You are required to answer Section A Question 1 and 3 Question selected form part B
1. Pucik (2007) identified three strategic approaches to International HRM, Identify and critique each of these approaches in relation to the India Calling case study discussed in class. Bring in examples from other organisation.
2. The models associated with best practice school of HRM assume a universalist approach which suggests a specific set of practices will lead to superior organisational performance. Critically evaluate the relevance of this approach in modern organisations with reference to relevant theory.
3. Line managers play a critical role in implementing HRM policies and procedures, Critically evaluate the challenges faced by the HR team in communicating policies and policies and practices to front line managers use the example to consider how front line managers can engage their direct reports in the HRM policies and procedures of their organization.
4. With reference to three different approaches to performance management evaluate how a Strategic HR strategy can effectively influence performance in teams and individuals.
5. Given the recent decline in trade union membership are they still as important in the workplace and society today?
6. Modern organization face huge challenges to retain knowledge given the increase in labour flow. Critically evaluate how (1) technology and (2) social capital can assist an organisation to retain knowledge.
7. As the world changes around us companies are placing increased emphasis on corporate social responsibility (CSR). Using examples form business. Critically evaluate how a CSR strategy can attract and retain people in an organization.
Many firms competing globally are being pointed in contradictory strategic directions, in order to survive and prosper in the new global competition,companies must embrace closer regional and global integration to cut cost and improve efficiency, while at the same time, meet demands for local responsiveness to increase local acceptance, flexibility and speed,’ on the basis of his research ,Pucik(2007) identified three strategic approaches to this issue. 1. A mega-national strategy, which means that the whole company operates in a centralized fashion. Worldwide facilities are centralized in the parent company, products are standardized, and overseas operations are used as delivery pipelines to serve international markets. There is tight central control of strategic decisions, resources and information.
As a result, the competitive strength of the mega-national firm is its global integration resulting in cost efficiencies. However, the firm’s ability to respond to variations in local conditions is limited and the international operation can become bureaucratic and inflexible. 2. A multi-domestic strategy, which emphasizes local differences by decentralizing operations to their subsidiaries and local business units in order to the close to customers, to create a heightened sense of local accountability and to encounrage more local innovation and entrepreneurship. But this can lead to an inability to compete on global term with fully integrated competitors, slowness in responding to change and failure to benefit from pooled resources, including knowledge and management expertise.
Decentralized companies meeting these problems tend to veer towards centralization until bureaucracy, lack of responsiveness and the inability to retain good people locally leads the pendulum to swing again towards centralization. 3. Dual centralized /decentralized strategy, which aims to benefit from both approaches, firms adopting a dual strategy recognize that decentralization (local autonomy) and centralization (global integration) are not contradictory, but from a duality..
They attempt to maximize the benefits from both approaches in order to achieve high integration while remaining locally responsive. This can mean following the old adage of “think globally and act locally’ and can get the best out of both words. But it is a hard strategy to implement. It requires managers with what Pucik calls a “global mindset”, who can behave and act in a way that recognizes the global nature of the firm and who can focus both on worldwide strategies and the need to encourage the development of local initiatives and allow a reasonable degree of local autonomy within a global frame work.