HUMAN RESOURCE PRACTICE
New Forms of Career: The Challenge to
Human Resource Management
Polly Parker and Kerr Inkson*
University of Auckland
Keywords: boundaryless careers, labour mobility, career
structure, self-development, role of HRM
The concept of career has recently undergone massive change.
Traditionally, careers have been, in Kanters (1989) terms, either
bureaucratic- constructed on a logic of loyalty to an employing
organization and ascent of a hierarchy of status and
responsibility; or professional- constructed on a logic of
increasing competence within a specific occupational frame of
reference. To secure and maintain a stable workforce, companies
have come to rely on predictable career behavior built around
stable organizational and occupational institutions.In recent
years, however, the comfortable accommodations between
organizations seeking stable workforces and individuals seeking
secure careers have been disrupted by massive restructuring,
downsizing, outsourcing; flexible forms of organization, rapid
growth of new technology, obsolescent occupations, and shifting
occupational boundaries (Inkson, 1997). The new mobile careers are
interorganizational and, to an extent, inter-occupational: Kanter
(1989) characterises a third career form as entrepreneurial, with a
logic of career development through the growth of organizational
and personal value. In boundaryless careers (Arthur & Rousseau,
1996), individuals careers take them across organizational
boundaries, and career assets are acquired and developed through
cumulative learning across organizations.
The change reflects a shift from long-term to short-term
commitment, from noncontingent to contingent rewards, from company
ownership to individual ownership of the career, and from permanent
mutual loyalty to temporary opportunistic alliance (Arthur, Claman,
& De Fillippi, 1995). Career progress comes not from
intracompany hierarchical advancement, but from inter-company
self-development.
For HR managers, the most obvious result of the change is the
problem of labour turnover. How does one plug holes in an edifice
which is in constant movement? However, the changes and problems go
far beyond this. Associated difficulties are loss of commitment by
the workforce, continuity problems in specific areas, instability
in the organization culture, loss of intellectual property,
negative returns on investments in initial socialization and
training, and the disruption of intraorganizational teams and
extra-organizational relationships. The potential consequences for
human resource management (HRM) are momentous.
In this paper we consider how well current theories and systems
of HRM stand up in an environment where more and more participants
in the labour market, rather than relying on corporate action for
their career development, seek to assert control over their own
careers. We also consider the appropriateness of corporate action
-typically embodied in HRM activities-in the context of the new
career environment. We ask, and attempt to answer, the question,
How should the HR function respond to these changes?* The authors
would like to thank Prof. Michael Arthur, Suffolk University,
Boston, MA, for his comments on an earlier draft.
HUMAN RESOURCES AS A SOURCE OF COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE
The early 1980s were marked by rapid and dramatic change, which
affected both. host economies and their associated employment
structures (Miles & Snow, 1984). The traditional means of
competitive advantage-economic, strategic, and technological-were
no longer sufficient. Organizational capability to change and adapt
was proffered as a source of competitive advantage (Ulrich, 1987).
In focusing on better deployment of human resources to create
organizational capability, Ulrich (1987) signalled the elaboration
of the Harvard framework of HRM (Beer, Spector, Lawrence, Quinn
& Mills, 1985) to emphasize competency-based behaviour.The
emphasis is evident in the resource-based view of the firm.
Attention moved from the properties of the industry environment
(e.g. Porter, 1985) to the internal resources of the firm (Wright,
McMahan, & Williams, 1994). Human capital was recognized as a
key asset for investment and development (Beer et al., 1985;
Boxall, 1994). In the resource-based view, competitive advantage is
facilitated through the development of firm-specific competencies
within the repository of the companys HRM system (Lado &
Wilson, 1994).Descriptions of competencies remain consistent on two
themes: (a) the source of competencies is always internal to the
firm, and (b) competency is produced by the way a firm utilises its
internal skills and resources, relative to the competition (Reed
& DeFillippi, 1990: 89). It is these assumptions which we now
question.The resource-based view claims that because the company
competencies on which strategies are based are assembled from the
motivations, knowledge, skills, and networks of individual
employees, HRM (as a philosophy, though not necessarily as a
discrete function) must have a primary influence within an
organizations strategic framework (Boxall, 1994; Schuler &
Jackson, 1987; Wright et al., 1994). Sustained competitive
advantages cannot be purchased on open markets: instead, such
advantages must be found in resources already controlled by a firm
(Barney, 1991: 117).This matching model ignores the possibility
that employee interests might make a difference to their
prescriptions (Boxall, 1992: 68). In the model, the emphasis in HRM
is to retain members and limit mobility: HR practices such as
reward systems, communication systems, training programs and
socialisation systems can be levers to develop the human capital to
behave in ways congruent with firm goals, the essence of
&dquo;strategic&dquo; human resource management (Wright et
al., 1994: 319).HRM AND CAREERS
By its nature, HRM theory gives primacy to a single level of
analysis: the organization. People are seen as elements in a pool
of relatively inert human resources, who can be induced by
appropriate HRM policies to remain members of the organization, to
work in organizational roles, and to develop their competencies for
the organizations benefit.Many organizations continue to conceive
of careers as company constructs designed to facilitate stability,
commitment, and the development of desired employee skills and
behaviour. Therefore, organizations build HR systems with strategic
HR plans, career development programs, and succession plans, which
provide hierarchical career paths to build company-relevant
expertise and encourage loyalty. The organization intent on
retaining a stable workforce recruits and socializes potentially
stable members, offers training and development to fill
organizational roles, promotes from within, and encourages people
to seek higher status. It offers inducements for loyalty, defers
rewards until higher status levels are reached, and provides
service bonuses and pension provisions.These HRM policies,
developed to encourage employee commitment, carry implicit signals
of career expectations. They encourage career dependency of the
employee on the organization. While both parties are claimed to
benefit, it is assumed that competency development is
firm-specific, embedded in a firms history and culture, and
generates tacit organizational knowledge (Lado & Wilson,1994:
699). This suggests that the responsibility for the individuals
career development lies with the organization. Thus, it is possible
for the organization to sustain competitive advantage through the
long-term accumulation and development of human capital in
corporate careers.The variances between the ideals and the
realities of careers propose a central challenge. Careers may be
viewed from the perspective of either the organization or the
employee (Gunz, 1989). From an employees perspective, he or she is
not a resource for the achievement of organizational goals, but an
autonomous actor striving to reach personal goals. From this
perspective, organizations are resources for people. Thus, career
actors reverse the assumptions on which much HRM thinking is
grounded. They recognize the career advantages that accrue from
mobility and versatility, and engage in inter-company boundaryless
careers (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996). In so doing, they create the
labour turnover problems of which HR managers complain.Career
mobility is facilitated by moves to more flexible organizational
forms. In the search for new ways of working, the traditional
boundaries of hierarchy, function and geography disappear, and
restructuring, alliance building and flexibility result in the
development of corporations without boundaries (Hirschom &
Gilmore,1992: 104). The blurring of boundaries is apparent in the
new world labour market (Johnston, 1991); in workforce flexibility
(Parker & Hall, 1993), and in new structures of work (Bridges,
1994). Delayering removes hierarchical boundaries. Team development
and multi-skilling remove specialization boundaries. Outsourcing
and joint venturing remove external boundaries. Downsizing and
flattening break the security and the commitment of middle managers
(Heckscher, 1995). Cross-functional teams demand reconfiguration of
roles as new groups form and disband around project work.Employees
aspirations are also changing. Increasingly, the focus for most
members of the workforce is not on employment security but on
potential employability (Kanter, 1989; Waterman, Waterman &
Collard, 1994). Employability dependsless on detailed company
knowledge, and more on flexibility and versatility. Employees
become aware that the kind of personal development they experience
in a single organization or role may become problematic in
preparation for taking on new roles elsewhere. As they become more
and more expert in a single organizations competencies and
idiosyncracies, they may progressively dis-equip themselves for
alternative employment.These new organizational forms and workforce
aspirations have transformed employment relationships and careers
(Inkson, 1997). Traditional maps for career paths no longer
describe reality. Career ladders are disappearing (Inkson &
Coe,1993). Instead, alternative metaphors such as hopping from job
to job (Kanter,1989: 299) or climbing on a jungle gym (Gunz, 1989)
describe careers that are neither linear nor incremental.Druckers
(1994) description of the knowledge age as one of social
transformation, in which the mobility of knowledge workers is of
the essence, presents a challenge to society to create a sense of
community for workers beyond their employing institutions.
Significantly, Drucker has reversed his longstanding position that
organizations should take care of long-term employee welfare.
Individual boundaryless career behaviour is characterized by
marketability outside of the present employer, inter-firm mobility,
extra-organizational networks and subjective rather than objective
criteria of success (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996). This career
model may become prototypal in the new millennium.
DEALING WITH CAREER MOBILITY
Boundaryless career and similar paradigms call into question the
philosophical underpinnings of HRM and its implications in
practice. In seeking to answer these questions, we were assisted by
case material gathered from, and reflections by, four HR managers
occupying senior positions in major companies in the Auckland area.
Each was the senior HR manager in his or her company, each was
involved in toplevel company strategy, and each indicated that
career mobility, particularly among skilled and professional staff
was a major problem. Some details about their companies are set out
in table 1.Inter-organizational career mobility by employees
affects organizations most obviously through labour turnover and
the loss of talent. The HR managers reported that few new employees
arrived with a clear expectation of a long-term organizational
career. For example, Astrid reported:
The average age is 30 and only 8% are over 40. The average
service is about 18 months now-were having to ramp up recruitment.
But typically people we talk to say, I am really pleased with the
opportunity ... I will probably stay here for 18 months and then
move on.Staff discontinuities frequently preclude the provision of
career support. HR managers find themselves preoccupied with
plugging gaps rather than thinking strategically. Creating a stable
organizational core in terms of competencies and culture is
difficult in such a fluid situation. In considering possible
responses to these problems, examining the literature, and
gathering information from the four informants as to how their
companies were responding, we found it convenient to group our
ideas under four headings:
1 Reduce internal boundaries
2 Encourage loyalty by supporting mobility
3 Educate management in the new realities
4 Reconceptualize HRM, both as a philosophy and as a
functionReduce Internal Boundaries
One approach to slowing turnover is to encourage the reduction
or removal of boundaries within the organization. These boundaries
are often created by the formalizing apparatus of organization
structure, such as hierarchical levels, job descriptions, and
specialist departmentation, which attempt to focus expertise and
discourage individuals from learning or progressing outside tight
parameters. The employees desire for versatility and externally
valid learning may be met by nontraditional internal career moves.
The expressed desire for people to cross internal boundaries has
been endorsed by several recent authors (e.g. Ashkenas, Jick,
Ulrich & Kerr, 1995) who emphasize staff liquidity to be
responsive to changing organizational circumstances.Natasha
reported:Loyalty today is to the role rather than to the company.
Once someone has been in a role for 2-3 years they start to get
edgy and after 5 years they ask why havent I been moved? Company
loyalty is only there if they see their role as one in which they
can develop. They want to be in a role for 2-3 years for their
CV.Natashas company used monthly individual feedback and coaching
meetings to identify competency developments and as a means of
stretching people further within their roles for development. The
company also went to some trouble to ensure that when people feel
there is nothing more to learn from their role ... they get away
from that role.The retail company had found it useful to increase
the use of the more flexible terminology of roles rather than jobs.
It also tried to ensure that it gave people responsibility for core
plus project work, i.e. temporary assignments facilitating fresh
individual development in addition to regular work routines. The
changed philosophy was assisted by the fact that the company was in
a turnaround situation.In initiatives such as these, the
organization recognizes that it can, through its involvement of the
individual in role extension and project activity, help the
individual to add to his or her career capital and become a
co-investor with the individual in his or her career. In the
longer-term, the mobility of the individuals career may well mean
that another employer reaps the benefits of the new learning. In
the short-term, however, the employees observation that there is
ongoing careerrelevant learning helps to maintain his or her
loyalty to the organization. As the professional services company
HR manager put it:
People are sensible. Theyre not so much worried about the dollar
market but about the opportunities. Those who dont have a
short-term horizon are being sensible economists. Theyre saying,
This stuff on my CV is going to make me an investment in a few
yearstime.Encourage Loyalty by Supporting Mobility
Astrid reported a case where an engineer who had external
opportunities was upfront and signalled the issue to his manager.
The manager tried to get him kicked out. This type of loyalty
syndrome is frequently counter-productive, because it precludes
honest exploration between individuals and their organizations
around the reality that the individuals may aspire to careers
beyond the organizations boundaries.In contrast, Bartlett and
Ghoshal (1996) envision a new corporate era grounded in career
processes that are specifically individualized rather than
hierarchically constrained. An appropriate policy is to encourage
employees, who often conceal their aspirations for career mobility
for fear of being thought disloyal, to be honest and open about
these aspirations. This allows the organization the chance to
conduct authentic discussions with them about their futures and to
respond to their real needs. As John put it: ,
I would rather have somebody that was open about what they want
to do. If we cannot give them the opportunity at least we know
about it ... I prefer them to discuss opportunities, be open about
when theyre going to leave. Theres a need for openness, otherwise
you get surprised.Paradoxically, providing the development inside
the company that people feel they will need for their futures
outside the organization may strengthen their loyalty. As Harvey
reported: In the skills we invest in developing [people], we make
them more marketable elsewhere. But in general, the more you
provide opportunities for personal growth, the less likely they are
to leave.Educate Managers about Careers
Because an individuals career development is intimately tied up
with his or her day-to-day on-the-job activities, the involvement
of those managing such activities is critical. Line managers must
therefore be ready to engage with employees career concerns. This
calls for consciousness-raising, particularly about the long-term
role a manager can play in understanding subordinates career
concerns and in providing career development opportunities.However,
the focus needs to be not just on utilizing individuals career
concerns so that organizational interests are directly met, but
also on supporting individuals self-determined career aspirations.
As Natasha stated:
They [employees] are the drivers. We [the company] can help with
advice, direction, support and ideas but the prime motivation must
come from them. There is no way we should try and sell something to
them that isnt a win-win.
A major issue for long-serving managers concerns changing their
own loyalty assumptions. Cultural caste systems where long-service
core employees are regarded as a natural aristocracy and more
mobile staff and temporary contractors as pariahs should be
discouraged. Aspects of the employment system designed to encourage
managerial loyalty may have to be changed. Harvey stated: Were
changing [employees] shareholding from a superannuation model to a
value model. We are moving it to how much value are you to us?
rather than up in a straight lineThe disloyalty syndrome may be
treated by a new platform of employment relationship grounded in
communal interests and short-term project arrangements. These
retain the basis of employment close to prevailing external market
mechanisms for peoples security and mobility. Accordingly, managers
are encouraged to engage through different forms of employment
contracting by rebalancing traditional relational assumptions with
more realistic transactional ones (Rousseau,1995), and
internalizing a new paradigm set of employment principles which
reverse traditional loyalty-based assumptions (Arthur, Claman &
DeFillippi, 1995). In this context, the manager ceases to be an
agent of bureaucratic control and instead becomes a career coach
(Heckscher, 1995; Bartlett & Ghoshal, 1995).Reconceptualize
HRM, both as a Philosophy and as a Function
To this point we have emphasized the role of the organization as
a whole and of rank-and-file managers in facilitating new
approaches to people management based on the recognition and
acceptance of the mobile career phenomenon. But another confronting
question concerns the relevance of HRM in the new era. What is the
specific role of HRM in new careers environment, beyond that of
consciousness raising?A recent Fortune magazine article recommended
dismantling the HRM function. The central argument was that the
so-called personnel function was the last bureaucracy within the
contemporary corporation. To circumvent bureaucratic impediments,
HRM could more usefully be devolved to line managers or contracted
to outside suppliers (Stewart, 1996). The counter argument is for
HRM to embrace the new career forms explicitly, and to shift
emphasis from bureaucracy-based to knowledge-based activities. The
problem for contemporary HRM is that it appears to be caught
between these alternative positions.How well equipped is a
conventional, internally located and focused HRM function to handle
an increasingly unstable, uncontrollable, internal and external
labour market? With high labour turnover and increasing mobility
across the organizations boundaries, it may become necessary for
the organization to develop better knowledge of, and sensitivity
to, the external labour market. Rather than emphasizing control
over, and planned development of, the organizations permanent
workforce, HRM may increasingly have the role of developing
temporary joint ventures with mobile career actors (including
contractors, interim managers, and consultants). These
relationships are also likely to involve external agencies such as
employment agencies, training and development consultants, and
suppliers of temporary labour, which act as go-betweens and
match-makers in the labour market.Can the HRM function itself be
outsourced? John, the head of an HR department employing 16 people,
saw major possibilities:
Were reviewing four temp. agencies now. All of them are raising
the issue of development. They all have programs. They say, we can
help you manage your temps. You can outsource everything. You can
contract in training and development. You can get employment
relations specialists when you need them. In our organization you
could get rid of most of the HR people. Youd need someone like me
in a go-between role. But even I could be on contract. The same
model applies to finance, IT, property. We dont need people. We
could run the company by phone or set up the CEO in Vanuatu and
contract everything else out. HR specialists arent needed
in-house.
This radical solution perhaps underestimates the importance of
retaining a strategic consideration of HR issues within the
organizations core.Understandably, HR managers, whose job tends to
be to fill the gaps, typically see career mobility, at least in the
context of their organizations, as a problem to be solved. In doing
so, they reflect conventional HRM assumptions. But career mobility
is also an opportunity to be grasped. Mobility provides an
opportunity not only for temporary relationship-makers such as
external agencies, but also for organizations which seek to build
their competencies in the long term. The HR managers to whom we
spoke reflected some ambivalence between their roles as would-be
controllers of labour mobility and of their employees careers, and
as promotors of new, flexible types of employment
relationships.Incoming employees in a high-mobility organizations
bring with them valuable, and often novel, expertise, learning,
values, and contacts. How can these be transferred and trapped
within the organization, after the almost inevitable departure of
the employees who first introduced them, so that they become part
of its culture, its strategy, its institutions and its networks?
The emphasis in building and retaining resources must refocus from
the people who bring in knowledge to the knowledge which they
bring. Should the HR manager become, or be replaced by, a KR
manager (knowledge resource manager)?It appears that HRM, whether
practised from within the organization or sourced from elsewhere,
may become less an acquirer, developer and controller of a
company-owned labour force, and more a broker between firms
evolving boundaryless strategies and individuals ursuing
boundaryless careers.CONCLUSION
According to Miles and Snow (1996), the twentieth-century
structure of pyramid organizations created second wave careers
characterized by the incremental acquisition over time of
responsibility, status and formal rewards. More recently, network
organizations with fluid and permeable boundaries have generated
third wave careers, identified by horizontal rather than vertical
movement. For the future, it is possible to conceive of careers
developing more reciprocal relationships with organizational forms.
Miles and Snow (1996) describe employment relationships of the
future as a fourth wave of enterprise development in which
individual work patterns will drive organizational form rather than
following it.Conventional HR theory makes the assumption that
organizations create careers. It is equally arguable that people,
through their career behaviour, create organizations ; that the
career is not an artefact of organization strategy and structure,
but, rather, that the organization, and even the industry, is a
dynamic nexus of interacting careers (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996;
Arthur, Inkson & Pringle, in press).Do organizations create
careers, or do careers create organizations? Both statements are
true simultaneously. Organizations and careers must remain mutally
supportive, but the dynamic between them must emphasize that the
employees contribution is not dependent on the organization but is
interdependent with it. The new dynamic creates constantly evolving
networks and partnerships. This conceptualization implies that
organizations, rather than viewing employees and contractors as
human resources, to be managed, must view them as partners in a
joint venture. If the HR function has a purpose, it is not to
manage a resource but to build relationships with business
partners.
Polly Parker has had a career in health education, tertiary
lecturing, and career consultancy. Currently she holds a university
scholarship from the University of Auckland where she is completing
a PhD in the area of career communities as sites of self-organizing
and learning.
Kerr Inkson (PhD, Otago) is professor of management studies at
the University of Auckland. He has been active in research in
organizational behaviour in the UK and New Zealand for over 30
years. His recent work has been concerned with career mobility and
economic and organizational change.
RANGKUMAN
Dalam beberapa tahun terakhir, bagaimanapun, akomodasi yang
nyaman antara organisasi mencari tenaga kerja yang stabil dan
individu mencari karir aman telah terganggu oleh besar
restrukturisasi, perampingan, outsourcing; bentuk fleksibel
organisasi, pertumbuhan yang cepat dari teknologi baru, pekerjaan
usang, dan pergeseran batas kerja (Inkson, 1997). Dalam 'berbatas
karir' (Arthur& Rousseau, 1996), karir individu membawa mereka
melintasi batas-batas organisasi,dan aset karir diperoleh dan
dikembangkan melalui pembelajaran kumulatif di organisasi.Kemajuan
karir tidak datang dari intracompany kemajuan hirarkis, tetapi dari
antar-perusahaan pengembangan diri. Untuk manajer HR, hasil yang
paling jelas dari perubahan adalah masalah 'tenaga kerja omset '.
Namun, perubahan dan masalah jauh melampaui ini. Kesulitan yang
terkait adalah kehilangan komitmen tenaga kerja, masalah
kesinambungan di daerah tertentu, ketidakstabilandalam budaya
organisasi, hilangnya kekayaan intelektual, hasil negatif
padainvestasi dalam sosialisasi awal dan pelatihan, dan gangguan
intraorganizational tim dan hubungan ekstra-organisasi. Konsekuensi
potensial untuk manajemen sumber daya manusia (SDM) yang
penting.
SUMBER DAYA MANUSIA SEBAGAI SUMBER KEUNGGULAN KOMPETITIFDalam
model, penekanan dalam HRM adalah untuk mempertahankan anggota dan
membatasi mobilitas: 'praktik HR seperti sistem reward,sistem
komunikasi, program pelatihan dan sistem sosialisasi dapat
tuasuntuk mengembangkan sumber daya manusia untuk berperilaku
dengan cara kongruen dengan tujuan perusahaan, esensi &
strategis sumber daya manajemen manusia (Wright et al, 1994:.
319).HRM DAN KARIRBerdasarkan sifatnya, teori HRM memberikan
keunggulan untuk satu tingkat analisis: organisasi. Orang dilihat
sebagai elemen dalam genangan relatif inert 'sumber daya manusia',
yang dapat disebabkan oleh kebijakan HRM yang tepat untuk tetap
anggota organisasi, untuk bekerja dalam peran organisasi, dan
mengembangkan kompetensi mereka untuk Manfaat organisasi.Banyak
organisasi terus membayangkan karir sebagai perusahaan
konstruksidirancang untuk memfasilitasi stabilitas, komitmen, dan
pengembangan dari yang diinginkan keterampilan karyawan dan
perilaku. Oleh karena itu, organisasi membangun sistem HR dengan
strategi Rencana HR, program pengembangan karir, dan rencana
suksesi, yang menyediakan hirarkis 'jalur karir' untuk membangun
keahlian perusahaan yang relevan dan mendorongloyalitas. Organisasi
bertekad mempertahankan rekrutan tenaga kerja yang stabil dan
sosialisasi anggota berpotensi stabil, menawarkan pelatihan dan
pengembangan untuk mengisi organisasi peran, mempromosikan dari
dalam, dan mendorong orang untuk mencari status yang lebih tinggi.
BERURUSAN DENGAN KARIR MOBILITASKarir berbatas dan paradigma yang
sama mempertanyakan filosofisdasar-dasar dari HRM dan implikasinya
dalam praktek. Dalam upaya untuk menjawab pertanyaan-pertanyaan,
kami dibantu oleh bahan kasus yang dikumpulkan dari, dan refleksi
oleh, empat Manajer HR menduduki posisi senior di
perusahaan-perusahaan besar di wilayah Auckland. Masing-masing
adalah manajer HR senior dalam perusahaan nya, masing-masing
terlibat dalam toplevelstrategi perusahaan, dan masing-masing
menunjukkan bahwa mobilitas karir, khususnya di kalangan staf ahli
dan profesional adalah masalah besar. Beberapa rincian tentang
perusahaan mereka ditetapkan dalam tabel 1. Karir antar organisasi
mobilitas karyawan mempengaruhi organisasi yang paling jelasmelalui
perputaran tenaga kerja dan hilangnya bakat. Manajer HR
dilaporkanbahwa beberapa karyawan baru tiba dengan harapan yang
jelas dari jangka panjang organisasi karir. Misalnya, Astrid
melaporkan: Aku Empat manajer HR senior yang meja dan perusahaan
mereka Usia rata-rata adalah 30 dan hanya 8% lebih 40. Layanan
rata-rata sekitar 18 bulan sekarang-kita harus untuk meningkatkan
perekrutan. Tapi biasanya orang yang kita berbicara untuk
mengatakan, 'Saya benar-benar senang dengan kesempatan ... Saya
mungkin akan tinggal di sini selama 18 bulan dan kemudian bergerak
'. Diskontinuitas staf sering menghalangi penyediaan dukungan
karir. Manajer HR menemukan diri mereka sibuk dengan memasukkan
kesenjangan daripada berpikir strategis. Membuat stabil organisasi
'inti' dalam hal kompetensi dan budaya sulit dalam situasi seperti
cairan. Dalam mempertimbangkan kemungkinan respon terhadap masalah
ini, memeriksa literatur, dan mengumpulkan informasi dari empat
informan bagaimana perusahaan mereka menanggapi, kami menemukan itu
nyaman untuk kelompok ide-ide kami dalam empat judul:1. Mengurangi
batas internal2. Mendorong loyalitas dengan mendukung mobilitas3.
Mendidik manajemen dalam realitas baru4. Reconceptualize HRM, baik
sebagai filsafat dan sebagai fungsi Mengurangi Batas internal.
Salah satu pendekatan untuk memperlambat perputaran adalah untuk
mendorong pengurangan atau penghapusan batas dalam organisasi.
Batas ini sering dibuat oleh meresmikan aparat struktur organisasi,
seperti tingkat hirarki, pekerjaan deskripsi, dan spesialis
departementasi, yang mencoba untuk fokus keahlian dan mencegah
individu dari belajar atau kemajuan luar parameter ketat. Itu
Keinginan karyawan untuk fleksibilitas dan belajar eksternal yang
valid dapat dipenuhi oleh nontradisional karir internal yang
bergerak. Keinginan menyatakan bagi orang untuk menyeberang intern
batas telah didukung oleh beberapa penulis baru-baru ini (misalnya
Ashkenas, Jick, Ulrich & Kerr, 1995) yang menekankan staf
'likuiditas' menjadi responsif terhadap perubahan organisasi
keadaan.Natasha melaporkan: Loyalitas hari ini adalah untuk peran
daripada perusahaan. Setelah seseorang telah di Peran selama 2-3
tahun mereka mulai mendapatkan gelisah dan setelah 5 tahun mereka
bertanya 'mengapa saya tidak pernah pindah? 'loyalitas Perusahaan
hanya ada jika mereka melihat peran mereka sebagai salah satu di
mana mereka dapat berkembang. Mereka ingin berada dalam peran
selama 2-3 tahun untuk CV mereka. Perusahaan Natasha digunakan
pertemuan umpan balik individu dan pembinaan bulanan untuk
mengidentifikasi perkembangan kompetensi dan sebagai sarana
peregangan orang lanjut dalam peran mereka untuk pembangunan.
Perusahaan juga pergi ke beberapa kesulitan untukmemastikan bahwa
'ketika orang merasa tidak ada yang lebih untuk belajar dari peran
mereka ... mereka menjauh dari peran '. Perusahaan ritel telah
menemukan itu berguna untuk meningkatkan penggunaan lebih fleksibel
terminologi 'peran' daripada 'pekerjaan'. Hal ini juga mencoba
untuk memastikan bahwa itu memberi orang tanggung jawab untuk 'inti
ditambah pekerjaan proyek', yaitu tugas sementara memfasilitasi
pengembangan individu segar selain rutinitas pekerjaan tetap. The
berubah Filosofi dibantu oleh fakta bahwa perusahaan berada dalam
situasi 'perputaran'. Dalam inisiatif seperti ini, organisasi
mengakui bahwa itu bisa, melalui keterlibatan individu dalam
ekstensi peran dan kegiatan proyek, membantu individu untuk
menambah modal karir 'nya dan menjadi co-investor dengan individu
dalam karir nya. Dalam jangka panjang, mobilitas karir
individumungkin berarti bahwa majikan lain menuai manfaat dari
pembelajaran baru. Dijangka pendek, bagaimanapun, pengamatan
karyawan yang ada careerrelevant berkelanjutan belajar membantu
untuk mempertahankan atau kesetiaannya kepada organisasi. Sebagai
profesional perusahaan jasa manajer HR mengatakan:Orang-orang yang
masuk akal. Mereka tidak begitu banyak khawatir tentang pasar dolar
tetapi tentang peluang. Mereka yang tidak memiliki horizon jangka
pendek sedang ekonom masuk akal. Mereka mengatakan, 'barang ini
pada CV saya akan membuat saya investasi dalam beberapa tahun'
waktu '. Mendorong Loyalitas oleh Pendukung Mobilitas Astrid
melaporkan kasus di mana 'seorang insinyur yang memiliki peluang
eksternal dimuka dan mengisyaratkan masalah ini ke manajernya.
Manajer mencoba untuk mendapatkan dia menendang out '. Jenis
loyalitas sindrom 'sering kontra produktif, karena menghalangi
eksplorasi jujur antara individu dan organisasi mereka di sekitar
realitas bahwa individu dapat bercita-cita untuk karir di luar
organisasi batas. Sebaliknya, Bartlett dan Ghoshal (1996)
membayangkan era baru perusahaan membumi dalam proses karir yang
secara khusus individual daripada hirarki dibatasi. Sebuah
kebijakan yang tepat adalah untuk mendorong karyawan, yang sering
menyembunyikan merekaaspirasi untuk mobilitas karir karena takut
dianggap 'tidak setia', jujur danmembuka tentang aspirasi ini. Hal
ini memungkinkan organisasi kesempatan untuk melakukan diskusi
otentik dengan mereka tentang masa depan mereka dan untuk
menanggapi mereka yang sebenarnya membutuhkan. Seperti John
mengatakan:, Saya lebih suka memiliki seseorang yang terbuka
tentang apa yang mereka ingin lakukan. Jika kita tidak bisa memberi
mereka kesempatan setidaknya kita tahu tentang hal itu ... Saya
lebih suka mereka untuk membahas peluang, terbuka tentang kapan
mereka akan pergi. Ada kebutuhan untuk keterbukaan, jika tidak Anda
mendapatkan terkejut. Paradoksnya, menyediakan pengembangan di
dalam perusahaan bahwa orang merasa mereka perlu untuk masa depan
mereka di luar organisasi dapat memperkuat loyalitas mereka.
Sebagai Harvey melaporkan: "Dalam keterampilan kita berinvestasi
dalam mengembangkan [orang], kami membuat mereka lebih berharga di
tempat lain. Tapi secara umum, semakin Anda memberikan kesempatan
untuk pertumbuhan pribadi, semakin kecil kemungkinan mereka untuk
meninggalkan '. Mendidik Manajer sekitar Pemilik Karena
pengembangan karir individu sangat terkait dengan nya on-the-job
kegiatan sehari-hari, keterlibatan mereka yang mengelola kegiatan
tersebut sangat penting. Oleh karena itu manajer lini harus siap
untuk terlibat dengan karir karyawan keprihatinan. Ini panggilan
untuk peningkatan kesadaran, terutama tentang peran jangka panjang
manajer bisa bermain dalam memahami kekhawatiran karir bawahan 'dan
dalam memberikan peluang pengembangan karir. Namun, fokus harus
tidak hanya pada memanfaatkan kekhawatiran karir individu '
sehingga kepentingan organisasi secara langsung bertemu, tetapi
juga untuk mendukung individu ' aspirasi karir ditentukan sendiri.
Sebagai Natasha menyatakan: Mereka [karyawan] adalah driver. Kami
[perusahaan] dapat membantu dengan saran, arah, dukungan dan
ide-ide tapi motivasi utama harus datang dari mereka. Tidak ada
cara kita harus mencoba dan menjual sesuatu kepada mereka yang
bukan win-win. Masalah utama bagi manajer lama-porsi kekhawatiran
mengubah kesetiaan mereka sendiri asumsi. 'Kasta' budaya sistem di
mana karyawan-layanan panjang 'inti' yangdianggap sebagai
aristokrasi alami dan staf lebih mobile dan kontraktor
sementarasebagai paria harus berkecil hati. Aspek dari sistem kerja
yang dirancang untukmendorong loyalitas manajerial mungkin harus
diubah. 'ketidaksetiaan sindrom' dapat diobati dengan platform baru
dari hubungan kerja didasarkan pada kepentingan komunal dan
pengaturan proyek jangka pendek. Ini mempertahankan dasar dekat
kerja ke mekanisme pasar eksternal yang berlaku untuk keamanan
rakyat dan mobilitas. Dengan demikian, manajer didorong untuk
terlibat melalui berbagai bentuk kontrak kerja dengan
menyeimbangkan tradisional asumsi relasional dengan lebih realistis
yang 'transaksional' (Rousseau, 1995), dan internalisasi sebuah
'paradigma baru' seperangkat prinsip kerja yang sebaliknya asumsi
berbasis loyalitas tradisional (Arthur, Claman & DeFillippi,
1995). Dalam konteks ini, manajer berhenti menjadi agen kontrol
birokrasi dan bukannya menjadi pelatih karir (Heckscher, 1995;
Bartlett & Ghoshal, 1995). Reconceptualize HRM, baik sebagai
Filsafat dan sebagai Fungsi Untuk saat ini kami telah menekankan
peran organisasi secara keseluruhan dan manajer peringkat-dan-file
dalam memfasilitasi pendekatan baru untuk manajemen orang
berdasarkan pada pengakuan dan penerimaan dari 'karir mobile'
fenomena. Tapi lain menghadapi pertanyaan menyangkut relevansi HRM
di era baru. Apakah yang peran spesifik dari HRM di lingkungan
karir baru, di luar itu dari Sebuah artikel majalah Fortune
baru-baru ini direkomendasikan membongkar fungsi HRM.Argumen utama
adalah bahwa yang disebut fungsi personil adalah 'terakhir
birokrasi 'dalam korporasi kontemporer. Untuk menghindari
birokrasihambatan, HRM bisa lebih berguna akan diserahkan kepada
manajer lini atau dikontrak kepada pemasok luar (Stewart, 1996).
Argumen counter untuk HRM untuk merangkul karir baru membentuk
eksplisit, dan menggeser penekanan dari birokrasi berbasis kegiatan
berbasis pengetahuan. Masalah bagi HRM kontemporer adalah bahwa hal
itu muncul ditangkap antara posisi ini alternatif.Seberapa baik
dilengkapi adalah konvensional, internal terletak dan terfokus
fungsi HRM untuk menangani tenaga kerja yang semakin tidak stabil,
tidak terkendali, internal dan eksternal pasar? Dengan perputaran
tenaga kerja tinggi dan meningkatkan mobilitas di seluruh
organisasi batas, itu mungkin menjadi perlu bagi organisasi untuk
mengembangkan pengetahuan yang lebih baikdari, dan kepekaan
terhadap, pasar tenaga kerja eksternal. Daripada menekankankontrol
atas, dan rencana pengembangan, tenaga kerja 'permanen'
organisasi,HRM dapat semakin memiliki peran mengembangkan usaha
patungan sementaradengan aktor ponsel karir (termasuk kontraktor,
manajer interim, dan konsultan).Hubungan ini juga cenderung untuk
melibatkan lembaga eksternal seperti kerjalembaga, pelatihan dan
pengembangan konsultan, dan pemasok tenaga kerja sementara, yang
bertindak sebagai perantara-perantara dan pertandingan-keputusan di
pasar tenaga kerja. Dapat fungsi HRM sendiri outsourcing? John,
kepala departemen HR mempekerjakan 16 orang, melihat kemungkinan
besar:Kami meninjau empat temp. lembaga sekarang. Semua dari mereka
yang mengangkat isu pembangunan. Mereka semua memiliki program.
Mereka mengatakan, 'kami dapat membantu Anda mengelola temps Anda'.
Andadapat outsource segalanya. Anda dapat kontrak dalam pelatihan
dan pengembangan. Anda bisa mendapatkan spesialis hubungan kerja
ketika Anda membutuhkannya. Dalam organisasi kami Anda bisa
menyingkirkan sebagian besar orang HR. Anda akan membutuhkan
seseorang seperti saya di go-antara peran. Tapi bahkan aku bisa di
kontrak. Model yang sama berlaku untuk membiayai, IT, properti.
Kita tidak perlu orang. Kita bisa menjalankan perusahaan melalui
telepon atau mengatur CEO di Vanuatu dan kontrak segala sesuatu
yang lain keluar. Spesialis HR tidak diperlukan di rumah. Solusi
radikal ini mungkin meremehkan pentingnya mempertahankan strategis
pertimbangan masalah SDM dalam inti organisasi. Maklum, manajer
SDM, yang tugasnya cenderung untuk 'mengisi kesenjangan', biasanya
melihat mobilitas karir, setidaknya dalam konteks organisasi
mereka, sebagai masalah menjadi dipecahkan. Dalam melakukannya,
mereka mencerminkan asumsi HRM konvensional. Tapi mobilitas karir
juga merupakan kesempatan untuk digenggam. Mobilitas memberikan
kesempatan tidak hanya untuk Hubungan pembuat sementara seperti
lembaga eksternal, tetapi juga untuk organisasi yang berusaha untuk
membangun kompetensi mereka dalam jangka panjang. Manajer HR kepada
siapa kita berbicara tercermin beberapa ambivalensi antara peran
mereka sebagai calon pengendali mobilitas tenaga kerja dan karir
karyawan mereka, dan sebagai promotor baru, fleksibel jenis
hubungan kerja. Karyawan yang masuk dalam organisasi-mobilitas
tinggi membawa dengan mereka yang berharga, dan sering baru,
keahlian, belajar, nilai-nilai, dan kontak. Bagaimana hal tersebut
dapat ditransfer dan terjebak dalam organisasi, setelah kepergian
hampir tak terelakkan karyawan yang pertama kali memperkenalkan
mereka, sehingga mereka menjadi bagian dari budaya, strategi,
lembaga dan jaringan yang? Penekanan dalam membangun dan
mempertahankansumber harus kembali fokus dari orang-orang yang
membawa pengetahuan untuk pengetahuan yang mereka bawa. Harus
manajer SDM menjadi, atau diganti dengan, manajer KR (Pengetahuan
manajer sumber daya)? Tampaknya HRM itu, apakah dilakukan dari
dalam organisasi atau bersumber dari tempat lain, mungkin menjadi
kurang pengakuisisi, pengembang dan pengendali dari
Perusahaan-'owned 'tenaga kerja, dan lebih broker antara perusahaan
berkembang berbatas strategi dan individu mengejar karir
berbatas.ANALISIS
Menurut Miles dan Snow (1996), struktur abad kedua puluh
piramida organisasi menciptakan 'gelombang kedua' karir ditandai
dengan akuisisi tambahan dari waktu ke waktu tanggung jawab, status
dan imbalan formal. Baru-baru ini, jaringan organisasi dengan
batas-batas cairan dan permeabel telah menghasilkan 'gelombang
ketiga' karier, diidentifikasi oleh gerakan horisontal bukan
vertikal. Untuk masa depan, itu adalah mungkin untuk memahami karir
mengembangkan hubungan yang lebih timbal balik dengan organisasi
bentuk. Miles dan Snow (1996) menggambarkan hubungan kerja dari
masa depan sebagai gelombang keempat pengembangan usaha di mana
pola kerja individual akan mendorong bentuk organisasi daripada
mengikuti itu. Teori HR konvensional membuat asumsi bahwa
organisasi membuat karir. Hal ini sama dikatakan bahwa orang,
melalui perilaku karir mereka, membuat organisasi ; bahwa karir
bukanlah artefak strategi dan struktur organisasi, namun, bukan,
bahwa organisasi, dan bahkan industri, adalah perhubungan dinamis
berinteraksi karier (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996; Arthur, Inkson
& Pringle, di tekan). Apakah organisasi membuat karier, atau
karir membuat organisasi? Kedua pernyataan benar secara bersamaan.
Organisasi dan karir harus tetap mutally mendukung, tetapi dinamis
antara mereka harus menekankan bahwa karyawan kontribusi tidak
tergantung pada organisasi tetapi saling tergantung dengan itu. Itu
dinamika baru menciptakan terus berkembang jaringan dan kemitraan.
Konseptualisasi ini menyiratkan bahwa organisasi, daripada melihat
karyawan dan kontraktor sumber daya manusia, untuk dikelola, harus
melihat mereka sebagai mitra dalam usaha patungan. Jika fungsi SDM
memiliki tujuan, tidak untuk mengelola sumber daya tetapi untuk
membangun hubungan dengan mitra bisnis. Polly Parker telah memiliki
karir dalam pendidikan kesehatan, kuliah tersier, dan konsultasi
karir. Sekarang ia memegang beasiswa universitas dari Universitas
Auckland di mana ia menyelesaikan PhD di bidang masyarakat karir
sebagai situs mengorganisir diri dan belajar. Kerr Inkson (PhD,
Otago) adalah profesor studi manajemen di Universitas Auckland. Dia
punya aktif dalam penelitian di perilaku organisasi di Inggris dan
Selandia Baru selama lebih dari 30 tahun. Karya baru-baru ini telah
peduli dengan mobilitas karir dan perubahan ekonomi dan
organisasi.
Referensi
Arthur, M.B., Claman, P.H. & DeFillippi, R.J. (1995) Cerdas
perusahaan, cerdas karir. Akademi Manajemen Eksekutif, 9 (4):
7-20.Arthur, M.B. Inkson, K. & Pringle, J.K. (In press)
Pemberlakuan karir. London: Sage.Arthur, M.B. & Rousseau, D.M.
(1996) The berbatas karir: Prinsip kerja baru untuk baru era
organisasi. New York: Oxford University Press.Ashkenas, R., Jick,
T. Ulrich, D. & Kerr, S. (1995) Organisasi berbatas: Breaking
rantai struktur organisasi. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass.Barney,
J. (1991) sumber Badan dan berkelanjutan keunggulan kompetitif.
Jurnal Manajemen, 17 (1): 99-20.
Bartlett, C.A. & Ghoshal, S. (1995) Mengubah peran manajemen
puncak: Beyond sistem untuk orang. Harvard Business Review,
Mei-Juni: 132-42.Beer, M., Spector, B., Lawrence, D., Quinn Mills,
D. & Walton, R. (1985) Mengelola aset manusia. Baru York: The
Free Press.Boxall, P. (1992) Strategis manajemen sumber daya
manusia: Awal dari kecanggihan teoritis baru? Manajemen Sumber Daya
Manusia Journal, 2 (3): 32-5.Boxall, P. (1994) Menempatkan strategi
HR di jantung keberhasilan bisnis. Manajemen Personalia, 4 (3):
32-5.Jembatan, W. (1994) JobSbift: Bagaimana untuk mencapai
kesejahteraan di tempat kerja tanpa pekerjaan. Membaca, MA:
Addison-Wesley.Drucker, P. (1994) Usia transformasi sosial.
Atlantic Monthly, November: 53-80.Gunz, H.P. (1989) Makna ganda
karir manajerial: tingkat Organisasi analisis. Jurnal Studi
Manajemen, 26: 225-50.Heckscher, C. (1995) Putih biru kerah. New
York: Basic Books.Hirschorn, L.G.T. (1992) Batas-batas baru dari
perusahaan bounaryless '. Harvard Business Review, Mei-Juni:
104-15. Inkson, struktur K. (1997) Organisasi dan transformasi
karir. Dalam T. Clark (ed.), Kemajuan dalam perilaku organisasi
(pp. 165-85). Aldershot, Inggris: Ashgate Publishing.
Inkson, K. & Coe, T. (1993) Apakah tangga karir menghilang?
Majikan multinasional, 10 (6): 14-17. Johnston, W.B. (1991) tenaga
kerja Global 2000: Pasar tenaga kerja dunia baru. Harvard Business
Review, Maret-April: 115-19.Kanter, R. (1989) Ketika raksasa
belajar menari: Menguasai tantangan strategi. New York: Simon &
Schuster.Lado, A. & Wilson, M. (1994) sistem sumber daya
manusia dan keunggulan kompetitif berkelanjutan: competency- A
perspektif berbasis. Academy of Management Review, 19 (4):
699-727.Miles, R.E. & Snow, C.C. (1984) Merancang strategis
sistem sumber daya manusia. Organizationl Dynamics, 13 (8):
36-52.Miles, R.E. & Snow, C.C. Karir abad dua puluh pertama
(1996). Dalam M.B. Arthur dan D.M. Rousseau (eds), The berbatas
karir: Prinsip kerja baru untuk era organisasi baru. New York:
Oxford University Press. Fleksibilitas Kerja Parker, V. & Hall,
D. (1993): yg bukan-bukan atau fundamental? Dalam P. Mirvis (ed.),
Building tenaga kerja yang kompetitif. New York: John Wiley &
Sons.Porter, M. (1985) Keunggulan kompetitif: Menciptakan dan
mempertahankan kinerja yang unggul. New York: Gratis Press.Reed, R.
& DeFillippi, R.J. (1990) kausal ambiguitas, hambatan imitasi
dan berkelanjutan kompetitif keuntungan. Academy of Management
Review, 15 (1): 103-12.Rousseau, D.M. (1995) Mengubah kesepakatan
sementara menjaga orang-orang. Akademi Manajemen Eksekutif, 10 (1):
50-8.Schuler, R. & Jackson, S. (1987) Menghubungkan strategi
kompetitif dengan praktek manajemen sumber daya manusia. Akademi
Manajemen Eksekutif, 1 (3): 207-19.Stewart, T.A. (1996) Sumber daya
manusia menggigit kembali. Fortune (9): 111-12.Ulrich, D. (1987)
kemampuan organisasi sebagai keunggulan kompetitif: profesional
sumber daya manusia sebagai mitra strategis. Manusia Resource
Planning, 10 (4): 169-84.Sampan, R.H., Waterman, J.A. &
Collard, B.A. (1994) Menuju tenaga kerja karir-tahan. Harvard
Business Review, Juli-Agustus: 87-95.Wright, P., McMahan, G. &
McWilliams, A. (1994) Sumber daya manusia dan berkelanjutan
keunggulan kompetitif: Sebuah perspektif berbasis sumber daya.
International Journal of Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia, 5 (2):
301-26.