Findings From Different Stakeholders Management Essay

For assignment help please contact at help@hndassignmenthelp.co.uk or hndassignmenthelp@gmail.com

In the following chapter, the detailed discussion will be presented in order to evaluate the findings from different stakeholder such as FLMs and HR Manager. The discussion section will critically comment on the key barriers that are preventing successful devolution of HR responsibilities to FLMs. The chapter during the discussion will reference the relevant literature, different studies and other fieldwork to provide readers with the well-rounded broad based knowledge. Also comparison will be made with the finding of the study with other fieldwork and literature review. The following section is divided into different key headings and sub-heading to represent the key themes during the discussion. Also where required reference will be made to the qualitative data gathered during the investigation phase in order to support the discussion.

The responses collected from FLMs and HR Manager were clear that FLMs are very motivated towards capacity development & training, as it will improve the efficiency and productivity of the staff in the specific case study. This clearly identifies that FLMs are very keen in the overall devolution strategy of HR responsibilities and would taken keen interest in the professional development of their staff. The finding of research collaborates with the detail research carried out in SCHOTT US "Problems with implementing Human Resource practices: The view of HR- and first-line managers" where FLMs show keen interest towards capacity development and training as they agree that productivity in the organization will only increase with detailed capacity development and training opportunities. Whereas the finding from the research is contrary to the literature review as stated by (Hope Hailey, Farndale & Truss, 2005) that most of line managers are not motivated to take on the new responsibilities. HR department to ensure that meets the keen interest of FLMs also offers a range of capacity development workshops such as communication skills, adapting to the changing environment, motivation of staff, ability to give and receive feedback and improving people skills.

B) Capacity Development & Training not according to aims and objectives

According to theory to be seen as effective, HRM must meet the basic criteria of both the strategic and the developmental perspectives. HR policies and practices must be long term in focus, integrated with one another and in line with the organization's strategy and objectives as well as treating all employees fairly, increasing employee motivation, satisfaction and commitment, and helping all employees develop to their maximum potential (Kane, Crawford & Grant, 1999). To compare this with the findings from the research to achieve effectiveness in the specific case study the capacity development and training has to be strategic, long term focus to achieve the overall aim and objectives and well integrated to meet the job requirements and skill set. Based on the investigation findings the situation in specific case study is contrary to the above reference literature.

The FLMs agree that the major barrier to the successful devolvement was the capacity development & training was not tailored according to FLMs job requirement and designed without considering the overall aim and objectives of the specific case study. As one of the respondents clearly identifies the problem faced by stating "Lack of support and no strategic vision from HR is a major hurdle in training and capacity development of staff. The program on offer totally mismatches the requirements at the floor level". This represent a major dilemma to the overall strategy of devolution of HR responsibilities as FLMs will not have the right kind of skills and capacity to perform into the new role leading to confusion, lack of understanding and overall poor productivity in the specific case study.

C) Lack of Involvement

To ensure the successful devolution of HR responsibilities FLMs have to involve in capacity development & training. As we have seen in the literature lack of involvement leads to poor accountability resulting in lack of ownership (McGovern, Gratton, Hope Hailey, Stiles, Truss, 1997). To compare with the literature the situation in the specific case study is identical where lack of involvement of FLMs in capacity development & training is leading to poor accountability and lack of ownership. The responses collected from the HR manager were clear that capacity development & training is designed in isolation and don't get input from FLMs about what are the key areas where they need assistance. As stated by the HR Manager "we design and offer the capacity development program to FLMs but this program is designed by HR department on its own". The overall strategy of devolution of HR responsibilities to FLMs will not be effective until FLMs are involved in designing the capacity development so that they become equal stakeholder in the overall process in the specific case study. Both the academics and practitioners have agreed that there was major requirement to move away from top-down command model to one that was based on high involvement with renewed commitment and ambition. This will build a stronger relationship based on trust between an organization and its employees. Also capacity development will only get effective results in the specific case study if we follow the academics and practitioner by allowing FLMs to have their say and they can modify it according to the requirements of the job and floor level. As reference to the literature (Gennard & Kelly, 1997) For successful HR delivery we need a strong and stable partnership between HR and line management. This is only possible if FLMs are full involved in the design and formulation of capacity development & training. The level of involvement will have direct impact on the overall devolution strategy so it is very crucial to involve FLMs so that overall strategy of devolution can succeed in the specific case study.

D) Capacity Development shouldn't be forced

The next major barrier to the successful devolution of HR responsibilities is the feeling that is among the FLMs that the capacity development & training is being forced upon them and it should be more tailored to provide support to different departments and staff needs that can fulfill the overall aim and objectives of the specific case study. It was evident from the responses collected that FLMs feel that the training program is imposed on them and doesn't serve the overall goals or assist them in their job role in the specific case study. As stated by FLM "Training & Capacity development should be tailored according to our needs and offered to the willing staff not to those which are not interested. This will reduce the amount of money wasted". Whereas according to the HR Manager everyone should be involved in the entire training program that will improve the overall efficiency in the organization. This creates a massive disagreement among the stakeholder, as there is no tailored training program offered to different departments according to their job role, skill set requirements, which is leading to mistrust and friction in the specific case study.

E) Time and Priority Issues

According to the literature, FLMs prefer spending time on the soft (employee motivation, commitment and development) HR issues instead of the hard (measurable) HR issues (Kane, Crawford & Grant, 1999). This outcome from the literature and research findings is similar. In the specific case study FLMs are used to work numbered driven, they want tangible results, and still they prefer performing soft HR practices, although these practices will not directly show tangible results. With reference to the literature the finding from the research matches. When investigated it was more evident the FLMs spend less time on administrative task (hard HR approach) and most time on having performance conversation with employees and managing their people (soft HR approach). As stated by another FLM "I'm not looking for more time spending, I enjoy my business material more but when required then I allocate more time for it". As reinforced by another FLM "leave HR activities out and focus more on the important thing". The finding from the research and the literature matches where FLMs have high priority and spend more time on people issues, employee motivation, commitment and their day job as compared to hard HR administrative issues. This finding is a major barrier to the successful devolution of HR responsibilities to FLMs.

The other barrier to the successful devolution of the policy is the amount of time spent in to the implementation of the policy. According to the research findings the HR Manager responses indicate that they think that each FLM should spend more time on training and capacity development of their staff. The response clearly indicate that the HR department is not happy on how much time FLMs spending on training and capacity development. Whereas it was evident from the responses collected from the FLMs when asked how much time they spend on the implementation of Capacity & Training Development Policy. The answers varies depending on the respondents as some stated "minimum of 20 hours a week or sometime more than that." The finding complete matches with the field work already carried out in SCHOTT US where FLMs spend " as little as possible' time on HR tasks and focuses more on their day job. This can have major impact on the overall devolution strategy of HR responsibilities to FLMs.

Also FLMs identified that with his existing job role it becomes really difficult to manage extra role of training and capacity development as well. According to FLMs the extra responsibility has created more work and they feel overloaded as stated "I feel sometime overloaded with too many things to do and less time available". This indicates the impact of the devolution strategy where FLMs feel overloaded with extra responsibilities. The impact of devolution is not the scope of this research and can further investigated in future.

F) Support and Guidance issues

According to the literature HR managers can affect the motivation and competencies of first-line managers by giving support in a good way. Good support of the HR department leads to good performance of FLMs, which can turn into improvement of the business results (Hope Hailey, Farndale & Truss, 2005).With reference to the literature, the finding from the research clearly indicates that both stakeholders FLMs and HR Manager have contrary responses to the support and guidance issues which is a major barrier to the overall devolution strategy in the specific case study. The HR Manager in their response was very confident with the level of support and guidance provided to FLMs with training and development issues as stated "we tried to provide support on regular interval but due to manpower issues sometimes there can be a delay". Whereas the FLMs view is contrary to the HR Manager they believe the support provide is not on a continuous basis and HR department is not proactive at all providing support. FLMs agree in the responses there is lack of support and no strategic vision from HR that is resulting in a major hurdle in overall devolution strategy in the specific case study. The respondents were very clear that HR department has "very minimal support and systems in-place" to provide them with the support to train and improve capacity for their staff. As stated by another respondents "lack of systems in-place and very minimal support from HR". This highlights the lack of confidence by FLMs in the support and guidance provided for capacity development & training by HR and because of this is a major barrier to the successful devolution in the specific case study.

5.2 Discussion --- Grievance/Disciplinary

Difficult Policy: Should HR get more Involved?

The outcome from the findings indicate clearly that the policy guidelines regarding Grievance/ Disciplinary are very difficult to understand and overwhelming majority 9 out of 12 FLMs who felt comfortable dealing with the grievance policy still believe that HR involvement would improve the overall process. As reference to the literature (Gennard & Kelly, 1997) for successful HR delivery we need a strong and stable partnership between HR and line management. This was contrary to the findings from the investigation phase where there was lack of strong and stable partnership between FLMs and HR Manager in the specific case study. The main barrier to the implementation of the policy was lack of HR involvement in the overall process, which clearly indicates lack of strong or stable partnership. The respondents concluded in their responses that "regular" and "continuous" guidance at all level is required to resolve any query as quickly as possible and provide assistance to deal with the difficult policy and ensure smooth devolution of HR responsibilities can take place.

B) Lack of Ownership

According to the Literature there is a consensus among different writers and authors that HRM was too important to be left to the Personnel specialist because the process of taking ownership, managing people and ensuring that accountability is taking place should be managed by line manager (Renwick, 2003). The finding from the research clearly indicates that the HR manager would like FLMs to become independent, take ownership and decide for themselves on issues dealing with Grievance/ Disciplinary rather than relay on HR. The findings from investigation in the specific case study is far away from the ideal situation mentioned in the literature where HR in their responses indicate the lack of ownership and over-reliance of FLMs on HR department to resolve queries related to Grievance and Disciplinary is a major hurdle in the overall devolution of HR responsibilities in the specific case study. As reinforced by HR Manager "Most of FLMs lack the ability to decide on themselves and always over dependent on HR to make decisions for them". Whereas FLMs would like HR to get involved straightaway to resolve queries and provide assistance which is a major barrier to the overall devolution of HR responsibilities.

According to the literature (Harris & Hall, 2007), the debate among different authors is still going on the reasons why devolvement of HR responsibilities has mixed results. Many authors agreed on the reasons such as lack of capacity development and training and poor mentoring, coaching and support mechanism as the underlying reasons to the lack of willingness and ownership from line manager to assume increased HR responsibilities. The literature and findings from the research are similar. When investigated further lack of capacity development and few mentoring, coaching and support mechanism as the underlining reasons for lack of ownership and over-reliance on HR department in the specific case study. This is a major barrier to the successful devolution of HR responsibilities to FLMs in the specific case study.

C) Level of support and quality of Training Issues

The finding from the research concludes that the poor level of support and minimal training offered by HR to deal with Grievance/ Disciplinary policy is a major barrier to the successful devolution of HR responsibilities to FLMs in the specific case study. The finding from different respondents concludes that due to poor support and weak training opportunities is affecting their overall motivation, which can affect the efficiency and productivity in the specific case study. As stated by a respondent "lack of support and minimal training is a major factors in the proper implementation of the policy".

The findings from the research directly correlate to the literature where HR Manager can affects the motivation and competencies of first-line managers by giving support in a good way. According to the literature (McGovern, Gratton, Hope Hailey, Stiles, Truss, 1997) Good support of the HR department leads to good performance of FLMs, which can turn into improvement of the business results. If the FLMs link the better business results to the better performance in HR tasks, they might become more motivated to perform their HR tasks. Besides, a good support by HR managers can lead to better HR skills of FLMs, which also might result in better business performance As FLM responded by stating that, "HR is not very proactive in the implementation of the policy. This is due to lack of support". Due to lack of support FLMs don't feel confident dealing with any issues, which is resulting in low motivation and spending less time, which will affect the overall business result in the specific case study.

The research finding indicate a contrary view of FLMs, where HR Manager is determined that department tries to provide full support to all the queries but they would like to see FLMs becoming more independent workers rather than relay on the department to do everything for them as stated "system and support is always there but we would like FLMs to take ownership and become more independent in the execution and implementation of the policy". This indicates that both the stakeholder have different expectation as HR manager would like FLMs to become independent in the execution and implementation of the Greivance Policy and not happy when FLMs are overly dependent on HR whereas FLMs need continuous support to deal with the difficult issues and don't have the appropriate skills sets to manage things on their own as reinforced by FLMs "I had massive problems in the implementation of the policy and felt in-adequate at all levels" another respondents stated "I felt always really uncomfortable as I was not trained to do this properly. We all need additional support". To conclude until the above issues are not addressed there will be barriers to the successful devolution of Grievance/ Disciplinary policy to FLMs in the specific case study and affecting the overall devolution strategy.

5.3 Discussion --Sickness/Absenteeism

A) Lack of Clarity & Confusion

In reference to the literature (Armstrong, 2001), employees tend to lose confidence in them when they are unclear what their HR role is and what is expected of them. This leads to lack of clarity and confusion. The reference to the literature matches with the research findings where according to FLMs, HR gives mix signals on the implementation of the policy that creates more confusion and weakens the position of FLMs to implement the policy. Because of lack of clarity and confusion the policy is not implemented with a uniform standards as stated "the policy on sickness and absenteeism is muddled up as it doesn't deal with specific queries and those employees who are not trying at all. The policy doesn't address that at all". It is concluded based on responses collected that the policy regarding Sickness and Absenteeism lack clarity, creates more confusion, which leads to major barrier in the devolution of HR responsibilities to FLMs in the specific case study.

B) Lack of Continuous Support & Guidance

In reference to literature the major criticism to the devolution strategy from (Harris, 2002), is line manager will have very little personal contact, support and guidance opportunities from HR department. The author references many case studies and real world examples where the devolution of HR responsibilities is facing this as a major barrier. The finding from the research identifies the same situation where FLMs never felt that were supported fully and provided with the required guidance to adjust into the new role smoothly. 9 out of 12 FLMs identified lack of support and weak guidance as a major barrier to the successful devolution of HR responsibilities to FLMs. As reinforced by respondent "I personally lack support and guidance from HR on the sickness issues".

Whereas HR Manager in their response were very clear that FLMs don't have desire and spend enough time on understanding and implementing Sickness/ Absenteeism policy as stated "they lack the desire and effort to implement this properly". The finding of research collaborates with the detail research carried out in SCHOTT US "Problems with implementing Human Resource practices: The view of HR- and first-line managers" which reinforced the finding from the research in the specific case study by identifying that the problem lies in the recruitment process. As found in SCHOTT US FLMs started working as a member of the team and the best team member became the manager. So, the FLMs are hired based on their technical knowledge and not, or just a little, on their HR knowledge. Because of this recruitment process FLMs expect they have to focus on the business issues rather then the HR responsibilities. Because the business issues are numbers driven, the FLMs can see the end results of their effort, which motivates them more than the people issues, which have only non-tangible results. The HR Manager in the response was very clear that in order to remove the barrier to successful devolution of HR responsibilities the recruitment process has to reflect the importance and urgency of dealing with people issues such as how they will support staff who have sickness/ absenteeism issues and not only technical issues. This will address the major barrier that is preventing successful devolution of HR responsibilities to FLMs in the specific case study.

5.4 Discussion -- Policy & Procedures

A) Poor Communication between the Stakeholders

In reference to literature the importance of good communication is very essential for the overall devolvement process especially understanding the hard element such as disciplinary/ grievance and dealing with sickness issues. To highlight the importance of good communication between an organization HR function and its line manager (Griffiths, 2006) states that good devolved HRM practice requires that the HR function interact directly with the Line Managers. The good communication will enable a customer friendly environment, which Line Managers can view that will improve the overall effectiveness in an organization. Many studies such as (Torrington and Hall, 1996), have highlighted good communication plays a vital role in ensuring that line managers take up HR responsibilities with less disturbance. The situation in the specific case study is contrary to the literature where due to poor communication between the HR Manager and FLMs is leading to confusion, misunderstanding and creating major barriers to the devolution of HR responsibilities in the specific case study. The theory mentioned earlier emphasizes on direct communication between the HR Manager and FLMs but according to the investigation that was not happening at all in the specific case study.

According to the FLMs they don't meet the HR Manager or have any cross-departmental meetings and mostly the communication is done using emails which can be very confusing and lacks clarity. As reinforced by FLMs "HR department sends out emails with the procedures and detail the HR tasks which gives confusing messages". FLMs are very clear that the communication of HR policy is not performed well. Due to poor communication there is lack of understanding about HR policies. FLMs have to depend on their own interpretation about the policies or relay on others sources to get advice which can be a further barrier to devolution of HR responsibilities to FLMs in the specific case study.

B) Policies and Guidelines open for Interpretation

The guidelines designed by HR should be clear, precise without any ambiguity or open to any interpretation. According to theory (Kane, Crawford & Grant, 1999) to be seen as effective, HRM must meet the basic criteria of both the strategic and the developmental perspectives. HR policies and practices must be long term in focus, clear, integrated with one another and in line with the organization's strategy and objectives. The outcome from the investigation portrays a situation where FLMs are unclear about the policies and guidelines and according to the responses due to lack or training or guidance these policies are difficult to understand, implement and open to interpretation in the specific case study. As the expectations are not clear by HR department every FLM interprets the guidelines differently and there is no consistency with all FLMs at the specific case study in performing their HR responsibilities. The research findings highlights a situation where HR Manager is also well aware of the inconsistency; policies and guidelines are open to different interpretation by different FLMs leading to inconsistency and more confusion in the specific case study. As reinforced by FLM "We need clear expectation from the HR department and defined rules and authority about these policies". If policies and guidelines are followed properly by all the FLMs without their own interpretation and there is detail support from HR department with clear rules and authority this will resolve the key barriers to the devolution of HR responsibilities to FLMs.

5.5 Discussion ---Mentoring Coaching & Support

Proactive Support?

The continuous and proactive support is essential for the overall devolution of HR responsibilities to FLMs in the specific case study. According to the literature (Guest & Conway, 2004) for successful HR delivery we need a strong, stable and proactive support and partnership between HR and line management. In reference to the literature the findings from the research clearly indicates that HR department provides mentoring, support and guidance by advising the FLMs in the specific case study. It was also clear from the research findings that the support is sometimes informal or formal but the main barrier to the devolution of the responsibilities highlighted by the FLMs that the HR department have to be more proactive in order to resolve the queries of FLM. From the responses it can be concluded that FLMs have to chase up HR to get support and mentoring for different queries and if they don't there queries are not resolved very quickly as reinforced by a respondent "You have to see HR to get support and advice you are looking for as they don't come and see you at all". As reinforced by another respondents "they don't come and see us as we have to approach them with a problem or issue". The responses clearly indicate that HR provides support but they are not very proactive in their approach and a lot of time is wasted chasing up HR to answer the query to resolve a problem. According to HR Manager due to shortage of manpower and the nature of queries there is a delay in their response. This is leading to major barrier to the successful devolution of HR responsibilities to FLMs in the specific case study.

Over-reliance on HR

The main problem highlighted in different fieldwork and studies during the devolution of HR responsibilities is over-reliance or dependency of FLMs on HR department. This is considered as a major barrier to the implementation of HR responsibilities. The finding from the research matches the literature where the major criticism from other studies is that line managers have generally received very little support, mentoring or no training in-order to improve "hard" and "soft" element of HR. This can lead to crisis of confidence in Line managers being able to undertake the HRM effectively leading to over-reliance on HR (Bond & McCracken, 2004). The FLM in their responses agree that HR provides support and guidance but they can't work on their own because things were done for them and they can't operate independently at all. The HR Manager states that FLMs are not very comfortable to address the issues on their own and relay on the HR department to fix the problems straightaway. They (FLMs) prefer to speak to the other FLMs to resolve the issue, which can lead to confusion and sometimes wrong decision taken. This shows lack of training and also lack of communication between different FLMs and HR Managers, which is leading to confusion and barrier to the implementation of the policy.

According to the HR manager they are always trying to find the cause of the problem and FLMs need to develop skills in order to resolve queries on their own. They will advise the FLM first to resolve the queries in a certain way but they have to follow a training course and have to develop skills. So when there is a problem or query FLM ask for help they will get full support but at the same time they will be criticized too. FLMs might not realize that the need this development and don't prioritize this because they have to deal with many issues. So there is a gap where HR department wants FLM to become independent workers whereas FLMs don't want to be held accountable according to the HR Manager and always require full support from HR to make decisions for them. This underlines issues such as lack of capacity development & training, poor communication, lack of importance for HR goals, which are major barriers to the overall devolution strategy in the specific case study.

The next chapter is Recommendation and Conclusion. The chapter will provide a list of key recommendation to overcome the problems faced by the case study. Also the chapter provides a detailed conclusion to the entire research.