HRM Coursework Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

HRM - Coursework Example The paper aims to show that the value of a HR system is depended not only on its effectiveness locally but also on its ability to be easily alternated in order to fit to its environment; the flexibility of the American HR system, as explained below, seems to be the system’s greater advantage towards its major competitor: the Japanese HR system. 2. American HR system – characteristics and differences from the Japanese HR system The appearance of the American HR system is dated back to 1877 (Kaufman 2008). At that year, the Great Railway Strike forced employees to search for a framework that could help them to improve their communication with workers (Kaufman 2008). Through the decades the American HR system has been expanded internationally; however, it was only in western countries that the American HR system has been kept unchanged (Kaufman 2008). In other countries, such as Japan, the HR system was highly differentiated so that it is aligned with local culture and eth ics (Kaufman 2008). When referring to the American HR system reference should be made to two important periods: a) at 1920s the system was clearly opposed to unionism, b) from 1933 onwards the system is characterized by a strong unionism, i.e. by the significant increase of the power of workers to fight for their rights (Kaufman 2008). As a concept, the HR management is rather broad incorporating all aspects of the relationship between employer and employee. In this context, a clear description of HR management would be rather difficult; however, the mission and role of HR management can be understood through the following definition: ‘HR management can be characterized using the term labour management’ (Kaufman 2008, p.3). In the context of the American HR system, HR management is considered as ‘one of the most critical organizational activities’ (Price 2007, p.593). In fact, in America, HR management is based on certain principles, such as the use of form al processes, the empowered role of leader, the use of teams for completing tasks (Price 2007). In addition, the American HR system is highly centralized, not leaving particular space for initiatives (Price 2007). Also, communication is not a critical part of the American HR system; rather emphasis is given on the assignment of tasks to employees who are appropriately skilled (Hendry 2012). Moreover, the use of consultation, as a tool for supporting employees is not quite developed in the American HR system; rather, teams are used so that views are exchanged between employees in regard to the needs and the risks of each task (Hendry 2012). As for training, this is not highly valued in American firms and it is used only when it is inevitable for the success of a task (Hendry 2012). The duration of employment and the level of compensation are also key elements of the American HR system: various modes of employment, such as part-time or short employment schemes are used in the system i n order to support employers to face the market pressures (Brewster and Mayrhofer 2012). As for the compensation in firms based on the American HR system, this is arranged centrally, i.e. in a firm’s head offices; managers do not have power to take initiatives as of the employees’ level of compensation (Brewster and Mayrhofer 2012). This means that salaries and benefits are part of the organization’