Search results

To guide managers on managing the “organizational environment” of their employees. To return motivation to the employee.

First by dissecting the psychological contract. Second by matching specific motivations to a maturity model of Human Resource Management.

The psychological contract is falsely offered as a management tool. Motivation is a function of the maturity level of the organization. The range of motivations available to employees is limited by this maturity level. Employee motivation is not a tool directly available to management. The environment within which employees operate is the maturity level of the organization.

Management should focus less on attempts to motivate employees directly and concentrate on developing the maturity level of the organization. It is argued that management should attend to managing the environment within which employees work.

In the popular and the professional literature management in large organizations are encouraged to motivate their people. This is a false cry. By understanding and mastering maturity levels, management can make the environment within which employees operate a more fulfilling place to work. Workers can then “draw out” the satisfaction they seek from their own work. “Motivation” is thus returned to its true owner – the employees themselves.

The paper proves that motivation is a function of the maturity level of the organization and not a management tool. It points management to the elements in their organizational environment that indirectly influence employee motivation. The paper will be of interest to business managers, HR managers and academics teaching and researching in related subjects.

Dissects “partnership” and “strategy” in the context of the work of HR.

Shows that it is not that HR is unclear about its role in the corporate world but that the exhortations of commentators are too simplistic.

Reveals that the continuing and continual debate over HR's role is a product of the role conflict inherent in the HR profession itself. Emphasizes the importance of balancing the needs of employees with those of managers, which is at the heart of HR.

Contends that divorcing the operational from the strategic denies the strategic the field intelligence that informs and proves strategy. The disparate, mundane operational tasks associated with HR specialists aggregate into the field intelligence that feeds their strategic perspective. Severing the connection between HR strategy and HR operations impoverishes any kind of strategic input available to HR.

Advances the view that managers and employees see their day-to-day requests as important and that these apparently mundane matters are the nuggets that inform HR's strategic input.

Emphasizes that there is an organizational and employee aspect to every element of HR and that the HR specialist should accept both of these.

The purpose of this paper is to describe the methodology being used in a study exploring the organisation of adult safeguarding.

A mixed-methods study is presented which describes how the research team is seeking to identify models of adult safeguarding and then compare them using a quasi-experimental study design.

Close examination of this study's methodology highlights the potential value of mixed-method research approaches.

Anticipated study challenges include difficulties with gaining agreement from study sites and recruitment of people who have been the subject of a safeguarding referral.

This will be the first study in England to identify and compare different models of adult safeguarding in depth. Outlining and discussing current methodology is likely to be of interest to practitioners, managers and other researchers and policy makers.