Human Resource Management Issues
Introduction
The human resource unit is perhaps the most dynamic one compared to virtually all the others. Majorly, this arises from the fact the human resource deals with the most important part of an organization and that is the employees. Therefore, there is a need for constant evolution in this area to ensure that the organization stays at par with the changing requirements of the employee.
Specifically, various issues are of utmost concern to each agency. For instance, compensation and benefits for the employees are one of the most important areas that the human capital department deserves to pay critical attention. Compensation includes the ordinary basic salaries that the employees receive for offering their services to the employer while the benefits are the fringe incomes that one receives on top of their salary. The compensation and benefits are a matter that wholly affects the welfare of the employee mainly because they act as both fixed and variable costs that weigh down on profitability. Therefore, it attracts attention from the management and even the shareholders. Recently, increased economic interactions have made the world smaller and enticed companies to expand globally. Once such global expansions are undertaken, the human resources people must ensure a smooth recruitment occurs in those new overseas branches. In this instance, the global staffing policies get their relevance. The goal of almost each company is to expand; therefore, the human capital department ought to place themselves in a position that allows perfect hiring. Further, performance management systems need a critical review.
Using Google Inc., this paper serves to exemplify the necessity of the human resource issues mentioned above. Google Inc. is a technology-based multinational corporation with its products and services reaching over half of the global population in almost all countries in the world (People, 2015). The company selected will aid us to have an object look into the chosen issues since it is both a local United States company as well as a multinational corporation. Further, the company has evolved from a college room idea into a worldwide corporation. Therefore, its human resource department and needs have changed over time. The principal aim of this article is to exemplify the proposition that the challenges that Google’s human resource department is facing in performance management, its international staffing issues and its employees’ benefit and compensations issues can be solved using simple human resource policies.
Discussion
Strategic Approaches to International Staffing
There are many functions of the human resource department of an organization, key among them being the staffing duty. Various organizations use different approaches when carrying out this important role. The type of staffing policy used depends on factors such as the size of the company, multinational presence of the company as well as the organization’s hiring and staffing policies. In the recent past, the Google’s People Operations Department had a dilemma of deciding on how it should hire in its international branches. It became difficult to determine whether using the employees in the host country would yield satisfactory results, or transferring the employees from Californian would create a culture-clash. Google ought to have utilized various international staffing policies such as the polycentric approach, ethnocentric or the geocentric one.
Multinational companies with subsidiaries or branches in more than one country apply ethnocentric staffing policy. Through this method, the parent company transfers some of its staff from the headquarters in the home country to work as the employees in the new host country (Banai, 2002). The primary reason underlying the ethnocentric staffing proposition is that the employees from the countries of origin tend to be almost perfectly aligned with the goals of the organization. Moreover, it is believed that transfer of employees to the new host country subsidiary aids the subsidiary in aligning itself with the objectives of the parent company. Advantages of this mode of staffing include the fact that there is a perfect match between the goals of the overseas office and those of the main one.
Also, communication becomes easier since there are no language barriers. Furthermore, cultural differences between the home and the host country are minimized and thus there is a sufficient continuity in business organization, communication, and execution (Kinder & Kam , 2009). Besides, the company transfers employees with an excellent work record and reputation and thus chances of failure due to certain and inexperienced workforce is minimized. However, several disadvantages arise through ethnocentric staffing. For instance, the company might lose the opinions that the local employees can provide regarding the local market, legal organization, and customer satisfaction approaches. Besides, transferring employees tend to be more expensive as opposed to hiring locally.
Polycentric staffing policy entails fully equipping the subsidiary with the local employees. The branch employs a full workforce that is powered by local talent from the junior-most all the way to the top executive members (Banai, 2002). The above method applies to developed countries since multinational corporations believe that developed countries contain competent, experienced, and educated labor force. Advantages of the polycentric staffing approach include the fact that the local employees can guide the operations of the subsidiary in a way that customized to suit the conditions of the local market. Moreover, local workforce is cheaper compared to “imported” workforce since relocation, setting, compensation and license fees and expenses are eliminated. However, reliance on the local employees might postulate that disconnect regarding goals and objectives exists between the parent company and the subsidiary.
Geocentric is an international staffing policy that entails a multinational corporation hiring its employees regardless of their nationality. Skills, expertise, and qualification are the major requirements sought by the employer, and not the nationality (Banai, 2002). Advantages of this policy are that the organization can develop a diverse pool of labor force with different skills, qualifications, abilities, and cultural backgrounds. More often than not, this diversity leads to desirable results. However, it might face setbacks especially from the legislations of the host country that may postulate hiring local labor. Moreover, the geocentric policy may lead to a very sophisticated and complex workforce difficult to handle.
During the process of staffing its subsidiaries, the company should utilize a blend of all the three international staffing policies (Banai, 2002). For instance, the talented local employees should not solely lead foreign subsidiaries. In many cases, especially in developing countries, Google should transfer some of the employees at its Mountain View headquarters to the new branch to work as corporate executive leaders. The leaders from the base may inculcate the Google culture into the local employees as well as align the new staff with the goals and objectives of the parent company (Harbor, 2009). This underscores the utilization of ethnocentric staffing policy by Google.
Google should not utilize the polycentric approach in its international staffing system. During the early periods after entry, the management of the subsidiary should lie in the hands of experienced Googlers from other affiliates, or the central office (Kinder& Kam, 2009). The local employees should spread out in the engineering departments, software development, and team leading roles. Despite the fact that a local employee points few subsidiaries in the early years of establishment, Google’s subsidiary management also entails local talent. The locals in the management level can guide the corporate executive into making decisions that favor the domestic market.
Compensation and Benefits
Comprehensive remuneration of employees is a fundamental necessity to any organization that desires to maximize its profitability and returns to shareholders. Comprehensive compensation and benefits dictate that employees receive pay to recompense them efficiently for their labor. Various things motivate productivity of workers, rewards being one of them. There is, therefore, need to ensure that all employees regardless of their level and background are compensated fairly. Besides, overall remuneration of employees is a fundamental necessity to any organization (Employee Compensation Management Principles, 2007). For various times now, Google has risen to become among the companies that many people desire to work. It has a combination of competitive packages and remuneration benefits combined with an ambient working environment. A few years ago, however, the employee benefits and compensation were heavily weighing on Google’s net income (People, 2015). Though the compensation and benefits packages for its employees did not get a review since the company experienced an unprecedented growth that increased its revenues, Google should have solved the problem through various approaches. Some of them include the ones stated below.
Total rewards and compensation system at Google should entail performance based pay and hourly payment and bonus grants on a monthly basis. Pegging remuneration to performance in that a basic salary exists for all the workers, but a commission of a certain percentage is paid to the workers based on their performance, is important. Besides, payment of overtime worked outside the normal working hours is necessary since workers are striving to achieve organizational goals.
For Google, the company should efficiently acknowledge that the performance of an employee is subject to the welfare of the employee’s family. The company should develop a reward system that covers for the protection of the employee’s family. For instance, health insurance schemes should not only include the individual employee but should also cover the employee’s dependents. Also, the company should also compensate the employee in case permanent of partial disability occurs in the line of duty.
Furthermore, it is for the enterprise to provide a clear retirement scheme where employees remit part of their salary to the scheme and the company rewards part of its income towards the employee’s pension plan (Employee Compensation Management Principles, 2007). However, only the permanently employed workers get in the pension system to put a cap on the company’s costs. Thus, the permanently employed receive basic salaries, allowances, insurance, and pension while those on temporary engagements acquire basic wages and insurance.
Furthermore, alignment with the industry’s average salary is fundamental to ensure that workers are not overpaid yet their productivity is similar to the others in the industry. The finance department should make sure that the employees are not only compensated as the average industrial dictates, but they are also paid in time. Moreover, constructing an internal income distribution ensures that persons performing the same task do not have immense disparities in their earnings. Moreover, as much as the management team gets more than the regular employees do, there should not exist major income distribution gaps.
Lastly, the principle of indemnification should always come into play whereby any employee who uses his or her money on behalf of the company gets a refund (Employee Compensation Management Principles, 2007). Moreover, fringe benefits should be available to the employees such as meals, tea, and swimming pool access. All staff, regardless of their tenure of employment, should enjoy the fringe benefits. As much Google has an already existing employee compensation scheme, income distribution, performance-based pay, insurance and pension conforms to the above-discussed policies. Such adjustments ensure that employees feel part of the organization, and that their efforts and by extension the efforts of their families are compensated adequately.
Performance Measurement
Measurement of the progress that the employees are making in their day-to-day operations carries heavy weight in the going concern of a company. Therefore, the human resource department of any company should ensure that there are stringent and precise means of measuring the performance of the employees. Feedback is a necessary ingredient in the daily routine of an employee. One requires knowing the progress they are making, the areas they are doing well and those that they need to improve in (Harbour, 2009). Therefore, structuring performance management systems, which apparently, at first sight, depict the performance of an employee correctly, is of an essence to not only the management but also the employee. A performance management system entails enactment of activities, which ensure that the employees achieve the goals of the company as well as their individual goals. Google has had trouble in measuring the performance of its employees.
Management and tracking of employee performance ensure that employees are aware of their progress concerning achieving individual and organization goals. Such progress can be communicated to the employees through various ways such as the company’s financial statements or the company’s prize giving day. A satisfied employee is a productive one. However, the latter does not have a long lasting impact while the former lacks a personal touch. Therefore, performance management systems that suit employees’ individual goals are essential to communicate to both the management and the employee.
Currently, Google uses various mechanisms of employee performance measurement that are not working. Some of these principles include the ones stated below. It utilizes the companion survey structure as a method of dealing with the productivity of their representatives. In the companion audit system, the constitution of an advisory group proceeds in intent to connect with a representative and perceive how the laborer can enhance his or her output. Once the board gets to be operational, it collaborates with the worker and thinks of measures necessary for improving the yield of the employee. Further, Google has several managers review the performance of the employees. Google's senior VP of individuals' operations says that having a few top-level directors look at the execution of their youngsters is a huge stride in getting rid of personal inclination and bias (People, 2015).
Different researchers and creators keep on coming up with successful methods for dealing with the performance of workers. Scholars also postulate the components of a proficient management framework that Google should utilize in a bid to streamline its system. In any case, every one of them consents to the way that a successful performance administration framework ought to be structured. In this way, an excellent structure ought to urge the workers to work harder for the company, enhance the employee’s steadfastness to the group, and improve the consistent quality of the employee (People, 2015).
Therefore, the company’s performance measurement framework should improve the effectiveness of the laborer. Since the profitability and yield of the employee are essential parts of the worker that an organization rides on, the framework should have a structure that enhances the yield of the representative. Productivity is accomplished through managing the employee on means through which they can achieve more noteworthy objectives, and enhance their frail zones. Thus, Google’s system should aim at increasing their employees’ productivity.
The performance system should also aim at identifying how well each employee is achieving the set organization’s objectives. One of Google's goals is to upgrade development and enhance data availability. The VP of individuals' operation broadcasts that execution surveys happen in November of every year. One exercise is a significantly long time in performance estimation. Quarterly audits and half-year reviews would permit Google to evaluate the progress of their representatives on a few occasions while the specialists get opinions on their execution severally over the span of the year.
The framework that Google uses ought to have clear expectations that the employee should accomplish. One requires understanding the progress they are making, the territories they are doing great and those that they have to enhance in as counted in a scorecard. Thus, organizing performance administration frameworks that evidently, at first sight, outline the performance of a worker effectively is ideal to the company as well as the employee on evaluation.
The performance management system that would efficiently serve Google should entail apparently putting down key performance indicators for use in performance measurement. Key performance indicators would be different for all the employees and managers working in various departments (Harbour, 2009). Also, harmonization of academic and technical knowledge in different departments would ensure that skills are shared among employees to reduce over-reliance on one department. Such performance management system raises no legal and federal compliance issues since the National Federation of Employers has the mandate of managing performance by the Labor Laws of the United States (People, 2015).
Conclusion
It is thus evident that simple human resource practices and policies can aid in overcoming the problems facing the human resource department at Google. As seen earlier, these problems arise in its performance measurement, international staffing, and compensation and benefits of its employees. Using a blend of geocentric, ethnocentric, and polycentric staffing policies, Google overcomes its global staffing problems and dilemmas. Also, pegging pay to performance as well as having different compensation schemes for different employees would aid Google to overcome the payment problem. Lastly, having a performance measurement system that efficiently communicates to both the employees and the management will enhance Google’s HR performance.
References
Banai, M. (2002). The ethnocentric staffing policy in multinational corporations a self-fulfilling prophecy. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 3(3), pp.451-472.
Employee Compensation Management Principles. (2007). Servant Leader Human Resource Management, 13-14.
Harbour, J. L. (2009). Integrated performance management: A conceptual, system-based model. Performance Improvement Perf. Improve. 48(7), 10-14. doi:10.1002/pfi.20089
Kinder, D. R., & Kam, C. D. (2009). Us against them: ethnocentric foundations of American opinion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
People. (2015). Retrieved May 05, 2016, from http://www.google.com/about/careers/teams/people-operations/
