Management.comDrogonetti and Ross, 1998; «Intellectual Capital», Internet, GestióndelConocimiento.comGonzález, LR; "The collective participation in the company", Prospectus MINBAS, 2001Píriz, RS 2001; «New ways for the organization of human resources functions», Internet, GestióndelConocimiento.comChávez SD; Replacing paradigms. Viña del Mar, Chile, 2001.
