U.S. Army Utilizing the Human

¶ … U.S. Army Utilizing the Human Resource Model Today

A human resource model is a performance framework that oversees conduction of tasks from an efficient point-of-view with the intention of attaining mutual objectives. The model works to manage the availability and essence of the most indispensable resource in management, the people. The model finds and controls major people as a resource through administrative functionality and control. The model has facilitated policy areas of management through two main categories of human resource management, control-based and commitment-based human resource management. Control-based HR functions oversee the accountability of a planned job responsibility, through a hierarchical status. This policy aims at recognizing individual evaluation and appraisal while at work. Labor management relations are usually adversarial, and its aspect of management philosophy places the members at the top hierarchy as dictators. The commitment-based human resource management is a shared management organization, whereby teamwork is valued. Compensation is mutually reinforced and achievements deemed as mutual and profit divided on an equal share basis. Under this policy, the HR model oversees the participation of mutual mechanisms and communication to manage expected joint endeavors. Labor management relations are based on mutuality, especially in problem solving and planning.

Various government based institutions, and departments utilize human resource areas that favor their operational activities. The U.S. army under the department of defense is one that utilizes the commitment-based HRM (Lundy 691). The U.S. department of defense is at the service of their nation, which reminds them that their people are their greatest resources. Having three main departmental areas, army, air force and navy, soldiers manage their obligatory responsibilities to the U.S. To attain defense commitments.

This model traces its origin from the conventional Personnel Management Models whose main objective was to make resources manageable. Personnel Management model was an ancient mode of administering functionality in organizations. In the army field of work, this model was used to bring together personnel, training activities, assignments and manpower to constitute of a defense support system. The system had separate organizational and management entities with specific jobs area, but whose eventual purpose favored national defense (1; pg 2). The Personnel management model was seconded by the Traditional Human Resource approach. This model regarded employees as the main center of resource. By doing so, the model ensured that the employees were obtained from a cost-effective plan, utilized sparingly. In addition, this model ensured that employees were highly-developed and tapped in an effort of increasing organizational and managerial interests. The ideology of having separate organizational and managerial processes raised alarm and theorists had to find a single, interactive and integrated model with suitable strategies of performance of an organization.

The conventional and current human resource models have various disparities to which have led to the creation and implementation of proper and reliable models. Traditional models supported single policy areas of and never integrated the organizational and managerial processes. Today's HR models have more than one policy areas (control-based and commitment-based human resource management) and integrate the organizational and managerial processes. The current models of human resource focus on the control and predictability of people as the main model of resource management. In addition, the traditional model was logistic-based and related frameworks while the Human Resource model being utilized today is based on performance outcomes towards realizing the intended objective. Transition of the Traditional Models to Human Resource Model has enabled the U.S. Army to execute the essential indicators of work from the initial selection process, training, appraisals, motivational techniques and gauging their quality of life.

Indicators

The U.S. army and its leadership have assimilated various business management concepts into its operational activities. Its organizational structure incorporates indicators that enable the leadership team to make rational decisions in assessing the progress that the group makes towards ensuring defense and protection of America. The indicators also aid towards realizing the intended outcomes from operational activities of the army. The indicators are selection process, training, appraisals, motivational techniques and quality of work. These indicators chosen by the Army are characterized by validity, reliability, precision, measurability, time-consciousness and programmability. In utilizing the frameworks of the Human Resource Model, the U.S. army consolidated these indicators for completion, monitoring and evaluation of their national objective. Each indicator is responsible in giving specific outcomes and representing progress, in the path of goal achievement.

i) Selection process

The Human resource model in the army selection process plays the role of determining the number of people to be recruited, number to be promoted to offer vacant positions for recruits, their wages and location of stationing (Bernard 6). This indicator ensures that the army does not end up having disproportional large recruit population. The citizens applying to the Army selection process ought to conform without supervision of the leaders. The U.S. has depicted proper organizational control in accordance to the strategies of the Human Resource Model that suggest proper strategies to be followed.

The U.S. In accordance to HR management is a utilitarian and normative organization and a government arm, whose selection process is derivative of formal mechanisms. As a utilitarian arm, recruits pledging to join the army usually undergo examinations, psychological tests, and in extreme cases, undergo a probation phase. This allows the superiors and team leaders of the recruitment process to improve the selection process of their participants. As a normative arm of the government, the selection process induces deeper commitments to the recruits in order to maintain its firm rich base and facilities that oversee the role of protecting the nation through the national defense. Despite the fact that most recruits arise from different backgrounds, this indicator ensures that the selected recruits are equal and that partial differences are controlled accordingly (Bhushan 6).

ii) Training

The U.S. army has a high magnitude and diversity in training programs for the successful recruits. The recruits from the army are trained in three phases, on the job, vestibule and offsite training. These training phases undertake everything that is necessary in preparation of war. In addition, human resource specialists are chosen and trained. The U.S. department of State Security in conjunction with the army invests a lot in training the recruits. The HR model utilizes the strategies in this indicator to measure training proficiency and performance of the recruits. Managerial training needs are also assessed by the team responsible for training.

on-the-job training conducted by army officers is incidental to everyday work responsibilities. According to the SGT Army website, this training takes after the assigned unit but never limits postal operations, airborne and from air assault schools. This mainly favors the recruits selected for human resource systems of the army. Their training takes ten weeks of Basic Combat Training, and another nine weeks of Advanced Individual Training. Both training programs are always accompanied by instructions that are followed in line of job practice. The HR Model ensures that the trainees availed for these training programs are of sound mind, apt in English and business management and capable of following detailed commands. In addition, the recruits trained in this program are oriented prior their first assignment. They are commonly referred to as an intern at work, who report to an apprentice who gives orders. Job rotation is the basic practice that enables the trainees to gain adequate experience in their allocated area of work.

Vestibule training method is a demonstration of the great possibilities in addressing the problem of training recruits for war production. A training room is facilitated and equipped with the essential materials for training masses of unskilled and semi-skilled recruits. This training method was used previously by the U.S. army in their participation in the World War I and II (Smith 62). Policies from the HR Model advocate for feedback from operational functions controlled and reproduced by a trainer's experience. Supervision and personal inquiry are limited, and this enables the trainees to be dependent and contribute to the production of the program they are being trained. In accordance to the policies of human resources, vestibule training ensures that dependence and fidelity levels are maintained. The U.S. army recruits positively undergo vestibule training sessions by maintaining their war equipment and increase dependence as depicted in war fronts. Human resource management is effectively maintained by making the training process cost-effective (Smith 66).

The off-site training programs are conducted away from work practice. Off-site training is done with the help of secondary sources other than the face-to-face instructor in the vestibule or apprentice in the on-the-job training. This training program is the ultimate representation of a trainee's capability to handle work responsibility. This is a resourceful action that leads to the development of a skilled behavior or practice. This exemplifies experience and enables a recruit to be ready for promotional advantage. In the U.S. army, various people that began as recruits hold different positions as well as responsibilities. Having undergone the basic on-the-job and vestibule training, most recruits have the same experience, but for other positions in the army to be held, an individual is responsible for being unique and undergo a basic from of training way from the normative operation in the army field (Cook and Mechner 12).

iii) Appraisals

Appraisals are precision indicators that enable managers to rat their organizational and managerial performance. The appraisal of the U.S. army is not only regarded in America, but also globally. The respect shown to them is due to the worth of sacrifice and zeal in achieving their objective of protecting America. These appraisals enhance the assessment of its performance and enhance the career development of the soldiers. The HR Model encompasses such human practices of appraisal in the army through three ways, the Critical Incident Method, Paired Comparisons and from Peer Reviews. These appraisal techniques form the fundamental part of personal management.

Appraisal from the Critical Incident methods involves the identification and description of events where a soldier has exemplifies exceptional work or needs to improve. Supervisors records incidents of interest to improving the work experience. Whether on the training ground or operational assignments, commanders recognize and correct soldiers where need be. In the situation of positive appraisal, a soldier is confident and is more trustworthy as no commander of supervisor needs to be available to oversee incidental happenings. The utilization of the HR Model under this aspect of appraisal indicator ensures that managers, and hereby the commanders and supervisors are more detailed and accurate in their performance ratings of their subjects (Susan and Randall 8).

Paired comparison appraisals are done by comparing two employees, and in this case soldiers. Judgments made from this method by the panel determine whether one is better or worse in comparison, in relation to his colleague. However, a formula is utilized by relating to a certain number of soldiers being compared to one another. This method is hardly of utility to army officials due to the amount of time consumed in conducting this appraisal; hence it is mostly replaced by the ranking method of appraisal (Laura).

The HR Model also advocates for appraisals from peer reviews by evaluating the employee. In the U.S. army, reviews are written by the supervisors or their assistants in view of what the soldiers are doing while at their field operations. This method allows the soldiers to pass indirect messages of how operations are conducted. This method of appraisal is also referred to as the easy appraisal. Strengths, weaknesses, positional performance and flexibility areas are written in accordance to a soldier's experience. This method gives the management a focus on the behavioral characteristics of an individual in the place of work and how this contributes to the entire operational success or failure (Jafari et al. 94).