HUMAN ASPECTS OF TECHNOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT

by Debasish Das

ADD YOUR CHAPTER ( ADDITIONS, COMMENTS, ETC.)  TO DEBASISH'  ARTICLE

INTRODUCTION

TECHNOLOGY & MANAGEMENT

TECHNOLOGY-MANAGEMENT LINKAGE

WHY HAS CHANGE IN TECHNOLOGY COME ABOUT ?

HOW HAS MANAGEMENT COPED WITH THIS CHANGE ?

CONCLUSION

ADD YOUR CHAPTER ( ADDITIONS, COMMENTS, ETC.)  TO DEBASISH'  ARTICLE

Chapter By Nelson Cordeiro Thursday, April 6, 2000 at 10:03:52

The attempt by the author to bring forth the views from human aspect is really commendable. However the increasing competitiveness in the market place and the demands made by the customers and the stakeholders on the organisational productivity ( the measurement of success !) leave little choice to the organisations than to increasing speed, further asking from each one in the company ever increasing competitive output from each of the people in the organisations. Increasing market share cannot be the business of the marketing people alone but it needs to be the responsibility of the each of the staff members in the organisations. The only way of survival in the market place is speed. We have innumberable successful corporates of the past years whose names too does not exist today. What happened to them? did market spoil them? or their own people? Who is responsible for the innocent shareholders and financers? If one can derive conclusions out of all these historical cases, the clear responsibility lies only with its people. People may be at Top or in the middle. In our corporates we have excellent resources, instant communications channels, the clear and complete informations and good people in the organisations, however we lack good managers who can lead, direct, motivate and create energy with speed and enthusiam. Unfortunately the some of the organisations are used as platforms for career building, self expression platforms than as competitive , energised, focussed teams of people to create and add value to the customers, employees and all the stake holders and thereby to the larger society. The over sensitive organsitions, inward looking groups will never be able to create toughness to absorb short term shocks and thereby furthering their weaknesses internally which leads to external weakness( a good market strength is earned only with good people eventually) if we have failed managers/leaders one day we have failed companies and organisations. To understand, feel emphathise and help people grow in organsations is the need of the day , but crying everyday with them on the desktops will be darkening our days when we are young and energetic. Eventually every organisation succeeds only with its people , but people with success in their mind, an attitude to win, to collaborate and strong perseverance ability with strong competitive ability with a stamina to run faster than the competition will make the organisation to succeed.

Chapter By Gautam Ghosh Thursday, December 7, 2000 at 07:37:52

Building Commitment in an Era of Change: Rx for HRM by John Meyer > The workplace has undergone extensive changes in the 1990s and will undoubtedly continue to do so in the new millenium. Downsizing, outsourcing, mergers, acquisitions, and re-engineering, are just some of the more radical changes that are occurring in response to increases in global compe(BLEEP)ion, improvements in technology, and government deregulation (Howard, 1995). These changes have the potential to radically alter the commitments that employees experience with regard to work (Meyer, Allen & Topolnytsky, 1998). This situation requires that we ask ourselves some tough questions, including "Is commitment really necessary?," "Can we expect employee commitment when we can't make long-term commitments ourselves?," and "Can we get the benefits of commitment in other ways?" Before we can answer these questions, we first need to consider what commitment is, how it develops, and how it relates to organizational effectiveness and employee well-being. What is Commitment? Commitment involves the "binding" of an individual to a course of action. An individual who is committed to a relationship is bound to stay in that relationship. Similarly, an employee who is committed to an organization is bound to stay in that organization. Our research has demonstrated, however, that not all commitments are alike (Meyer & Allen, 1997). What makes them different is the "mindset" that accompanies them. This mindset reflects the individual's perception of why (s)he is bound to a course of action and, as we will see, has implications for the nature and duration of that action. We have identified three distinguishable mindsets that accompany commitments: * Desire: I want to do this. * Cost: I have to do this. * Obligation: I ought to do this. Thus, employees who are committed to an organization might continue employment in that organization because they want to (e.g., they value membership), they have to (e.g., to avoid loss of benefits or unemployment), or they believe they ought to (e.g., to reciprocate for benefits received). Does Commitment Matter? The value of commitment is that it makes behaviour more predictable. Because employees who are committed to an organization are bound to remain, an organization with a committed workforce can expect a relatively low rate of turnover. This is only part of the story, however. How long employees remain, and what they do while in the organization's employ, will depend on the nature of the mindset that accompanies the commitment. We have found, for example, that employees who want to stay tend to be rated as better performers, are absent less frequently, and are better "organizational citizens" than those who do not. In contrast, those who remain merely to avoid costs are often motivated to do little more than is required to maintain employment. Although those who remain out of obligation might also feel some obligation to contribute to the attainment of organizational goals, the duration and extent of these obligations are likely to be more circumscribed than would be the case with employees who remain out of desire. That is, individuals who act out of obligation tend to have a clear sense of what is required of them to fulfill their obligation, and might have little motivation to exceed these requirements. In sum, then, commitment does matter. It helps us to predict and plan for the future. More importantly, the nature of the commitment matters. In many, if not most cases, we seek employee commitment to a particular course of action (e.g., we want employees to stay in the organization) but want them to do more (e.g., stay and do what it takes to make the organization effective). Often it is not possible to specify the exact form of behaviour we want to accompany a commitment. Indeed, as jobs become less well defined and expectations for employee flexibility increase (Bridges, 1994), we want employees to do what is in the organization's best interest in whatever situations they encounter. This kind of behaviour is most likely among employees whose commitment is based on a desire to maintain membership in the organization. Because this kind of commitment is typically accompanied by positive emotion (affect), it has come to be known as affective commitment. Before turning to the issue of development, it is important to note that commitment has implications for employees as well as employers. Although much less attention has been paid to these implications, there is accumulating evidence to suggest that affective commitment is positively (BLEEP)ociated with employee health and well-being. In contrast, being committed to a course of action out of need has the potential to increase stress and ill-health. Therefore, building strong affective commitment can be of benefit to both organizations and their employees. How Does One Build "Affective" Commitment? There are many factors that contribute to employees' desire to belong and contribute to the success of an organization. These can be summarized as falling into four broad categories: work experiences, value-fit, organizational support, and organizational justice. Work experiences. Although the desire to belong to an organization is likely to be influenced initially by employees' expectations prior to entry (including what they are told in the recruitment process), our research consistently shows that what they experience on a day-to-day basis ultimately determines the strength of employees' affective commitment to the organization. Very generally, commitment tends to be greater among those employees whose day-to-day experiences contribute to feelings of comfort (e.g., role clarity; positive interpersonal relationships) and competence (e.g., appropriate levels of challenge and personal responsibility). Value fit. Although typically reflected in employee's day-to-day work experience, value fit is an important consideration in its own right. Organizational values are reflected in many ways including the nature of the business they are in, the products and services they provide, the way they market these products and services, and the way they treat employees. Employees have values too, and they will have a stronger desire to remain and contribute when their values are compatible with those of the organization. Organizational support. Commitment is a two-way street and therefore employees will be more committed to organizations that are committed to them. Although providing job security is one way in which organizations can commit to employees, it is not the only way. Employees have been shown to have greater commitment to the extent that they believe the organization is concerned about their well-being and values the contribution they make. Perceptions of support are shaped by day-to-day experiences and, as noted later, by Human Resource Management (HRM) policies and practices. Organizational justice. People expect and value fair treatment. Although perceptions of fairness are influenced, in part, by the distribution of valued resources (e.g., pay, promotions), recent research has shown that commitment to organizations is influenced even more by the way in which these resources are distributed. Even decisions leading to negative outcomes (e.g., pay cuts; job loss) will be accepted with minimal impact on commitment if they are arrived at fairly (e.g., without bias; based on relevant information). Employees also expect to be treated with dignity and respect and will respond favourably to organizations that treat them this way. What Are the Implications for HRM Policies and Practices? Employees' day-to-day work experiences and perceptions of organizational values, support, and justice are shaped largely by HRM policies and practices. Keeping in mind, of course, that these policies and practices must be compatible with one another and with the overall business strategy, the following recommendations for specific policy and practices derive from research findings to date (Meyer & Allen, 1997). Recruitment and Selection. There is as yet little evidence to suggest that we can select employees who are predisposed to commitment. Nevertheless, the way in which an organization goes about recruiting and selecting employees can help shape employees' perception of organizational values, support, and justice. Perhaps most obvious is the fact that providing employees with "realistic job previews" (i.e., providing an accurate description of the job, organization, and opportunities, including both positive and negative features) will permit a better (BLEEP)essment of "fit." Recruits who discover during the selection process that their values are incompatible with those of the organization can drop out at that point rather than after they are hired and have undertaken potentially costly training. Less obvious perhaps, is the fact that the degree of honesty shown for employees during the selection process will shape perceptions of support and justice among those who are ultimately hired. Training and Socialization. From the standpoint of building commitment, socialization and training experiences should help to make employees feel competent and valued. Research findings consistently demonstrate that strategies designed to build self-esteem (e.g., "We hired you because we value your ability/potential") lead to greater commitment than do those designed to "reshape" the employee (e.g., "Forget what you learned before - this is the right way to do things"). Similarly, training that helps employees to feel confident in their ability to do their jobs has been found to contribute to the development of affective commitment. (BLEEP)essment and Promotion. Evidence suggests that internal promotion policies contribute to higher levels of affective commitment. Employees are likely to perceive such policies as a sign of support and, perhaps, increased job security. A major factor in employees' evaluation of (BLEEP)essment and promotion practices, however, will be fairness. Research consistently demonstrates that how appraisals are conducted, and promotion decisions are made, contributes over and above the favourability of the outcome in (BLEEP)essments of justice. For example, employees have been found to react more favourably to a negative evaluation when they believe that the judgements were based on accurate information, when they are given an opportunity to state their own views about their performance, and when strategies for improvement are discussed. Compensation and Benefits. Compensation policy and practice will be scrutinized closely by employees and judgements will be made about organizational values, support, and justice. Employee-ownership and profit-sharing plans have been found to be (BLEEP)ociated with higher levels of commitment, presumably because they strengthen the alignment of employee and organizational goals. Evidence also suggests, however, that these plans are effective only when employees' expectations concerning involvement in decision making and/or increased compensation are realized. Benefit packages offered by organizations also say something about values, support, and fairness. The provision of family-responsive benefits (e.g., day-care; flextime), for example, have been linked to higher levels of affective commitment under conditions in which need-based distribution of outcomes is accepted as part of the organizational culture. In summary, HRM policies and practices are complex and, to be effective, must be properly aligned, compatible with the organizational culture, and consistent with the overall business strategy. Consequently, it is difficult to make firm predictions about whether a specific practice will or will not help to strengthen employee commitment. Knowing that HRM policies and practices influence affective commitment by shaping perceptions of organizational values, support, and justice should help to guide decisions. It would be a mistake, however, to (BLEEP)ume that we know what these perceptions are, or will be, without making efforts to gather information from employees themselves (e.g., using surveys or focus groups). Aut(BLEEP) John Meyer meyer@julian.uwo.ca www.cpa.ca

Chapter By Sartar Iqbal Panhwar Tuesday, October 26, 2004 at 11:54:08

Introduction Basic concepts of management and its relationships with HRM Components of an organization 2. Concepts of people working together Individual vs. Group behavior and Teams History of HRM 3. New trends at workplace with changing environment Workforce diversity, pros and cons Functions of HRM 4. Relationship between HR specialist and line managers Legal and ethical issues in HRM Human resource planning (HRP) 5. Human resource information system (HRIS) Job analysis Job analysis continued, Job analysis outcomes 6. Recruitment Source of recruitment Selection 7. Selection Tests Selection process, continued Socialization 8. Training & development Maximizing learning Career management 9. Performance Performance Appraisal Job evaluation and pricing 10. Compensation system Benefits Role of money in performance of employee 11. Motivation Occupation health and safety Stress management 12. Communication in organization Trade union Conflict and Negotiation 13. Power & politics HR auditing Discipline

Chapter By AVINASH Friday, January 20, 2006 at 03:54:48

IMPACT OF IT IN HRM IN COMPE(BLEEP)IVE ENVIRONMENT