Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources

http://apj.sagepub.com/ The Role of Manpower Planning in Corporate Strategy : The Chief Executive's Viewpoint
Robert William Pollock Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources 1980 18: 13 DOI: 10.1177/103841118001800102 The online version of this article can be found at: http://apj.sagepub.com/content/18/1/13

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Australian Human Resources Institute (AHRI)

Additional services and information for Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources can be found at: Email Alerts: http://apj.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://apj.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Downloaded from apj.sagepub.com at Dehli University Library Syst on July 7, 2011

... deployment of capital is a critical Chief Executive decision. is the procurement and deployment of people resources.

Equally critical, if not more so,

The Role of Manpower Planning in

Corporate Strategy
The Chief

Executives Viewpoint

R. W. POLLOCK

reasons for this are laid out and analysed. There is also a hard-hitting assessment of management priorities, which might sound like heresy to some personnel managers. The paper also discusses confusion that might exist between what is strategic and what is operational in the personnel function, and the relationship that exists between the two.
the

his paper T looks at theManpowerPlanningfunctionplanning theeyes of theChief Executive. From thisangle effective, through irrevocably
comes the proposition that,
to

be

manpower

most

be tied to corporate strategy, and

Introduction
The history of industries and of companies is a history of a contest for the survival of the fittest. All companies are engaged in such a contest for market
even for survival itself. The business world is a world of competition. Competition is people, and strategy. In any business, people make a difference of plus or minus 100%, but strategy makes a difference of plus or minus 1,000%. If we are to meet the needs of people-whatever those needs may be-security, material progress or self actualisation-we must

Perhaps they are true. But I believe they are not 100% accurate. These are motivational statements, made to make people feel important, and needed. But they cloud the true role of manpower planning and impede its effectiveness.

position and

The Value of Information

People are extremely important, but I do not agree that people make all the difference in any business. People are more important than any one of our tangible assets of facilities and capital, but they are not the most important asset we have.
There is another resource more valuable than either people or capital. Our most important asset is-information. Information and statistics about our markets, about competition, about what has happened in the past. Because business is fundamentally a task activity involving numbers and specific goals. And people need information on which to base decisions as to what actions to take to accomplish the tasks of the organisation. For instance, in military operations, knowledge of the disposition of the enemys forces is of vital importance. The military has developed an elaborate procedure for providing the decision-maker with all relevant intelligence and facts that he cannot personally determine. Information is the most important corporate resource because it multiplies the leadership capacities of people in business. And strategy is
13

have an efficacious corporate strategy. The only reason for the existence of a firm is to meet the needs of the market place. It will only survive and prosper so long as it does this effectively. All planning, therefore, starts with a corporate strategy which has nothing to do with what goes on inside a company. It relates to the external opportunities and environment. People play a catalytic role. Here, however, are three statements which have been heard on many occasions. Our most important assets ride up and down in the elevator every day. Secondly, People are our most valuable

assets.
And
any

third, People enterprise.

make ali the difference in

Downloaded from apj.sagepub.com at Dehli University Library Syst on July 7, 2011

basically all about information. About

analyse it and how
resources to
we

decide to

use our

how we corporate

Executive, must therefore think about his business

total system in a total environment. He has to be able to identify the various crucial elements in the situation and the key relationships among them. He must conceptualise regarding these critical relationships. Then he has to systematically analyse the constraints, the alternative opportunities and problem situations. He must determine the realistic limits of what is achievable. His thought process tests feasibility, and questions relevance, and emphasis. He must evaluate corporate ingenuity, and determine timing. He has to judge carefully the conse~uences of various alternative courses of action. Then, he has to choose a desirable objective. Almost always, this means he has to be satisfied with less than perfection in order to have realistic and attainable goals and plans. If business is to be dynamic and cope with change, meeting the competition, not only of direct competitors, but of new products and new industries, then it must be prepared to accept both some casualties, and something less than perfection. These are the dynamics of change-the facts of life today in our rapidly changing world. For those Governments, those companies, those trade unions, that stubbornly resist change, rather than adapting to it, the end results are only more harsh in the long run. Institutions can only go so far in protecting their people from the impact of changes in the external environment. Very often this so-called protection is not protection at all, but only a sign of temporising by weak leadership.
as a

impact on problems and opportunities. first point is that a company has to have the My information to make the right strategic decisions in order to achieve the optimum degree of success. And good people, no matter how good, will perform better under the right corporate strategy.

aeployment of People: Task

resource

Oriented

My second point is that the proper deployment of people within a company structure, under a human
allocation system, is not a human relations oriented function. It is a task oriented function. Business has been called neither an art nor a science, but a combination of the two. Military strategy is military science and business strategy is the science of business. It is task oriented. It is num-

bers, analysis, statistics, ratios, forecasting-ali tempered with sound business judgement. People exist in business to perform tasks. This point of view is not in conflict with some of the emerging viewpoints from within the personnel management profession itself. In Fortune magazine, one leading Senior Vice-President of personnel in the USA stated that, &dquo;I am not a Personnel Manager. I am a Business Manager, with responsibilities for personnel,.&dquo; This is an encouraging, pragmatic point of view. It reflects the business realities of the marketplace, and the business realities of how manpower planning relates to the
allocation of human resources within a corporate strategy, and not just to the care, development and growth of those resources. But this is not to say that recruiting, retaining and developing the right people is unimportant. Corporate strategy basically revolves around the use of five key corporate resources: the financial resources of cash and credit; the corporate image or established goodwill-, the corporate plant and facilities-, corporate information to be used in the decision-making process, and of course, the human resources. Unlike the first four resources, it is in the area of human resources where we will all compete with one another. Shell Oil is in competition with IBM. The ANZ Bank is in competition with Air New Zealand. Every organisation is in competition for human resources with every other organisation. Not just with those companies which it defines as being. in its own industry. And in no other respect is competition keener. In the long run, at the operating level of any business, people make a significant difference. It is therefore important for any company to develop a competitive advantage through a manpower recruiting programme which focuses on attracting into the business the right kinds of people for its requirements.

All of us are striving to improve the productivity and the effectiveness of our employees by improving morale and reducing turnover. But how many of us would like to see a zero rate of turnover? A zero rate of turnover would produce rigidities in the manpower planning process. It would require such an intensive degree of management effort to focus on meeting the personal needs of people that the primacy of the corporate objectives would be over-

looked.

Conflicting Demands on the Personnel Specialist

There is no question that there are conflicting demands placed upon the personnel specialist. On the one hand, he is expected to mobilise the human resources within the enterprise in order to meet the organisational needs of effectiveness, growth, productivity and profit. On the other hand, he is expected to meet the needs and aspirations of the employees and contribute to their morale, their well-being and their individual career progress. These same conflicting demands confront every line manager. The Chief Executive is almost totally in the people business-getting the right people to do the right job at the right time. We are all managing the multiple needs of the organisation and of its members and trying to integrate the goals of the corporation with those of the individual.

Drucker says, &dquo;Management has no choice but to anticipate the future, to attempt to mould it, and to balance short range and long range goals.&dquo; A Chief
14

Downloaded from apj.sagepub.com at Dehli University Library Syst on July 7, 2011

But a fundamental concept of corporate strategy is that what is best for the total enterprise is always sub-optimal from the point of view of each individual unit, or function, or person within the

needs. The result is that management may stray into more of their personal values than corporate values. In the absence of

personal strategies which reflect

organisation. Every Chief Executive

on numerous

occasions,

has been confronted with the uncomfortable but necessary choice of either observing or initiating the turnover of outstandingly competent managers. I call them The Casualties in the military sense. These are the people whom we are not able to convince to accept something that is sub-optimal for themselves in order to achieve what is best for the total organisation. Although he can sometimes bend slightly, in the long run the Chief Executive must maintain the integrity of the corporate strategy plan and the integrity of the group. That is what is best for all members of the group. People problems are almost always urgent. They are like a toothache that you cannot ignore. But they arent always the most important priority. This may sound like heresy to personnel managers. But the corporate strategy comes first and the people come second. This is what manpower planning is all about.

established corporate goals, these personal goals take over, and the sum total of them together become the goals of the organisation. One individual may be near to retirement and simply doesnt want to rock the boat, another may want to prove himself at the expense of the company as being the Crown Prince. In the absence of well-defined goals, the corporate strategy which accumulates as a result of these personal goals will not be a sufficiently strong response to the environment. Therefore the corporate strategy plan should be made known to all the key members of the organisation. This includes the manpower plan and its concepts. These concepts should be reinforced constantly so
that managers understand and
are

committed to the

principles and so that they will not try to override those principles with their own personal values and goals. Moreover, they will know when the values of
their subordinates conflict with strategy so that they dont yield to pressure from those values. Therefore, almost nowhere in business is it more important to have things clearly in focus than in
manpower planning. Seeing things clearly is not always easy and things arent always what they seem
to be.

Human Resource

Planning and Corporate Goals

A fundamental conflict exists between manpower planning as a strategic function, and sound personnel practices as a hygienic and motivational function. If we can fully integrate human resource planning with corporate goals, then the entire manpower planning process can have a multiplier effect on corporate strategy and growth. You therefore can make a significant contribution to your organisation. Strategy is direction, missions and goals; it is where you plan to be in the long run and what alternatives you select to build a framework for the business. Strategy has to do with what you want to be and how you are going to get there, and what are the major allocations of corporate resources.

In human resource planning, it is important to keep things in perspective. It is not easy for any one of us to disengage our emotions, our prejudices and our own set of values when it comes to making people decisions.

The Chief Executive and Human Resource

Planning
How then does the Chief Executive look upon human resource planning? And how does it lock into his strategic planning? From the viewpoint of the Chief Executive, the external environment may

Someone once said, &dquo;Economics is like being lost in the woods-how can you tell where you are going when you dont even know where you are?&dquo; Corporate strategy helps to describe where you are, by examining the past and evaluating performance to date. But its purpose and greatest value is in planning the future activities of the company. Planning enables a company to exercise greater control over where it is going and to impact with greater initiative on the market, the competition and the basic environment. Without planned direction, every company ends up with strategy by default, with goals that are arbitrary and haphazard. The marketing function has its goals. The production unit has goals of its own. More importantly, every member of the organisation has personal goals which may not integrate with the goals of the company. They have certain needs, such as power or recognition and personal goals which reflect these

not only include changing customer needs, competitive developments, new technology and so on, but also the entire socio-political economic fabric of the
world.
we must look at our within the organisation, both those we have and those which are potentially available to us, such as additional credit, and additional new people. These establish limits as to what the company realistically can do. Human resource planning is concerned with the growth of the organisation, and its adaptation to its environment through innovation and undertaking new directions. In this area, the Personnel function becomes involved with such issues as recruiting resources to suit the corporate strategic objectives, managerial training and development, management education, performance appraisal and employee counselling, organisation structure and planning, and interaction with top management on these issues.

After looking outside,

resources

15
Downloaded from apj.sagepub.com at Dehli University Library Syst on July 7, 2011

Looking at the manpower strategy, the Chief Executive is interested in knowing what constraints are imposed on the organisation through the particular abilities of the current workforce, particularly the key members. For it is the values, commitments and motivations, and personal influence of the key members that will determine what the corporation will do. These members of the
organisation have under their control an aggregation

of physical resources which can impact favourably or unfavourably on the external environment. Decisions regarding assignments of key personnel are therefore of high importance because of the impact persons in the new positions may have on the selection of sub-goals and the strategic choices
which are made. In developing strategy, the Chief Executive looks for unique strengths, not weaknesses. You cant build a strategy on weaknesses. This is where human resource planning is critically important. It must provide channels for moving people within the organisation in such a way that each person can perform according to his optimum ability. Looking at individuals, we should be looking not just at their strengths, but at what they do uncommonly well.

their skill at marketing door-to-door is the driving force. In most companies there are probably also some separate divisions which could have several different driving forces behind them. It is important to apply these concepts of distinctive competence and driving force, either when recruiting from the outside or transferring or promoting from within. At todays rapid rate of change in new technology and in entire markets, any extension of past strategy
is essentially a negative course. No matter how successful it has been, the fact remains that, sooner or later, it will become counter-productive. Strategy should therefore be undergoing constant review and change. And therefore, so should the structure of the organisation and the manpower planning. The manpower plan is not something which is cast in concrete or even altered just once a year. Rather, it is a broad, continuously changing programme of corporate emphasis and resource allocation. The changes take effect in response to changes in the competitive environment and also sometimes because of factors internally which will dictate that the company chooses to impact differently on the competitive environment. The more specific a company has been, as to where it wants to go and what sort of company it wants to be, the more clear will be the choices it should make. A sound rule in strategic planning&dquo;Put off until tomorrow what must be done todaybecause if it must be done today, it is too immediate and not strategic&dquo;.

Strategy and Manpower Planning

Strategy defines what business we are in and it indicates in which direction we intend to grow. Allocation of the human capital and other resources of the organisation, and precisely how these are deployed determine our priorities, and where we shall emphasis. This deployment of resources represents where we are putting our force. It is a clear indication of where a company wants to go. If the main strength
our

place

Strategic or Uperat~onal ?
The strategic variables in a business make 99% of the difference, but the operating variables take 99% of the time. Managing and motivating people is operational. Deciding who to hire and who to dehire is strategic. Rewarding the training people is operational. But deciding on the kinds of manpower training programmes you will have is strategic. Transferring and promoting people is an allocation of the corporate human resource, and is strategic.

of capital and human resources is concentrated in running the business of yesterday and today, it indicates that we want to stand still. If it is concentrated

expansion, research, innovation, new markets new products, it holds the promise of growth. This is why we cannot arrive at the allocation of the
on

and

human

resource
on

haphazardly,

as

it has tremendous

impact

the corporate strategy.

When we define the segments of the market we will serve, we do so on the basis of trying to establish a distinctive competence, something which will give us a unique competitive advantage. Having determined what this will be, you can see that it signifi-

Operating variables are such matters as those that concerned with employee productivity, satisfaction, training, co-operation, turnover and so on. They affect corporate performance and they may also seriously enhance or thwart a strategic plan, but they are not significant compared to strategic variaare

bles.

cantly affects every hiring decision, every personnel t policy, every management development
programme,
as

well

as

structure,

resource

allocation

Strategic plans should not be too intricate. If they are complex, they could be including operations and planning and that is not what strategy is about. But operations and planning are powerful forces in an organisation because there are a lot of people involved in them. In the absence of an explicitly stated strategic plan, it is very easy to allow these powerful forces to gain momentum and take over and direct strategy. Whereas strategy has to do with direction, operations and planning are not direction and, in fact, could be going in the wrong direction.

policies-in fact, every aspect of manpower planning. There is usually one driving force which is the key
element behind the success of any company and which contributes to its distinctive competence, or competitive advantage. A technology oriented company would be DuPont where invention and innovation are part of the destiny of the company. Avon Products is a distribution oriented company where
16

Downloaded from apj.sagepub.com at Dehli University Library Syst on July 7, 2011

Some manpower plans are merely operational projections, based on someones assumption that &dquo;we are going to continue to do about what we are doing now, with the same kind of people, but we are going to grow and we are going to need more of them&dquo;. That is not a strategic plan. If it includes
necessary

changes in knowledge and ability

and

re-

allocations of manpower resources, based on a conscious statement of strategy, then it is a strategic

plan.
For example,

marketing has nothing

to do with
a

strategy. Markets served is strategy. Marketing,

however, is operational. Similarly,

demand

forecast of manpower planning needs and a review of supply sources is strategy. But manpower-related

activities, such as doing appraisals, running training

planning for the retirement of more senior employees is not manpower strategy, it is operational. Manpower strategy is where the battle with your competitors will be won or lost. For most companies, life consists of working very hard to produce small differences in performance. Yet even in the most commonplace industries, the perspective of history reveals that different strategies eventually produce quite different conseprogrammes, quences.

Once a viable corporate direction has been

established, the key difference in the performance of an enterprise results from management. Therefore, any sound process to select, train, organise, evaluate and motivate managers has to
an improvement in corporate performance. But many organisations, if they were to be critically analysed, would find that they have no idea whether they are recruiting, selecting, developing and promoting people in harmony with the strategic long-run interests of the organisation.

contribute to

Goal Oriented
Much has been written about switching people on turning them off. There is no question that a high moraled group of managers and employees can produce more than a switched-off group of employees. Of course, it is the task of every leader to capture the energy and drive of the human resource within the company, to motivate them, to challenge them, to reward and punish them and to train the individuals. But all of that is a tactical offshoot of the manpower strategic process. We must never forget why an enterprise exists. A business does not exist to keep people on the payroll (except, perhaps, in the case of subsidised/nationalised industries in countries like Great Brit~in) . Nor are the people there for the purpose of meeting their hierarchy of needs, as Maslow would outline them. I dont say that we should ignore the hierarchy of needs. In order to manage our organisations effectively, it is essential that we take personal needs into account. But business is
or

primarily goal-oriented. If people are not deployed into a configuration that is the optimum for the
organisation, it is neither sound human relations, nor good for the individuals in the long run.
17
Downloaded from apj.sagepub.com at Dehli University Library Syst on July 7, 2011

You hear a lot about bottoms up management and the participative approach. But strategy cannot be handled in this way. Allocating the various resources in the organisation is an undelegatable function of the Chief Executive. He may receive inputs from others and delegate sub-parts of the resource allocation process, but the final responsibility rests with him. When the Human Resources Manager participates in this process, he is performing a general management strategic function. Therefore it is important to recognise that manpower planning is not a bottoms up approach whereby the plan is submitted to successive levels of management. Nor is it an activity which can be performed in a vacuum. It has to clearly link up with the direction and goals of the organisation.

fit the corporate strategy is a leading in this direction today will not be reflected until tomorrow in the profitability of the
resources to

activity and

success

organisation. It is important that personnel managers

measure

not

their

own

self-worth in terms of

some

absolute measurement of their professional skills and abilities. The personnel function is a service function, and as such it must meet the needs of the organisation. Professional skills in themselves are therefore irrelevant unless the personnel manager understands the forward planning requirements of the company, its direction and its goals, and the human resource planning requirements to get there and how the human resources integrate with the other resources of the organisation. In this sense the

Line

Managers and Manpower Planning

personnel management function must have a marketing orientation towards its clients-the
senior management of the company who are charged with executing the corporate strategy. Every personnel manager should therefore prepare an annual human resource plan similar to the marketing plans prepared by line management or the marketing department. Line management should therefore approve these plans at the most
senior level possible, in order to ensure that the time and costs of the personnel function are directed towards corporate goals, and not less significant issues, or the personal goals of the manager of the

A manpower plan that only generates data is useless. Therefore, the supply/demand analysis is only a step towards decisions and actions. These decisions can only be made by line managers. They must participate directly in the identification of the problems in order to put the solutions into practice. The Personnel Managers job is to make line managers aware of various options, such as alternate sources of recruiting versus traditional recruiting methods, or restructuring of responsibility as opposed to transfers of individuals, or recruiting

personnel department.
plus
an

externally versus training.

To achieve integration with strategy, line manageparticipation is essential on all decisions regarding the direction of manpower planning and the extent of the programme. Failure to do this can result in failure of the entire plan, despite the fact that the mechanics are executed with great flair. If a Personnel Manager detects any source of perceived or actual conflict between the objectives as viewed by the line management in his company, and those held by him as a personnel specialist, I suggest that he needs to confront this issue, head on, with an open mind, because it may be a strong signal that either he or line management are not integrating their activities with the strategy of the organisation. I believe the personnel function must become totally integrated with the business, with the business the organisation is in, with the growth and profit and competitive problems the organisation faces, and it does this through manpower planning. The personnel function must be measured on corporate profitability. It can be tied directly to profits on such things as turnover and absenteeism, but these are usually lagging indicators of what is happening. The true measure of the effectiveness of the personnel function is whether the right human resources of the organisation have been in place and properly deployed to dc~ what is necessary to implement the corporate strategy. And if this is the case, the company will be, in all likelihood, highly profitable. Moreover, the functions of the personnel activity in attracting and developing human
ment

Just as corporate strategy can make a difference of or minus 1,000% to the performance results of

organisation,

manpower

planning

can

make

difference of plus or minus 1,000% to all of the other normal functions of the personnel department. It is central to everything else done by that department.

Effectiveness
resources

versus

Efficiency

Human planning departments have often grown out of the personnel administrative function. Depending upon the size and nature of the organisation, it is entirely possible that the human resources planning function and the personnel administrative functions, of necessity, must be one and the same department. If this is the case in a company, it will require of the Personnel Manager a constant, conscious awareness of the entirely different nature of the dual roles which he plays. He must know the strengths and weaknesses in both directions, and know what hat he is wearing, and when. Because there is, in fact, a basic inconsistency between the manpower planning function in a strategic sense and the personnel administrative function which has a basic efficiency objective. Manpower planning is much more concerned with the effectiveness of the organisation as opposed to the efficiency of the organisation. The human resource managers role is to identify the human resource needs of the company as defined by top management, and then to assist those managers to deal with their problems of achieving corporate objectives. This requires that the personnel manager when wearing the hat of the human

18
Downloaded from apj.sagepub.com at Dehli University Library Syst on July 7, 2011

planner is concerned with strategic issues rather than tactical issues, and must deal with corporate matters from a conceptual point of view. If manpower planning is to function most effectively, it must be primarily concerned with how the allocation of resources can impact most favourably upon the corporate strategy. This is the major challenge to anyone involved with manpower planresource

styles, it could be irrelevant to the corporate strategy and therefore counter-productive in terms of
cost/effectiveness.
If you are simply on a projection system which ignores changes in direction, people will continue to project because projection has much more strength and momentum at any given moment in time. And people will continue to operate and function the way

ning.
Just as every company has a corporate strategy, whether it is planned or whether it is unconsciously brought into being, manpower planning likewise exists in every organisation. It might simply be a reaction to change, or it might be consciously created to mesh with the corporate objectives and to anticipate changes and plan appropriate alternatives. The issue, therefore, is not whether an organisation does manpower planning or not, but how consciously it is undertaken. If manpower planning takes place in a vacuum, without consciously integrating it with the goals of the organisation, it can inadvertently impact negatively as well as positively on the corporate

they

are.

It is

particularly important for

human

resource

manager to understand this momentum and to

ensure that he doesnt contribute to it through his methodology. He could be adding more resources in an opposite direction to where the Chief Executive aims to be in the future, so he has to take steps to integrate his key planning decisions with the long range resource requirements. When there is a shift
aware

in strategy, the human resource manager, should be of this, because a strategy shift demands to know what new resources will be required.

strategy.

Manpower Planning- From the Top

Down
structure

A company is its people. And if you dont plan for the right number of people, of the right kind, with the right disciplines, expose them to the right development programmes, you will not have the people that you need to meet the challenges as they come along. It is all too obvious to all of us that if we dont have sufficient capital, or cant raise it on favourable terms, we cannot go ahead with a project. What seems to be less obvious to many organisations is that finding the right capital, at the right terms, is far easier than finding the right people, at the right time, at the right recruitment cost. Our manpower inventory information tells us both what strengths we have now and what we can expect in the future in terms of potential employee performance. This has immeasurable value to the Chief Executive. It tells him whether he can push for the implementation of his strategies, or whether the company is lacking in the resources to do so.

If the company is going to change its management from functional to geographic and all the key people are today functionally oriented, how does the human resource manager impact on the manpower planning to facilitate this change?

In the development of a manpower plan, it is essential to work from the top down. To speak to the Chief Executive first, in order to have a thorough grasp of corporate needs. Very often, only the Chief Executive knows all of the shifts in emphasis and direction which are about to occur. Moreover, he has a-much longer time frame.

If you have

responsibility for

manpower

plan-

ning, but do not

A brilliant corporate strategy is often most vulnerable due to a lack of forward planning with respect to adequate manpower resources. When this occurs, those responsible for manpower must decide whether they apply renewed emphasis to their normal training and development programmes, or whether they rapidly seek new resources through

recruiting

programmes.

resources manager must ensure that he is not focusing his attention on introducing training programmes which have little relevance to the corporate strategy. Many fashionable and interesting types of training programmes are always coming upon the scene. But if, for example, the markets for a companys products are significantly changing, training may be needed in such areas as marketing innovation and cost control in order to meet the pressures of change. If the corporate training programmes on the other hand are directed towards transactional analysis, or management

The human

know the corporate strategic plan, you cannot be effective in discharging your responsibilities. A professional manpower planning programme, no matter how sophisticated in design and skilfully implemented, that is not in harmony with the corporate goals will, in fact, impede the progress of the organisation and be counter-productive. You must have it straight from the Chief Executive himself what he wants from the manpower system. What is the corporate strategy? What are the changes he foresees? What does he perceive to be the needs of the organisation in terms of human resources? How does he view the current

deployment of human
pany is

resources

structure? You cant target in

on

within the existing where the com-

going by guesswork.

The Resource Audit

A
resource

audit is

an

essential part of manpower

on

company you are strong or any absolute measurement of your human resources, but rather on how your human resources relate to the external
19

planning. Whether as a weak does not depend

Downloaded from apj.sagepub.com at Dehli University Library Syst on July 7, 2011

Downloaded from apj.sagepub.com at Dehli University Library Syst on July 7, 2011

environment and to your strategic posture

pany.

as a com-

If a performance appraisal system is instituted, the key thing is not to emphasise the procedures, but to put the focus on improving performance-and more
to use the performance appraisals as a evaluate the suitability of present corporate human resources to corporate strategy. Is it necessary to attract into the organisation new human resources to enable us to meet our strategic objectives? Or alternatively, if our time constraints are not acute, as they usually are when it comes to implementing corporate strategy, do we have the time to introduce new training programmes to upgrade the existing resources? For the manpower planning process to be effective, therefore, the Chief Executive has to place high priority on performance appraisal. It enables the Chief Executive to evaluate the capability of the organisation, to move in the direction he wants to move it within the opportunities and constraints of what it can do. Therefore, crucial to the achievement of the corporate goals and objectives is the behaviour of people. Behaviour is a function of both personality and environment. People and their personalities change very slowly. To achieve behaviour changes, therefore, we must change the environment in which people work.
means to

importantly

tunities for changing the environment in which the individual operates. Because resource allocation is so crucial, I favour the concept of a structure which is fluid and dynamic, whereby structural changes can take place on an evolutionary basis without major upheavals in an individuals responsibilities. A dynamic structure of this type allows individuals to grow at their maximum potential rates. The more the organisation structure can be made subject to frequent minor changes, the closer the enterprise will come to deploying its human resources to the optimum level. The organisation will then obtain the greatest return on its human resources investment. Organisational development systems which are carved out of theory, based on what the planner has read or seen elsewhere, often look elegant in their

design

or

classically perfect. But

too

often, they

are

Work Environment, Structure and

Strategy

oriented towards developing people for the organisation only as it is today and as its human resources are allocated or committed today. Structure building, therefore, shouldnt take place by looking solely internally, but should look at the external environment. Structure is really a system in which we are trying to relate more effectively to the competitive market for our products. Deployment of capital is a critical Chief Executive decision. So is its procurement. From what sources? Under what terms? Equally critically, if not more so, is the procurement and deployment of people
resources.

The way to change environment is to change structure. Structure follows strategy. One should therefore not select a structure for the sake of attempting to get behaviour change alone. But changing the structure of reporting relationships and responsibilities, in order to re-direct behaviour towards corporate goals should be an integral part of the manpower planning process. Everyone, therefore, charged with the responsibility of manpower planning, should have a direct involvement in the establishment of organisation structure. They should have an intimate understanding of the interrelationship of personality, structure, corporate strategy, motivation and results. If one establishes a structure of reporting relationships that is considered ideal and then adheres to that structure, while slotting people in and out of positions on the organisation chart, then the full potential effectiveness of the management resources will not be captured. Alternating people within a structure is one way of changing their environment, but in order to achieve behaviour change there are also times when the structure should be altered around people. You could say that this is not different from slotting people in and out. But I believe that it is an added dimension. Unlike switching people within a rigid corporate structure, thereby totally altering their jobs, you can partially alter their responsibilities. This offers countless additional oppor*

In mast businesses, key performers represent a more crucial scarce resource than the availability of capital which itself is always considered limited. It could be totally wrong to commit your most talented

largest, most profitable operation. Why do we do that? Instead of assigning him to what appears to be a smaller job, but which involves the business of tomorrow? Because of our job evaluation programme which says the largest job is the highest paying job. This is a contradiction of sound strategy. Its a case of. an elegant job evaluation system starting to rule,--tc~ formulate strategy for
manager to your
us.

It is imperative that we select people and strucpeople tc~ fit the strategy and not try to fit the strategy and its various elements to the people. The first approach is looking externally and is entrepreneurial. The second is looking internally.
tune

Conclusion
To summarise, the design of the manpower plan follows upon the organisations evaluation of its environment and its present posture. The system requires development of a manpower planning philosophy and a decision framework in areas of

recruiting, training and development, performance appraisal, succession and promotion. In this way,
the process facilitates line management decision management and the achievement of corporate

goals.
21

Downloaded from apj.sagepub.com at Dehli University Library Syst on July 7, 2011

Here is a recommended programme for the Human Resource Manager to check the efficacy of his manpower planning in relation to corporate

how well the manpower

planning function integrating with the corporate strategy.

is

strategy.

Firstly, make a critical assessment of the existing situation by establishing answers to the following

Thirdly, flag your calendar for a regular quarterly follow-up to repeat these steps, so that you are never out of touch with the changing requirements of your
company and so that you can receive
an objective critique for the Chief Executive on what adjustments are required to your manpower plan.

questions:
Does the manpower plan not only relate to the corporate strategy and goals of the organisa-

tion, but fully integrates with them? Is the Human Resource Manager comprehensively aware of the corporate strategy? Is there a clear indication that the human resources are being allocated to the optimum advantage of the organisation, or does the organisation tend to abdicate this management role? Do the wishes of the employees and the openings caused by resignation provide most of the initiative with respect to deploying personnel? Can it be said with full assurance that the organisation has a positive, constructive, highly aggressive human resource allocation

In the final analysis, the Chief Executive of any organisation is ultimately responsible for the survival and the prosperity and growth of the company. Always the company. Individuals come and go, but his job-is the company. That is his mission. It is a task-oriented mission. Not a people-oriented mission. His job is setting goals and achieving them. He is inescapably accountable for that fact. To the extent that he is successful in his role, he serves the interests of all the members of the organisation to the best possible advantage. This is the best form of human relations possible. For manpower planners, this is also their mission-the goals of the company.Like the Chief Executive, on a daily basis, they may have another job to do as well, an operational job which has great importance to the performance of people. Their overall success will be determined by the extent to which they are able to avoid intermingling the two roles.
come first, then the human element is adapted to fit the plans. This is the only sequence of priorities which works effectively in any business enterprise. Kipling put it rather well, &dquo;This is the law of the jungle, as old and as true as the sky, and the wolf that shall keep it may prosper, but the wolf that shall break it must die.&dquo; resource

system? Is the organisation willing to take a hard, cold, tough, objective look at what kinds of resources are lacking, and is the organisation
willing
to do

something about it?

Strategic plans

Secondly, make an appointment with the Chief Executive for two or three weeks hence. Advise him that you will send him a comprehensive agenda of questions and points, at least one week prior to the meeting. From the information you have gathered from the first part of the exercise, have an update on

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Robert William (Bill) Pollock, world President of Drake International Limited, was born in Winnipeg, Canada. He attended Keivin High School in that city, and took his B.Comm. at the University of Manitoba in 1949.

Starting
Limited,

his business career in 1949 with Burroughs Corporation in 1951 in association with the late J. R. Shore, he estab-

lished Office Overload Company (Drake Overload in Australia), a temporary office help contractor which has now expanded throughout Canada, Germany, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa, with a present total of 200 branches. In 1959 he established Drake Personnel, a permanent placement bureau for every type of office worker from senior executive to junior clerk, male and female. In 1970 Bill Pollock moved his personal headquarters from Toronto to Monaco in order to establish a strategic headquarters that would be set apart from the operations of the business. Believing that knowledge of his staffs problems should be obtained at first hand, travel has become a way of life with him and he covers more than 200,000 miles visiting every major centre annually. Mr Pollock was a Keynote Speaker at the 1979 IPMA Asian/Pacific Human Resource Management Conference at Surfers Paradise.
22
Downloaded from apj.sagepub.com at Dehli University Library Syst on July 7, 2011