Alternative perspective on management
In management and organizational studies, there is seemingly one way used to analyze aspects of management. However due to the scientific nature of management and organizational studies, there are alternative critical approaches used to analyze various aspect of management. Looking at the definition of management and organization, one can easily say that both concepts are as old as the history of human beings. In the historical period, there were various forms of organizations including armies and states which experienced management and organizational challenges. These challenges highlighted on areas such as human resource management, resource and financial management, branding and identity. This paper seeks to use two topics in management to explain how alternative critical perspective to management challenges the traditional understanding of business and management. The two management topics include human resource management and accounting.
The territory of critical analysis in all aspect of organizational and business management has been occupied primarily by the orientation of the critical management studies. Approaches used in management and organizational studies scientific approach, population ecology theory, neo institutional perspective, contingency approaches, and human relations. Each of these approaches is regarded to be a critique of approaches that existed prior its development. They also reflect on the historical context of the dominant school of thought.
Critical perspective to business and organizational management is based on the exemplars, strategies, criteria, and beliefs for acquiring knowledge on management. Most of the literature materials focusing on traditional perspective to management and organization only focus on the approaches and methods that form what scholars regard to be normal science. They fail to illustrate the fundamental issues linked to value assumptions within the advocated methods and strategies. Critical perspective addresses the role of human values in managing an enterprise.
Applying critical perspective to human resource management develops an argument that HRM has contradictions which are inherent to the traditional models of human resource management. The profession of human resource management has for a long time now faced a trust and legitimacy crisis in the eyes of those perceived to be major stakeholders in the business industry. Scholars with a critical perspective towards human resource management argue that for more than two decades management of human resource with organizations has failed to achieve its potential of influence and status. It has therefore been a perfect area in business and organizational management which has been subjected to serious critique. Research studies on human resources have also been very conservative and irrelevant as argued by Delbridge (2010). One cannot help but notice how the need to challenge this area of human has been taken for granted by researchers subscribed to the traditional perspective and approaches. Critical perspective on human resource management does not provide a definite solution to the weaknesses in HR management. It borrows too many assumptions and fails to engage with the weakness part.
In order to understand the phenomenon of human resource management, it is important to first view as a cultural construction that consists of metaphors which make up a new reality. Human resource management is therefore assumed to involve production of employees and managing the meaning of work relations. This is achieved through interventions of various kinds. Traditional models of human resources have been found to focus mainly on culture change as the central and most important activity of the department. Studies providing empirical evidence in human resource management argue on a cultural perspective. Karreman and Alvesson (2004) examined human resource practices in the multinational consulting firms. They contend that the reason why human resource practices become efficient is not due to their technicality but because they are able to construct a rational identity functions. In consequence, this builds feelings of competency and belonging. Reeds (2010) also identifies that having a culturial perspective in human resource management is wrongfully placed. The school of critical perspective existed during the early 90s and authors such as Willmort (1993) contend that when cultural practices is used to promote employee commitment, then most likely, management control is extended at the expense of affective domain. This implies that the nature of management and employees to be affective will be dominated by management control. The debate raised by Willmort was emphasized on a new school of thought based on the internationalization of control, calculation and regulation. There was less emphasis on discipline and external authority.
Other writings from the traditional perspective on human resource management also tend to create a variety of managerial practices and discourses. For instance, the contributions made by Tomely (1993) suggest that human resource management is merit based. He also points out from his argument that HRM practices can be viewed from the angle of a power knowledge discourse.
Human resource management does not have a dimension that assumes symbolic nature. The culture that an organization adopts or promotes with regard to human resource management can have an effect on share prices as well as the reputation of a firm. At the same time, human resource management best practices can have limitations. The limitations especially arise due to over investments on the professional discourses that provide outcomes and the actual practices. If one assumes that the functioning of human resource management can be found in its discourses, there is large disconnection from context. In other words, the traditionalists who argue from the point of view of post structuralism tend to be bias on discussions focusing on empirical realities. Such analysis are only driven by how aspect of it. They fail to make considerations on the ‘what’ aspect or the ‘why’ aspect. For instance, the ‘what’ aspect should take into account the market and administration whereas the ‘why’ analysis should take into account the factors such as efficiency. If studies are to follow this particular line, then human resource management can be viewed only as a will to knowledge. In addition, the compilation of the studies can simply be considered texts which use new languages to focus on old practices.
Another problem that can be highlighted resulting from the traditional perspectives to human resource management is the lack of engagement with mainstream research studies on HR. mainstream research studies have an obsession to prove how effective human resource management can be. This focus can be dismissed to be either too much on positivism or on performance. This implies that it only highlights on the performance of human resource management or on its positive aspects. At same time, critical perspective on human resource management also fails to analyze the concepts with an expected level of depth. Too many assertions are made on power knowledge but they fail to provide a reflection on evidence and methods. However when the reflections are provided, it creates a lot of convenience compared to traditional perspectives that bases their research work on culture.
With regards to the commitment model of human resource, main stream research studies use the model in a number of diverse ways. Scholars criticizing the mainstream research studies identify that for a long time, there has been too much focus on linking high performance to commitment. As a result, these studies recommend human resource practices which are arguable considered to improve the performance levels of employees and the organizations at large. The scholars have also identified a difference between the practices that generate commitment and those that seek high commitment. Some commentators, who have made contribution to the debate, have argued that there is a distinction between employment practices and work practices. The distinction is that the latter may help to generate a sense of involvement among employees but does not cause them to be committed to their work. Work practices may include but not limited to the following examples, team work, and alternative job design. However, the former is ideally placed to generate a sense of commitment among employees. But researchers and managers cannot assume that employment practices generate commitment among employees. They also cannot assume that it generates higher performance. It is recommended that both work practices and employment practices be implemented simultaneously within an organization. Nonetheless, there are still unproven links of weaknesses between high performance and commitment.
Other sources criticizing the use of high performance practices in the organization have observed that most companies do not use policies on high performance practices due to its inconsistency in research studies. The sources claim that the policies are mainly used by small firms.
Based on the analysis and criticism of various approached to human resource management, it is apparent that the solution lies with best fit approach. There are scenarios where high performance human resource management fails to work. Similarly, the combination of both work practices and employment practices to create high performance work system also has weaknesses and may not be ideal for certain scenarios. The observation of best fit is not a new phenomenon to research studies on human resource management. Studies have identified the underlying reasons explaining why best practices in human resource management are not universally applicable. One common reason identified by Legge (2005) is when the cost of labor has a less significant proportion of total cost. As a result, legge hypothetical says that an industry that is labor intensive is ideal for high performance practices but less ideal for high performance work system.
Application of critical perspective in financial management also exposes the erroneous thinking of traditional perspectives about the role of accounting in the organizations. Critical perspective on financial management is more that simply raising concerns of whether particular methods of accounting should be used or not in practice. The theories of critical accounting focus on the role of accounting in sustaining the opportunities of those appointed to manage resources. Through the theoretical concept, one can be able to establish that accounting is neutrally construed. Early studies criticizing accounting fundamental concepts of accounting tend to disagree with the capitalistic ideologies that revolve around these principles. Instead, the accounting systems are built around the social order. Despite the fact that big corporation control a large amount of money, accounting systems support social order.
Research on accounting management is expected to be relevant to practice. This is a very key concern for the researchers with a critical view towards accounting and financial management. This critical perspective is based on scientific model approach to research in the field of accounting. It recognizes the presence of theoretical work in the financial management. However, these theories are insufficient to examine the growth and changes in financial markets. In order to have a deep understanding of the issues involved, there is need to critically analyze the work of financial and accounting management in organizations.
In conclusion, if we look today in the newspapers, listen to the news, look around the world we see a lot of fluidity and flux in the world of management. There are a lot of different ideas out there and different strategies. Many books have been written advocating a lot of contradictory ideas. In the context of an economy that has gone through the recent recession, these questions are more important than ever. One of the ways that challenges of management can be addressed is by thinking about them in a new way. This implies bringing new kinds of critical apparatus to bear the challenges in a new way. The critical perspective school of thought basically aims to address the new challenges.
References
Alvesson, M. & Deetz, S., 2000. Doing Critical Management Research. 2nd ed. London: Sage.
Alvesson, M. & Willmott, H., 1992. Critical Management Studies. London: Sage.
Chia, R., 1995. From modern to postmodern analysis. Organization Studies, 16(4), pp. 579-604.
Clegg, S. R., Kornberger, M., Carter, C. & Rhodes, C., 2006. For management. Management Learning, 37(1), pp. 7-27.
Delbridge, R., 2010. The critical future of HRM. In: P. Blyton, E. Heery & P. Turnbull, eds. Reassessing the Employment Relationship: An Introduction. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Hanif, M., Hafeez, S. & Riaz, A., 2010. Factors Affecting Customer Satisfaction. International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, pp. 44-51.
Karreman, D. & Alvesson, M., 2004. Cages in tandem: management control, social identity, and identification in a knowledge-intensive firm. Organization, 11(1), pp. 149-179.
Koontz, H., 1991. The management theory jungle. The Journal of the Academy of Management, 4(1), pp. 174-188.
Kuzic, J., Fisher, J. & Scollary, A., 2002. Electronic commerce benefits, challenges and success factors in the Australian banking and finance industry. ECIS, pp. 1607-1616.
Legge, K., 2005. Human Resource Management: Rhetorics and Realities. 2nd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillian.
Reed, M., 2010. Control in contemporary work organizations. In: P. Blyton, E. Heery & P. Turnbull, eds. Reassessing the Employment Relationship. Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp. 50-62.
Sen, P. K., 2008. Ownership incentives and management Fraud. Journal of business finance and accounting, 34(7-8), pp. 1123-40.
Thompson, P., 2011. The trouble with HRM. Human Resource Management Journal, 21(4), pp. 355-367.
Townley, B., 1993. ‘Foucault, power knowledge, and its relevance for human-resource management. Academy of Management Review, 18(3), pp. 518-545.
Willmott, H., 1993. ‘Strength is ignorance; slavery is freedom: managing culture in modern organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 30(4), pp. 515-552.
