The Age of Oversupply: Why the Future Would be Demanding on the Present Generation
February 7, 2025
Bankruptcy is one of the natural states which a company may find itself in. Entrepreneurship is primarily about taking risks. When companies take risks, some of them succeed, whereas others fail. Hence failure is a natural part of the business. However, many critics of bankruptcy laws believe that there isn’t a need for an elaborate […]
The Wirecard and Infosys Scandals are a Lesson on How NOT to Treat WhistleblowersWhat is the Wirecard Scandal all about and Why it is a Wakeup Call for Whistleblowers Anyone who has been following financial and business news over the last couple of years would have heard about Wirecard, the embattled German payments firm that had to file for bankruptcy after serious and humungous frauds were uncovered leading […]
Why the Digital Age Demands Decision Makers to be Like Elite Marines and Zen MonksHow Modern Decision Makers Have to Confront Present Shock and Information Overload We live in times when Information Overload is getting the better of cognitive abilities to absorb and process the needed data and information to make informed decisions. In addition, the Digital Age has also engendered the Present Shock of Virality and Instant Gratification […]
Why Indian Firms Must Strive for Strategic Autonomy in Their Geoeconomic StrategiesGeopolitics, Economics, and Geoeconomics In the evolving global trading and economic system, firms and corporates are impacted as much by the economic policies of nations as they are by the geopolitical and foreign policies. In other words, any global firm wishing to do business in the international sphere has to be cognizant of both the […]
Why Government Should Not Invest Public Money in Sports Stadiums Used by Professional FranchisesIn the previous article, we have already come across some of the reasons why the government should not encourage funding of stadiums that are to be used by private franchises. We have already seen that the entire mechanism of government funding ends up being a regressive tax on the citizens of a particular city who […]
Many students of management and laypeople often hear the term HRM or Human Resource Management and wonder about the difference between HRM and the traditional term Personnel Management.
In earlier times, the Personnel Manager of a factory or firm was the person in charge of ensuring employee welfare and interceding between the management and the employees. In recent times, the term has been replaced with HR manager.
This article looks at the differences in usage and scope of functions as well as the underlying theory behind these nomenclatures. In the section on introducing HRM, we briefly looked at the main differences. We shall look into them in more detail here.
Traditionally the term personnel management was used to refer to the set of activities concerning the workforce which included staffing, payroll, contractual obligations and other administrative tasks. In this respect, personnel management encompasses the range of activities that are to do with managing the workforce rather than resources.
Personnel Management is more administrative in nature and the Personnel Manager’s main job is to ensure that the needs of the workforce as they pertain to their immediate concerns are taken care of. Further, personnel managers typically played the role of mediators between the management and the employees and hence there was always the feeling that personnel management was not in tune with the objectives of the management.
With the advent of resource centric organizations in recent decades, it has become imperative to put “people first” as well as secure management objectives of maximizing the ROI (Return on Investment) on the resources. This has led to the development of the modern HRM function which is primarily concerned with ensuring the fulfillment of management objectives and at the same time ensuring that the needs of the resources are taken care of. In this way, HRM differs from personnel management not only in its broader scope but also in the way in which its mission is defined.
HRM goes beyond the administrative tasks of personnel management and encompasses a broad vision of how management would like the resources to contribute to the success of the organization.
Cynics might point to the fact that whatever term we use, it is finally “about managing people”. The answer to this would be that the way in which people are managed says a lot about the approach that the firm is taking. For instance, traditional manufacturing units had personnel managers whereas the services firms have HR managers.
While it is tempting to view Personnel Management as archaic and HRM as modern, we have to recognize the fact that each serves or served the purpose for which they were instituted. Personnel Management was effective in the “smokestack” era and HRM is effective in the 21st century and this definitely reflects a paradigm shift in the practice of managing people.
It is clear from the above paragraphs that HRM denotes a shift in focus and strategy and is in tune with the needs of the modern organization. HRM concentrates on the planning, monitoring and control aspects of resources whereas Personnel Management was largely about mediating between the management and employees.
Many experts view Personnel Management as being workforce centered whereas HRM is resource centered. In conclusion, the differences between these two terms have to be viewed through the prism of people management through the times and in context of the industry that is being studied.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *