Human Resource Management: Mark & Spencer Company

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
M&S Company Background
Structure of the Human Resource Management
M&S Human Resource Management Constraints
M&S Performance Appraisal Model
Recommendations
Reference List

Introduction

The success of a firm’s productivity depends on organization of the human resource management. Reflectively, labour as a factor of production, determines gross output, performance, and goal achievement at optimal resource use. Thus, this reflective treatise identifies critical constraints faced by the human resource department of Mark & Spencer (M&S) Limited Company based in United Kingdom. The paper applies human resource management models to design necessary recommendations towards reversing the negative constraints.

M&S Company Background

Marks and Spencer PLC commonly known as M&S was founded in 1884 by Michael Marks and Thomas Spencer in Leeds under the United Kingdom laws. M&S is a leading British retailer with headquarters in the City of Westminster, London. Reflectively, an average of 21 million clients shop at M&S stores every fortnight. “M&S has over 700 stores across UK and covers other 42 territories globally with a total of 78,000 employees.

The Group aims to deliver shareholders value in terms of increase in returns and increase in sales and market share in retailing. M&S outlines its corporate social responsibility (CRS) as we have a strong tradition of CRS but we want to make sure CRS is integrated into our operations at every level” (Marks and Spencer plc 2011, par. 13). Reflectively, M&S are focused towards continuing its differentiation strategy by delivering freshness and innovation across the expansive market of the UK.

Structure of the Human Resource Management

Management committee of the company is made up of very high profile personnel who have worked with top performing organizations before joining the company. Over the past five years, there have been changes in the management committee.

These changes have lead to a new makeup of the company and the business now has a flatter organization structure. The company is surrounded by several opportunities for growth of business. For instance, it has not fully explored the international market. It can develop overseas supply chain as a short and midterm strategies for shifting new product market more in to international markets.

Also, customers demand for change to more value for money products presents itself as an opportunity for the business. M&S still has an opportunity to diversify its products further. Besides, paperless operation, management and administration of the company are undertaken in IT systems, which are accessed through secure servers, thus, provide flexibility in the running of the business (Greene & Kirton 2005).

M&S Human Resource Management Constraints

Budget constraints for a producer are represented by a production possibility frontier curve. The curve shows the limitation of available factors of production to a producer. M&S faced several limitations in its operations during the financial year ended April 2011. Increases in price of factors of production directly affect budgeted cost of production.

In addition, inability of the company to leverage its systems and processes hindered the growth of international business as it reduced ability of the company to attract capital for expansion. Finally, the company faces operational risks in areas such as stock management, supply chain management, key supplier constraint and IT security (Marks and Spencer plc 2011). Given that the company has to operate within a predetermined budget, changes in the individual component of the budget affect the operations of the entire business.

M&S Performance Appraisal Model

At the end of every six months, performance reviews are carried out at M&S for all the employees. Employees engage their line mangers in discussing their performances for six months. The employees are rated based on the proficiencies and competencies they have shown during the period ended. Staff members are then given ratings for the skills and competencies they have shown over the past period.

A comparison is then done between the ratings and the expected results as agreed upon at the beginning of the year and also with expected skills profiles for these areas (Kew & Stedwick 2005). Such appraisals are important as they help employees to establish their performance in relation to the expectations from the business and expected outcomes as agreed during performance planning (Cole 2006). Further, the appraisals reveal gaps that may be inherent when executing duties.

At the end of appraisal procedure, the line manager and the staff member formulate a plan for further development for the next period. In the personal development plan, the employees set objectives based on the feedback from their performance appraisal and it is mandatory for all staff members to have such a plan (Stone 2011).

The whole interactive appraisal process is beneficial as it aids employees in developing a focused vocation trail. Further, the process is realistic (Burke & Cooper 2008). The gaps noted during the review process are bridged by training and development. These trainings also help in preparing the staff members for future managerial duties.

The performance review process helps management of the Company to have a well-organized, effectual and motivated human resource base (Gmur & Thommen 2011). However, the performance appraisal segment is ineffective since employee retention initiative performs below 20% index.

Recommendations

M&S should undertake several career development programmes, such would be necessary for attracting and retaining human resource base. Reflectively, a planned change approach is required with the initiation and implementation of change being driven by management with the aid of a ‘practioner’. Magnitude of change is quantum as large changes involving culture, structure and strategy of the company is required (Armstrong 2006).

Transformational change is a relatively new count to organizational change. It is concerned with drastic change and is fundamentally about altering the way that the organization is perceived both internally and externally as well as how it functions (Beardwell & Claydon 2007). This type of change would be particularly relevant to the case of M&S as it needs to radically alter how it operates in the face of economic meltdown.

Training and development form part of organizational strategy mostly because the company has been characterized by numerous expansions without and within the region. Consequently, there is a need to merge organizational skills, knowledge, and culture with the new challenges and demands (Blyton & Turnbull 2006). M&S needs to use training and development largely because it is operating in a highly competitive retail sector. Consequently, there is a need to ensure that the company remains ahead of the competition.

Management ought to realize that there is no better way to achieve this rather than through the use of training and development. Further, M&S should evaluate effectiveness of training and development in realizing the goals and objectives of the company. Finally management of the company should use outcomes of trainings and development in decision making that relate promotions and transfers within the organization.

Reference List

Armstrong, M 2006, Strategic HRM: a guide to action, 23rd edn, Kogan Page, London.

Beardwell, L., & Claydon, T 2007, HRM: a contemporary perspective, 5th edn, FT/Prentice Hall, London.

Blyton, P., & Turnbull, P, 2006, The Dynamics of Employee Relations, 5th edn, Palgrave, California

Burke, L., & Cooper, T 2008, Building more effective organisations: HR management and performance in practice, Palgrave, California.

Cole, G 2006, Personnel & HRM, 5th edn,Continuum, London.

Gmur, M., & Thommen, J 2011, Human Resource Management, Strategien und Instrumente für Führungskräfte und das Personal management, Versus, Vancouver.

Greene, M., & Kirton, G, 2005, The Dynamics of Managing Diversity, 2nd edn, Elsevier, Alabama.

Kew, J., & Stedwick, J 2005, Business Environment: Managing in a Strategic Context, CIPD, London.

Marks and Spencer plc: About Us 2011. Web.

Stone, J 2011, Human Resource Management, 7th edn, John Wiley & Sons, Sidney

Click Here To Order Now!