Background to Research

Part of top hierarchy decision making to be effective. But the HR function is not attaining this strategic ideal role because of barriers Dyer, (1996) that may to a large extent confine HR to an administrative role.

The existing literature has been largely confined to HR function as an administrative role but little empirical research has been carried out on the strategic role of the HR function for it to be effective and the barriers to effective HRM are mostly strategic in nature.  This research is carried out using combined primary and secondary data. The primary data was obtained through self-administered questionnaires and the secondary data library based using textbooks and CIPD reports. The data will be synthesised and analysed in an endeavour to bring out coherent discourse on the mentioned barriers, on their existence, how they can be overcome and ascertain if they can be avoided.

Noon (1992) gives a deep chronology of the development of HRM status through age which explores HRM with a broader lens which answers the question on whether it is a Map, a model or a theory. According to Noon the USA Harvard version came into existence as a modest map for 1981 MBA (Beer et al, 1984) this is supported by (Poole, 1990) at the launch of the “International Journal of Human Resources Management” who described it as the most familiar and influential road map to manage human capital within the fraternity of scholars and business communities. The aim of the Harvard scholars was to develop a model which availed a prescriptive agenda that enabled a descriptive analysis of managing human resources which managers would find useful (Beer et al, 1984) On the other hand the UK version whose foundation to a large extend is the Harvard model was tweaked and developed by (Guest, 1989) into a theory which enabled testable propositions that would lead to a cocktail of effective prescriptive policies in HRM. The resultant effect of is that to some practitioners and academics HRM is a well grounded theory with practical implications but to others it remains an uncertain and imprecise notion (Noon, 1992) which also leads to a barrier within the minds of line managers who think it’s a passing fad. Supportive evidence is found in (Armstrong, 1987) who gives an example of some organisations from a practitioners perspective that have simply changed the name plaque on personnel managers door to read human resources manager. (Sparrow, 1991) contributes to the discourse by giving a robust example by pointing out that some illustrative organisations like Marks and Spencer in UK have always utilised HRM type of policies but persist in describing the practice as personnel management. It is evident from such diverse views that overall there is generally lack of clarity as to what HRM is to both academic and practitioners which in turn is a basis of some of the barriers in HRM as this discourse will elucidate on some barriers. Noon,(1992 p17) noted the difference between the UK approach to HRM and the American whereby he observed that some writers on the subject simply changed book titles from Personnel management to HRM with minimal changes to content and yet the American approach is more liberal and uses the titles interchangeably (Sisson,1990). What appears to be apparent in the UK is that HRM is a fusion of such disciplines like Industrial Relations, Personnel management and organisational behaviour (Sisson, 1990), whose confusing pedigree can be traced back to organisational development in the seventies, (Iles and Johnston, 1989) which emerged when NCR Corporation created a separate personnel department in 1890s (Legge, 1989, Springer and Springer, 1990).

Literature Review

There is need to establish on HRM as a theory the purpose being that element of a theory have to exist and Noon, (1992) utilises the work of (Dubin, 1978, Cohen 1980 and Bacharach, 1989) to support the elements of HRM as a theory. According to Noon, (1992) a theory is comprised of units whose interaction enables researchers to put forward a proposition of their relationship. It follows then that the propositions can be conceptualised as abstracts but must be represented by variables at empirical or observable level with boundaries by known values through epistemological reasoning. According to the Harvard map HRM can be measured through the four Cs (commitment, competence, congruence and cost effectiveness) which come from Management policies Noon, (1992). 

The main drivers of the ever accelerating change in the business terrain are globalisation, technological advancement and the use of artificial knowledge. The rate of acceleration in changes due to technological advancement will keep accelerating and with it brings change.  Globalisation has turned the world into a global village and it has opened all markets, which also means access to resources especially scarce ones like talent through ease in mobility. This phenomenon has increased the war for talent fiercer whereby every organisation can tap into the global talent pool. Although existing research acknowledges barriers to effective HRM to research very little empirical research has been done to shade light and give knowledge on the mutual factors inherent in the barriers. 

The existing literature has identified some of the ten most common barriers to effective HRM and they are strategic in nature. This review will mention the barrier and then look at the literature and sources of relevant information establish its reliability, validity authenticity and currency. Use of current surveys undertaken by CIPD and statistics on the state of the Labour market from the Office of National Statistics as well as primary data from interviews by the writer will be used in this research.

The first strategic barrier is “Management system response” Voehl, (1995). This argument is supported by Petrick and  Furr (1995) who stated that differences in priorities by management over their attitude in foregoing  power, perks and investors risk of  losing financial returns in the short term in pursuance of investing in effective HRM for customer satisfaction and increased market share.

The Second barrier is the “Educational system response” this is related to resistance to HRM by senior management and this calls for HR professionals to have extensive business acumen and the education system may equip senior functional managers with the necessary knowledge.

Management system response

The writers tutor chronicled an example of his life experience while working as Personnel Officer at Lucas Diesel Systems Officer and the welfare officer tasked an ex-social worker with the recruitment of engineering graduates without any requisite of both HR education and experience. The task was a disaster which resonated for years after with engineers from the company rubbishing HR as an ineffective and incompetent department due to the fact that The Personnel Manager had assigned the ex-welfare officer a task which was way above her head.

This is supported by (Luc Galoppin, March 20, 2008 ) who pointed out that HR is a favourite  scapegoat in almost every organisation throughout the globe because they are perceived to be adding value to product or service because they have got a clue about what “value-chain” is.

 HR specialist staff whose remit is staffing, compensation and benefits, training and development may resist to roped into doing any other duties that deviate from this narrow specific remit. Specialisation gives professional status too many individuals in the HR field and for them to give up some of these functions to line and team managers and employees and take up training for new roles may cause them psychological discomfort. This is supported by Kochan and Osterman (1994) (in their “Mutual Gains” model), and even more explicitly by Pfeffer (1994). On the other hand the educational system can address this barrier by providing training and development so that they are enabled to confidently take new roles.

Specialisation barrier number 2 some Hr specialists will resist by saying that continuous improvement and participation is already in place so any other change towards quality assurance is not necessary. This being true though the change is necessitated by the fact that in most organisation cross functional system improvements rarely exist. The social system will overcome this barrier by attaching attractive reward system to any broadening of roles by to HR staff.

Structural barrier 1/ Management systems Response: a high level of divisionalization in an organisation has the problem of creating group or department affiliation as opposed to identifying with the organisation. This is addressed by interdepartmental, interdisciplinary and system wide collaboration in problem solving and management can put in place well-coordinated cross functional engagement within the armpit of operational strategic planning.

This is supported by Santos- Vijande and Alvarez- Gonzalez (2007) 93 ISO 9000 certified firms (manufacturing and service) in Spain Structural equation modelling there is a significant positive relationship between HRM and administrative innovation

Educational system response

Structural barrier 2/ Hierarchy Inertia which means people who have power in I pyramid type of structure will resist the idea of embracing change to effective  HRM because they will have to forego some of that power. Any Hr professional who subscribes to the quality ideal accept it as an inevitable operational condition to accept a flatter organisation which is technically linked. This is evidence by Kotter (1996) who argues that, as successful organizations mature, their people become change averse. When they are required to implement transformational rather than incremental change to meet the challenge of new and increasingly global competition, they find it highly problematic.

Structural barrier 3: most organisations have a system whereby the compensation system is attuned to individual performance. What this means is that there is no prevalent gains sharing and profit sharing and this becomes a good excuse for management to avoid changing the system and embrace quality work system. One way of addressing this is to restructure the reward system to include a broader range.

Linguistic Barrier 1 In a system where effectiveness is advocated at every level it works well by supporting uniformity and steers away from variation by using statistical process control. Such a system is shunned by individuals who have an inclination towards innovation and creativity. However the quality system addresses positive variations that focus on desired outcomes this means that those individuals who are creative and innovative are not put in a box but the quality system goes a mile further by controlling unacceptable variations.

Linguistic barrier 2: where a system is based on the quality control system there is an inclination for resistance because it is regarded as an intrusion that limits individual work style. The quality system addresses  this barrier by allowing workers to identify and do what is required to make the organisation successful as opposed to doing what top management requires them to do in other words workers are empowered

Operational Barrier:  It is a common thing for HR staff to resist the quality approach because they may feel that there is not enough time to carry out their work and work on job improvement simultaneously. But this is the way to quality assurance to be able to do the work as well as improve on the way it should be done. HR Management need to have it impressed upon them that once they start thinking statistically quality in HR improved and can easily manage because it prevents the from overreacting by thinking that all variations emanate  from some special causes.

Specialisation barrier

Attitude: Workers may just regard movement towards quality as a passing fad which will not work because it focusses towards internal operations when it is supposed to focus on the external environment and output. Supporting evidence is found in Samson and Terziovskib (1999).   As a result, there is now widespread disillusionment with HRQM, and many are saying that `the bubble has burst’.

The study by Martinez- Costa and Martinez- Lorente (2008) 451 manufacturing and non-manufacturing firms in Spain Structural equation modelling QM has a positive impact on product and process innovation and on the company performance.

First strategic barrier is management system response.

Common sense dictates that we start at the Top i.e. deal with management as a barrier discuss its impact and suggest solutions to this.

CIPD 2014 research revealed that £3.2 billion is spent on training managers in Britain alone but 72% business organizations report a deficit in the management and leadership skills. Effectiveness in leadership is manifested in the quality of leadership and the success of the organisations they lead. Fast paced technological change in the onslaught of global competition talent has become a key resource of any organisation. It follows that an organisations success is directly linked to its ability to manage its human capital.  CIPD research shows that the need for leadership has changed following the global shifts in the ways we work today. While organisations are seen to be better at understanding leadership at the highest levels in the hierarchy, many are now seeking to devolve leadership down the line, expecting more junior managers and employees without managerial responsibility to treat the organisational agenda as their own. The barriers to quality leadership and effectiveness stems from the challenges that leadership in organisations face nowadays especially the thrust that many organisations are moving towards a flatter type of people management ( Hamel, 2016) and this devolution presents a challenge to leaders used to a spikey hierarchical leadership. CIPD, (2014) exploring the systemic barriers to leadership, identified four groups of challenges present in some organisations today.

Where HR has a deficit in business related competencies it becomes hard if not impossible to synchronise HR activities with those of the business (Heehan 2005). The corrective measure to be taken in order to enable HR to give meaningful strategic contribution must familiarise with the business organisations activities.  It is suggested here that work rotation for HRM top professionals with those from others units is encouraged. When HR is unable to measure and carry out effective and comprehensive analysis of what their contribution has achieved towards the organisations performance it often attracts lack of respect and commitment from top management because in the world of top management data driven decision-making has primacy over intangible analysis. According to (Khan,2014) one way of overcoming this barrier is to make sure the positive results that come as a result of effective HR function, is to make sure that effective communication of such positive results to the organisation is carried out. On the other hand (Beer, 1997) pointed out another danger of HR personnel getting engrossed in basic operational problems and are left with not  enough time to formulate new strategies to drive the business forward the resultant effect is that strategic HR planning may not be effected correctly or not even be implemented at all. Although (Lawler and Morhman, 2003) agree with (Beer, 1997) view but they argue that a solution to this issue can be achieved by outsourcing non- strategic operations and efficient utilisation of IT systems.  However (Ulrich, 1977) puts forward a strong argument that HR must confine or concentrate on an operational role rather than allow HR department to be used as a landfill to line management problems.

Specialisation barrier number 2

One would have thought that having an HR manager as part of the spearheading committee would mean involvement of HR in the decision making but (Beer, 1997) observed that this move would just mean HR was involved but does not warrant HR strategic involvement. The main reason put forward for this was is that this is attributed to HR mangers lack of business acumen. It is a fact that most HR personnel are drawn from many different back grounds but a common factor is that they lack strategic management exposure, and according to (Beer,1997) this leads to their failure to play a quality and effective strategical role. (Lawler III and Morhman, 2003) supports this by saying that Corporate strategy matters are regarded as complex and overwhelming and may not be easily understood by HR personnel who may have had no exposure to them. On the other hand (Beer, 1997) goes on to mention that the CEO deficit in understanding HRM may be a barrier to achieving  effective quality to the HRM function in the organisation because the CEO may give passive resistance to implementation of HR recommendations. One factor that also is a barrier to HRM quality effectiveness is that HRM may revert to the old school in measuring HRM success and value by using cost per employee this sets HR back to being regarded  the cost centre (Becker and Huselid,  2006).  

In organisations with this type of structure sharing information and expedient decision making is instrumental to the success of the business especially in customer driven companies and cross –functional teams despite that some organisations with this type of structure have reduced the number of managerial levels there is still a general feeling amongst their employees that they are not empowered to make independent decisions. Empowerment becomes a barrier because communication between the strategic planning and the operational sides whereby some managers in the top echelons regard those in operational as lacking acumen in grasping strategic needs of the business and become resistant to change. Those in top hierarchy will then shift into a command and control mode as they perceive directive leadership to be able to achieve greater performance and results expediently. Trust amongst these groups becomes a stumbling issue between the strategic and operational sides as the business organisations expects their people to embrace uncertainty.

Short-term, bottom-line focus the second challenge to leadership in the organisations is the tension between the sustainability of performance and the immediate balance of profit and cost. More organisations are now concerned with sustainability of performance and the ethical aspects of decision-making, and are including relevant measures in their behaviour and/ or value frameworks. However, in practice, the message that some individuals are actually receiving through performance management processes, and through informal aspects of organisational culture, may be emphasising the value of short-term bottom-line priorities over ‘how’ things are done.

Is a barrier to effective HRM due to the relationship between line managers and HR. Gratton et al, (1999) stated that there is arguments for and against even among academics, those who oppose HR are of the view that HR strategy is a concept that is fraught with contradictions. According to Gratton at al, (1999) this is evidenced by the various description towards HR some call it “the emperor’s new clothes”, “a sheep in wolf skin,” or “an iron fist in in velvet gloves” this highlights the suspicion directed at HR. But most organisation utilise HR as a tool to achieve competitive edge from the perspective that people are the most important asset this is supported by studies carried out by (Gratton et al, (1999) on organisations like BT Payphones , Citibank, Glaxo, Welcome, Hewlett  Packard,  Lloyds TSB group, C&W NHS Trusts etc. The academics are not alone in criticizing HR line managers who are not HRM specialists HR have problems in understanding all the ramification associated with HRM strategy. Contradictions emerge between the technical jargon used by Both HR in line with their profession and the technical jargon of specialist line managers like engineers etc. These cracks between line managers and HR has earned HR labels like “The biggest show stopper in town.

A more complex issue with professionals like Solicitors, barristers, doctors and engineers etc. is that these are experts in their field and carry out interviews on everyday basis and to pass that function of hiring staff to HR is a problem because their position is that they are the professional in their field and to get someone who does not have their expertise hiring staff for them is regarded as having “unprofessional fingers on the agenda”. In order to have effective HRM it is necessary to craft strategic themes of HR in the languor that most line managers are au fait with. Gratton, et al, (1999) also observed some slip-ups which are some silly mistakes that HR could have avoided for example recruiting and hiring someone who is ill suited and has no clue about what their job entails and place them in a department where thy have to work with a specialised manager obviously such a bungle up will not go down well with the expert manager. In some cases sighted by Gratton HR trickle is another barrier where HR can plan to give some training and development to employees but for some reason attributed to inefficiency the proposed training then is never followed up. In similar situation line managers may correctly identify an area of deficit in their employees and then ask HR to carry out training to target the correction of such deficiency creates frustration in the line manager as this affect his effectiveness and efficiency. 

A fellow student also found lack of HR support to line managers as a barrier that affected HRM effectiveness and this was due to a number of things, HR viewed line managers as gifted unprofessional and assumed they could adapt quickly to any new situation, HR has a presumption that line managers already have the technical knowledge and skills to carry out their human resources managerial roles, HR believes that its more effective for line managers to learn through experience which means very little support is availed to line managers.

This lack of HR support to line managers has manifested itself in the various inconsistencies line manager interpret HR role. This perspective can easily align to Employee relations i.e. line managers not getting support from HR and as a result implementing ambiguous organisational policies on the other hand shop stewards and Union Convenors why there is inconsistency in the way their union members are treated.  

One student chronicled HR inconsistency and the supportive evidence was that if she consulted different members of the HR team with the same query she got several answers to one question the perception and analysis that came out of a group discourse agreed that this phenomena could come about because of a varied level of both education and experience, and also pointed out that policies and procedures need to effectively communicated and applied consistently to avoid ambiguity and inconsistency and achieve uniformity across the board.  

A fellow student on the MHRM course made a survey and discovered that in the respective organisation which had introduced a service centre HR remoteness was actually a barrier that line managers were experiencing because contact with HR was at arm’s length because it was at the end of a telephone line. The biggest contention was lack of urgency and lack of personal contact with the resultant effect that HR technical advice and queries were not instantaneous but were subjected to a 24 hour call back interval. A very big problem when a line manager was faced with a problem that required urgent attention or dealing with an irate member of staff which is often the case.   

There are voices of discontent from line managers who are of the school of thought that HR specialists should do one job i.e. to give managers advice where technical aspects are needed but other than that managing of the workforce must be a line manager’s function (David Poole) This is supported by a student on placement (Graham White) at Surrey Council where he experienced (HR treacle) he discovered that HR was so bureaucratic and had become a monster that neutralised goods ideas from line managers always willing to say no. HR policies and procedures stood as barriers stifled initiatives rather than assist managers to achieve their objectives (Resilient HRM Notes). This is further supported by, (Mintzberg, 2009) who gave an example of a scenario where one is a line manager with serious, informed doubts  about a strategy, but get saddled with a leadership that is too detached from the fray to listen to you.    

 If the organisations ethical work culture is underdeveloped its senior management leaning to the manipulation culture will criticize and oppose any strategy to implement global Effective HRM strategies as a farfetched idea. This is supported by rejuvenating the mature business, Baden-Fuller and Stopford (1992, 1994) also tackle the problem of transforming the mature enterprise. Ogbonna, (1992) stated that one of the fundamental aspects of HRM is its influence in the creation and maintenance of strong organisational culture. In the 1980s according to Ogbonna it was widely believed that managing culture was an effective method of acquiring competitive advantage however it is now evident that HRM identifies many other routes to generating competitive advantage besides strong cultures. The question to ask is that is it possible to manage culture? An explorative approach to answering this questions unearthed some contradictions and dilemmas. Literature to this is available which is both critical and prescriptive which highlight the issues inherent in the management of culture. This is further supported by the fact that a global HRM strategy for it to be effective must be developed and implemented on policies that are in line with host countries. Barriers to effective Global HRM may emerge due to the diversity of political and legal factors that vary from country to country, because while the legal system may be stable or similar in Europe due to the primacy of the Law of the EU over member states as a stabilising factor, a departure of this occurs when it comes to for example African countries. Most African governments are not stable due to rampant coups, and corrupt and dictatorial rules (Zkjadoon, 2015

A case study by of a leading UK supermarket is put forward as an example in trying to explore the management of culture to come up with a management policy. In an attempt to unravel the controversy of trying to manage culture (Smircich, 1983) came up with two ways of approaching the discourse based on Burrell and Morgan’s (1979) paradigm framework that defined culture as something a business organisation is or has these being mutually exclusive meaning they cannot be present  together.  Many scholars have followed the elaborative school of thought by (Silverzweig and Allen, 1976) which approaches this discourse from cultural change perspective. Basically this model is based on the assumption that when people have worked in a sustained period they develop a set of norms expectations and values which although not written down as well grounded rules can influence their collective action as members the so called community of purpose. This approach also assumes that the culture of individuals can be shaped by that of the organisation and at the same time the members can also shape the culture of the organisation of which they are part of. (Silverzweig and Allen, 1976) went on to say in the long term the values and culture become the organisational guide and can be adaptive to change depending on the environmental changes and identified variables in HRM that derive the organisations success these include  leadership, performance and reward systems, training and orientation.    

Another cultural barrier can be caused when social expectations towards effective HRM are too high and when failure to meet these is experienced, frustration will get the better side of management. The solution to this will be to put in place a realistic strategy planning.

When comes to global operations of any organisation it is not an area of dispute that every country its unique culture which in a way may be akin to another country’s culture, but common sense also dictates that narrative of global human resources management should utilise such polices and procedure within the organisation are in line with the local culture of the host country or region. It is suggested here that staff of the foreign branch of the organisation should be sourced from the Host country because they may be cultural norms that are accepted in one country but are anathema in another country. The resultant effect of not taking these factors into consideration is a problematic global HRM of any business organisation this should be reciprocated by expatriates of the organisation by taking into consideration cultural norms and values of a host country to a large extent. Organisation management need to implement a broad corporate culture throughout all its global subsidiaries.  

Globalisation has a combination of factors that can constitute barriers. The first barrier attached to globalisation may embody economic factors. It is a fact that there isn’t a homogenous model of economics operating throughout the globe where the economy follows capitalism the focus is on efficiency and productivity while cutting costs to do more with less, whereas in a socialistic  economy efficiency and productivity are foregone as eliminating unemployment is the main thrust.  The production input costs vary from country to country more so labour costs which is a stickling issue if not managed properly. The relationship between employees and management also vary between countries this becomes a barrier because it is not a walk in the park for an organisation to effectively manage its expatriate staff (Zkjadoon November 29, 2017). A study has revealed that the rate of failure on effective expatriate assignment is between 20 to 40% and the common reasons are cultural shock, family problems, maybe done to get rid of a bothering employee but this can be overcome by giving assignees cross cultural and pre- departure training (Zkjadoon November 29, 2017)

This barrier needs to be looked at in depth by examining the ideal approach to HRM There are two distinct theoretical approaches to HRM i.e. instrument HRM and Humanistic HRM (Stone, 2002, p8). The instrumental approach focuses on the quantitative narrative that relates to performance improvement, relentless improvement of the competitive advantage. On the other hand the Humanistic approach is centred on synchronizing HR policies with the organisations strategic objectives with a focus on employee development, collaboration, participation trust and informed choice (Stone, 2002) The soft approach recognises human capital as instrumental to the organisations competitive advantage with their superior knowledge their loyalty, positive responsiveness to change through motivation and job satisfaction. The chief aim of this approach is to develop a culture of agile employees through effective and comprehensive HRM. It is not an area of dispute that the hard approach has potential of fomenting industrial conflict whereas although it is less obvious the soft approach is has a subtle potential of creating union conflict whereby the trade union may on ideological basis object to pay for performance because it incentivises individualistic as opposed to a collectivist way of managing a work force. The resultant effect of this is that a barrier is formed between the union and HRM especially when HR calls for mutual interest, cooperation communication the union will regard this as an attempt cynically manipulate and dilute the power of the union. Visa vee HR may also label the union as an incompatible stumbling block to organisational objectives and progress akin to putting (old wine in a new bottle).

According to Ulrich for HR to be effective managers would like HR professional to be a strategic partner of the business organisation. In this regard the expected and ideal position envisioned by management is that HRM should be able to transform business strategy into concrete action. This position can only be attainable if the HRM manager becomes part of business spearheading team, acquire requisite business acumen customer driven focus and possess a broader lens in analysing other competitor’s strategies within the industry so that they can come up with HR policies and practises that keeps the organisation ahead of competition. Unfortunately (Stone, 2002) points out that research has shown that HR managers are not satisfying this role of strategic partner as very few CEOs involve HR managers in creating business their business strategies. There is robust evidence that show unsound HR policies and practices trigger alienation, demotivation and unrest within the labour force. On the other hand it is also evident that CEOs who have embraced HR as part of their strategic team have gained competitive advantage against those who do not. (Ernst and Young, 2000) put forward ten things that HR must do to achieve a good relationship with line management:

• Put nooks and cranes of HR in place
• Pune off all HR activities that does not add value to the business
• Be au fait with the business ins and outs
• Augment interrelationship throughout the organisation
• Enhance line managers confidence in their HR role
• Acquire the knowledge to effectively communicate your ideas in the line managers jargon
• Avoid being rigid
• Broaden the breadth of grasping  general Big picture issues
• Focus on same goals
• Pivot HR practice on the three Cs, collaborate, cooperate and communicate.

However there is an argument from line management that disagrees with Ulrich’s suggestion that HR should be a strategic partner with top management because this strategic role puts HR in the firing line as workers will perceive HR as running in cahoots with the management which makes them enemies of the work force (Poole) Whereas if HR partners with workers senior management will not take them seriously. Some line managers do not believe that HR specialist will be able to grasp the minute and pertinent details of the functions of finance, marketing and production of a business organisation.  

The strategic perspective is that HR plays an instrumental role in a business organisation which is achieving performance. This function separates HR from that if a manager in the personnel department whose function is head of administration. According to (A. Vanderstraeten, 2014) there are two prominent models that have a strong impact on the concept of strategic HRM i.e. the “ Michigan Titchy” model and the “ Beer also known as threw Harvard model”.  

According to Vanderstraeten, (2014) there are basically two main models that have a prominent impact on the strategic HRM concept namely the Michigan or Titchy model and the “Beer” or. “Harvard” model. The (Michigan) model emphasises that HRM strategy and HRM policy are fundamental to the wellbeing of a business organisation but are subject to some external influence which may be political, cultural and economic environment. Fombrun et al, (1984) points out that the Michigan model is pivoted on four functions namely, selection, appraisal, remuneration and development and these four must be as a rule of thumb be embedded in the strategy and structure of the organisation, and are to be located at three levels of the business entity strategic, managerial and operational level. This is corroborated by Vanderstraeten, (2014) who pointed out the ever increasing importance of HRM in both private and public organisations and the trend and evolution of HRM provides a road map of providing a curriculum in higher education that equips future HR professionals with a tool box of overcoming barriers in HRM especially where ethical behaviour is concerned. Vanderstraeten, (2014) mentions that the thrust of the (Harvard model) is a strategy that apportions more attention to stakeholders and external environment

According to Vanderstraeten, (2014) there are four distinct dimensions whose properties are moulded by the organisational environment in which they are applied, and they work in tandem and complement each other in adding value to HRM. The identified dimensions deal with four different functions, essential administration, human element of the business organisation, goal directed aspects and cultural and structural function consecutively. According to Ulrich (2000) there is need for HR practitioners to be administrative experts and this is achieved by utilising technology , rethinking  , redesigning work processes by putting in place reengineering of the Hr function as a tool for adding value and measuring of Human resources in terms of being cost efficient, effective manifested in the quality of delivery. According to Stone (2002) effective HR management is linked to high performing organisations while incompetency in HR is linked to low performing organisations. Ulrich (200) states that HR professionals must be employee champions by being able to foster a good relationship with the employees and be the employee’s voice in all management discussions. HR professionals are expected to provide learning resources in the following arears, coaching line managers and employees on how to set priorities, getting rid of no-value adding work, give clarification of goals, decode complex processes, partake in decision making, enhance workers commitment, and facilitate the employees  sharing of economic  gains. This is by no means an exhaustive list of expectations but (Ulrich, 2000) states that this will enable employees to give effective contribution as they will gain competency and commitment to do the job the right way. On the other hand Ulrich makes a further point that the dual HR function of being a strategic business partner and an employee champion may be a source of tension as the HR manager grapples with the act of balancing both.

The reason for an HR manager to carry out this balancing act was emphasised by Appelbaum, (2000) who contributed to the discourse by bringing in “The People Dimension” with a people – oriented model that has (motivation and Participation as the key words to the approach. According to Appelbaum, (2000) the chief factor to HRM motivation of employees i.e. a relentless and prolific creation of ways to stimulate employees to work for the benefit of the organisation. Appelbaum, (2000) mentioned observed that there are several ways of influencing employee behaviour with some ideas just managing to provoke just minimum compliance with the employers wishes but some will actually motivate employees to be committed and be actively  involved, participate engage in looking for solutions to challenges facing the organisation. Appelbaum averred that employees will perform well when they possess the requisite (ability or competence) and when they are incentivised or stimulated (motivation) and when they are part of the decision making process (participation). To empower employees is instrumental to engagement and is a strategic method of recognising employee autonomy which in turn views the manager as a facilitator. This is supported by Herzberg (2003) who said, “ Forget praise, Forget punishment, Forget cash you need to make employees job more interesting “ as this will motivate them to perform well for the benefit of the organisation

It is then a sole responsibility of the HR manager to keep cognisance of employee responses to any HR initiatives that are meant to enhance organisational performance this is supported by the fact that not all employees may want to be involved in decision making especially where thy realise it is more work for the same pay. If this is not done its resultant effect is seen as a failure by HRM to lose focus on the needs and aspirations of the workforce which in turn will result in distrust, employees going half-mast which affects which has negative impact on organisational performances. HR manger is expected to be Change agent that is act as a catalyst that facilitate smooth and effective change in an organisation. This function can involve among others, leading change in the organisation HR function (Stone, 2005), develop problem solving communication, and enhance required skill within the workforce to be responsive to change, in short the HR manager is expected to know how to manage change. To be effective (Gloet ) puts forward an argument that HR management must be able to reinvent or reengineer itself through continuous development of learning environments where new knowledge is acquisition sharing and dissemination is esteemed as valuable. The HR manager must use a pragmatic approach in managing change where positive results are realised and overcoming and avoiding all obstacles play a pivotal role. However some line managers believe that workers do not like change because they are suspicious and change so for HR to champions for people such a role will make them enemies instead of allies.      

There is a lot of discourse centred on whether HRM should be done away with altogether by many business organisations this only underscores the high expectations and importance placed on HRM within the business fraternity but such a question alludes to the ineffectiveness of the HRM Harvard (Business Review, 2017). According to (Ulrich, 2017) this discourse is triggered by a common shared perception of doubt on the expected HR’s contribution to organisational performance. This is supported by (Stone, 2005) who avers that it is justified to label HR with such a beleaguered reputation because HR is usually ineffective, incompetent, and expensive and is value depleting to an organisation. This position is reached when HR is wrongly configured and lacks concrete action. However HRM should be an integral part of any organisational excellence by focusing on learning, quality, teamwork, reengineering and geared to get things done how they manage human capital (Spencer, Jr. 1995). In this context quality of the HR function is measured by its effectiveness to the organisational performance.

• First, HR should become a partner with senior and line managers in strategy execution, helping to move planning from the conference room to the marketplace.
• Second, it should become an expert in the way work is organized and executed, delivering administrative efficiency to ensure that costs are reduced while quality is maintained.

Ulrich, (2017) to be effective HR must move from the traditional norm that is hinged on staffing and remuneration and partner with senior and line managers to create an agile and nimble organisation highly responsive to change through strategy execution. In other words “HR must not be defined by what it does but by what it delivers enriches the organisation’s value to customer, investors and employees.”   

According to (Mintzberg,) the most important job in our society is that of the manager because it is the manager who determines if the business organisations serve us well or whether they usap our talents and resources. HR practitioners in an Organisation must ensure that employees are allocated tasks they are suitable for a good example is that it would be ineffective to hire someone with an accounting background into a technical sales department.

Daft, (1997, p 560) defined organisational communication as an interaction between two people whereby information is exchanged and understood by two or more people with the intention of motivating and influencing desirable behaviour. The crucial thing to note here is that the intent goes beyond just transferring of information by pointing out that the sender to influence the receiver. Contributing and supporting business communication (Bryman, 1992, p146) identified distinct but interrelated interpersonal and organisational factors that are in concert in the communication process and are relevant in the leadership literature. (Bryman, 1992 p146) went on to itemise the themes as follows:

• That having a vision is a pivotal role of leadership
• Communication of that vision is crucial to turn it into reality
• The vision has an empowering effect on organisational members
• Leaders need to create an organisational culture that underpins the vision
• Leaders will not be able to implement such a vision without their followers trust

Prachi Juneja, (2017) writing for Deloitte stated that every organisation aspires to make a profit  by meeting its goals but HR managers need to take cognisance of the fact that an organisation is the first home for the employee because he or she spends most of their time at work . Juneja (2017) stated that employees are the most important assets of any organisation because the profitability of any business entity is directly proportionate to the labour input by its employees. Labour in this context needs to be understood as any smart work  done by the employees and it is very crucial that free flow of effective information be fostered within the organisation as it is conducive in enhancing transparency and coordination between team members. When there are barriers in effective communication in an organisation they manifest in a long way in distorting messages and in some cases messages never reaching the intended recipient at all or sometimes it does but not in the desired form.

A simple diagram by Hunt above can be used for a simple illustration of barrier to effective communication in work places and a simple case study where a managing director through his secretary is giving instruction and task to a team member to prepare and submit a report complete with budgets for sales marketing department to a deadline but for poor communication the information is misinterpreted and reaches the member of staff tasked to carry out the task and then he submits a report without a budget. One would then imagine what this employee’s appraisal report will look like after making such a mistake most probable thing is no promotion and no wage increment. Noisy work stations and employee chitchat in work places can cause breakdown in communication.

HR staff are constantly within a business organisation presiding over business meetings, presentations or chairing training seminars and as communicators it is imperative that they understand that every individual has his or her own mind set and different levels of understanding so it is imperative that clarity and sharing details to ensure that everybody is on board is essential Davison, (2014). This is supported by Illeris, (2003) who stated that research has shown during seminars or presentations only front benchers are attentive the last benchers are lost I their own sweet world, it is then essential for HR practitioners when presenting at seminars to ensure that that they keep their audience who may be employees or line managers engaged and interactive and this can be achieved effectively by asking questions from participants.   

HR practitioners in an organisation must ensure that the organisational structure does not allow communication barriers through bad organisational policies for example rules that make it imperative for communication to be in writing between managers and employees, this may cause delays in implementing tasks. Bad policies on status are a barrier in organisations especially when communication is from bottom to top, a good example is when a junior employee is sending communication top hierarchy  managers they may have lurking fear that the communication may be faulty this manifests itself in delayed decision making. This is further exacerbated by the complexity of the organisational structure especially if there is a greater number of managerial levels as there tends to be criticism and changes are made before the communication reaches the intended receiver. There is a likelihood of personal barriers which may emanate from lack of confidence in subordinates by higher ranking managers as they have a prejudiced idea that their junior subordinates are less capable whereas on the other hand there is always fear of challenging higher ranking managers by junior employees.  Some top ranking managers pull ranks by simply ignoring suggestions from junior subordinates which in turn lower the self-esteem and incentive of the junior employees when they feel that their suggestions are not given importance. The explosion of IT has brought forth integrated approach to HRM which enabled automated recruiting system, performance management, and reward systems although the long term advantage of this is cost effective fully customisation and necessary maintenance of such systems is expansive and can be a barrier to effective HRM if the necessary training and system is not given to employees (HRMIS, 2012 )

Research is basically the process of inquiry and investigation, and it is also systematic and methodical (Collis and Hussey, 2013). The importance of research could also mean the method of looking for a specific answer to a specific question in a structured objective reliable way (Payton, 1979). However, the purpose of this research is to understand the factors that drive and enhance employee motivations in the retail industry

Researchers have three possible approaches to take such as; quantitative which relates to analysis with numbers and statistical methods which add up to a conclusion (Collis and Hussey, 2013), qualitative research allow the researcher to examine peoples experience in depth by using a certain type of research methods such as in-depth interviews, focus group discussions, observation, content analysis, visual methods and life histories, or a mixed approach (Hennink, Hutter and Bailey, 2015).

For this study, the researcher used mixed method approach to explicitly mix quantitative and qualitative research approaches to best understand the research problem by capitalizing on their complementary strengths and differences (Creswell and Piano Clark, 2011). It also, allows the researcher to collect and analyse both quantitative and qualitative data, and to come up with different result for further analysis (Creswell and Piano Clark, 2011). Mixed method approach has been used in employee motivation studies more often to provide both numeric data and expanded information for more understanding. But for this study, the researcher wanted to focus on the retail industry staff, and line managers from Team leaders, Team Managers shift Managers, Senior Managers on the identified barriers to effective Human Resources Management in their workplace. Using mixed method to analyse the case study, enable the researcher to present a more in-depth study by using questionnaires or interviews to provide a more reliable result and the researcher could also make “inferences with confidence” (Jogulu and Pansiri, 2011). Mixed method approach is a complex method as it involves the researcher to undergoing different research methods to interpret information in different ways. For the researcher to undertake this method, it can be time consuming as it requires knowledge of both forms of data collection (Hesse-Biber, 2010).

Seventy participants from the population have been selected as a sample in order to accumulate the primary data for the research.  

The close-ended and Open-ended questionnaire has been undertaken as the structure of the questionnaire to gather primary data for the study.

The process of collecting data from different source is to ensure the accuracy and reliability of the data. It is important for researcher to select the best method for collecting data for the research (Hair, 2015). Data collection method is divided into two parts which are; secondary and primary data collections

When secondary data are unable to help solve the research problem, primary data is used to collect vital information relevant to the particular study or research problem. They are different ways of collecting primary data such as; Observations, experiments, surveys (Questionnaires) and interviews. The advantage of using this method is that they are collected for the particular research at hand and they are more consistent with the research objectives or research questions. The disadvantage of this, is that it can be difficult to find the target group (Ghauri and Grønhaug, 2006). As this research is based on mixed method approach, the main primary source of data was obtained from the Questionnaire. The researcher used Questionnaire as part of the primary data in this research and it was handed out to the participants through face to face interactions. Although, some of the participants initially agreed to participate in the study, but some failed to participate because they felt it could be time consuming.

The researcher made sure that the questions were as brief and concise as possible, and all the questions were created in a way that it would enable the respondents to either agree nor neither disagree. The researcher also considered using other methods such as; sending the questions across via emails, creating online questionnaire or posting the questionnaire to the participant, but it was discounted because these approaches are time consuming and require follow ups in cases where responses are not returned on time (Hox and Boeije, 2005).

Secondary data was carried out to find information to solve the problem of the study and this was done through review of the literature. The literature reviewed included various sources such as; books, journal articles, websites and Newspapers. Although, the advantage of using this data it saves time and money, sometimes the data can be inaccurate (Ghauri and Grønhaug, 2006).

In this research, ethical consideration was taken into account and the researcher abided by ethical principles at all times. As Shamoo and Resnik (2009) states that it is the responsibility of the researcher to respect and protect the research participant information and keep it confidential. During the handing out of the questionnaire, the researcher gave out a consent form and participant information sheet (see appendix 3 and 4), along with the questionnaire which was given to the participant to request their informed consent before partaking in the research.

According to Bryman and Bell (2015), data analysis is the method of analysing and examining data to sum up to a conclusion about the information they contain, with the use of specialised systems or software. The researcher used thematic analysis as it is a process for encoding data, by grouping raw information from the responses to the questionnaires into a list of themes and to interpret the information clearly (Boyatzis, 1998). This process was conducted in the research as the researcher grouped the last 4 open question response from the questionnaire into themes to come up with a result.

Thus, Excel Software Package was also used to analyse the 11 open question response from the questionnaire into pie charts, tables and graphs to explain the statistics and the findings of the research.

One of the major limitations of the study is the use of a survey through a questionnaire. This method of gathering data is time-consuming as well as costly (Debois, 2016). There must be the use of online data collection methods, because according to Sue and Ritter (2012), collecting data through these methods is quick and cost effective.

To sum up, the researcher considered various research methodologies and designs, followed specific guidelines regarding data collection and considered ethical issues relating to this research study. In addition, different methods of data collection and analysis were taken into account.

These findings were supported by the view of Pfeffer (1994), as it is stated that most of the participants believe that HR executives in their organization are fully aware of the business needs and strategies. For example, the HR Managers adopt quality assurance strategies in order to overcome operational barriers.

These findings were supported by the view of Voehl (1995), as it is stated that most of the participants believe that there are numerous barriers to the effective Human Resource Management in their organization. As per the literature review, there are around ten common barriers to operative Human Resource Management and they are strategic in nature, for example, management system response, educational system response, hierarchy inertia, communication, cultural barriers, etc.

These findings were supported by the view of Santos- Vijande and Alvarez- Gonzalez (2007), as it is stated that most of the participants believe that there are three categories of barriers experienced by almost all the businesses and they are structural barriers, specialization barrier, and linguistic barrier.

These findings were supported by the view of Kotter (1996), as it is stated that most of the participants believe that there are different strategies available that are used by the human resource manager in order to overcome the barriers. For example, the organization adopts a strategy of attractive reward system in order to overcome specialization barriers.

These findings were supported by the view of Kotter (1996), as it is stated that most of the participants believe that structural barriers are the most influencing barriers in their organization.  For example, Hierarchy Inertia is one of the structural barriers which means people with the power in I pyramid structure type will resist the notion of implementing change to effective human resource management since they have to sacrifice some of that power.

Survey through questionnaire has been conducted on 70 participants of different organizations. The questionnaire is comprised of different questions related to the research objective and focused on attaining the goal of the research.

Conclusion

The research is comprised of different aspects such as research methodology, literature review, questionnaire, finding, and analysis, etc. The report has identified that the organizations deal with different barriers that affect the human resource management, but according to the secondary research majorly only 10 barriers are highlighted. Besides this, the researcher has conducted the survey through questionnaire according to which linguistic barriers are majorly influencing the organizations.  

References 

Debois, S. (2016) 9 Advantages and Disadvantages of Questionnaires [online]. Available from https://surveyanyplace.com/questionnaire-pros-and-cons/ [accessed 18 December 2018]

Eco, U. (2015) How to Write a Thesis 1^st ed. U.S: MIT Press.

Hendry, C. (2012) Human Resource Management 1^st ed. U.S: Routledge.

Sue, V.M., and Ritter, L.A. (2012) Conducting Online Surveys 3^rd ed. U.K: SAGE.

Survey Software Reviews (2018) Comparison between Offline and Online Surveys [online]. Available from https://www.survey-reviews.net/index.php/survey-software/comparison-between-offline-and-online-surveys/ [accessed 18 December 2018]