The Concept of Strategic Human Resource Management has a widely use but very arrangement of definition. Research has present reasons that if the concept is to have any social systematic value, it should be defined in a way as to characterize it from traditional personnel management, and to allow the development of testable interpretation about its impact.
Concept of Strategic Human Resource Management Thought out the research many definitions arose, strategy provides a great structure to support within which s set out what the company is considerate to do about managing people in general or in ordinary areas of human resource management. The strategic is the intention and plan to use human resources to achieve company goals, and it is part of a strategic human resource management process that leads to the development of overall specific performance by human resources management.
It depends highly on the viewpoint being taken by human resource management. It can be express as traditional personnel management, as a mixture of personnel management and industrial relations, and as part of strategic, managerial role. Research has monstrance the benefits of bringing human resource management and knowledge and experience of management. That will reinforces the support and enhance organizational effectiveness of performance. A typical handbook usually defines human resource management as the management of the company’s employees ( Scarsdale and Leading, 1 988, p. 4).
Armstrong (2000) defines human resource management as strategic personnel management emphasizing the acquisition, organization and motivation of human resources. This input is a group of handbook that discovers how human resource management and knowledge management have organized and roved guided by experience. Researcher firmly believe that it will set the stage for enlarging and enriching the research base on the association between human resource management, and manager that are knowledgeable, and experience this will set a good first step in the concept of strategic human resource management.
Strategic Human Resource Management is one of the most significant and important ideas to arise in the business world, and management during the past two decades. Policy makers at Government have move leading ideas in order to encourage high performance and human capital management. In this case research will demonstrate the boundary in bringing together human resource management and the knowledge and experience management to incorporating two disciplines having the employee at the centre.
Human capital is a major asset for competitive benefit or perhaps the most essential point regarding human resource management is that a person and their interpersonal relations can become and are treated as resources, which could be measured either good or bad. The horrific side is that the recourse is frequently treated as not necessary they need to support the constructive did, that recourses are important and necessary for an organization to become special.
Viewing the resources of the employees has the potential to become desirable and real resources for the company if they are to a high scale valuable and in short supply, peerless, Nan-substitutable and suitable. The company has the opportunity of generating human capital advantage through recruiting and retaining excellent person through capturing a collection of exceptional human potential, latent with powerful forms of unexpressed information. Organizational process advantage can also be understood as a function of conventional evolved, socially difficult, causing confusion in the processes, I. . Group base learning, and also irritate efficient collaboration is most of the time very difficult to duplicate In a nutshell, human resource advantage can be traced to better people in organizations with better process (Boxful and Purcell, 2003, up. 85-86). There are two things to keep in mind. Human resource management does not manage people as such, their personal and interpersonal uniqueness, which could be a well thought-out resources and constructive organizational advantages.
Second, human resources management are not brought into the company by means of recruitment and developed within the company by asset in their personal capacities and deployed by fostering of interpersonal and inter-group relation. There are other important issues that come in play. How are human resources management composed what is their structure and how it is changing Corresponding with author name O’Donnell et al. (2003), individual are evaluated through their core competencies, understanding, know-how, flexibility, network connections, and most of all their experiences.
Along with hose components, knowledge has become most emphasize. The basic, cost- effective resource is no longer capital, natural resources but knowledge. What distinguishes work results from each other is the share of embedded knowledge (Burton, 1 999, p. 4). In their study of the Irish CIT sector ( O’Donnell et al. 2003) found that approximately two thirds of organizational value is perceived to be composed of intellectual capital and that over half of this capital stems directly from people working, thinking and communicating.
Maybe the most thoughtful difference in the study is knowledge as a objective state in person minds implanted by groups and societies – a constructivist approach, and knowledge as an intention state of things – objectivism approach. This similarity is to some extent made between tacit and explicit knowledge. The supporter of the second view would argue that knowledge management is a conscious strategy of getting the right knowledge to the right people at the right time and helping people share and put information into action in ways that strive to improve organizational performance ( Doodle and Jackson, 1 998, p. ). Knowledge and experience management is not about managing the information is about making change total business cultures and strategies of companies the ones that can value learning and sharing the knowledge. Ever if part of the information or data, as a culture, company structure, of the communication process and information can be managed. Knowledge itself is doubtful one can manage the processes of learning somewhat than managing it. The approach of constructivist is accepted not only as individual knowledge, but it also exists in the social framework of a group, companies and the social order.
Although the knowledge is formed and lay on the hands of individual employees, it is also formed through common communication and is embedded in the collective structure of the company. Researchers have evaluated in detail the individuality of human resource management and knowledge management and establish that human resources management is about managing individuals effectively and if the individual has most valuable resource is knowledge, then both came close to interconnected.
Even more, when both share familiar behavior and goals when constructing work units, roof, cross cooperation between the both, and flow of communication within the company. Compare the cycle Of human resource management and knowledge management the processes is the same I. E. Information, acquisition for recruiting the right person for the right job, and helping each other to learn and grow as individual professionals. Also, it can promote individuals to participate in professional networks and communities of practice that extend past the organizational limitations.
It creates a supportive environment and investment in the training development of the o-worker. Transforming various forms of training and creating an establishment of information sharing, training organization or units which access the training needs and that can provide a good evaluation that will lead to a better learning organization. Conclusion By this assessment Researcher suggests a corporative approach between human resource management and knowledge management, one that will move forward information in both fields as well as developing organizational efficiency.
If human resources management overlooks the necessary management of knowledge and does not adjust its concepts and perform to the multi-faceted environment of knowledge, it puts itself in jeopardy. The same situates of knowledge management if it does not concentrate on the necessary management of personnel, their interpersonal communication and their relations with their relevant organizations.