7co02 Assignment Example

The Critical Role of Administrative Functions

Strategic imperative notwithstanding, administration of people is the backbone of any people management system (Hoffman, Boyle and Rogers, 2016). Payroll processing and benefits administration as well as ensuring that administrative tasks such as regulatory compliance go on to make sure an organisation runs smoothly and maintains trust among employees. Research by Ade, Sheriffdeen Olayinka Kayode and Toluwani Bolu (2022), shows that neglecting these functions can result in the organisation’s falling into operational disarray, thereby increasing errors, employee dissatisfaction and legal complications. For instance, managing payroll inaccurately can lead to problems like late payments and decreasing morale amongst the employees. Consequently, such strategic initiatives should be built on a firm operational basis and, therefore, the essential administrative functions should be maintained (Handoyo et al., 2023).

Strengths of a Strategic Focus Evaluation

There are some strengths in adopting a strategic focus in people management. The first way in which it enables HR professionals to participate in high-level decision making processes is that it can help them identify and fill a vital talent gap (Komm et al., 2021). HR can work alongside executive leadership to spearhead ideas that provoke innovation and bring about a sustainable competitive advantage. Second, a strategic perspective creates strong employee engagement programs that have been shown to drive productivity and reduce turnover. For instance, Gallup studies show that companies that engaged their employees reasonably well report better financial outcomes (Hashim, Farooq and Piatti-Fünfkirchen, 2020). Thirdly, this will give HR a tactical focus to invest in continuous professional development and leadership training so that the workforce is ready to deal with future challenges. Strategic interventions above not only improve organisational performance but also create a resilient workforce to respond to change.

Weaknesses of Overlooking the Administrative Functions.

The strategic focus has some benefits, but it can present some limitations if there is a complete disconnection between people management and administrative functions (King, 2023). Legal compliance, keeping records accurate, and provision of other important services to support the workforce depend on administrative activities. Failure to fulfil these functions leads to operational gaps, dissatisfied employees and the destruction of the trust employees place in the HR function. Also, a fragmented approach where strategic and administrative functional silos work against each other can be inefficient and lead to miscommunications (Jackson, Schuler and Jiang, 2014). For example, if an organization invests in highly sophisticated talent development programs without significantly addressing underlying administration fundamentals workflow financing management it can lead to disruptions in internal operations and the performance of employees. As a result, an integrated approach between both the strategic and the administrative functions is imperative for effective contribution of people practice to organisational success (Caylan, 2024). 

Integrating Strategic and Administrative Functions

It is important that maximum benefits of strategic and administrative aspects of human resources management are achieved through a balanced approach (Caylan, 2024). When such functions are integrated into organisations, they create a synergetic effect that leads to an overall performance. This integrated model ensures that both strategic decision making is based on accurate data and operational support for the strategic decisions. Organisations can get greater consistency, effectiveness and accountability on all sides of people management by linking strategic goals with good practice on the people management front (Albrecht et al., 2015). That dual approach ensures that HR is kept abreast of company operations by being able to respond quickly to the needs of employees in the short term and can also think ahead of the organisation into the future in the long term.

Conclusion

To achieve the maximum effects of both strategic and administrative aspects of people management, a balanced approach is necessary. Organisations, which are able to combine these functions, generate a synergistic effect on overall performance. For instance, the HR departments in companies such as IBM have created systems that make administrative efficiency critical to achievement of organisational goals, performance management and employee development. These integrations meet both immediate operational need and long term strategic goals, creating a resilient, agile workforce. Overall, management in people must consider its major objectives as encompassing a commitment to efficiency and strategic growth, hence ensuring HR remains a core element in the success of the organisation.

Question 8

AC 2.4 Evaluate the view of the critics of ‘promoting employee engagement’ who see it simply as another in a long line of people management practices which intensify work, benefit employers more than employees and generally lead to stress and burn-out over a period of time. Justify your answer.

Introduction

Organisations have invested in people strategies aimed at boosting employee performance, innovation and retention and on employee engagement. Engaged employees provide a competitive advantage and vibrant workplace culture, therefore, persuading proponents that embracing employee engagement will contribute to a company’s success (Markos and Sridevi, 2010). But critics say that employee engagement promotion is really just a new style of people management that does not actually reduce work, that primarily benefits the employers, and ultimately ends up causing stress and burning out workers. This report critically evaluates these criticisms on the basis of the conceptual underpinnings of employee engagement, and assesses the pros and cons of adopting employee engagement, and justifies the position that, properly implemented, employee engagement initiatives can offer mutual benefits rather than simply exploiting workers.

Understanding Employee Engagement

Broadly, employee engagement is referred to as the emotional and intellectual commitment of the employees to the organisations, which ultimately promote extraneous effort over and above the mandatory requirements (Deepalakshmi et al., 2024). Studies by Pincus (2022), demonstrate that engagement is not solely about satisfaction or motivation but a complicated state of feeling involved in interesting and important work, which is characterized as organised with organizational targets and supported by relational relationships. According to their proponents, an engaged workforce is productive, creative and loyal (Markos and Sridevi, 2010). Typically, engagement initiatives are made up of strong communication around vision, developing leaders, recognition initiatives, and steps to career progression. Well integrated into these elements, they have been demonstrated to be conducive to an ambience where employees will be cherished and empowered and will yield to positive results for the employee and the organisation.

Critics’ Perspective on Employee Engagement

However, critics argue that the focus on employee engagement is not genuine in supporting well-being claim but a managerial tool purveyed to extract additional effort from employees without commensurate increases in reward or support. It argues that initiatives supporting engagement may result in increase in work intensity, whereby employees have to invest more emotionally and cognitively in their roles. According to Young (2023), the aforementioned is beneficial for employers because it increases productivity and profitability but will often come at a cost to employees’ time and mental health. Empirical research has shown instances where high commitment has been associated with higher stress, until it leads to burnout (Rizvi et al., 2023). Furthermore, some critics also argue that when engagement is driven mostly by organisational objectives without concurrent commitment to employee well-being, engagement could turn into a cultural phenomenon of overwork, eroding work–life balance and longer-term job satisfaction.

Evaluating the Strengths of Employee Engagement Initiatives

Critics argue that the compensation effect that employee engagement has, but there is evidence that when used in a true focus on the welfare of employees, the employee engagement program can provide measurable benefits (Kmposo, 2025). According to research conducted by Gupta and Sharma (2016), there is a strong correlation between increased levels of engagement and better business results such as greater customer satisfaction, decreased absenteeism and improved profitability. These initiatives do not only support open communication but also add to the trust between the management and employees; also, it creates room for continuous improvement (Abson, Schofield and Kennell, 2024). Organisations where engagement strategies are combined with well-supported systems, for example flexible working conditions, thorough performance management and possible professional development benefit by ensuring employees are more satisfied with their job and suffer less from burnout. For instance, Google and SAS Institute, among many other successful companies to achieve integration of engagement and their well-being programs, to illustrate how good cultures can ameliorate the risk of overwork, and drive innovation and productivit (Culture Partners, 2024).

Identifying the Weaknesses and Risks

Nevertheless, the potential pitfalls of employee engagement should not be ignored. In reality, engagement strategies usually implemented without proper thought towards employee workload or personal boundaries can be the opposite can inadvertently lead to creation of excessive pressure and unreal expectations (Gallup, 2022). In environments where the organisational culture is such that constant high performance is the premium, the risk of over engagement is very real. Because of this imbalance, chronic stress, poor mental health and burnout can impact the individual as well as directly influence organisational performance deteriorating over time. Whilst the success of the engagement initiatives depends upon context, critics rightly state that they are applied in a particular context . If working engagement is not accompanied by proper checks and balances for instance reasonable workload management, clear job expectations and supporting leadership, working (Newton et al., 2020) engagement can turn out to be a double-edged sword that ultimately benefits the employer but damages the employee’s health.

Best Practices for Sustainable Engagement Integrated

However, the key to reconciling this conflict is in the finding the formula that reconciles employee engagement with comprehensive well-being strategies. Simultaneously, organisations pursuing engagement must protect against overwork and stress (De-la-Calle-Durán and Rodríguez-Sánchez, 2021). This entails formation of policies to achieve work–life balance, and mental health support, while providing the means for employees to give their feedback to continually shape engagement practices. Transparency is a best practice model, and it refers to a situation where performance expectations are clearly communicated and aligned to the realistic goals. It can also provide continuous monitoring and evaluation to identify signs of early burnout, so that the timely interventions can be taken (Doan and Loi Tan Nguyen, 2022). An engaged organisation creates an environment where employees are pushed and pulled to achieve the highest levels of performance without getting into overdrive.

Conclusion

Overall, the merits of employee engagement are valid concerns, such as the danger that it may lead to the intensification of the work and thus to stress, but a careful approach can limit these risks. Well designed and implemented engagement initiatives drive organisational performance, and improve employee well being and satisfaction. The secret lies in the synchronization of the opportunities for engagement versus well being as employees should be nurtured and workload manageable. Consequently, rather than being inherently exploitative, employee engagement is a mechanism through which organisational objectives can be mutually beneficial in terms of employee health and development.

Question 11

AC 3.3 Examine the major ways in which technology is changing the people management function in organisations. How far do you agree that the advent of generative artificial intelligence will bring about much more change in the future? Justify your answer.

Introduction

With all the technology we have today, people management is fundamentally different than it was a decade ago. Technology has streamlined processes, enables data driven decision-making and helps with employee experience (Diard, 2022). At the core of HR activities like dealing with recruitment, performance management and development, they have gone digital through use of advanced analytics and automation. One of these innovations is the ability to generate new insights using generative AI, to automate content creation and very importantly, personalise employee development. This report explores how generative AI is altering people management in organizations through the main ways, and how further change will take place in the future with the basis of research, examples and analysis.

Digital Transformation in People Management

Digital Transformation in People Management

Traditional practices of HR have undergone a transformation due to the digital revolution of the recent decades. Today, the everyday administrative tasks like payroll, benefits administration and compliance management rely on Human Resource Information Systems (HRIS) that brings manual record keeping to real time data analytics. According to research by the CIPD (2020), organisations using complicated HRIS platforms present better operational efficiency, higher data accuracy, and more fitting of HR strategies with business objectives. In addition, the HR teams have also been able to shift their focus from routine administrative duties to strategic ones with the help of digital transformation. Automating time consuming processes freed up the HR professionals to pay more attention to talent management, workforce planning and organizational development. However, there remains a great need to invest in technology and training as we move towards digital solutions, and the key issue at hand continues to be bringing the new system online while protecting the data security and privacy.

Enhanced Recruitment and Talent Management

Technology has led to a drastic transformation in the recruitment process, in the sense that today one can reach much further into the talent acquisition space and apply new ways of selecting candidates. Today, large pools of potential candidates can be identified and screened  throughonline job portals, social media, and AI powered screening tools and quickly and efficiently sifted through. For example, advanced algorithms can assess resumes to determine the skills and experience a good fit to the job requirements to decrease time to hire and improve quality of hires. According to Deloitte (2021), companies that have adopted AI in their recruitment processes see great improvements in matching of candidates as well as their costs. Although automated systems come with such risks as possible algorithmic bias and depersonalization of the process, reliance on them cannot be completely avoided. Although these drawbacks, however, organizations need to make sure that AI-driven tools for recruitment are made with solid ethical guidelines and are driven by humans, so that the balance between efficiency and fairness is maintained.

Revolutionizing the Performance Management and Learning systems

Digital tools have also changed the performance and learning systems by moving from static, annual review to continuous, data based performance reviews. With platforms like Workday and SAP Success Factors, real time feedback, ongoing goal tracking, and even personalised learning journeys and taking them at your own pace. Harter et al. (2002) provides research showing that those organisations that have a high levels of employee engagement experience a higher level of productivity and lower turnover. Dashboards used in these systems permit managers to observe performance metrics through very clear visualisations and work out remedy promptly. Despite the culture they promote of continual improvement, there’s the possibility that too much monitoring would give rise to employee stress and the destruction of the separation between work and personal responsibility. Hence, performance management systems that are not sensitive to employee wellbeing will require feedback to be constructive rather than punitive.

The Advent of Generative Artificial Intelligence

Generative AI is the next frontier in the people management transformation. Generative AI is a different breed of AI systems compared to traditional AI systems whose outcome is dependent on fixed algorithm. Generative AI relies on cutting edge machine learning models to generate new content, predict outcomes as well as come up with brilliant solutions. This technology can be applied in areas of HR such as standardisation of reports generation, drafting policy documents and even the generation of personalised learning content for employees. AI driven chatbots have already replaced questions like benefits and training possibilities for which HR employees can not focus on strategic tasks anymore. The McKinsey (2022) indicates that generative AI could reduce HR department’s administrative workload up to 30% resulting in a better overall efficiency. In addition, generative AI can analyse enormous data to make predictive intelligence about employee turnover, engagement levels, and performance trends. However, critics say over-reliance on AI could erode the very human factor that is important to people management – depersonalisation and employee disconnect from management. In addition, there are some ethical issues that such data-driven decisions need to be transparent, and that AI systems should be free from bias (Law, Ye and Lei, 2024). These challenges highlight the importance of ensuring that AI tools and human judgment complement each other, enabling the HR to continue offering the relational part and benefit from technological innovation.

Integration and Future Implications

Contemporary organisations will need to integrate their administrative functions, with new technologies. For instance organisations such as IBM, that have shown that a hybrid approach —a way where an administrative efficiency helps fuel strategic innovation—can provide companies with huge competitive advantages (Pelser and Gaffley, 2020). This lies in maximising rather than replacing the potential of technology to allow humans to interact with one another. Robust digital HRIS systems, dynamic performance management solutions, and the power of generative AI combine to give organisations a modern, and agile people management function. This integrated model equally provides operational stability as well as cultivate an atmosphere of constant learning and participation (Tominc, Oreški and Rožman, 2023). However, like with many emerging technologies, the degree to which generative AI will potentially determine a significant level of further change for people management will be bases on its capacity to address ethical concerns, ensure transparency and maintain its human touch core (Singh, Chatterjee and Mariani, 2024). Generative AI adoption is headed to a drastic change, as long as organisations manage to adopt these tools with a strategic vision and a dedication to employees’ well-being.

Conclusion

In conclusion, technology has effectively revolutionized the people management function by making it more efficient in its operation, enabling companies to outsource more of its recruitment abilities, and radically reorganizing performance management and learning systems. Generative AI is poised to enhance these changes through the automation of routine tasks, customised solutions and deeper data insights. Generative AI also presents some opportunities that can be used to drive innovation however; its successful implementation relies on ethical oversight, openness and ensuring human-centric practices. In general,  balancing between traditional and technological approaches not only serves to incentivise the sustainable progress in people management, but also makes positive contributions to the performance of the organisation and to the well-being of employees.

Question 14

AC 4.2 You work for a public sector organisation. A senior manager from a large, commercial private sector organisation has been hired to undertake an important project-based people management role. You are asked to prepare a short training session as part of their induction which examines the major ways in which people management in your organisation varies from that typically found in larger private sector organisations. What key points would you make? Justify your answer.

Introduction

The training session delivers comprehensive knowledge about the fundamental distinctions between public sector people management practices and private sector large commercial companies (Blaskovics, 2023). The public sector maintains its own operational framework, which emphasizes public accountability and service delivery and transparency above profit-making goals despite sharing employee performance optimization goals with the private sector. Multiple distinctive approaches control the selection of regulatory methods and performance measurements and employee incentives and workplace culture creation (Doan and Loi Tan Nguyen, 2022). This session evaluates diverse sectorial differences by analysing genuine research together with practical insights and concrete examples to help you refine your management approach.

Organisational Objectives and Strategic Priorities

The underlying organisational objectives are one of the fundamental differences between public and private sector people management. In the public sector, our main mission is service delivery to the community and enable equitable service delivery, with focus on public accountability and regulatory compliance (Rccademy, 2024). Such values are our standards for our people management practices and therefore we do so through fairness, transparency and the public interest. In contrast to the private sector, where people management is usually driven by the desire to improve profitability, market share and competitive advantage. Public sector HR practices are more process oriented and are balancing many different stakeholder expectations and are complying strictly with statutory yardsticks, as evidenced through CIPD (2023) research.

Strategies in our organisation are developed with a long term service sustainability in mind rather than short term financial gains (Bertolotti and Roman, 2024). So, for instance, recruitment or promotion decisions are made with systematic processes governed by public procurements and by equality legislation for which any decision is defensible in the public eye. On the other hand, private sector organisations tend to rely more on flexible and performance-driven procedures that (sometimes) reward innovation and efficiency without the need to operate under the same procedural uniformity (Eran Vigoda-Gadot et al., 2005). The difference in global priorities means the first priority in our public sector environment is keeping the public trust and honoring the legal compliance while the second is the organization’s performance. What is more critical to adapt to our way of working is, first and foremost, understanding these divergent objectives—you need to take a more cautious, deliberate approach rather than high velocity change, all in pursuit of due process.

Regulatory Framework and Operational Constraints

The public sector organisations operate in a complex regulatory framework that has very strict guidelines on every aspect of people management (Knies and Leisink, 2017). Government bodies and, often, trade unions, have a rigorous oversight of our hiring processes, performance appraisals and reward systems. All this represents a highly endowed pro-Islamist environment that requires high levels of procedural transparency and close adherence to prescribed public policies (OECD, 2017). For example, recruitment policies have to stick by rules on public procurement, rules on equality, and this invariably leads to considerable lag between decision and implementation, as is the case in the private sector where market driven processes are faster by nature. Hennekam and Van Der Voet (2010) find that such constraints generate fairness and prevent discrimination, but in the process may precipitate the bureaucratic inertia and lack of response to changing circumstances.

Operational constraints in the public sector also stem from fixed budgets and limited financial flexibility. Public sector organisations are unlike private companies in the sense that they can’t change compensation and benefits packages to attract the best employees as there are statutory pay scales and collective bargaining agreement to adhere to. It restricts the scope for merit based incentives and can reduce motivation of high performers (Fernandez and Cheema, 2024). On the other hand, these regulatory measures play their own part in securing employees by offering protection against erratic work life. Any manager who is moving from the private sector to the public sector must understand these constraints, because it means a change in mind set from wanting to innovate quickly to making sure that everything is in line with public accountability and legal requirements (Arundel, Bloch and Ferguson, 2019). The challenge is to create due in these confines while maintaining operating effectiveness and staff morale.

Performance Management and Reward Structures

The formal, structured affairs of public sector performance management are determined by formal performance management systems that impose fairness, consistency, and accountability upon decision making (Heinrich and Marschke, 2010). The annual reviews are complemented, most often at mid year, by review that couple to define service delivery targets as opposed to driving metrics which could be used to maximise profit. According Ojiyovwi Onavwie et al. (2023) businesses that use standardized systems create fair compensation and minimize bias yet their strict rules lead people to view these systems as rigid, which hinders outstanding performers from receiving suitable recognition.

Public sector reward systems operate under the restrictions imposed by both financial budgets and government regulations. Our organization restricts merit-based bonuses and variable pay systems because we maintain standardized remuneration to maintain employee equity (Fulmer, Gerhart and Kim, 2023). Staff motivation becomes challenging because high-performing employees believe their financial rewards do not match their contributions. However, since public sector organisations lack some of these mechanisms, they make up for these deficiencies by investing in non-financial rewards like professional development opportunities, success progression and reward programs that promote a sense of belonging as well as a commitment to public service (Chiang and Birtch, 2012).

Cultural Differences and Stakeholder Engagement

A public sector organization’s cultural environment strongly reflects its responsibility to serve multiple stakeholders which includes government entities and citizens and regulatory bodies (Khuong, Truong an and Thanh Hang, 2021). The organization develops a work environment that values both ethical conduct and transparency alongside consensus building above quick competitive decision-making. The people management system of our organization maintains policies dedicated to inclusivity together with organizational purpose which leads to decision-making processes through employee consultations (Monteiro and Adler, 2021). 

Our organization follows a series of comprehensive stakeholder consultations when modifying public sector policy or practice to collect input from employee organization members and community representatives. Staff trust increases along with long-term commitment because the collaborative approach improves both decision legitimacy and employee-employer relationships. Processe that take time become slow and do not readily adapt to operational briefs. Hendry (2022) demonstrate that organizations with participative cultures maintain stability and ethical conduct yet these cultures might restrict fast innovation and flexibility. As you take on your new position make sure your leadership approach switches toward gathering input from your team members through inclusive processes that balance individual freedom with input received from others (Wooll, 2022). 

Conclusion

The management of people in public and private sector organizations demonstrates substantial and complex distinctions. The public sector methodology, which follows four main characteristics: strict adherence to regulatory requirements and public accountability and structured performance management and a participative approach with a consensus-driven culture. The approach preserves both transparency and fairness together with enduring stability although they work slower than private sector models that operate under profit goals. The transition to this new position requires understanding and respect to the differences between public sector practices and private sector agility because these public sector methods exist to maintain public trust and deliver exceptional service. Besides the ability to balance public sector practices with private sector innovation can help in driving success through innovation.