Search results

The purpose of this paper is to focus on the different rationales for devolving people management responsibilities to the line and examine their consequences for the HR function and HR’s interactions with line managers and employees.

A model was developed and tested that describes how the rationale for devolving people management to the line influences the HR function, HR’s interactions with line managers and the quality of people management. Survey data were collected from 446 managers who reported that their organisations had devolved people management to the line.

Results indicate that devolution rationales are associated with distinct changes to the HR function’s strategic integration and size. These changes in the HR function are in turn associated with utilisation of line manager focused HR practices, HR’s business partner orientation and people management effectiveness.

The HR function should consider changes that refine job descriptions to include a clear statement of people management responsibilities, ensure performance appraisals incorporate an assessment of people management effectiveness and prioritise line manager training and rewards in an environment where line managers may be less than enthusiastic about their newly acquired people management responsibilities.

The study contributes to the devolution literature by outlining how the effects of devolution are tied to the rationale underlying devolution efforts. It suggests that the tendency to conceptualise devolution without reference to the reason why it is pursued may be contributing to the controversy over its consequences.

Reports on how East Midlands International Airport, Newcastle International Airport and the BAA group are meeting the changing needs of a rapidly expanding sector through management development and training that looks to future as well as current needs.

The privatisation of the electricity industry was badly flawed. It created a generating duopoly in the form of National Power and Powergen. These two companies have a degree of control which is incompatible with the concept of the open market and which is detrimental to the interests of the consumer. Given the power of that duopoly, it is doubtful whether the Governmental regulatory authority, OFFER, can effect real change without a referral to the Monopolies and Mergers Commission.

In the wake of numerous late twentieth century cult disasters, and most recently, the September 11 tragedy, this paper considers the question, why do people obey outrageous commands from charismatic authorities? According to Gary Becker, “the economic ap‐proach provides a valuable unified framework for understanding all human behavior” (Becker 1976:14). We test this generalization by attempting to explain, in terms of rational choice theory, the behavior of two members of infamous cults, the Manson Family and the Ragneesh Foundation International. Each of these subjects slavishly obeyed orders from a charismatic personality, one to the extent of committing murder. Were they mentally ill or rationally maximizing their utility? We consider these theoretical options. In August of 1969 Charles Manson ordered several of his followers to commit gruesome murders for the purpose of initiating the apocalypse. They obeyed. In late 1978, Jim Jones commanded over 900 members of the Peoples Temple to commit suicide. They obeyed. From 1981 to 1985, executing orders to build utopia perceived to come from their guru, members of the Ragneesh Foundation International terrorized the inhabitants of Antelope, Oregon. Similarly, followers of Osama Bin Laden are suspected of carrying out the disastrous suicide murders of September 11. Over past decades, the incidence of violence involving submission to a charismatic leader appears to be escalating. Increasingly the public must contend with the “awesome power” of charisma, “enshrouded in a mystique of irrationality” (Bradley 1987: 3–4). The extent to which followers committing criminal acts of obedience may be held accountable has become a pressing legal issue. How can this kind of volatile religious commitment be explained? In recent years, experts on cults have experimented with rational choice theory. According to economist, Gary Becker, “the economic approach provides a valuable unified framework for understanding all human behavior” (Becker 1976: 14). We test this extravagant claim with two cases of seemingly irrational commitment to a charismatic cult leader—one a follower of Bhagwan Rajneesh, the other a Manson Family killer. These subjects are not representative cult members but rather were chosen because they demonstrated an exceptional loyalty to their leaders that has been widely construed as the result of brainwashing or insanity. Rather than survey data, we rely on autobiographical testimonies since they offer a more detailed and comprehensive view of the thought processes that motivate behavior, the subject matter of this paper.

The Minister of Health, in exercise of all powers enabling him by any Statute in that behalf, hereby Orders as follows :—

Union Carbide UK Limited are to donate a fully equipped welding laboratory to Sheffield University's Department of Metallurgy. Union Carbide, who have a specialist division that manufactures and markets welding equipment throughout the world, are to install a complete range comprising over 30 items of their latest and most sophisticated welding equipment in the Department of Metallurgy building at Mappin Street, Sheffield.