The footings “best fit” and “best practice” are used in strategic human resource direction and applied to the specific policy country of wages systems. Each attack attempts to explicate the manner that HR policies in general and reward policies in peculiar can take to greater organisational effectivity.
The “best fit” position claims that a firm’s wages system should be aligned to back up the organization’s concern scheme in order to accomplish competitory advantage. “Best practice” advocates claim that there is a package of HR policies including the wages system that lead to extremely motivated and committed employees who are the key to an organization’s competitory advantage. There is a deficiency of lucidity about the specific features of either perspective as applied to pay theoretical account.
Lawler ( 1995. p. 14 ) provinces that all organisational systems must get down with concern scheme because “…it specifies what the company wants to carry through. how it wants to act. and the sorts of public presentation and public presentation degrees it must show to be effectual. ” Business scheme. driving single and organisational behaviours. is the standard for the development of the wages scheme.
The contingent nature of the wages system is emphasized by Lawler ( 1995. p. 14 ) when he states. “indeed the ‘new pay’ is non a set of compensation patterns at all. but instead a manner of believing about the function of reward systems in a complex organization…it argues against an premise that certain best patterns must be incorporated into a company’s attack to pay. ” Indeed. he contrasts the wages system for a traditional direction manner with one that fosters employee engagement. The right tantrum for the former includes a wages system that is job-based with merit wage while for the latter it is skill-based with fillips based on concern success.
Schuster and Zingheim ( 1993. p. 6 ) besides follow a contingent attack but argue that “Merit wage and traditional public presentation assessment make it impossible to see employees as cardinal elements of organisational scheme and tactics. ” They suggest that every component of an organization’s wages system should lend to spread outing employees’ line of site “…to include concern about how their organisation is executing. ” ( Schuster and Zingheim. 1993. p. 6 ) Variable or incentive wage. which is non consolidated into basal wage. replaces the traditional virtue program.
Harmonizing to Conway ( 2003 ) . research analyzing ‘high committedness management’ in HRM has its roots in both the configurationally and the cosmopolitan theoretical models. Marchington and Wilkinson ( 2002. p. 177 ) . claim that “most of the involvement over the last decennary or so has been in theoretical accounts of “high commitment” or “best practice” HRM. stimulated ab initio by the work of a figure of US faculty members. but developed more late by people in Britain every bit good. ” While. for the most portion this is a generalist HR argument. authors such as Pfeffer and Huselid applied best pattern rules to the field of wages. In making this they build on the work of Herzberg ( 1966 ) and Kohn ( 1993 ) .
Both attacks believe that HR patterns should be complimentary. However. harmonizing to Purcell ( 1999. p. 27 ) . “…what is most noteworthy about the best pattern theoretical account is there is no treatment on company scheme at all. ” The implicit in premiss of this position is that organisations following a set of best patterns attract ace human resources. endowment and competences. “These superior human resources will. in bend. act upon the scheme the organisation adopts and is the beginning of its competitory advantage. ” ( Milkovich & A ; Newman. 2002. p. 30 )
Advocates suggest there are reciprocally compatible ‘bundles’ of HR policies that promote high degrees of employee motive and committedness that positively impact on organisational public presentation. Although there is non consentaneous understanding in placing these patterns. the list by and large includes: selective hiring. extended preparation. employment security. a construction that encourages employee engagement and pay policies that lead in relation to industry rivals. ( Pfeffer. 1998a ; Huselid. 1995 ) One obvious point of contradiction is in the country of wage linked to public presentation assessment. Pfeffer ( 1998a. pp. 203-204 ) criticizes merit wage on five grounds:1. Subjectivity and unpredictability that reward political skills… instead than public presentation.
2. An accent on the success of the individuals…consequently undermining teamwork.
3. An absence of concern for organisational public presentation.
4. Encouragement of short-run focus…5. The inclination of such systems to bring forth fright in the work topographic point.
This brief description of the two attacks indicates that there is one chief country of understanding. HR policies should be congruent. Reward systems. as one policy country should complect and complement other policies like employee choice. preparation and public presentation assessment. However. there is besides a cardinal dissension. Best fit policies are contingent. They are developed or amended to keep a “line of sight” with scheme. This means that an organization’s wages system will be alone and should conceivably alteration with major accommodations to organisational scheme. Best pattern policies are cosmopolitan. The policy package does non alter irrespective of the organization’s strategic push. This suggests that similar wages systems will predominate across organisations and industries.
However. advocators of either attack are non in complete understanding about the impact on wages systems. Schuster and Zingheim ( 1993 ) suggest that employee wagess should ever be tied to organisational public presentation. Lawler’s ( 1995 ) attack is genuinely contingent. His traditional direction design option does non include any wage component that varies with organisational public presentation. Although considered a cosmopolitan attack. best pattern advocators have non identified an in agreement package HR policies. There is besides a dramatic deficiency of catholicity with respect to honor systems. Theoretical treatment and empirical research does non shed visible radiation on specific wages elements adopted by organisations with a ‘best practice’ orientation.
As a decision. I would barely urge any of the patterns without carry oning farther surveies of every particular Egyptian organisation or classified industry. Presently. the public sector in Egypt can non afford constructing a dependable system utilizing the “best fit” method. Merely when we reach a minute of holding a normally supported apprehension of the HR scientific discipline. so the compensation theoretical account can be unified. while covering the demand or Egyptian society.
Mentions:
•Lawler ( 1995. p. 14 ) •Schuster and Zingheim ( 1993. p. 6 ) •Conway ( 2003 ) •Marchington and Wilkinson ( 2002. p. 177 ) •Herzberg ( 1966 ) and Kohn ( 1993 ) .
•Purcell ( 1999. p. 27 ) •Milkovich & A ; Newman. 2002. p. 30•Pfeffer. 1998a ; Huselid. 1995
