Conclusion on STRATEGIC HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

            In conclusion it is observed that HRM’s rhetoric is considered soft, but in reality, it is hard, and organizations interest are always taken first on priority as compared to interest of individuals. Still, all organizations make sure that they use the mixture of both rhetoric and reality of soft as well as hard approach. In other words, it can be said that soft model has a strategic dimension, which asserts that commitment is the key to gain control of things, whereas hard model strategic dimension is different from soft model in this regard. However, HRM’s soft as well as hard models have different kind of intellectual traditions, and their incorporated concepts are opposing to each other about managerial control & human nature, when these aspects are viewed under the radar of both theories since both recognize that human resources need to be managed strategically in order to attain a set goal or vision of an organization. Both models eventually aim at fulfilling the organizations goals and aims. Though it is quite apparent that both theories are well contrasting and lie on opposite sides of the managerial spectrum, organizations often use a strategically designed mix of both models. Hence, while most theorists discuss the differences and similarities between the models, organizations are practically incorporating both models in order to attain a balance between commitment and control. (Hope, 1994)

References on STRATEGIC HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

Hope, V. (1994). HRM and Corporate Cultural control: the limits to Commitment. Annual Conference of the British Academy of mangement, lanchaster University.