The Ethical Context of HRM (Blog 10)

Definition to Corporate Social Responsibility

Corporate social responsibility is the obligations of businessmen to pursue policies, to make decisions, or to follow action which are desirable in terms of the objectives and values of our society” (Bowen, 1953). Carroll (1979) defines CSR as the social responsibility of business encompasses the economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary expectations that society has of organizations at a given point in time.
As stated by Lee (2008), CSR as a concept is quite modern and it has developed progressively over the years as a result of several pioneering studies. CSR takes decisions and functions of a company that go beyond financial and technical interests (Davis, 1960).

HRM role in Corporate Social Responsibility

The most obvious role HR has to play is as the expert on ethical employment practices, which is a core strand of corporate responsibility. But beyond this, HR is also the single function best placed to pick up on and develop organisational culture and values to embed corporate responsibility. HR’s remit for leadership capability, people management practices and employee behaviours means that it can add value to all aspects of the business, and it must be prepared to speak up on these (CIPD, 2013).

The role of HRM in implementing CSR is a part of the study focuses in implementing CSR goals.

Figure 1 : Ulrich Model of HR Roles

Role of HRM in implementing CSR is based on the key roles of Ulrich’s (1997) model:

• Strategic Partner role
• administrative expert role
• employee champion role
• change agent role

These roles can be kept the most relevant when evaluating the role of HRM in implementing CSR strategies, because these roles demonstrate the necessary actions required from HR unit to develop and implement CSR.

HRM Ethics

Video 1: Ethics Defined: Corporate Social Responsibility

Ethics have to be an inherent quality of an individual, whether in business or society for various reasons described below. Ethics is important to business in general and HR manager in particular. To be ethical all through life is a wish of everyone. This is a fundamental need of a human being after the satisfaction of physiological needs

Stewart and Rigg (2011) who see ethics as ‘the study of right and wrong as well as to a specification of what is right and what is wrong’. In a contemporary context, the increasing importance of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) associated with publicised scandals.

Figure 2: HRM ethics

Kew and Stradwick (2008), lists some of the distinctive characteristics of ethics to include:

• Nobody can avoid ethical decisions. We all make ethical decisions every day.
• Other people are always involved in ethical decisions. There is no such thing as private morality.
• Ethical decisions matter – they affect the lives of others.
• Although ethics is about right and wrong, there are no definitive answers. The philosopher can forward principles which should guide decisions, but the ultimate decision is always down to the individual.
• Ethics is always about choice – a decision where the individual has no choice cannot be considered unethical. 

References

• Bowen, H. (1953) ‘Social Responsibilities of the Businessman’, Harper, New York.

• Carroll, A. B. (1979) ‘A three-dimensional concept model of corporate social performance’, Academy of Management Review, Vol. (4), pp. 487-505. 

• Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (2013) ‘Sustainable organisation performance: The role of HR in corporate responsibility’, London: CIPD. [Online] Available at: https://www.cipd.co.uk/Images/the-role-of-hr-in-corporate-responsibility_2013-sop_tcm18-9315.pdf [Accessed on: 02 October 2018].

• Davis, K. (1960) ‘Can business afford to ignore social responsibilities?’, California Management Review, 2(3), pp. 70-76.

• Kew, J. and Stradwick, J. (2008) ‘Business environment, managing in a strategic context’, London: CIPD. 

• Lee, M. P. (2008) ‘A review of the theories of corporate social responsibility: Its evolutionary path and the road ahead’, International Journal of Management Reviews, 10(1), pp. 53-73. 

• Stewart, J. and Rigg, C. (2011) ‘Learning  and talent development’, London: CIPD.

• Ulrich, D. (1997) ‘Human Resource Champions: The next agenda for adding value and delivering results’, 1^st edn., Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

•  Figure 1 : Ulrich Model of HR Roles (1997) [Online] Available at: http://editart.club/suntory.html [Accessed on: 02 October 2018]. 

• Figure 2: HRM ethics (2018), [Online] Available at: https://slideplayer.com/slide/4880861/ [Accessed 02 on: October 2018]. 

• Video 1 :  Corporate Social Responsibility (2018) Ethics Defined: [Online] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7d2XbOyU-EM [Accessed on: 02 October 2018].

Organisational Culture (Blog 9)

What is Organisational Culture..?

Organisational culture is a pattern of beliefs, values and learned ways of coping with experience that have developed during the course of an organisation’s history, and which tend to be manifested in its material arrangements and in the behaviours of its members (Brown, 1998). Watson (2006) emphasises that the concept of culture originally derived from a metaphor of the organisation as ‘something cultivated’.

Handy (1985) described organisational culture by using four types of classification, namely power, role, task and person cultures. However Deal and Kennedy (1982) described the more visible levels of culture (heroes, rites, rituals, legends and ceremonies) because it is these attributes they believe shape behaviour. But it is the invisible levels that may be of more interest to public sector organisations in terms of their influence in progressing or impeding organisational change.

Models of Organisational Culture

Harrison (1993) presents a theoretical model for the purpose of diagnosing organisational culture. The organisational culture model indicates that the four dimensions of culture orientation are measured within two modes of operation, which are formalisation and centralisation. Both modes of operation can be measured on a scale of low or high levels.

Organisational culture can be diagnosed in four cultural dimensions,

1. Power oriented culture
2. Role oriented culture
3. Achievement oriented culture
4. Support oriented culture

             Figure 1: Diagnosing Organizational Culture 
Source: (Harrison, 1993)          

Power culture dimension

Power is centralised and organisational members are connected to the center by functional and specialist strings. A power-oriented culture organisation often has a top down communication approach.In this type of organisational culture a dominant head sits in the center surrounded by intimates and subordinates who are the dependents.

Role culture dimension

This role oriented culture defines as “substituting a system of structures and procedures for the naked power of the leader”. Organisations with this type of culture is characterised by a set of roles or job boxes joined together in a logical fashion.

Achievement culture dimension

Define achievement oriented culture as “the aligned culture which lines people up behind a common vision or purpose”. While using teams is an advantage, the main weakness of the achievement culture in this regard is that it overshadows individual performance.

Support culture dimension

Support oriented culture defined as an “organisational climate that is based on mutual trust between the individual and the organisation”. These organisations are normally small in size and people have worked together for a long time and have managed to build up personal relationships.

Levels of Organisational Culture

Schein (1985) maintains that culture has to be examined at the level of deeply held basic assumptions that members of a group share, and they are historically established structures, stored in the organisational members' almost unconscious realm, and which offer direction and meaning for man's relations with nature, with reality and in human relationships, while the artifacts are regarded as materialised expressions of the values and basic assumptions.

Schein (1985) proposes that the structure of organisational culture could best be thought of as consisting of three different layers,

 Figure 2: Organizational Culture and Leadership: 
Source: (Schein, 1985)

Artifacts 

What we see, what a newcomer, visitor or consultant would notice (e.g., dress, organisation charts, physical layout, degree and formality, logos, and mission statement.

Espoused Values

What they say, what we would be told is the reason things are the way they are and should be. This includes company philosophy, norms and justifications.

Assumptions and Beliefs

What they deeply believe in and act on Unconscious, taken for granted beliefs about the organisation and its work/purpose, about people, rewards etc.

References

• Brown, A. (1998) ‘Organisational Culture’, 2^nd edn., London: Financial Times Pitman Publishing.

• Deal, T. E. and Kennedy A. A. (1982) ‘Corporate cultures. Reading’, MA: Addison-Wesley.

• Handy, C. B. (1985) ‘Understanding Organizations’, 4^th edn., Facts on File Publications, New York, USA.

• Harrison, R. (1993) ‘Diagnosing Organizational Culture: Trainer’s Manual’, Amsterdam: Pfeiffer & Company.

• Schein, E. H. (1985) ‘Organizational Culture and Leadership’, 1^st  edn., San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

• Watson, T. J. (2006) ‘Organising and Managing Work’, UK: Pearson Education Limited.

• Figure 1: Harrison, R. (1993) ‘Diagnosing Organizational Culture: Trainer’s Manual’, Amsterdam: Pfeiffer & Company.

• Figure 2: Schein, E. H. (1985) ‘Organizational Culture and Leadership’, 1^st  edn., San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.