Taylor (2005) states, A case against human resource planning has been articulated in recent years by authors who consider the practice to be at best irrelevant and at worst damaging to organisations.

University Degree Business and Administrative studies

People Resourcing: Strategies & Policies

Title

Taylor (2005) states, “A case against human resource planning has been articulated in recent years by authors who consider the practice to be at best irrelevant and at worst damaging to organisations”.

Discuss the case for and against human resource planning. Explain how the outcomes from HR planning can inform other activities.

Introduction

The issue of Human resource planning (HRP) can be express as a way of managing supply and demand for labour in order to lessen the risk of surplus or a shortage of labour which would either result in inefficiency or ineffectiveness. For that reason labour will be managed at least cost and all targets can be achieved. My first instinct was that most small to medium sized organisations would not need to plan because they simply hire or fire staff as required. And secondly that HRP would only apply to organisations that belonged to a non-volatile market because long term planning would not be affected by regular changes.

In this report I will attempt to discuss whether my instincts were correct or not. This can be done by looking at various arguments of support for HRP and against HRP that have been written. Possibly it would be appropriate first to start with the cons and then outlining the pros, in outlining the pros I will attempt to address small, large and international organisations.

Stephen Taylor against HRP

Different studies carried out (Taylor 2002) seem to have come to the conclusion that many organisations do not think that HRP is needed. They have placed HRP as ‘low priority’ within their organisations.

Taylor (2002) explains the reasoning for this may be that small size organisations think that HRP as money and time wasting. Employees are seen as not being long term and, therefore planning is seen as inappropriate and ineffective. The conventional model of HRP also had clearly defined jobs whereas employees these days are expected to do many different jobs. Secondly he suggests that the HRP is not used by organisations because they consider that their environment is too unstable to plan in.

These give very good reasoning’s as to why HRP is not being used by organisations and support my first instincts towards HRP, but are my instincts correct? The main argument against HRP is that it is too difficult to predict with any precision the demand for and supply of labour.

Other authors against HRP

This is a preview of the whole essay

Other authors against HRP

Mintzberg (1994) argued that HRP could not be used effectively and efficiently because it was based on one off events that in all likelihood would not happen again. He believes that HRP can do more harm than good and, that in today’s volatile markets HRP is practically finished as a tool to manage demand for and supply of labour. He suggested that nothing could be done to plan for the future and the best thing to do would be to plan in a general way in order to react quickly in the event of a dilemma occurring.

An example of HRP failing was explained by Sisson and Timperley (1994) and it was further reviewed by Taylor (2002). The 1960’s saw low birth rates, promoting a fear of the supply of young labour entering the jobs market in the 1990’s as at an all time low. It was suggested that organisations made up plans to cope with the shortage of labour. Due to unforeseen and unpredictable change of events the staff shortage never occurred, instead the opposite happened seeing organisations left with a flood of employees. The organisations that did not draw up any plans were in fact healthier.

The main arguments to support HRP are that plans should be viewed as flexible. The more volatile the market is, the more planning should take place. HRP is proposed to be an adaptable plan that can be frequently updated (Taylor, 2002).

Authors who support HRP

“Being prepared is better than being surprised” wrote by Sullivan (2002), he believes those businesses that don’t plan will fail. His primary reason to use HRP is economics, believing that you will have greater productivity, because you will have the ‘right people, with the right skills, in the right places, at the right time’. He comes up with six reasons why planning is good.

Eliminating surprise

HR should limit the element of surprise.

Rapid talent replacement- able to respond quickly to abrupt turnover.

2. Smoothing out business cycles

Developing plans to ensure your workforce are able to work effectively during both good and bad times.
No-delays Employee the correct amount of people to hit production targets.
Employee development- Get the most out of production because they are internally trained.
The right skills- increasing product development because there are the right employment factors in place.

Identifying problems early

HRP involves putting measures in place to notify managers of minor problems before they become major problems.

Preventing problems

Can be expensive to fix problems.

∙ Lower turnover rates- constantly training employees in field’s careers suitable to their interests and capabilities, insuring the transition to new roles is smooth.

∙ Low labour cost- HRP ensures there is no need for large scale layoffs of permanent employees, as the capacity to reduce labour costs without delay is established.

∙ No layoffs- By managing the amount of employees, the company make certain there isn’t an excess of talent.

Taking advantage of opportunities.

Because you are not responding hastily to arising problems, you have more opportunity to look for new opportunities and rising talent.

Improving your image

By being prepared for any situation you look confident and in control.

There have been numerous studies conducted in the area of HRP that illustrate the pros of the topic.

In Taylor view HRP is not a good or bad thing

Taylor (2002) suggests that from all the debate it does not appear that HRP is a good or bad thing, it just require to be adapted to meet different organisations’ needs and position. He suggests that large numbers of organisations in the UK could benefit from traditional HRP. The organisations that come into this category are- organisations with large HR departments, dedicated to HRP function, organisations operating in a steady environment, organisations requiring specialist staff and organisations where upcoming investment decisions are made years in advance.

Taylor (2002) argued the case to adopt HRP for small organisations and organisations with a fast changing environment. He suggests that they should plan but not using the traditional method but using newer techniques.

The French football board can be taken as an example which used the succession planning technique. They had been training someone to take over the manager’s post in even though the position was filled in preparation of a highly likely sacking or retirement, as the sport is notorious for this. The result was a continuous and well managed football team that went on to win the world cup.

Can HRP be used on a global scale?

Not only one labour market but hundreds, it seems to be impossible to plan in this sort of environment. Traditional HRP techniques would certainly not apply. Taylor (2002) suggests that planning can be implemented by applying the technique suitable for each individual country it in displaying the data in the same format. The data can then be used to aid decisions regarding decision making about future investments and downsizing programmes.

In an article written by Brewster (2003) he observed the need for HRP as essential in the IAEA, which is part of a group that comes under the UN employing people from more than 200 nations. HRP is needed in these organisations because of so many different languages and cultures that need to be catered for. HRP will also play an important role in helping the employees work effectively under difficult and dangerous conditions.

Conclusion

The above discussion has attempted to explore and discuss the case for and against human resource planning. In doing so it was found that the debate in support of HRP seems far more weighted than the case against.

The main points against HRP such as long term plans could not be used in a volatile business environment, have been dismissed, as it has been said that HRP is always open for adaptation and therefore can be used for any sort of business in any sort of environment.

More modern ways of using HRP have been developed making HRP workable even for small organisations and those in an ever changing environment. With a plan in place if the eventuality you planned for surfaces you can take care of it effectively. If the eventuality does not arise you can adapt your plan to suit your needs. Future research will ideally need to evaluate the effectiveness of the new HRP techniques by looking at various companies that have implemented them as this is obviously an area where more study needs to be conducted.

References

People Resourcing by Stephen Taylor, 2nd edition, London, Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, 2002.

The rise and fall of strategic planning, Henry Mintzberg, 1994, (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA), ISBN 0273650378.

(Sisson, K., Timperley, S. (1994), "From manpower planning to strategic human resource management", Journal: Personnel Management: A Comprehensive Guide to Theory and Practice in Britain, Blackwell, Oxford.