Brenda Slusse
Hi Marcus,
You
ing up some good valid points about legal ramifications. There are definitely some things that could go wrong if the process is not followed or eliminated. In terms of the evaluation, you mentioned if HR doesn't ca
y them out consistently and fairly that there could be legal problems. I hear that, but how do you control people who ca
y out the evaluations to be consistent and fair? How is it proven that they're not being consistent and fair?
Marcus Mccall-MY POST
What processes are a must-do or must-have, and which can be eliminated? Explain your reasoning.
XXXXXXXXXXThe particular environment and demands of the activity determine which procedures are a must-do or must-have. However, several core HRM procedures are usually seen as being crucial –
Job Analysis: This procedure includes determining and compiling the duties, obligations, abilities, and credentials necessary for a specific position (Strah & Rupp, XXXXXXXXXXThe basis for several HR processes, including hiring, selecting, training, and performance review, is laid by job analysis. Therefore, for the duration of the HR lifecycle, making informed decisions requires having a comprehensive grasp of the job needs.
Job Design: Job design is how duties are distributed, allotted, and organized inside work. It entails identifying the tasks, accountability, and amount of responsibility for each role. Performance and job satisfaction improve when work duties are well-defined, balanced, and aligned with organizational objectives.
Performance Evaluation: A critical step in measuring employee performance, giving feedback, and pinpointing areas that need work is performance evaluation. It includes establishing performance standards, gathering performance information, and performing performance evaluations. The growth, recognition, and incentives of employees are supported by practical performance evaluation.
XXXXXXXXXXAlthough these procedures are typically required, particular activities or phases within each system may be removed or modified depending on the situation. For instance, some work analysis or task design components may be simplified in a time-constrained scenario while keeping the essential elements required for decision-making.
Will there be problems if you do not do something within a process?
Not completing specific steps within a process can lead to various problems:
A mismatch between the work requirements and personnel skills can be caused by a job analysis that needs to be completed or co
ected (Rios et al., XXXXXXXXXXThis may result in poor performance outcomes, inefficient recruiting and selection processes, and insufficient training.
Role ambiguity, contradictory obligations, and a lack of understanding of power and decision-making can all result from poor job design. This might result in confusion, a drop in production, and increased employee unhappiness.
Neglecting performance reviews might make spotting performance gaps, skill shortages, or potential improvement areas more challenging. This may restrict the capacity to give constructive criticism and praise, impair performance management, and hinder employee growth.
Can I not do something now and readdress it later without repercussions?
XXXXXXXXXXEven if delaying or going through some steps in a process might be feasible again, it is necessary to consider the consequences. Adverse outcomes might result from skipping or delaying essential actions, including –
Inaccurate or incomplete data: If a procedure is not addressed right away, it may leave behind or become out-of-date information, making it challenging to make decisions and causing inefficiencies in later HR tasks.
Cost increases: Postponing or missing stages may incur additional expenses (Al
echtsen, Solberg & Svensli, XXXXXXXXXXFor instance, insufficient job analysis may result in lousy recruiting choices, which would increase attrition rates and recruitment costs.
Employee unhappiness: Important neglected tasks can affect employee satisfaction, engagement, and morale. Employees' perception of unfairness or lack of openness may lower motivation and increase attrition.
Are there any legal ramifications for not addressing something in each process?
XXXXXXXXXXFailure to address certain aspects within HR processes can have legal ramifications. For example:
Job analysis: Failing to perform a thorough job analysis may lead to biased or discriminatory job requirements, raising legal concerns about legislation governing equal employment opportunities (Susanto, Syailendra & Suryawan, 2023).
Job design: Poor job designs that fail to consider reasonable accommodations for workers with disabilities may violate the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) or other applicable regulations in other countries.
Assessment of performance: If assessment procedures are not ca
ied out fairly and consistently by HR, it may give rise to accusations of discrimination, unfair dismissal, or other legal issues (Kruse, 2016).
XXXXXXXXXXTo reduce legal risks and maintain an equitable and inclusive workplace, it is crucial to make sure that all HR activities comply with all applicable laws and regulations.
References:
Al
echtsen, E., Solberg, I., & Svensli, E XXXXXXXXXXThe application and benefits of job safety analysis. Safety Science, 113, XXXXXXXXXX.
Kruse K XXXXXXXXXXEmployee Engagement Wrap-Up For Fe
uary 2016 Retrieved From https:
www.fo
es.com/sites/kevinkruse/2016/02/29/employee-engagement-wrap-up-for-fe
uary-2016/?sh=681aa0902abeLinks to an external site.
Rios, J. A., Ling, G., Pugh, R., Becker, D., & Bacall, A XXXXXXXXXXIdentifying critical 21st-century skills for workplace success: A content analysis of job advertisements. Educational Researcher, 49(2), 80-89.
Strah, N., & Rupp, D. E XXXXXXXXXXAre there cracks in our foundation? An integrative review of diversity issues in job analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(7), 1031.
Susanto, P. C., Syailendra, S., & Suryawan, R. F XXXXXXXXXXDetermination of Motivation and Performance: Analysis of Job Satisfaction, Employee Engagement, and Leadership. International Journal of Business and Applied Economics, 2(2), 59-68