Rapid Essay Researchers We offer fast essays with the best content
Title: Project Case Study Individual Report
Length: 2000 words (10% either way) (excluding references and appendices)
Building and learning from your group work, as reflected in the WIP Submissions (this is assessment 1 named WIP it separate for part A and part B I will give you’re a together A&B ) and Formal Presentations (assessment 2)-both group, you are required to write a report analysing your case study organisation from a minimum of two HRM topics covered in the unit-in the group part our organization is Australian department of immigration and border protection (please see our WIP A&B and formal presentation PPT know more detail about our organization and our topic focus and issues) Your analysis must use concepts and theories learnt in the unit and recommendations must be the result of the analysis.(your concept analysis must use 80% form my text book Kramar, R., Bartram, T., De Cieri, H., (and Noe, R. A., Hollenbeck, J. R., Gerhart, B. & Wright, P. M.) (2014).
Human Resource Management: Strategy, People and Performance (5th Edition). McGraw-Hill. ) Also when you use it please shown the page number in the in-text reference)
In your analysis, you need to cite at least 8 scholarly/academic (refereed) HRM related journal articles. (please notices when you make reference list make one is academic reference, one is other reference you can know this format form my WIP or presentation PPT)
Report marks will be awarded on the following:
• Identification of topics, discussion, analysis, and recommendations;
• How succinct, focused, convincing and persuasive the argument was; and
• Depth of research, referencing and report readability.
Recent HRM Related Textbooks
Kramar, R., Bartram, T., De Cieri, H., (and Noe, R. A., Hollenbeck, J. R., Gerhart, B. & Wright, P. M.) (2014). Human Resource Management: Strategy, People and Performance (5th Edition). McGraw-Hill.
Noe, R.A. & Winkler, C. (2012) Training and Development Learning for Sustainable Management 2e, Sydney: McGraw-Hill.
Phillips, J. & Gully, S. (2012) Strategic Staffing, Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
Truss, C Mankin, D and Kelliher, C (2012), Strategic Human Resource Management, Oxford, United Kingdom, Oxford University Press.
Next is detail for our WIP part , because it has a colour code style analysis, my tutor also want us use this colour code style in our individual report for the analysis, please have look and got idea. In my group part we use two topic is managing diversity and attraction and retention, please follow the presentation PPT in the report also need and use 3-4 issues in each topic. And the marking criteria available.
After individual report slids there are more detail about colour code style you can have look.
End page I have provide some useful reading that my tutor provide you can have look.
You can have got more detail for this report it need 2 appendices(it not including words), one is reflection for group work (I can do it by myself would you mind when I finished have edit it by your own word make it same writing style with the report.
Also I will upload some useful reading that my group remember used in our group part. Please have look. thanks
WIP Submission Part B
0. Conducting Analysis – using theories or concepts from the textbook to analyse practices in the case study organisation – the ‘Individual’ Colour Coded Slides (CCS) – (one slide per individual)
Each member of the group will provide a single colour coded slide, using the standard template format (which will be available via Moodle), to demonstrate their understanding of description, analysis and the application of an HRM theory or concept as applied to an organisation.
One of the lessons learnt from previous HRM classes has been that students who don’t understand early enough the appropriate standard of readability, structuring and referencing requirements, will often do very badly in their Individual Reports. So the CCS are an opportunity for students to workshop these requirements and receive feedback before their final WIP Submission is submitted.
As the requirement is for one CCS for each member of the group, it is suggested that each individual group member develop their own slide, but then have the group collectively review it and recommend improvements. To reinforce this collaboration and review opportunity, the mark for the CCS will be a group mark. A critical element of the CCS will be to ensure appropriate referencing is included – both a full Harvard reference and appropriate in-text referencing. Further explanation of the colour coding approach is contained in Section 4.
Note: to ensure that all individual members contribute equally, individual members of the group who do not contribute to this assessment item in any way (unless Special Consideration applies) will receive 0% for their WIP Submission, but it will not affect the overall group assessment score for other members of the group. This is to factor in group members who may withdraw from the unit or who are not contributing. Obviously, groups, at any time, should inform the lecturer if one of these has occurred.
The CCS will require each member of the group to choose a relevant HRM individual theory or concept from the Unit Textbook. Once a particular HRM theory or concept has been chosen by one group member, no one else in that group may duplicate that theory or concept.
Each individual CCS should contain:
• A full Harvard reference;
• a brief descriptive summary of the theory or concept (1 paragraph); and
• application of this theory or concept to the specific case study organisation as if it would be material in a final Individual Report (so it is critical to include in-text references) (1-2 paragraphs).
The slide will also need to be colour coded by whether the content is organisational description (red), HRM theoretical description (yellow), analysis (light blue) or recommendations/implementation strategies (green). Appropriate references must also be used and these are likely to be either red or yellow depending on whether they are about the organisation or are from the HRM textbook.
In the first paragraph you should provide enough ‘theoretical’ background in order to apply it effectively and with some depth to your organisation (some description and analysis). One approach might be to include a small number of critical theoretical requirements, and then apply them (step by step) to your organisation in the later paragraphs in order to support a persuasive argument to justify your recommendations.
Elements of the later paragraphs might include:
• What does the organisation currently do (in relation to the problem)?
• What’s wrong with the way they do it (the deficiency?)
• What does HRM theory or concept tell us (possible solution?)
• What specific recommendations do you have for the organisation?
Some of these elements may only be a sentence or two. Remember, while we are looking for a lot of content in this slide, it should still be readable (so the font size should not be too small). Where in-text references are used in the CCS that are not from the Unit Textbook, then groups should ensure that the full Harvard reference is provided for these sources in the relevant Reference List.
SECTION 3: PROJECT CASE STUDY ASSESSMENT ITEM 3: INDIVDIUAL REPORT (2000 WORDS)
Report Requirements
You are required to analyse the organisation from a minimum of two HRM topics covered in the unit.
You are required to analyse the organisation and make recommendations using HRM materials covered in this unit as well as after conducting additional research. The reading list (provided in Annex D) provides you with a range of references. You are encouraged to explore further.
In your analysis, you need to cite at least 8 scholarly/academic (refereed) HRM related journal articles from the approved list. Students should endeavour to identify journal articles that have been released in the last few years. Journal articles from more than 10 years ago will not count as one of the 8 approved journal articles.
In terms of information you might use in your report, please observe appropriate laws and social conventions (such as intellectual property, confidentiality, privacy, security, etc). If information you seek to rely on is subject to these considerations, please discuss with your lecturer before using this material.
Assignment Writing Requirements
Style
The Report assessment is a ‘theory-enhanced’ analytical report.
Students will need to first provide a brief description of the organisation and its organisational context, as Strategic HRM must be aligned with the organisation’s strategy. This part is counted in the word limit but should be no more than 5%. The risk is that students may spend too much time initially describing the organisation (which indicates an inability to compress information and identify what’s important), and in turn this may leave insufficient time to analyse the organisation. Obviously students will still need to describe organisational practices (that fit within the scope of the initial organisational description) throughout the report as the necessary background to analysis, but this description should be relatively short and directly linked to the analysis and recommendations.
Students will need to focus on the application of the HRM body of knowledge (principles, themes, concepts and individual theories), analysis and recommendations supported by the unit materials (notably the Unit Textbook – which should account for the majority of in-text references).
Appendices
Students are required to provide two appendices in their reports (not included in the word count) covering:
Appendix A: Post Approval Implementation Strategy to support your analysis and recommendations (one page – which could be in the form of a table). Note: individual implementation elements could still be used within the report body, but this strategy would provide the overall implementation approach if the specific recommendations were approved, such as planning, communications, staff, budget and process.
Appendix B: Group Work Reflection (one page)
The idea of this Appendix is to provide an opportunity for you to reflect on whether your group functioned as a high performing team, what you have learnt in the unit and how your report evolved as a result of ongoing feedback across the semester. Questions to address would include:
• How did your group perform (what worked and what didn’t work)?
• What would you do next time to improve team performance?
• How did you approach learning the HRM body of knowledge and what would you do next time to improve your performance as a result of what you have learnt?
• In terms of applying HRM theory to an organisation, what other learning approaches would have helped you?
Appendix C: (Optional) Organisation SWOT Analysis （in WIP part A）
Students have previously asked whether they could include their group’s SWOT Analysis in their Individual Reports as an appendix. The answer is yes. This provides the opportunity to refer to the SWOT Analysis in the Individual Report without having to repeat the detail and impact the Report’s word-count.
However, if students do include their SWOT Analysis as a separate Appendix, it will require a full Harvard reference as the SWOT Analysis was a group rather than an individual effort. Further, in the Individual Report, the URKUND review may identify elements of the SWOT Analysis that may have come from another (unreferenced) source – these individual elements will also need to be properly referenced in the Report.
Note: if time allows, the appendices may be discussed in class.
References
References MUST be in the Harvard format and should be separated into two sections:
• The first ‘Academic’ Reference’ section should include the HRM related materials you have used to guide or support your analysis. It is strongly suggested that students use the library’s journals to obtain academic reference material and refrain from using internet source material for this reference list. Note that the 8 HRM journal articles that must be used in the report must come from an approved journal; and
• The second ‘Other Reference’ section should include the sources relating to your case study organisation and any other sources (e.g., articles, website, newspapers, etc).
Note: use of crowd-sourced websites such as Wikipedia, which may appear informative but which are not academically peer-reviewed, must not be used in a university assessment item (for either section, including about the organisation).
Students may include relevant subheadings under their Reference sections, for example, if the report contained a significant legal element it may have Reference subheadings for Legislation or Case Law.
As per the Marking Criteria, Individual Report marks will be awarded on the following:
• Identification of topics, discussion, analysis, and recommendations;
• How succinct, focused, convincing and persuasive the argument was; and
• Depth of research, referencing and report structure and readability.
In-Text References
For in-text references, after you have provided the full in-text reference for the Unit Textbook the first time, you may then abbreviate it down to just (Kramar, 2014, pX). Even where you have not provided a direct quotation from your source material, please include the relevant page number(s).
Individual Report – Marking Criteria
The filename of your Individual Report should include: Unit Title, Assessment Item, Organisation, and Student Number (HRM MON Individual Report NASA u12345678). Please include your Unit, Assessment Item, Student Number and Organisation in the footer of each page of your report, as well as your page number.
Criteria Out of
100% Grade Descriptors
Note: these criteria are not self-contained – analysis content that is unreadable would fail on both criteria. F
0-49% P
50-64% CR
65-74% DI
75-84% HD
85-100%
Structure and Written Presentation
1. Structure – was the report’s structure logical and integrated (so all the generic organisational background was in one place)?
2. Readability and Expression – did the report use appropriate grammar, syntax, spelling, punctuation and proof reading?
3. Argument Clarity – were topics effectively introduced to provide context, were key terms defined and used effectively, did the issues raised support the overall argument in a convincing and persuasive manner, and were only those elements that were directly relevant to the argument included? 10%
Effective Introduction (Establishing the Argument)
4. Were there appropriate links between Strategic HRM Principles; Case Study Organisational Strategy, Background and Context; HRM Body of Knowledge; and Identified Topics?
5. Did the Introduction introduce the report’s argument and structure? 2.5%
Body of the Report – Analysis
6. Body Introduction – Were the HRM topics to be discussed introduced in the context of the report’s overall argument, notably alignment with organisational objectives and application of HRM theory and practice to improve value (performance, productivity efficiency, effectiveness, etc).
For Each Topic
7. Topic Introduction – Was an overview and appropriate definitions provided of the particular topic issue (ie Career Management) and its relevance to supporting the report’s argument and delivering organisational value.
8. What is the Problem – What does the organisation currently do and what is wrong with the way they do it? Was the evidence detailed enough and referenced to confirm exactly what the problems are? Were there effective links between organisational strategy, the HRM topic and the organisational practice evidence?
9. What is the Solution – What does the HRM body of knowledge tell us about a solution? This may include looking at individual theories or practices and how they could be applied to improve value. Was there an effective and relevant application of HRM knowledge (notably engagement with the Unit Textbook)? In terms of the Theory/Practice Gap – was there appropriate analysis of HRM knowledge to resolve the organisation’s gap between what it does and what it could be doing better?
10. What specific practical recommendations do you have to improve organisational performance? You may want to comment briefly on implementation issues if these recommendations were approved (See Appendix A)?
11. Topic Summary – How did the discussion support the overall report argument, for example, in terms of the analysis and recommendations, was a return on investment benefit demonstrated for the organisation? 70%
Effective Conclusion (Has your argument been satisfied?)
12. Was the overarching report argument answered through the use of appropriate organisational evidence, HRM analysis and a demonstrated return on investment for the organisation if the proposed recommendations were adopted? Was there an identification of broader HRM implications? 2.5%
Two Reference Lists (Academic and Other)
13. Were the two reference lists provided in full Harvard Referencing format? Did these references demonstrate good and relevant research?
14. Were a minimum 8 journal articles from approved sources used appropriately in the report (loss of one mark for every approved journal article below 8 not provided)?
15. Were correct in-text references used – notably for all descriptive elements? 10%
Appendices
16. Were the two required Appendices provided – Appendix A: Post Approval Implementation Strategy and Appendix B: Group Work Reflection – and did they meet the task requirements? 5%
Word Count meets requirement (2000 + or – 10%)
Note: References or Appendices are not included in the word count.
17. Loss of 5% of the total assessment mark for every 500 words below or above the 2000 Word Count Requirement (+ or – 10%).
Report Overdue
18. After the first 30 minutes, the loss of 5% of the total assessment mark for each 24 hour period the report is overdue without lecturer approval.
Academic Misconduct (Plagiarism)
19. Academic Misconduct issues will be dealt with in accordance with University Policy (which may result in no mark for the assessment item or failure of the unit).
Assessment Mark 100%
See Annex A for a definition of each HRM Grade Descriptor.
Section 4: Description, Analysis and Referencing
Introduction
This section of the Work Book Guidance focuses on providing students with further detail about project-based learning, with a particular focus on distinguishing between description and analysis in academic assessments.
Project-based learning has been defined as learning where the student solves a problem, not necessarily by themselves, which involves:
• a variety of activities;
• where there is commonly a definable end product;
• the learning process goes on over a period of time; and
• teaching staff play an advisory rather than an authoritarian role. (Helle, Tynjala & Olkinuora, 2006).
As noted above, the intent of a project based assessment is to use a range of management skills, including analysis, communication and teamwork skills, to apply HRM concepts and theories in order to deal with real issues faced by an organisation.
Before proceeding, we will first explain a number of useful definitions.
Definitions
Theory: a set of assumptions, propositions, or accepted facts that attempts to provide a plausible or rational explanation of cause-and-effect (causal) relationships among a group of observed phenomenon. Example: performance theory; the theory of planned action; transaction theory. (Businessdictionary.com).
Concept: a general notion or idea; or an idea of something formed by mentally combining all its characteristics or particulars; a construct. (Dictionary.com). Example: that International HRM practices, as a result of globalisation, are converging around the world rather than increasing in diversity.
Framework: the work that forms the frame (Chambers Twentieth Century Dictionary). Example: a framework or model for understanding the inter-relationship of HRM practices on the outcomes of an organisation.
Concepts / Theories / Frameworks (examples from the relevant literature)
Concepts/Ideas
• Balancing the integration with the diversity;
• Stages of internationalisation;
• Convergence versus divergence;
• Strategic HRM;
• Productive Diversity;
• Fairness (distributive justice, procedural justice, etc);
• Global Performance Management; and
• Global Leadership Development.
Theories
• Resource based theory of the firm;
• Reinforcement theory; and
• Adult learning theory.
Frameworks
• Stages of International HRM;
• Balanced Scorecard; and
• Strategic HRM in Multinationals.
Perspective for the Analysis
The tasks
Identify strengths and weaknesses of the current HRM systems / policies / practices in the organisation.
How do you identify strengths and weaknesses?
By critically analysing the current policies /practices in comparison with relevant theory and practice (the theory/practice gap).
How do you critically analyse practices?
By comparing the practices against a benchmark, in this case by applying the concepts and theory discussed in the textbook material or journal articles that you selected. If they are different, find out as much as possible the reason for the difference.
What happens to the weaknesses?
You suggest a recommendation and possible implementation plan for improvement based on the weaknesses that you have identified. This ensures your recommendations are evidence-based.
Current Practices
Whether the management of HRM is strategic or not is about whether the HRM function is explicitly linked to the organisational strategy/goals of the organisation (i.e. how managing people contributes to organisational objectives of efficiency, effectiveness, and ultimately success).
What the HRM policies and practices look like compared to relevant research literature will give you a clue as to why the organisation may not be operating at ‘best practice’.
For example, in International HRM, you might look particularly at how the organisation manages its expatriates versus how it manages its other employees in its international offices/subsidiaries.
Critical Analysis
Critically analyse – as opposed to providing a description – the extent to which the organisation’s actual practices differ from concepts and theories, and what significance this has for the organisation’s effectiveness.
Try and establish the extent to which people management practices in the policy domain/industry and the organisation are a basis for ‘competitive advantage’. This may require you to understand Resource Based Theory (Barney, 1991), or the notion of Core Competencies (Hamel and Prahalad, 1994).
For example, students might like to consider what the relevance is to their project of the Unit Textbook chapters that are being discussed across the semester.
How to Analyse and conduct a Critical Analysis
Conducting a critical analysis requires linking organisational practices with HRM concepts/theories.
Your Analysis
See Academic Skills Centre website on activities in ‘critical thinking’ as summarised below. http://www.canberra.edu.au/studyskills/learning/critical
Some of the activities involved in critical thinking (Source: UC – ASC website)
Interpreting according to a framework
Relating theory to practice
Making a claim and supporting it
Using appropriate evidence
Making links between ideas
Evaluating
Predicting Analysing
Synthesising
Categorising
Establishing cause and effect
Comparing and contrasting
Identifying problems and solutions
Applying or linking concepts/theories to the findings/practices in organisation
Some examples:
Ask yourself questions, such as:
• To what extent is (Concept A) reflected in this organisation? For example, is there evidence for a psychological contract as defined in the text; or
• Given the situation/practices in the organisation, to what extent is (Theory / Model X) demonstrated? For example does the organisation support high performance work systems?
Minimum Components of Analysis
Evidence of organisational policy, procedure and practice Claims of relation with concepts or theories Reasons
There is evidence of the organisation’s policy, procedures, practices in respect of A, B, C.
(i.e. HRM practice areas) These policies, procedures, practices adopt or do not adopt concept/theory X.
They demonstrate or do not demonstrate the adoption of concept/theory Y
They are seen to be in line with or are not in line with concept/theory Z.
They are in keeping with or they are not in keeping with concept/theory A.
Why this policy, procedure or practice is relevant, important or critical to the operation or the change of operation of the organisation.
Why its improvement would make a difference to the success of the organisation now or in the future.
Important – on using concepts/theories
You must follow source referencing conventions, such as when you are paraphrasing or using quotations for the concept/theory. Please refer to the UC Library’s Harvard referencing guidelines. Please note, that this can be picked up by URKUND.
Some possible further analysis using other concepts, for example:
• Strategies – evolutionary versus intended;
• Purposes or objectives – shifting to match competitors behaviour; and
• Structure or systems – changing in line with changes in the external environment.
For example, given the strengths and weaknesses of Strategic HRM practices in the organisation, which elements of purposes or objectives are they likely or unlikely to effect?
Example of Expressions
Given —- the organisation will be likely to meet/achieve the purpose of —
…is unlikely to meet /achieve the objectives of —
Suggested Organisational Resources
Supporting evidence in the internal and ‘Task Environment’ Societal or General Environment
• Annual or Financial Reports
• External or internal Audits
• Scrutiny by Parliament or other external agencies
• Shift or trend evident from objectives and strategies outlined in earlier reports
• Results of SWOT
• Other Results of industry analysis
(i.e. Porter’s model)
Advanced and Deeper Analysis
For a more advanced and deeper analysis, you may consider including the following additional elements.
Try to find more information, for example:
• reasons that explains why findings in the organisation are what you claim in your analysis;
• factors that influence whether your recommendations can or cannot be implemented;
• the external environment that influences practices in your case study organisation (legislation) as well as other reasons why their practices may exist (industry standards); and
• external factors such as national economic, political and social factors; influence of external stakeholders (such as union or industry associations); aspects in the global environment; or behaviour of competitors.
In addition to looking at what is being said (description) with regards to organisational practices or theoretical approaches, students might like to consider:
• What is being implied (not explicitly stated);
• What should the material say (is the content complete);
• What is it deliberately not saying;
• Is the content reliable (does it use authoritative sources); and
• Is the content valid (is there a causal link between two sets of related data).
Section 4A: An Example of Differentiating Description and Analysis
One of the biggest mistakes that students make is spending too much time on describing content in their assignments.
This in turn reduces their opportunity to focus on analysis: such as identifying relevant issues, such as strengths and weaknesses, applying relevant theories, and outlining practical recommendations and implementation strategies.
As an example, the following material provides a single paragraph of text, provides an aggregated summary (in one sentence), before analysing the text.
Note how much of this is description and how much analysis!
Don’t forget that in your analysis, you will need to specify the theories or concepts that you have used, and they should be aggregated/paraphrased with the use of in-text references as appropriate.
For the purposes of the project case study approach, the following definitions and colour coding should be used.
Organisational Description (red) –to state something about an organisation that already exists and is either being quoted, summarised or paraphrased, including descriptive evidence relied upon during analysis.
Theory Description (yellow) –when using an existing HR concept/theory that is either being quoted, summarised or paraphrased.
Analysis (light blue) – a student or student’s groups own (original) contribution to the project, notably a claim, argument, application, evaluation or conclusion. Students should seek to maximise their analysis.
Recommendation or Implementation Strategy (green).
Regardless of which category is being developed, the material must be supported by appropriate references.
Example of Differentiating Description and Analysis from some Original Text
Original Text Example
Department X has established a comprehensive HRM policy to ensure its staff are supported in learning and development opportunities that meet their business requirements.
Staff are required, as part of their annual performance reviews, to meet their annual mandatory training obligations (otherwise they will not get their salary bonuses) and supported in job specific training requirements. They are also asked to identify vocational, university or professional qualifications where they are relevant to the staff member’s ongoing career development.
Description/Summary of Original Text
Department X has established an organisational commitment to support learning and development to meet mandatory, job specific and career aspirational training requirements.
Notes:
• This ‘description/summary’ is an aggregation or compression of the above ‘original text’ from the organisation.
• In your analyses, you will need to specify concepts or theories used in your analysis, but they should also be aggregated/paraphrased with the use of in-text references as appropriate.
Analysis of Original Text
Strengths – Department X has made a policy commitment to develop its staff and this approach is reinforced through its performance management reviews and incentivised through a link to salary bonuses.
Weaknesses – Implementation (Micro) – there is no data provided that indicates whether this training is actually being undertaken (as distinct from just being identified), whether a sufficient budget has been allocated to deliver this training, or whether management supports staff to take time out of the office to undertake training.
Weaknesses – Strategic (Macro) – there is no evidence about how this commitment to training is specifically supporting Department X’s strategic outcomes. A common risk with these types of organisational commitments is that they may remain a high level policy direction (strategy formulation), but fail completely during strategy implementation; or alternatively, where they are delivered, may not align with strategic objectives or actually deliver organisational value.
Recommendation – in order to gather sufficient evidence to determine whether Department X’s investment in training is delivering organisational value, an external review is recommended.
This review should identify whether the existing policy direction is sufficiently clear, whether implementation strategies are effective, identify any constraints on achieving these strategies (such as time or funding), and whether this approach to training and development actually supports organisational capability requirements.
Key issues for consideration is Return on Investment (ROI), impact on innovation, demonstrated improvements in productivity, the value of additional senior management support, or whether a more comprehensive approach to staff professionalisation is needed, for example, distinguishing between common core skills required by the entire workforce versus specific job training requirements.
The role of the Supervisor during performance discussions should also be investigated, notably whether staff training and development can be better supported through more structured on-the-job training activities or a more formal approach to coaching and mentoring within the organisation, rather than assume that formal training and qualifications is the only approach.
Note how the relatively short original text can be quickly summarised, before a relatively developed analysis can take place. Further, obviously any analysis will refer back to a description of organisational processes, but if these are incidental, they can be considered broadly part of the analysis.
Further, this example did not include relevant individual HRM theories or concepts as part of its analysis. This is the critical component that students must address if they wish to do well in the unit.
Section 4B: Working through a Project Case Study Analysis
This is an example on how to conduct a critical analysis as discussed above. Please note that this is a hypothetical organisation used to provide an example of linking concepts/theory and practices in the project organisation. There are two major steps.
Step 1: Your preparation – have this as a draft
Component 1 – Identify practices and policies in your case study organisation
Organisation X is currently expanding its operation by adding branches in new locations, including in a smaller town outside the main city. The bank’s management decided that employees for the new branches should be sourced locally by recruiting people from the town. The organisation acknowledges that these employees will not be as good in terms of their knowledge and skills. However, this approach is less expensive than sending well trained employees from their main office in the city to work in the town.
Component 2 – Identify relevant concepts and theories (from source material)
Taken from the text Chapter 2 of Phillips and Gully, 2013 text.
1. Growth strategy. Definition: company expansion organically (happening as the organisation expands from within by opening new locations).
2. Strategy during growth phase:
a. New and growing organisations often pursue innovation or differentiation strategies to distinguish themselves from their competition:
i. Because they are less established and thus higher-risk employers, they often need to invest more money and resources in staffing to attract the talent they need to grow; and
ii. Because they lack a strong internal talent pool and need to add new employees as they grow, they frequently need to hire from outside the organisation and tend to have an external talent focus.
3. Success of growth strategy depends on the organisation’s ability to find and retain the right number and types of employees to sustain its intended growth. Organic growth requires an investment in recruiting, selecting and training the right people to expand the company’s operations.
4. ‘Human capital advantage’ is about acquiring a stock of quality talent that creates a competitive advantage. This is achieved by hiring and retaining outstanding people which in turn produces a stock of exceptional talent.
Taken from an additional source Milkovich and Newman, 2005 text.
1. Employee development can be conducted through job enrichment, which involves assigning employees to other kinds of jobs in other parts of the organisation to gain broader experience. Job enrichment does not necessarily involve promotion.
2. Providing financial incentives or promotion opportunity can also motivate employees to work in a less ideal situation.
Step 2: Write an analysis and recommendations
Below is an example of what is expected in your Individual Report. Analysis and Recommendations will be the core content, which also forms the bulk of your report assessment, weighted at 70%.
In line with the learning development approach (formative and summative stages), the formal presentation will be the dry run for the Individual Report.
As discussed earlier, these processes emulate the real life situation of an organisation in terms of project development.
While you have components 1 and 2 as part of your drafting activity, Analysis and Recommendations components are the part that WILL BE MARKED.
Component 3 – Analysis
It is apparent that the organisation is currently implementing a growth strategy. According to Phillips and Gully (2013), a growth strategy occurs when an organisation expands internally, characterised by the addition of new locations. The organisation’s growth strategy is evidenced in the way it expands by opening up of new branches in other locations.
In terms of staffing strategy to support the growth, however, it appears that the organisation is lacking a human capital advantage. Human capital advantage takes place when an organisation can build a competitive advantage which is achieved through acquiring high quality talent (Phillip and Gully, 2013).
Phillip and Gully (2013) further state the importance of building a sufficient number of individuals with appropriate excellence by not only recruiting them but also supporting existing staff to develop outstanding knowledge and skills. The lack of human capital advantage in the organisation is demonstrated by its inability to recruit people with the required talent because of its reliance on recruiting people only from within the town. Investing more resources in staffing, necessary to support a growth strategy (Phillip and Gully, 2013), does not seem to be a consideration by the organisation.
Component 4 – Recommendations
Due to the lack of human capital advantage in the organisation, three recommendations are proposed to improve the situation.
First, consistent with the importance of investing in people to support the growth strategy (Phillip and Gully, 2013), it is recommended that the organisation recruit high quality talent from other areas, which may be more expensive than just hiring local people.
Second, training and development (Phillips and Gully, 2013) is also suggested to up-skill existing employees.
Third, there are two possible recommendations for employees who are currently working in the city to motivate them to work in a smaller town:
• firstly, providing opportunities for job enrichment. According Phillips and Gully (2013) job enrichment, such as —–, can —–; and
• secondly, providing special rewards, such as pay or promotion, for employees who are willing to work in new branches established in smaller towns. This is in keeping with Milkovich and Newman (2005), who state that —–.
References
Milkovich, G.T. and Newman, J.M. (2005). Compensation. Eighth edition. McGraw Hill Irwin, Boston.
Phillip, J. and Gully, S. (2012). Strategic Staffing. Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
EXPLANATION OF COMPONENTS
Component 3 – ANALYSIS
When conducting an analysis, you must include 3 key elements.
Notes: In terms of the order of the elements, it can be in any order depending on your creativity in making the argument flows well.
1. The organisational description and the theory description – to be paraphrased, supported by references.
2. The evaluation – what differentiates analytical from merely descriptive works.
a. This is your claim, evaluation or analysis – whether the organisation is in line with, implementing or having adopted the concepts or theory.
b. You need to state to what extent:
i. fully?
ii. to a great extent?
iii. successfully?
these are the strengths
iv. not successfully/hardly?
these are the weaknesses
v. to a little extent?
vi. only partially?
c. expressions used include:
i. it appears
ii. it is apparent
iii. it seems
iv. it looks like
Identifying descriptive work that lacks critical analysis?
If you do not evaluate or provide a claim on the extent of the adoption of concepts/theories (for example the lack of X or the presence of Y), but only describe the organisational practices (see Component 1) and state the concepts/theories (see Component 2), your work would be viewed as descriptive, meaning it is not evaluative and would be lacking in critical analysis.
3. Descriptive Evidence – red box – Evidence of policies and practices in the case study organisation – for your claim (see Component 1).
Expressions used include:
a. this is evidenced by …
b. these are demonstrated in …
c. it can be seen …
d. it can be observed …
Thus evidence not only describes the practices in the organisation but can also be used to support and demonstrate the successful or unsuccessful adoption of HRM concepts or theories (evaluation) in the organisation.
4. Reasons that explains why findings in the organisation are as what you claim are a form of evaluation/analysis. It is an additional element but an important one. Ultimately, reasons form part of the overarching argument that the project may be trying to prove. As such, in terms of structure, it makes sense to be explicit in the report about what the overarching project argument is, so that evidence, evaluation and reasons can be used to more convincingly support this argument.
Component 4 – RECOMMENDATION – ANALYSIS
When you make a recommendation, you need another 3 elements:
1. Refer to weaknesses – You need to refer to the weaknesses which you identified in the analysis, not just coming from ‘nowhere’.
2. Statement of recommendation – State what you wish to recommend (including likely implementation strategies).
3. Use of concepts and theories – Your recommendation should not be ‘out of the blue’ but must be supported by relevant theories or concepts, including their references.
Human Resource Development Related Journal Articles
Bates, R. & Khasawneh, S. (2005), Organisational learning culture, learning transfer climate and perceived innovation in Jordanian organisations. International Journal of Training & Development, 9 (2), p96-109.
Clarke, N. (2004), HRD and the challenges of assessing learning in the workplace. International Journal of Training & Development, 8 (2), p140-156.
Clarke, N. (2006), Why HR policies fail to support workplace learning: the complexities of policy implementation in healthcare. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 17 (1), p190-206.
Eddy, E.R., Tannenbaum, S.L., Lorenzet, S.J. & Smith-Jentsch, K.A. (2005), The Influence of a Continuous Learning Environment on Peer Mentoring Behaviors. Journal of Managerial Issues, 17 (3), p383-395.
Macpherson, A., Elliot, M., Harris, I. & Homan, G. (2004), E-learning: reflections and evaluation of corporate programmes. Human Resource Development International, 7 (3), p295-313.
O’Donnell, D., McGuire, D. & Cross, C. (2006), Critically challenging some assumptions in HRD. International Journal of Training & Development, 10 (1), p4-16
Sambrook, S. (2005), Factors Influencing the Context and Process of Work-Related Learning: Synthesizing Findings from Two Research Projects. Human Resource Development International, 8 (1), p101-119.
Seijts, G.H. & Latham, G.P. (2005), Learning versus performance goals: When should each be used? Academy of Management Executive, 19 (1), p124-131.
Sels, L. (2002), More is not necessarily better: the relationship between the quantity and quality of training efforts. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 13 (8): p1279-1298.
Shipton, H., West, M.A., Dawson, J., Birdi, K. & Patterson, M. (2006), HRM as a predictor of innovation. Human Resource Management Journal, 16 (1), p3-27.
Staffing Related Journal Articles
Avery, D.R. & McKay, P.F. (2006), Target Practice: An organisational impression management approach to attracting minority and female job applicants. Personnel Psychology 59, 157-187.
Collins, C.J. & Han, J. (2004), Exploring applicant pool quantity and quality: The effects of early recruitment practice strategies, corporate advertising, and firm reputation. Personnel Psychology, 57, 685-717.
Haesl, A. & Boxall, P. (2005), When knowledge management meets HR strategy: an exploration of personalisation-retention and codification-recruitment configurations. International Journal of Human Resource Management 16, 1955-1975.
Lee, T. W., Mitchell, T. R., Sablynski, C. J., Burton, J. P., Holtom, B. C., (2004), The effects of job embeddedness on organizational citizenship, job performance, volitional absences, and voluntary turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 47 (5), pp 711-722.
Matracci, S.H. (2009), Evaluating HR management strategies for recruiting and retaining IT professionals in the US Federal Government. Public Personnel Management 38 (2), 19-34.
Rao, H. (2002), Overcoming resource constraints on product innovation by recruiting talent from rivals: A study of the mutual fund industry, 1986-94. Academy of Management Journal, 45 (3), 491-507.
Tzabbar, D. (2009) When does scientist recruitment affect technological repositioning? Academy of Management Journal, 52 (5), 873-896.
Books
Note: many of these are on short loan in the UC Library. You should also consider using other libraries, including the National Library of Australia.
Argyris, C. and Schon, D. (1996). Organizational Learning II: Theory, Method and Practice. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.
Australian Master Human Resources Guide (10th Edition). (2013). Sydney: CCH Australia Ltd.
Becker, BE, Huselid, MA & Beatty, RW, 2009, The Differentiated Workforce: Transforming Talent into Strategic Impact, Harvard University Press, Boston.
Becker, BE, Huselid, MA & Ulrich, D, 2001, The HR Scorecard: Linking People, Strategy and Performance, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
Boudreau, JW & Ramstad, PM, 2007, Beyond HR: The New Science of Human Capital, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
Buford, J. A. Jr., & Lindner, J. R. (2002). Human Resource Management in Local Government: Concepts and Applications for HRM Students and Practitioners. Cincinnati, OH: South-Western.
Burton-Jones, A & Spender, JC, 2011, The Oxford Handbook of Human Capital, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Cascio, W. F. (2012). Managing Human Resources: Productivity, Quality of Work Life, Profits (9th Edition). McGraw-Hill.
Compton, R. and Baird, M. (2005). Human Resource Management: Strategies and Processes. 5th ed. Southbank, Vic. Thomson Learning.
Cooke, F. L. (2012). Human Resource Management in China: New Trends and Practices. Routledge Asian Studies, Taylor & Francis Group.
De Cieri, Helen (2008), Human Resource Management in Australia: Strategy, People, Performance, 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill/Irwin, North Ryde, N.S.W.
Dessler, G. (2013). A Framework for Human Resource Management. 7th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Elliot, C. and Turnbull, S. (2008). Critical Thinking in Human Resource Development. London: Taylor Francis Publishing.
Holbeche, L, 2009, Aligning Human Resources and Business Strategy (2nd Ed), Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford (Chapter 1).
Huselid, MA, Becker, BE & Beatty, RW, 2005, The Workforce Scorecard: Managing Human Capital to Execute Strategy, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
Leopold, J. & Harris, L (2009). Strategic Managing of Human Resources (2nd Edition). England: Prentice Hall.
Losey, M., Meisinger, S., & Ulrich, D. (2005). The Future of Human Resource Management: Thought Leaders Explore the Critical HR Issues of Today and Tomorrow. Alexandria, VA: Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Mayo, A, 2012, Human Resource of Human Capital, Gower Publishing Ltd., London.
McBeath, G, 1992, The Handbook of Human Resource Planning: Practical Manpower Analysis Techniques for HR Professionals, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.
Mello, JA, 2015, Strategic Human Resource Management (4th Ed), Cengage Learning, Stamford, CT (Chapter 3).
Millmore, M., Lewis, P. Saunders, M., Thornhill, A. & Morrow, T. (2007). Strategic Human Resource Management: Contemporary Issues. England: Prentice Hall.
Mullins, Laurie J & Christy, Gill, (contributor) (2014), Management & Organisational Behaviour, 10th edition, Harlow Pearson Education.
Nankervis, A, Baird, M, Coffey, J & Shields, J, 2014, Human Resource Management: Strategy and Practice, 8th Ed (Chapters 1 & 4), Cengage Learning Australia Pty Ltd, Victoria.
Pease, G, Byerly, B & Fitz-enz, J, 2013, Human Capital Analytics: How to Harness the Potential of your Organization’s Greatest Asset, John Wiley & Sons Publishers, New Jersey.
Pinnington, Ashly & Lafferty, George (2004), Human Resource Management in Australia, 2nd ed, Oxford University Press, South Melbourne.
Selden, SC, 2009, Human Capital: Tools and Strategies for the Public Sector, CQ Press, Washington, DC.
Smith T, 2012, Strategic Workforce Planning: Guidance and Backup Plans, Author.
Stone, R.J. Human Resource Management (8th Edition). (2013). Australia: John Wiley & Sons.
Swart, Juani & Mann, Clare & Brown, Steve & Price, Alan (2012), Human Resource Development, Taylor and Francis, Hoboken.
Torrington, Derek & Hall, Laura, & Taylor, Stephen, & Atkinson, Carol, (2014), Human Resource Management, 9th edition, Harlow, England Pearson.
PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT