You can download the solution to the following question for free. For further assistance in Human Resource assignments please check our offerings in Accounting assignment solutions. Our subject-matter experts provide online assignment help to Accounting students from across the world and deliver plagiarism free solution with free Grammarly report with every solution.
(ExpertAssignmentHelp does not recommend anyone to use this sample as their own work.)
Compare and contrast three elements of HRM (e.g. strategic staffing, recruitment selection, retention, training and development, performance management, compensation and industrial relations) between three countries, also referring to issues relating to culture.
Clearly overview HRM in each country and state which three elements you are focusing on. Discuss and analyse each element in relation to the three countries, making sure to cover similarities and differences.
Present a table that summarises your analysis.
Present this assignment in essay form with at least one comparative table in the body of the essay or as an appendix.
Clearly state and support your argument.
This assignment requires you to undertake some desk research and wider reading/analysis. You are not required to interview anyone. However, you do need to access recent (past three years) information from journals, books, and reliable government/private enterprise, university and non-government organisations' (NGOs) sites on the Internet (e.g. not Wikipedia).
Remember The International Journal of HRM is an excellent source but do not use this solely.
Start on this assignment as soon as you can.
What are you aiming for?
Comparative HRM (CHRM) explores the extent to which HRM differs between different countries – or between different areas within a country or different regions of the world, such as North America, the Pacific Rim states or Europe (Brewster & Larsen 2000).
We know that countries may have different labour markets and education systems, different employment laws and trade unions, and different cultural expectations. It should be no surprise, therefore, to find that employment systems differ noticeably between countries and that managing human resources has to vary from country to country.
TYPICAL QUESTIONS ASKED BY COMPARATIVE RESEARCHERS
Review your requirements with our FREE Assignment Understanding Brief and avoid last minute chaos.
We provide you services from PhD experts from well known universities across the globe.
No more plagiarism worries. We give you a FREE Grammarly report with every assignment.
Our experts work round the clock to provide you with solutions before the scheduled deadline.
International human resource management is the management of the workforce through various HR functions in an international setup, as there may be differences among nations (Armstrong & Taylor 2014). Every multinational company that operates in various countries need to understand and adopt human resource practices based on the cultural differences in the nations it exists. For such companies, it is important to know the differences in culture, employment policies and laws and educational systems in the countries they operate so that the workforce is managed in the most effective way (Jackson, Schuler & Jiang 2014).
This understanding would be gained through the essay which would analyse and discuss the differences that exist among India, UK and Australia with respect to their strategic staffing, training and development and performance management systems. A comparison would be made to bring out the similarities and differences among the countries with respect to their human resource practices. The choice of countries is defined by analysing the complete opposite cultures and also a comparison between developed and developing countries. The choice of HRM elements is based on the entry of employees, training and future growth.
Human resource management elements are related to critical functions on employees like recruitment, selection, training, development, performance appraisal and compensation. Due to globalisation, it becomes important to understand how these are taken up in different nations and what impact it has on workforce development. Strategic staffing relates to the integration of the hiring and recruiting of employees in sync with the overall strategy of that organisation (Armstrong & Taylor 2014). Depending upon what plan the organisation has for itself the requirement and hiring of people would be done so that the final organisational goals can be achieved. Strategic staffing in India is highly based on ethnocentric approach analysed by Kramar (2014), where the parent country nationals are preferred over employees from the host country. The reasons for this approach are deeply rooted between the cultural context, joint family system and the historical invasion through foreigners. Culture is the implicit and latent values, beliefs, customs and rituals that a nation adopts and passes on the next generations also (Lehtonen 2015). The culture of India as per Hofstede is high on power distance, long term orientation(Pereira & Malik 2015) which lead to Indian companies hiring more people from the parent country and then placing them at global locations.
Whereas strategic staffing in Australia is based more on a geocentric approach where ability and capability are more important that nationality (Snell, Morris & Bohlander 2015). This reasoning is critical to understand for the diversified workforce that Australian firms have. The cultural aspect of high individualism and masculinity puts a high focus on preferring people from the host or global locations as merit and performance are the most important reasons for hiring (Cooke, Saini & Jue 2014). Also, the organisations in the country are strategically run which undertake a careful analysis of each position according to the strategy of the company. Even the legal system of the country promotes diversity in the country by allowing work permit and immigration to foreign nationals.
The third country UK has also been analysed for having an ethnocentric approach as a preference is given to the UK nationals while hiring and recruiting (Geppert, Matten & Williams (eds.) 2016). This also involves a proactive approach of having the strategic intention in place and then undertaking the staffing function. As the UK education setup is very advanced, the best quality employees are hired from the top universities from within the UK (T.Moran, Abramson & V.Moran 2014). This is also linked to their historical and cultural values of forming colonies and ruling them. An ethnocentric approach is also desired as per the employment and legal regulations of hiring nationals first before giving preference to a third country or host country nationals (Thomas & Peterson 2014).
Thus it can be understood that strategic staffing as a function of IHRM is very similar in India and the UK as their cultural values, employment system and legal requirements give preference to the parent country nationals. They also adopt a reactive approach of hiring people as and when the need arises. Whereas Australia has a geocentric approach to staffing and hiring of people follows through the overall development of strategy first. This promotes diversity of workforce along with giving first preference to people with merit (Fitzsimmons & Stamper 2014).
