手机版|
二维码|
SHRD Practices with Organisational Effectiveness
SHRD is based on the business strategy of organisation, through long term learning, training, and evaluation to support organisations toachieve effectiveness, while when SHRD transferred into practice, it should include training needs analysis, planning & developing training, evaluating training, mentoring & coaching, personal & professional development, management learning & development and learning in group. This section will focus on the practice of training needs analysis, learning in group and evaluation.
Training needs analysis
Training needs analysis is an important step of design a training program for organisation; According to Beardwell and Claydon (2010) the purpose of training needs analysis is to identify the current learning and development situation to find out the gap between the requirement of business strategy & objective and current learning and development situation. Garavan (1991) has mentioned that the key contribution that SHRD made for organisational effectiveness is the implementation of strategy. The most hard areas of operation strategic change is to make sure organisation have enough skills or competence to undertaking the tasks which that change needs (Johnson and Scholes 1988); this is require that before organisation start use SHRD to seek achievement in business strategy, they have to do a training needs analysis, to familiar with the weakness in the current situation.
To analysis the needs of training in organisation should from 3 levels: organisational, job and individual. In the organisational level is provides the link between the broader strategy of the organisation and the HRD strategy, through identify the quantity and type of learning demand make sure it can becomes a guidance for the whole training process, and ensure all of employees in organisation can have enough skills when face their job (Beardwell & Claydon, 2010). While Hirsch and Reilly (1998) argued that organisation cannot just simply require individuals having appropriate skills, they should also concern business structure and employee attitude, if they want to achieve a high performance. The job level of analysis is doing a comprehensive analysis, to deeply analysis the job specification of all jobs, characters and current effectiveness level, and the requirement in further develop (Beardwell & Claydon, 2010). Analysis individual level of training needs, is to ensure they have enough skills to achieve a high performance; Pilbeam and Corbridge (2006) has said that organisation have to pay more attentions to this level because of this level’s analysis can directly reflect the gaps or failures in performance; and Ashworth (2006) strongly recommend that analysis in individual level’s need is very useful to support organisation solve strategic training demand.
In order to achieve effectiveness in training result, it is important to identify employees’ learning style in the training need analysis. Kolb’s learning style is a recommend by many literatures to support individual learning (Wilson, 1986); he thought people should divided learning into 4 different styles: accommodators, diverters, converters and assimilator. Pilbeam and Corbridge (2006) has stated that if trainers can clear individual employee’s learning style, they can deliver the training method much easier, and can ensure all learning preferences are catered for. While Geller (1979) argued that the inventory in Kolb’s learning style cannot fulfil the reliably differentiation between individuals, Juch (1980) also mentioned the mismatch between inventory and reality; while Kolb (1981) argued that the learning style stands for priorities for one model of accommodation over the others, but these priorities do not work to the exclusion of other accommodative modes and will change from time to time in different situations. So it is recommend that to link Kolb’s learning style with job monitoring, to ensure the employees can be performedin a high level.
Learning in Group
Learning is a main focus of SHRD, Beardwell and Claydon (2010) has suggested that continues learning and development in individuals will playsa crucial and strategic role in the development of organisation; it can also benefit the overall economy in organisation. In order to achieve maximal benefit from learning, organisations now emphasis on the study in learning organisation which is means transfer learning to every individual employees not just focus on learning in management level (Pilbeam and Corbridge, 2006). Mullins (2007) defined learning organisation as a key factor of organisational effectiveness, he suggested that pay attention to learning organisation will support organisations to increase international competitiveness, and will help them keep the long term effectiveness in this unstable business market. Pedler (1994) described learning organisation as a vision for business strategy to increase self-development; Evans (1998) also mentioned that the learning organisation is a route to develop performance, productivity and profit; it is just another means to a business goal. While Evans (1998) also identified that even there are huge focus on learning organisation, but only few role model appears in the reality. Carratt, (2000) has mentioned 4 features of learning organisation, firstly organisation should have strong awareness of learning, they emphasise on encourages(encouraging) employees from all levels of organisation to join into the learning process and rigorously require them to learning; the second is organisations should have systems for researching and learning information andbe flexible to moveit; the learning organisation should also values its learning, to make sure all the learning information can fit with the requirement of business strategy and objective; at the end the learning organisation should have able to transform itself continuously (Mullins 2007). Many methods haveidentified in literatures to support organisationtoachieve learning organisation, for example Pedlar (1991,) have identified 11 point diagnostic jigsaw(Appendix，2), Bartram et al. (1993) also have mentioned a 70-item questionnaire which based on 7 different levels to support the analysis; those tools are suitable for organisations find out the gap between their current learning situation and furthere development. Where there have many critiques about those tools, Lahteenmaki et al. (1999) have argue the models are lack of convincing in link theory and practice; Stewart and Sambrook (2002) also against the concept of learning organisations have low match rate with the reliaty. However, any of tools should have weakness, but organisation still need to emphasis on build learning as their organisational culture, to ensure learning and develop can support business benefit (Beardwell and Claydon 2010).
Kolb’s learning cycle is another strategic learning approach for organisations to achieve long term effectiveness. Kolb’s learning cycle can be divided into 4 stages (Kolb, 1996), Kolb thought peoplewho wants to learn somethingshould firstly identify the new learning, watch and reflect on these, then should link their observations into theories, then check the in new situations, at the end leading to another new experience and starting the whole learning cycle again (Pilbeam and Corbridge, 2006); while it should to recommend that, the learning cycle is better to use together with learning style which mentioned in the front (Pilbeam and Corbridge, 2006), because it will increase the effectiveness of the learning process.
evaluation
Garavan, (1991) has importantly identified the evaluation in the description of characteristic of SHRD; because of HRD should to be strategic, so organisations have to evaluate all the training and learning activities, it will become guidance for further development (Garavan, 1991) Hamblin (1974) has suggested that evaluation have to be ultimate level of SHRD, because it can test whether business need have been fulfilled or organisation performance have been improved after the training or learning process. Garavan (1991) has mentioned 3 different test levels which is test from suitability, feasibility, acceptability, to test whether organisational effectiveness have been achieve by SHRD. Literatures have also identified many different methods to support organisation to test the learning/training result, for example Kirkpatrick (1960) has recommend 4 level of evaluation of learning and training, he thought to evaluate training and learning result should firstly test does the training or learning system welcome by trainees, employer should use different measures like reaction questionnaires, observation of reactions, and trainees body language, and so on. Secondly, through written, interview, performance review or other useful methods to identify whether the learning/training information (i.e. principles, techniques) are understood or absorbed by trainees. Then organisation have to test conferees’ behaviour, through self/ peer/ manager’s appraisals to research whether conferees changed their behaviours after training/learning process. The last step is to analysis the performance result, such as the reduction of cost, turnover and absenteeism, the increased rate of quality, quantity or production, to identify whether SHRD have been improved organisational effectiveness. Many of literatures are rely on Kirkpatrick’s model, while Bose (2007) has critiques that those 4 levels evaluation have not mentioned the assessment of the business impact on the training and it never present the ROT (Return On Investment) method in his model, McCracken and Wallace (2000) also suggested that organisation have to emphasis on pay return calculation, because organisational effectiveness is emphasis on cost effectiveness. However, currently Kirkpatrick’s model is popular in many organisations, and those four levels seem as the best way to evaluate training and learning result (Beardwell and Claydon 2010).
Conclusion
In conclusion, this paper work is focused on the study of how SHRD can impact on organisational effectiveness. Garavan (1991) has identified 9 characteristics of SHRD; he reckons that SHRD can support organisational effectiveness from the achievement of business strategy, and contribute to HRM efforts, organisational performance, and some others like job satisfaction. This paper work can be divided into 2 parts. In the first part of the essay, it describes the relationship between SHRD and organisational effectiveness in total, which includes different factors of organisational effectiveness and the main aspects of SHRD. The second part of the essay is based on SHRD practices, through analyzing 3 different aspects of SHRD practices to support the achievement of effectiveness, some methods are critisized in this part. Training Needs Analysis is the first practice mentioned in the second part, it is an importance stage of training; it can be a guide for organizations to link the training demand with the training practice. Harrison’s 3 level analysis models and Kolb’s learning style are mentioned in this part to support the effectiveness of analysis. Learning In Group is the second practice mentioned in this paper work, the learning organisation is the main focus in this part; because organisational effectiveness requires all levels’ employees to join into the learning process; Kolb’s learning cycle is also mentioned in this part to help the learning process. The third practice mentioned is evaluation. evaluation is an important characteristic of SHRD, and organisations have to test whether SHRD has supported organisational effectiveness, Kirkpatrick’s evaluation model is the key approach to identify in this evaluation part. The effect of globalisation has increased the change rate in business market, in order to achieve competitive advantages and gain long-term effectiveness; organisations have to emphasise on SHRD through long-term learning, training and evaluation, to meet the development demand.
