What are flexible HRM practices To what extent do such practices mark Essay

What are flexible HRM practices To what extent do such practices mark a break from Fordism and the season of mass production - Essay ExampleThese negative features include hierarchy, standardization and an inward focus. This paper bequeath discuss to what extent flexible HRM practices mark a break from Fordism and the era of mass production.The word tractableness itself means differently to different people. Having an employee-centered feeler, not being authoritative, being anti-hierarchical, persuasive, or even empowering and considering the employees as impact stakeholders are close to of the ways that flexibility has been defined (Caldwell). Hence flexible HRM is not a norm which firms follow. It is a state of mind, and the practice itself varies from firm to firm. Within an organization also, flexibility provokes mixed reaction. While some consider flexibility an employee problem, the senior management thinks of it as a cost cutting strategy. The flexible approach has also led to the evolution of self-managed teams who work closely together to achieve greater horizontal coordination across organizational divisions.Marlow (1997) contends that in the UK few HRM initiatives that are being adopted are aimed at raising employee productiveness without the return of rewards. Marlow further cites that the destruction of traditional style industrial relations and the lack of industrial policy articulated by the state have led to neo-Fordism. Hence, the flexible HR practices are used to pee-pee the labor into higher productivity. It does not form a part of the larger process of post-Fordism. Since these are not supported by technology and training, these practices become unsustainable. Further arguments arise that flexible HR practices arise imputable to market volatility and labour weakness, and not due to sophisticated approach to labour management.While the Fordist authorities may have had structural deficiencies, flexible HR practices will lead to diff iculties in attracting, gaining and retaining a happy workforce (Fuchs, 2002). Although employees are considered to