netrashetty
Netra Shetty
Human Resource Management of Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company : The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company was founded in 1898 by Frank Seiberling. Goodyear manufactures tires for automobiles, commercial trucks, light trucks, SUVs, race cars, airplanes, and heavy earth-mover machinery.
Although the company was not connected with him, it was named in honor of Charles Goodyear. Goodyear invented vulcanized rubber in 1839. The first Goodyear Tires became popular because they were easily detachable and low maintenance.
Goodyear is very famous throughout the world because of the Goodyear blimp. The first Goodyear blimp flew in 1925. Today it is one of the most recognizable advertising icons in America. The company is the most successful tire supplier in Formula One history, with more starts, wins, and constructors' championships than any other tire supplier. They pulled out of the sport after the 1998 season.
HRM is seen by practitioners in the field as a more innovative view of workplace management than the traditional approach. Its techniques force the managers of an enterprise to express their goals with specificity so that they can be understood and undertaken by the workforce and to provide the resources needed for them to successfully accomplish their assignments. As such, HRM techniques, when properly practiced, are expressive of the goals and operating practices of the enterprise overall. HRM is also seen by many to have a key role in risk reduction within organizations.
Objectives are pre-determined goals to which individual or group activity in an organization is directed. Objectives of personnel management are influenced by organizational objectives and individual and social goals. Institutions are instituted to attain certain specific objectives. The objectives of the economic institutions are mostly to earn profits, and of the educational institutions are mostly to impart education and / or conduct research so on and so forth. However, the fundamental objective of any organization is survival. Organizations are not just satisfied with this goal. Further the goal of most of the organizations is growth and / or profits.
Institutions procure and manage various resources including human to attain the specified objectives. Thus, human resources are managed to divert and utilize their resources towards and for the accomplishment of organizational objectives. Therefore, basically the objectives of HRM are drawn from and to contribute to the accomplishment of the organizational objectives. The other objectives of HRM are to meet the needs, aspirations, values and dignity of individual employees and having due concern for the socio-economic problems of the community and the country.
The objectives of HRM of company:
1. To create and utilize an able and motivated workforce, to accomplish the basic organizational goals.
2. To establish and maintain sound organizational structure and desirable working relationships among all the members of the organization.
3. To secure the integration of individual or groups within the organization by co-ordination of the individual and group goals with those of the organization.
4. To create facilities and opportunities for individual or group development so as to match it with the growth of the organization.
5. To attain an effective utilization of human resources in the achievement of organizational goals.
6. To identify and satisfy individual and group needs by providing adequate and equitable wages, incentives, employee benefits and social security and measures for challenging work, prestige, recognition, security, status.
7. To maintain high employees morale and sound human relations by sustaining and improving the various conditions and facilities.
8. To strengthen and appreciate the human assets continuously by providing training and development programs.
9. To consider and contribute to the minimization of socio-economic evils such as unemployment, under-employment, inequalities in the distribution of income and wealth and to improve the welfare of the society by providing employment opportunities to women and disadvantaged sections of the society.
10. To provide an opportunity for expression and voice management.
11. To provide fair, acceptable and efficient leadership.
12. To provide facilities and conditions of work and creation of favorable atmosphere for maintaining stability of employment.
Management has to create conductive environment and provide necessary prerequisites for the attainment of the personnel management objectives after formulating them.
To be socially responsible to the needs and challenges of society while minimizing the negative impact of such demands upon the organization. The failure of organizations to use their resources for society's benefit may result in restrictions. For example, societies may pass laws that limit human resource decisions.
Organizational objective. To recognize that HRM exists to contribute to organizational effectiveness. HRM is not an end in itself; it is only a means to assist the organization with its primary objectives. Simply stated, the department exists to serve the rest of the organization.
HRM values for the management of people at work. Perhaps this taken-forgranted
dichotomy of workplace treatment toward employees can be explained
by a strong contingency orientation in the cognitive mindsets of many HR
managers. If people are viewed primarily or limitingly as a ``resource'' or
instrumental to organizational strategic ends (Dachler and Enderle, 1989), this
dominant, unitary HRM paradigm in many organizations would tend to group
people as well as other factors of production similarly as the simple A/B/C
classification system often used in time and expense allocation frameworks for
purchases or materials. This contingent and ``resource user'' perspective
concerning employee ``worth'' helps to create perceptions of ``first class'' versus
``second class'' employees and can erode widespread employee acceptance of the
discourse and espoused values of HRM and top management. Employee
cynicism and a lack of solidarity among employees to ``pull together'' to reach
certain organizational goals seems the result in many organizations.
Certainly, individuals with less conservative assumptions and values
priorities concerning organizational potentials are also attracted to HRM
careers. Alternative assumptions concerning potential organizational
functioning have long existed. Although early radical critiques of management
practice may have occasionally pressured American business leaders to
recognize and reduce some cases of abuse of human potentials, the influence of
such radicalism on overall HRM thinking and practice in American institutions
has been marginal. Less radical and more liberal or humanistic assumptions for
HRM practice are associated with various reforms advocated by theorists to
address the moral claims of organizational stakeholders within the context of
corporate capitalism. Academic theorists have suggested techniques, programs,
and policies as wide ranging as stakeholder analysis, social
responsiveness, issues management, ethical audits, and quality of working life
concerns such as flexitime and cafeteria compensation systems. Edwards and
Bennett (1987) refer to HRM ethical reforms as potentially including
comprehensive programs establishing ethics codes, training, ombudspersons,
hotlines, and various monitoring and enforcement approaches. Such
``progressive'' reforms in the USA are rhetorically engaged by conservative
critics who use efficiency and market-related metaphors against them as well
as by more radical critics who question how the adoption of only such limited
internal reforms can lead to significant human empowerment and social
change.
Educational material on the ethics of HRM practice seldom incorporates how
differing ideological beliefs such as conservative, liberal, or radical values
assumptions of practitioners may affect the definition or social construction of
whether an ethical dilemma/duty actually exists. The differing values
assumptions of HRM practitioners also seem to influence how individuals ``act''
upon any ethical reasoning and/or ethical intentions concerning a perceived
dilemma (Rest, 1986).
Within the HRM field, mixed messages or conflicting values assumptions
and ideals seem to exist. Some HRM managers may be torn at times between
strong values themes associated with the field such as communication
openness, empowerment and change, as well as an apparently contrasting set
of values for communication discretion, discipline and nurturance of existing
organizational cultures and interests. Other values such as the firm's
adaptation to dynamic marketplace change and potential outsourcing
advantages can seem to conflict with HRM desires for employee motivation
and wellbeing through reduction in threats such as employment insecurity.
Today's HRM managers and professionals are increasingly advised not to see
these values as dichotomous choices, but somehow to embrace ``paradox'' as the
simultaneous expression of diverse values. The necessary insights and skills
concerning ``how'' to embrace paradox through diverse values or interests
pursued, and not to appear contradictory or inconsistent, in HRM roles seem
much less established.
Implications for any emerging HRM ethic
Perhaps one pragmatic imperative associated with questions concerning any
potentially expanded sense of HRM ethical obligation would be forums
established to determine to what extent these claims are beginning to have
greater intersubjective acceptance among various stakeholder groups. Many
observers have long noted cynicism, mistrust, and lack of confidence toward
managerial and professional eÂlites held by certain organizational stakeholders.
Whether claims for expanded HRM ethical obligation have any validity to
those having more conservative and control-oriented HRM assumptions, the
more assertive communication of moral claims and expected ethical duties of
managers among stakeholder groups would influence evolving role
expectations for HRM practitioners.
Yet an emerging and different mindset regarding HRM ethical obligation
and practice, especially toward monitoring and compliance activities, faces
obvious obstacles associated with existing and surrounding institutional
practices. Legal and governmental reporting norms, often established on moral
bases to promote justice and protect individual and group rights, may actually
inhibit discourses aimed toward assuming a new and different ``control'' ethic in
employee relations. Any new ethic would also confront existing union
strategies, often oriented largely to reactive monitoring and balancing of
management ``rights''. More sophisticated communication approaches, beyond
those based on simple unitarist/pluralist interest models, would need to be
further developed to support different mindsets regarding HRM ethical
obligation. These new communication approaches and dialogic skills, if
actually used in organizational and institutional settings, could be used as
illustrative examples or models for HRM educational/developmental purposes.
HRM in American corporations still seems largely relegated to a role of
serving strategic and control interests, defined mostly by owners, institutional
investors and managers in work organizations, rather than conceived of as a
force in helping shape alternative organizational potentials. Existing HRM role
demands and work activities can inhibit the consciousness of HRM
practitioners toward potentially expanded ethical obligations toward
organizational members and stakeholders. Many HRM practitioners may
accept fully the aspirations found in their professional association's ethical
code and may believe firmly in such values as empowerment and corporate
social responsibility that are advocated in HRM textbooks and periodicals.
Although the company was not connected with him, it was named in honor of Charles Goodyear. Goodyear invented vulcanized rubber in 1839. The first Goodyear Tires became popular because they were easily detachable and low maintenance.
Goodyear is very famous throughout the world because of the Goodyear blimp. The first Goodyear blimp flew in 1925. Today it is one of the most recognizable advertising icons in America. The company is the most successful tire supplier in Formula One history, with more starts, wins, and constructors' championships than any other tire supplier. They pulled out of the sport after the 1998 season.
HRM is seen by practitioners in the field as a more innovative view of workplace management than the traditional approach. Its techniques force the managers of an enterprise to express their goals with specificity so that they can be understood and undertaken by the workforce and to provide the resources needed for them to successfully accomplish their assignments. As such, HRM techniques, when properly practiced, are expressive of the goals and operating practices of the enterprise overall. HRM is also seen by many to have a key role in risk reduction within organizations.
Objectives are pre-determined goals to which individual or group activity in an organization is directed. Objectives of personnel management are influenced by organizational objectives and individual and social goals. Institutions are instituted to attain certain specific objectives. The objectives of the economic institutions are mostly to earn profits, and of the educational institutions are mostly to impart education and / or conduct research so on and so forth. However, the fundamental objective of any organization is survival. Organizations are not just satisfied with this goal. Further the goal of most of the organizations is growth and / or profits.
Institutions procure and manage various resources including human to attain the specified objectives. Thus, human resources are managed to divert and utilize their resources towards and for the accomplishment of organizational objectives. Therefore, basically the objectives of HRM are drawn from and to contribute to the accomplishment of the organizational objectives. The other objectives of HRM are to meet the needs, aspirations, values and dignity of individual employees and having due concern for the socio-economic problems of the community and the country.
The objectives of HRM of company:
1. To create and utilize an able and motivated workforce, to accomplish the basic organizational goals.
2. To establish and maintain sound organizational structure and desirable working relationships among all the members of the organization.
3. To secure the integration of individual or groups within the organization by co-ordination of the individual and group goals with those of the organization.
4. To create facilities and opportunities for individual or group development so as to match it with the growth of the organization.
5. To attain an effective utilization of human resources in the achievement of organizational goals.
6. To identify and satisfy individual and group needs by providing adequate and equitable wages, incentives, employee benefits and social security and measures for challenging work, prestige, recognition, security, status.
7. To maintain high employees morale and sound human relations by sustaining and improving the various conditions and facilities.
8. To strengthen and appreciate the human assets continuously by providing training and development programs.
9. To consider and contribute to the minimization of socio-economic evils such as unemployment, under-employment, inequalities in the distribution of income and wealth and to improve the welfare of the society by providing employment opportunities to women and disadvantaged sections of the society.
10. To provide an opportunity for expression and voice management.
11. To provide fair, acceptable and efficient leadership.
12. To provide facilities and conditions of work and creation of favorable atmosphere for maintaining stability of employment.
Management has to create conductive environment and provide necessary prerequisites for the attainment of the personnel management objectives after formulating them.
To be socially responsible to the needs and challenges of society while minimizing the negative impact of such demands upon the organization. The failure of organizations to use their resources for society's benefit may result in restrictions. For example, societies may pass laws that limit human resource decisions.
Organizational objective. To recognize that HRM exists to contribute to organizational effectiveness. HRM is not an end in itself; it is only a means to assist the organization with its primary objectives. Simply stated, the department exists to serve the rest of the organization.
HRM values for the management of people at work. Perhaps this taken-forgranted
dichotomy of workplace treatment toward employees can be explained
by a strong contingency orientation in the cognitive mindsets of many HR
managers. If people are viewed primarily or limitingly as a ``resource'' or
instrumental to organizational strategic ends (Dachler and Enderle, 1989), this
dominant, unitary HRM paradigm in many organizations would tend to group
people as well as other factors of production similarly as the simple A/B/C
classification system often used in time and expense allocation frameworks for
purchases or materials. This contingent and ``resource user'' perspective
concerning employee ``worth'' helps to create perceptions of ``first class'' versus
``second class'' employees and can erode widespread employee acceptance of the
discourse and espoused values of HRM and top management. Employee
cynicism and a lack of solidarity among employees to ``pull together'' to reach
certain organizational goals seems the result in many organizations.
Certainly, individuals with less conservative assumptions and values
priorities concerning organizational potentials are also attracted to HRM
careers. Alternative assumptions concerning potential organizational
functioning have long existed. Although early radical critiques of management
practice may have occasionally pressured American business leaders to
recognize and reduce some cases of abuse of human potentials, the influence of
such radicalism on overall HRM thinking and practice in American institutions
has been marginal. Less radical and more liberal or humanistic assumptions for
HRM practice are associated with various reforms advocated by theorists to
address the moral claims of organizational stakeholders within the context of
corporate capitalism. Academic theorists have suggested techniques, programs,
and policies as wide ranging as stakeholder analysis, social
responsiveness, issues management, ethical audits, and quality of working life
concerns such as flexitime and cafeteria compensation systems. Edwards and
Bennett (1987) refer to HRM ethical reforms as potentially including
comprehensive programs establishing ethics codes, training, ombudspersons,
hotlines, and various monitoring and enforcement approaches. Such
``progressive'' reforms in the USA are rhetorically engaged by conservative
critics who use efficiency and market-related metaphors against them as well
as by more radical critics who question how the adoption of only such limited
internal reforms can lead to significant human empowerment and social
change.
Educational material on the ethics of HRM practice seldom incorporates how
differing ideological beliefs such as conservative, liberal, or radical values
assumptions of practitioners may affect the definition or social construction of
whether an ethical dilemma/duty actually exists. The differing values
assumptions of HRM practitioners also seem to influence how individuals ``act''
upon any ethical reasoning and/or ethical intentions concerning a perceived
dilemma (Rest, 1986).
Within the HRM field, mixed messages or conflicting values assumptions
and ideals seem to exist. Some HRM managers may be torn at times between
strong values themes associated with the field such as communication
openness, empowerment and change, as well as an apparently contrasting set
of values for communication discretion, discipline and nurturance of existing
organizational cultures and interests. Other values such as the firm's
adaptation to dynamic marketplace change and potential outsourcing
advantages can seem to conflict with HRM desires for employee motivation
and wellbeing through reduction in threats such as employment insecurity.
Today's HRM managers and professionals are increasingly advised not to see
these values as dichotomous choices, but somehow to embrace ``paradox'' as the
simultaneous expression of diverse values. The necessary insights and skills
concerning ``how'' to embrace paradox through diverse values or interests
pursued, and not to appear contradictory or inconsistent, in HRM roles seem
much less established.
Implications for any emerging HRM ethic
Perhaps one pragmatic imperative associated with questions concerning any
potentially expanded sense of HRM ethical obligation would be forums
established to determine to what extent these claims are beginning to have
greater intersubjective acceptance among various stakeholder groups. Many
observers have long noted cynicism, mistrust, and lack of confidence toward
managerial and professional eÂlites held by certain organizational stakeholders.
Whether claims for expanded HRM ethical obligation have any validity to
those having more conservative and control-oriented HRM assumptions, the
more assertive communication of moral claims and expected ethical duties of
managers among stakeholder groups would influence evolving role
expectations for HRM practitioners.
Yet an emerging and different mindset regarding HRM ethical obligation
and practice, especially toward monitoring and compliance activities, faces
obvious obstacles associated with existing and surrounding institutional
practices. Legal and governmental reporting norms, often established on moral
bases to promote justice and protect individual and group rights, may actually
inhibit discourses aimed toward assuming a new and different ``control'' ethic in
employee relations. Any new ethic would also confront existing union
strategies, often oriented largely to reactive monitoring and balancing of
management ``rights''. More sophisticated communication approaches, beyond
those based on simple unitarist/pluralist interest models, would need to be
further developed to support different mindsets regarding HRM ethical
obligation. These new communication approaches and dialogic skills, if
actually used in organizational and institutional settings, could be used as
illustrative examples or models for HRM educational/developmental purposes.
HRM in American corporations still seems largely relegated to a role of
serving strategic and control interests, defined mostly by owners, institutional
investors and managers in work organizations, rather than conceived of as a
force in helping shape alternative organizational potentials. Existing HRM role
demands and work activities can inhibit the consciousness of HRM
practitioners toward potentially expanded ethical obligations toward
organizational members and stakeholders. Many HRM practitioners may
accept fully the aspirations found in their professional association's ethical
code and may believe firmly in such values as empowerment and corporate
social responsibility that are advocated in HRM textbooks and periodicals.
Last edited by a moderator: