December 2008

Q2 There are two main approaches for human resource management (HRM):
the hard and the soft.
(a)
Summarize the central assumptions and features of the hard
approach to HRM. (5 marks)
(b)
Summarize the central assumptions and features of the soft
approach to HRM.(5 marks)
(c)
Critically compare the two approaches in terms of their
usefulness and relevance for organisations wishing to compete
successfully in the modern world. (15 marks) (Total 25 marks)
Q2 Hard and soft approaches to HRM
(a) Central assumptions of the hard approach to HRM
The hard approach emphasises managing the headcount resource in a
rational way as for any other economic factor
The hard approach concentrates on quantitative, measurable criteria,
cost control and performance management. It emphasises:
- The need to manage people in order to obtain added value from them and
thus achieve competitive advantages
- People as human capital from whom a return can be obtained by
investing in their development
The hard approach requires a close integration between HR strategies
and business strategies
One mark was available for the inclusion of any named example or named
author. Instances could have been taken in particular from the world of
(supermarket) retailing and conventional manufacturing based on assemblyline production methods
(b) Central assumptions of the soft approach to HRM
The soft model of HRM is based upon the Human Relations school and is
identified by Storey as treating employees as valued assets, a source of
competitive advantage through their commitment, adaptability and high
quality (of skills, performance and so on).
Thus the soft approach emphasises the need to gain commitment of
employees through involvement, communications and other methods for
creating an engaged, high trust, high performance organisation

 Soft HRM believes that the interests of management and employees

should coincide and that all employees should share the same organisational
goals and work as one team
One mark was available for the inclusion of any named example of a
named author. Instances could have been selected from some of the worlds
most admired businesses, like international management consultancies,
pharmaceutical companies, oil fi rms, and so forth
(c) Critical comparison of the two approaches
In reality each of the two approaches has merits and disadvantages - thus
in practice a majority of organisational HRM strategies will incorporate both
hard and soft elements
Evaluation of the hard approach:
- Because of its top-down character, it can appear manipulative and is
excessively managerial
- Employees are not actively involved in the design of the strategies, but are
recipients for a strategy determined elsewhere - hence they may react
adversely
- One of the implications of the hard approach is that it stimulates a strong
corporate culture expressed in mission, vision and value statements,
reinforced by communications, training and performance management.
Though this may appear very hierarchical, it has yielded excellent results for
some organisations that operate in this way, e.g., Tesco
- The hard approach may be especially advantageous for geographically
scattered organisations which seek to impose some uniformity across their
HRM strategies
Evaluation of the soft approach:
- The soft approach is based on the proposition that the interests of
management and employees should coincide. In reality, this may be diffi cult
to achieve, and certainly diffi cult to translate into a single set of reward
practices, for example
- A commonality of interest is particularly problematic when the organization
needs to reduce its operations and therefore its workforce: it is at such
moments that employees may accuse their management of hypocrisy, when
it seems that the needs of the business take precedence over the aspirations
of the workers
Relevance of the hard and soft approaches for modern organisations:
- Pragmatically, it is likely that there are elements of both approaches which
can be combined to produce a high-performance outcome
- The terms hard and soft, though suggesting opposite extremes, dont
adequately refl ect the similarities between the two approaches.

Q1 John Storey makes a distinction between the hard and soft

approaches to human resource management.
(a) Discuss the principal characteristics of the hard approach, and indicate,
with reasons, the kind of organisation for which a predominantly hard
model of HRMwould be appropriate. (10 marks)
(b) Discuss the principal characteristics of the soft approach, and indicate,
with reasons, the kind of organisation for which a predominantly soft
model of HRM would be appropriate. (10 marks)
(c) Several researchers have suggested that many if not most organisations
in practice exhibit a mixture of both hard and soft approaches to HRM at
the same time. Why might this be the case? (5 marks)
(Total 25 marks)

Q1 Features of the hard approach to HRM, and the kind of organisation for
which a hard approach would be appropriate
Principal characteristics of the hard approach to HRM strategy
The hard approach emphasises managing the headcount resource in a
rational way as for any other economic factor. It stresses the need to
manage people in ways that will obtain added value from them and thus
deliver competitive advantage; it regards people as human capital from
which a return can be obtained by sensibly investing in their development.
Thus the hard approach concentrates on quantitative, measurable criteria,
control, and performance management. Its main features are:
(1) The interests of management;
(2) A strategic approach that is closely integrated with business strategy;
(3) Obtaining added value from people;
(4) The need for a strong corporate culture expressed in mission, vision and
value statements, and reinforced by communications, training and
performance management processes.
The kinds of organisation for which a relatively hard approach to HRM
strategy would be appropriate

The hard approach makes good sense for larger organisations operating in
a largely stable, predictable business environment, e.g., financial services
companies, telecoms, utilities (gas, water, and electricity), local authorities
and government departments.
(b) Features of the soft approach to HRM, and the kind of organisation for
which a soft approach would be appropriate
Principal characteristics of the soft approach to HRM strategy
The soft model of HRM is based on the human relations school and is
identified by
Storey as a philosophy that treats employees as valued assets, a source of
competitive advantage through their commitment, adaptability and high
quality (of skills, performance, and so on). The soft approach, therefore,
emphasises the need to gain commitment of employees through
involvement, communications and other methods of developing a high
commitment, high trust organisation.
The overall focus of soft human resource management is the belief that the
interests of management and the workforce can coincide, and that all
employees should share the organisational goals and work as one team.
The kinds of organisation for which a soft approach to HRM strategy
would be appropriate
Because a soft philosophy of HRM gives great importance to employee
commitment, it is particularly applicable to organisations functioning in a
highly competitive, service-centred environment, where the actions of each
customer-facing employee can make an enormous difference to the
probabilities of customer loyalty, retention and support. Thus a soft style
would in principle make sense for large multinational supermarket
businesses, international airlines (other than low-cost airlines like Ryanair or
EasyJet, for which a hard HRM model is more typical) and all organisations
that depend on the cultivation of long-term relationships with a loyal
customer following, e.g., high-class restaurants.
(c) Reasons for a mixture of hard and soft approaches
Competent approaches to this sub-question require at least two reasons to
be given, especially in view of the fact that many organisations in effect offer
a mixture of hard and soft approaches. Points to be made should include:
It is very rare for any organisation, public or private, to exhibit strategies
and environmental considerations that are unequivocally in one camp or
the other, and so a mingling of hard and soft approaches is unavoidable.

If a business operates across national boundaries, or has customers from

a variety of cultures, its HRM strategies may need to reflect differing sets of
underpinning values about people as assets.
When designing HRM strategies, organisations do not work from
textbook models, but proceed pragmatically.
Much may depend, too, on the significance accorded to the role of HRM
in the business. For some, it is central to the development of both corporate
and peopleperformance strategies; for others, the HR function is peripheral,
confined more or less solely to administration and to fire-fighting (i.e.,
resolving performance problems)