This paper examines recurring human relations management problems that arise when organizations cling to outdated practices in the face of new challenges. Drawing on case studies and academic sources, it analyzes four major problem areas: rising healthcare costs and labor-management partnerships, the misapplication of information technology as a "silver bullet," chronically poor employee performance and the World Bank's Performance Advisory Service model, and the need for a general management system that operates independently of individual managerial personalities. The paper argues that correct diagnosis of organizational problems — rather than reactive, piecemeal responses — is the foundation of effective human resource management and long-term business competitiveness.
The paper demonstrates synthesis across multiple sources and domains. Rather than summarizing each source in isolation, the writer weaves together findings from labor relations, information systems, and organizational behavior literature to build a unified argument about the root cause of management failure: misdiagnosis and resistance to change. This cross-disciplinary synthesis is a hallmark of strong graduate-level management writing.
The paper opens with a theoretical frame about leadership failure before moving into a findings section divided by problem area: healthcare costs, IT adoption, chronic poor performance, and management systems. Each subsection introduces a problem, presents empirical examples or models, and connects back to the central theme of correct diagnosis. The conclusion synthesizes findings and reaffirms the paper's core prescription — cooperative, long-term, and diagnostically honest management practice.
Leadership failures occur most frequently because of ineptness, the inability to keep pace with development requirements, or simply because of a wrong diagnosis or mishandling of problems (Heisler, 1989). Newer and more unprecedented changes and forces keep emerging, and in many cases they are not addressed adequately because companies adhere to old ways. Managers and leaders grow accustomed to established methods, and when new developments arrive, old programs prove ineffective, costly, and a source of employee restiveness. There is an urgent need to shift American business culture away from a short-term, fast-buck orientation toward a long-term, employee-centered approach as the only viable path to building and maintaining competitiveness. Greater still is the need to adopt a new vision for correctly diagnosing and implementing responses to emerging problems within or affecting the human resources department.
Foremost among these new problems and issues are those concerning human resource management, healthcare, information technology, and the broader management system (Heisler, 1989).
In the past, healthcare costs were considered a management problem and were always an issue at the bargaining table between labor and management (Jordhal, 1992), since these costs form part of the worker's compensation package. With rising healthcare costs, this issue has grown more complex for both parties. Rather than adopting an adversarial stance, labor and management can agree to cooperate toward the shared goal of adequately responding to increasing health and dependent-care costs as well as on-the-job pressures. A number of businesses have opted for innovative programs to promote partnership between management and labor unions, and experience shows that these programs have contributed to greater employee productivity.
One such business was Nynex Corporation, which embarked on a labor-management partnership to provide funding assistance for child or elderly care in communities where its employees live and work (Jordhal, 1992). Another was General Motors, which adopted a system to help employees injured on the job and to provide counseling to reduce or manage stress, thereby saving on mental health benefits that drive up costs. A third example is MRC Bearings Company, which maintains a labor-management healthcare committee that evaluates alternatives to healthcare coverage before signing work contracts. Truck-Lite Company similarly operates a wellness program jointly with management.
MRC Bearings President Mike Piazza noted employees' favorable response to the effort and observed that they appreciate the connection between wellness and the healthcare cost initiative undertaken by management (Jordhal, 1992). He acknowledged that his company had not yet measured short-term cost impact, but expected their efforts to modify employee behavior to produce a positive effect on costs. Truck-Lite Company human resources manager Jose Zeman suggested that companies encourage teamwork to sustain such partnerships and focus closely on the membership dynamics of those responsible for implementation. Truck-Lite produces vehicular lighting with 500 workers, approximately 300 of whom are represented by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. Its partnership is implemented by an Employee Involvement and Betterment Team, which also oversees the operation of smaller teams in areas such as nutrition, fitness testing, and health education (Jordhal, 1992).
Another major problem area in human resources is the introduction of increasingly sophisticated information technology and its role in industrial failure and financial loss (Thorp, 1999). The experiences of Hershey, Whirlpool, Starbucks, and Bang & Olufsen serve as instructive lessons. Hershey's biggest challenge was a troubled new computer system; Starbucks' internet start-up expenses hurt its earnings; Bang & Olufsen faced financial difficulties due to SAP software implementation; and Whirlpool encountered shipping problems in attempting to go live and attributed the disruption to SAP as well. These disasters demonstrate that management must abandon the "silver bullet" approach of simply plugging in new technology and waiting for benefits and profits to materialize. Empirical evidence points to exactly that kind of thinking as a major cause of failure.
New technology hurdles are not, at their core, technology problems — they are business management problems that affect both labor and management alike (Thorp, 1999). Automating industrial processes was relatively straightforward when organizations first became acquainted with information technology in office environments. However, supply chain management, electronic commerce, and knowledge management are far more complicated, and far more is at stake.
The reality is that technology accounts for only 5–15% of what is required to realize full business benefits (Thorp, 1999). The remainder involves evaluating and rethinking the overall business system — from the details of individual processes all the way up to the fundamental nature of the business or industry. Organizations must now implement change, not merely technology, and the old practice of plugging in technology and expecting benefits to follow has become wholly inadequate. What is needed is a new approach to realizing the benefits and returns of IT-enabled change — one that goes beyond managing technology projects in isolation from broader business programs. This means elevating technology issues to the business level and evaluating all business programs as a managed portfolio, retaining only the most promising. This major shift in management approach also transforms decision-making from a one-time event into a proactively managed process that must carry through the full delivery of a product or service.
While the IT section of the human resources department may be accountable for delivering technical capabilities, the business itself is ultimately responsible for those capabilities in the context of delivering the final product or service to market (Thorp, 1999). The business and its IT department must collaborate in deciding what they want to achieve, who is accountable for what, how achievement will be measured, and how programs should be managed. The new approach to benefits realization demands an environment in which labor and management genuinely work together. Nothing less than a long-term, sustained, and combined change effort is required — one that reshapes how organizations think, manage, and act. It is a decision that will not transform everything overnight, but it must be initiated soon if businesses are to successfully reinvent themselves as competitive players in their industries (Thorp, 1999).
This century and those to come will require businesses to invest heavily — but wisely — in their human resources (Tellier, 1999). The organization cannot function without its people, and for employees to perform well, they must be adequately trained for their roles. As technology continues to evolve and grow more sophisticated, employees who operate it must be more intensively trained to keep pace. Each employee also needs to understand how his or her individual performance affects the business that invests in them. That investment includes listening to employee feedback and acting on it, recognizing contributions appropriately, and, above all, respecting employees as fellow workers who possess dignity as human beings.
An employee's pay must be commensurate with his or her performance and contribution to the company's overall success. In turn, company success must be measured against industry performance and the prompt delivery of products or services to market (Thorp, 1999). Chronically poor performance is a serious liability and something management must learn to address effectively.
Many businesses confront difficulty or fail on account of a wrong diagnosis of their organizational problems or a stubborn persistence in outmoded ways of handling management challenges. The most important and most difficult of these challenges center on human resources and healthcare costs, the misguided "silver bullet" concept about information technology, chronically poor performance, and the need for a general management system encompassing both the rank-and-file and managers themselves.
You’re 48% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.