Human Relations and Human Resource Approach

Discuss the differences between the human relations and human resource approaches to management. Pay particular attention to how they approach the issue of worker participation.

The human relations approach differs from early views of management because it considers the needs of individuals. It focuses on the fact that people want to feel unified, part of a team, like they are making a difference, and they are a significant part of life. In addition, the human relations approach believes that creativity and dedication will come naturally when an employee is empowered in the workplace.

Elton Mayo studied humans and their working environments and came up with some definitive observations. He saw that people were part of a group, and not just an individual. People are influenced by the group and do not act according to their own self-interest. Finally, he found that decisions are based on emotions. Throughout his studies he concluded that the environment of work did not matter as much as the human interaction available to the employees. The basis for the Hawthorne effect is that increased attention equals increased productivity. This approach concludes that human relationships allow business to run smoothly. Open communication is honored and any differences are negotiated through negotiation. This is very different from classical management that held very different expectations from its employees.

Classical management thought that a stable company would come from strict adherence to policies and order. Human relations approach encouraged personal happiness through communication. A negative side of classical management is that it is too constraining and employees must participate in thoughtless routinized practices. The downside of human relations is that with encouraged communication comes possible deception and dishonesty. Also, if the employee is not happy, they will not be productive. Both the classical management approach and the human relations approach have positive and negative sides. However, the human relations approach differs from the human resources approach in many ways that will be discussed in the following paragraphs.

The human resources approach is concerned with the “total organizational climate as well as with how an organization can encourage employee participation and dialogue” (Eisenberg, 87). Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs refers to the needs that every human has before they can reach their potential. This means that if someone is satisfied, his or her self-actualization will continue to inspire productivity. However, if basic needs such as food or shelter are not provided, then having these needs will encourage more productivity then initially available. Another way to explain Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is to discuss them as an upward pointing arrow. At the bottom of the arrow are necessary physiological needs such as food and clothing. After this is safety needs such as shelter, security and employment. Next is love and a sense of belonging, respect from others, and affection. The penultimate need is self-esteem and this includes salary, status, opportunities and responsibilities. Finally, self-actualization will occur. However, not everyone can achieve self-actualization.

Employees such as the maintenance workers or people that remain in very monotonous jobs may not ever achieve self-actualization. This is because they are separated by class and cannot reach their full potential. This is where human resources and human relations approaches differ. Human resources gives people the chance to feel needed and achieve greatness. However, there are still people that cannot get to this level. Contrastingly, in human relations, everyone is able to communicate and express their needs. Every worker can convey their feelings to even though there is division of labor; they are able to remain productive. This is not possible for the human resources approach because some jobs are not designed to express the hierarchy of needs.

The human relations approach and the human resource approach also differ in that human relations is more superficial then human resource. Human relations wants positive and happy employees. It focuses more on the psychological factors and tries to make everyone happy. One example of this would be painting the office walls to be a warmer color. Though it might make the room look better, it's not really going to change an employees opinion about the company. This causes it to be more superficial then the other human resource approach. Human resource approach uses teams rather then a hierarchy approach. The entire organization is questioned and challenged, making it more substantial. Workers tend to be more satified in this approach because their input is used to benefit the company. Participation is increased by rearranging the work structure to be more democratic and focused on worker empowerment. This approach increases worker satisfaction by avoiding the superficial tendencies of the human relations approach. Though the human relations and human resources approaches are very different, but both strive to have workers be as productive as possible.

Elton Mayo