Introduction

Industrial relations is the study of all aspects of job regulations- the making and administering of the rule which regulate employment relationship regardless of whether these are seen as being formal or informal, structured or unstructured (Bain and Clegg, 1974). Guest (1987) says that, The main dimension of human resources management involve the goal of integration (i.e. if human resources can be integrated into strategic plans, if human resources policies cohere, if line managers have internalized the importance of human resources and if this is reflected in their behavior and if employees identify with the company) then the companys strategic plans are likely to be more successfully implemented, the goal of employee commitment, the goal of flexibility adaptability (i.e. organic structure, functional flexibility), the goal of quality [i.e. quality of staff, performance, standards and public image]. This paper seeks to interrogate the statement that human resources management and industrial relations have convergence and divergence .In fact, Kaufman (2001) says that researchers in HR and IR are often like the proverbial ships passing in the nightsailing much the same seas but unaware of each others presence-and that the advancement of knowledge would be materially promoted by greater interaction among people in the two fields. Management has a general way of giving an overview to both IR and HRM and this is called the frame of reference. According to Fox (1966), frame of reference assists in understanding the nature of workplace, dynamics and relations. The next section discusses the frame of reference in detail.

B eauty

Tsur o: R 08 199 9H

MB A I R Assignm ent 2

P age |1

Frame of reference
According to Swanepoel et al (2005), there are three different perspectives relating to the way in which management views the concept. The various approaches or perspectives are the unitarist; the pluralist and the radical perspective.
The Unitarist Perspective

The unitarist perspective emphasizes that the organization is a coherent and integrated team united for a common purpose (Swanepoel et al; 2005). The approach identifies the organization as an employment entity with an integrated group of people with a single authority and loyalty structure and a common set of values, interests and objectives shared by all members of the organization. Salamon (1987) and Marchington (1982) share the same view and further state that the managements prerogative to manage and to make decisions is regarded as legitimate, rational and accepted. Any opposition to this prerogative of management is regarded as irrational. However, Fox (1966) argued that the importance of a common goal for the enterprise is that there will be no room for division within the enterprise because all participants would have the goal of the efficient functioning of the enterprise and all will share in the rewards which accrue from the attainment of this aim. Management believes in reward systems tied down to individual performance and negotiations that are individualistic. The unitary frame of reference can be subdivided into the crude and sophisticated versions. In the crude version, the enterprise is seen as a structure resembling a pyramid with the manager at the apex of the organization and the lines of demarcations are very clear. On the other hand, management in the sophisticated version are not comfortable with workers union but are not blunt and however use competitive working conditions like culture of high commitment to the organizational goals, focus on the need to bond the employee through a strong culture, employee involvement, structure and strong communication including the open door policy. Conflict is seen as irrational and pathological due to faulty communications or procedures, and conflict is also seen as emanating from troublemakers or agitators and the managers role is clearly to be at the apex and make decisions (Magaramombe, 2010).

B eauty

Tsur o: R 08 199 9H

MB A I R Assignm ent 2

P age |2

The Pluralism Perspective

In terms of this perspective, the organization is composed of individuals who coalesce into a variety of distract sectional groups each having its own interests, objectives and leadership. Collective worker bodies are accommodated and collective bargaining is an important characteristic in this regard (Swanepoel, 2005). This view is similar to that of Fox (1966) who argues that the organization contains people with a variety of different interests, aims and aspirations; therefore it is a coalition of different interests rather than the embodiment of one common goal. Since an organization is multi structured and competitive in terms of groupings, leadership, authority and loyalty, this results in tension and competing claims which have to be managed in the interest of maintaining a viable collaborative structure. Under the pluralist perspective, conflict is normal and management should try to reconcile conflicting opinions and keep the conflict within acceptable bounds so that it does not destroy the organization altogether. On the other hand, management views the different stakeholders to have convergence at one time and therein the organization which makes the relationship cooperative to stabilize the company and an example is the collective bargaining process.
The Radical Perspective

This is not a frame of reference normally used by managers to manage, but an analytical tool used by academics to understand the nature and dynamics of society including the workplace .There is an inherent and antagonistic conflict between the interests of capital and that of organized labour, where capital aims to maximize profit and labour aiming to maximize on wages and salaries which is a cost to capital, therefore conflict between the two is seen as being inevitable. Industrial peace is only acquired on a pragmatic basis, that is, employees only cooperate with the employer to the extent that it is in their interest to do so (Magaramombe, 2010).

B eauty

Tsur o: R 08 199 9H

MB A I R Assignm ent 2

P age |3

Human Resources Management (HRM)

Storey (1989) says that the concept of HRM asserts that a characteristic of human resources management is its internally coherent approach and it locates human resources management policy formulation firmly at the strategic level. This view is also shared by Magaramombe (2010) who says that human resources management is a more business oriented and integrates general management function with a qualitatively different role to fulfill. Human resources management focuses on the one to one relationship between the manager and the employee. It is concerned with things like organizational culture, putting in place high performance system and anything that supports the business in a more palpable way. The effort of HRM is to create an organizational model which supports business strategic plans through policies and puts in place measures to make it unnecessary to make employees not think of unionism. Management provides superior conditions of service and is conscious to create conditions that crate bonding between employee and employer. Fox (1966) says that the rise of HRM in the late 70s and early 80s can in part be seen as an attempt by managers in Europe and North America to reclaim the power that they lost in the 1970s during unionism. According to Swanepoel (2005), HRM applies the unitarist perspective in the following manner; a) The organization system is fundamentally in harmony and conflict is unnecessary and exceptional. This has four important implications; i. ii. iii. Conflict is caused by agitators rather than management; Conflict behavior is perceived as an irrational activity; Trade unions are regarded as an intrusion into the organization from outside competing with management for the loyalty of workers and must therefore be avoided; and iv. The presence of trade unions in organizations has an effect not only upon efficiency or managerial prerogatives but upon the focus of loyalty and source of authority within the enterprise.

B eauty

Tsur o: R 08 199 9H

MB A I R Assignm ent 2

P age |4

b) Employment relations should at all times reflect order. c) Employment relations should be exercised strictly in terms of a clearly diffused judicial system and set rules and regulations. In the event that a trade union being given access to a business concern, such a union should act as a partner of management in the application of rules and regulations. HRM shows that the organization is a unitary structure where all levels and kinds of employees have common objectives and values. The hierarchy of authority within the organization should be very clear to all and must be maintained (Leopold, 2002).

Industrial Relations (IR)

Dunlop (1958) says that the central task of a theory of industrial relations is to explain why particular rules are established in particular industrial relations systems and how and why they change in response to changes affecting the systemthe rules of the work place and work community become the general focus of enquiry to be explained by theoretical analysis.the study of industrial relations may therefore be described as a study of the institutions of job regulation. He conceptualized industrial relations as system with four key elements: a) actors, that is people with certain roles to play; b) context, that is, industrial relations does not occur in a vacuum but it co-exists in the economic, political, cultural, legal and technological environment; c) industrial relations is characterized by rules and regulations and; d) Industrial relations have a common binding agreement. Fox (1986) further states that conflict is accepted as being inevitable as a result of the different interest groups within the organization.IR has a collectivism dimension which leads to obsession and standardization in term of conditions of service, equality, social justice and equity (Magaramombe, 2010).

B eauty

Tsur o: R 08 199 9H

MB A I R Assignm ent 2

P age |5

The nature and scope of conflict are however limited by the interdependence of the parties involved in the process of economic survival. The different parties in the organization like the employer and the trade unions will attempt to settle their differences by means of interactions mechanisms such as negotiation and collective bargaining. According to Van der Merwe (1986), IR as an employment relations system involves the individuals and groups who have conflicting interests and goals. The organization is in a permanent state of dynamic tension resulting from the inherent conflict of interests between the various sectional groups and requires management through a variety of roles, institutions and processes. Conflict is natural and inherent in the relationship and however negotiations between the employer and employees is the primary means of achieving compromise and rules for controlling future conflict. The role of management is clear but workers should be afforded the opportunity to participate in making decisions concerning matters affecting their daily work life (Van der Merwe, 1986).

Divergence between IR and HRM

The underlying values of human resources management reflected in human resources policies and practices is essentially unitaristic and individualistic whilst industrial

relations tends to contrast this with a more pluralistic and collective value system. The table below shows some of the differences between HRM and IR.

Aspect
Employment Contract

IR
Clear delineation of formalized contracts.

HRM
Try going beyond formal contract. Much less rule based.

Rule orientation

Importance of rules/ stressed

Management actions driven by Managements role in

Procedures

Business needs

To monitor

To nurture

B eauty

Tsur o: R 08 199 9H

MB A I R Assignm ent 2

P age |6

Aspect
respect of labour Frame of reference Key relations focus

IR
Pluralist Internal: ;Labour management

HRM

Unitarist External: Customer

Initiatives/Interventions Corporate Strategy Line Managements Role

Piecemeal Not important Transactional

Integrated Very important Transformational Leadership

Ker role players Communication Degree of standardization Selection Pay thrust Conditions of service Collectivism/ Individualism

Specialists Indirect High Separate, marginal task Fixed into job evaluation Separately negotiated Collective agreements

Line Managers Direct Direct Integrated, key task Performance based Harmonization Towards individual agreements

Job levels and categories Work design Human Resources Development Foci of attention for interventions

Many Mechanistic Controlled access to courses Personnel and IR procedures

Few Motivational Learning organizations

Wide ranging cultural, structural and HR strategies.

Source: Storey (1995). However different HRM and IR authors show that there is a move to converge both theories in employment relations and the next section shows the level of convergence between the different authors.

B eauty

Tsur o: R 08 199 9H

MB A I R Assignm ent 2

P age |7

Convergence of HRM and IR

Guest (1987) says that a new term coined the new industrial relations is a loose multi dimensional term used to describe and explain certain industrial relations development of the 1980s and sometimes to prescribe a policy. Angle and Perry (1986) share a similar view when they indicate that there is dual allegiance where a cooperative industrial relations climate exists and in a less cooperative climate, workers may be forced to make a choice. Swanepoel (1985) argued that management should have a systems approach where they view HRM and IR as an integrated perspective. They say that trade unions and concomitant collectivism elements cannot be divorced from the more individualistic aspects traditionally related to personnel or HRM. They further state that this integration is required both horizontally between the individuals and collective dimensions of employment relations and vertically between decisions about employment relations matters and general business management matters. According to Guest (1987), the new industrial relations in the United Kingdom have also been used to describe a new set of management practices affecting both collective bargaining arrangements and the management of employees. These practices include a move towards longer-term deals, recognition of only one union or even no unions and attempts to create employee involvement and a more flexible and swiftly adaptable workforce. These innovations have been encouraged by government legislation and policy culminating in a decline in the centrality of industrial relations issues and the role of trade unions in the workplace. Guest (1987) further says that since human resources management seeks to produce a positive working climate, it need not appear overtly anti-union, although it poses a threat in three different ways: a) where unions are already established in organizations, human resources goals are likely to be pursued through policies that tend to by-pass trade unions which are a critical component in industrial relations, for example, management is likely to prefer its own channels of communication to foster individualized forms of
P age |8

B eauty

Tsur o: R 08 199 9H

MB A I R Assignm ent 2

incentive and reward schemes and to control socialization of new recruits carefully. b) by practicing high quality management, the need for union as a protective device against arbitrary management behaviour is likely to be reduced. The industrial relations system will still be used to negotiate annual wages, but if a policy of paying above average rates is pursued, individualized incentive schemes are increasingly operating and longer term pay deals are concluded diminishing the central role of trade unions. c) the anti-union threat and at new sites where human resources policies should obviate any felt need for a union. In the UK, there is little empirical evidence on the link between human resources and industrial relations. Jackson (1977) argued for the beginning of a long term trend reflecting a shift in workers attitudes from a collective to a more individualistic orientation. However, Kelly (1988) says that the extent of the changes and the novelty of the circumstances suggesting could also be misleading citing a few publicised cases and pointing to the upsurge in industrial unrest and the increase in the membership of a number of trade unions.

Development in the world in term of HRM and IR application: the Green Field Site
According to Guest (1987) not everyone would agree that human resources management is inevitably associated with an absence of trade unions, even in the USA. Case studies from General Motors and Xerox illustrating the role of trade union in facilitating a move towards human resources management were used. Market forces were driving American companies towards human resources management and nonunion companies have been at the leading edge of this movement collaborating with trade unions.

B eauty

Tsur o: R 08 199 9H

MB A I R Assignm ent 2

P age |9

Companies setting up green-field sites in the UK have an ideal opportunity to consider new initiatives in many aspects of management including the explicit choices about management of industrial relations: (1) adopting a unitarist individualistic human resources policy and have no union and no collective arrangements, (2) adopting a unitarist perspective with no independent trade union, but provide a collective voice through some form of company consultative council, (3) accepting a pluralist perspective but plan it carefully seeking a single union agreement signed on the companys terms and possibly containing some form of no strike clause linked to pendulum arbitration, and (4) accepting the traditional pluralist perspective in the UK and recognize any unions who can demonstrate significant membership. One indication of human resources practices in green-field sites might therefore be the presence of trade union. Single union deals have not always stood in the way of human resources management, in the case of Toshiba and Nissan, a union has played a supportive role in instituting human resources policies. It seems American companies with the strong flair of anti-unionism, individualism, and general appreciation of human resources management, will generally pursue the nonunion path. On the other hand, other countries that used to accommodate trade unions may opt for non-union company council or a single union deal. Those countries with the pluralist perspective are more likely to plan a positive union role with collective bargaining. In the green field sites, HRM determines the strategic competence of management and its pursuance is never determinable in terms of risk. Organizations driven by market pressures to seek improved quality, greater flexibility, and constant innovation, human resources management may appear to an attractive option.

B eauty

Tsur o: R 08 199 9H

MB A I R Assignm ent 2

P a g e | 10

Conclusion
Due to the globalization and world class organizations, Peters and Waterman (1982) say that the excellent companies needs to focus their strategies on the customers to survive competition. However, organizations should also ensure that there is a good interaction and dynamism related to the role of employers, labour and the government. Locke, Kochan and Piore (1985) view HRM and IR as basically one integrated area of employment relations management. This view is similar to that of Swanepoel (1985) who say that the changing nature of HRM and IR denotes a shift towards employment relations a theory that suits the perspective of management in general and the strategic management in particular. From this detailed discussion, indeed it can be argued that to a greater extent, it is true that researchers in HR and IR are often like the proverbial ships passing in the nightsailing much the same seas but unaware of each others presence-and that the advancement of knowledge would be materially promoted by greater interaction among people in the two fields. However the new industrial relations or employment relations show that there is indeed a convergence of both theories.

B eauty

Tsur o: R 08 199 9H

MB A I R Assignm ent 2

P a g e | 11

REFERENCES 1. Bain, G.S., and Clegg, H.A., (1974). A Strategy for Industrial Relations Research in Great Britain. Journal of Industrial Relations. 2. Dunlop, J.E.T., (1958). Industrial Relations Systems. Southern Illinois UP, Carbondale. 3. Fox, A., (1966). Industrial Relations: A Social Critique of Pluralist Ideology 4. Guest, D. E. (1987). Human Resource Management: Its implications for Industrial Relations and Trade Unions. 5. Jackson, M.P., (1977).Industrial Relations. British Library Cataloguing in Publication. London. 6. Magaramombe (2010). MBA Industrial Relations in Class Notes. 7. Marching ton, M., (1982). The management of employee relations. UMIST University of Manchester. 8. Salamon, M (1987). Industrial relations: theory and practice. New York: Prentice Hall. 9. Storey, J., (1989). New Perspectives on Human Resource Management. Routledge 10. Swanepoel, B.J., Slabbert, K., Prinsloo, J.J., Backer, W., Erasmus, B., Brink, M.,(2005)

B eauty

Tsur o: R 08 199 9H

MB A I R Assignm ent 2

P a g e | 12