Human Resource Management of General Motors : General Motors Company (NYSE: GM, TSX: GMM.U) is an American multinational automaker based in Detroit, Michigan and the world's second largest automaker.[3] With its global headquarters in Detroit, GM employs 209,000 people in every major region of the world and does business in some 157 countries. General Motors produces cars and trucks in 31 countries, and sells and services these vehicles through the following divisions: Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, GMC, Opel, Vauxhall, and Holden. GM's OnStar subsidiary provides vehicle safety, security and information services.

On June 8, 2009, GM filed for bankruptcy protection and reorganization under the provisions of Chapter 11, Title 11, United States Code. On July 10, 2009, with financing partially provided by the US Government, General Motors emerged from reorganization[4] and was re-listed on major stock exchanges on November 18, 2010 with the world`s largest IPO.[4][5]

Examples of HR metrics, which are or may be relevant to CGIAR Centers for benchmarking and then
monitoring trends, are:




Staff turnover/retention

Staff “headroom” – proportion of filled positions to total positions; proportion of positions filled by
long-term staff versus temporary staff and consultants










Staff qualifications and experience

Numbers and types of applicants for advertised vacancies

Staff diversity

Staff satisfaction

Staff performance ratings

Professional development hours achieved

Overtime and (where Centers implement time tracking systems) unbilled time

Health and safety statistics

Many of these metrics can be efficiently captured through good HR management information systems.

ORGANIZATIONAL DESIGN

Organizational design can be defined as the “process of managing the organizational structure” (Wagner
and Hollenbeck, 1998). The organization’s structure is not only a tool for managing the workforce but
also a means of communicating priorities and responsibilities, enabling management to focus
employees’ and stakeholders’ attention on particular aspects of the business (Davenport and Beck,
2002). Organizational design should support strategy implementation, facilitate the flow of work,
permit effective managerial control, and create reasonable and measurable jobs (Nadler and Tushman,
1992).

According to Galbraith (2003), the problem of organizational design occurs when there are many
employees in a number of specialist groups, which need to be integrated around the completion of a
global task.

CGIAR Centers seek to have staff from different scientific disciplines, as well as those from financial,
administrative, and technology support functions, working collaboratively on identifying key research
problems, attracting donor funding to have these tackled, and delivering the necessary research products.
Often, overlaying this is a move by Centers to decentralize functions geographically (in varying degrees)
to regionally located offices. Many Centers have turned to various types of matrix organizations and the
formation of multidisciplinary teams to facilitate this collaboration.

In “strong” matrix management structures, resources are managed by function or discipline; managers
work on projects managed by program managers.

Pitagorsky (1998) notes that, while project and program managers (PMs) and functional managers
(FMs) are in the business of keeping their organizations happy and healthy, their relationship is often
competitive and antagonistic. Conflict between PMs and FMs is often rooted in problems with the
organization's structure, particularly, role definition, incentive/compensation, reporting hierarchies, and
lines of communication. Pitagorsky identifies the need for stability in program/project resourcing
promised by functional managers, and defining program/functional manager roles as important elements
in minimizing problems with matrix management.


Several factors affect the organizations and its expected growth. As organizations grow and move into the international market different challenges and opportunities are encountered. Now more than ever, organizations need to focus on developing strategies and explore the opportunities the new business environment provides. Strategies are the guiding force that aids in the achievement of business goals whereby the success rely on the ability to manage its resources and capabilities as well as the ability to change and develop according to the demands of the business environment.

As argued, placing Human Resource Management (HRM) at the core of every management function will be the most plausible avenue towards succeeding to this new environment. Michael Armstrong (2006) defined HRM as the strategic and coherent approach to the management of an organization’s most valued assets – the people. This paper will critically evaluate such claim and will be two-fold in nature. The first part will be devoted to the discussion of why HRM should be adapted as the central management function.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Human resource management is headed by HR. He/she is the individual who deals with the employee of the company. Company is made of people and if people are not satisfied from you work then, your company might face big problems because if your backbone is broken then you cannot stand again on your feet.
 
Top