Developing Professional Practice: Recruitment And Selection Process

The Objectives

Explain Developing Professional Practice?

The Purpose of the project is to investigate The relevant company (Lets name it Royalty)’s recruitment and selection process. The process should be cost effective in manner and must ensure that only qualified people are brought to the company. It also needed to be seen that the employees are trained, monitored, remunerated and retained. This will require thorough planning and management of the Human resource department of our Organization (Everyday Life – Global Post, 2015).

• The recruitment and selection of talented and qualified personnel for each department
   
• On boarding the new hires and employee retention
   
• Talent management and employee boarding
   
• Training and monitoring employees
•  
• Performance management and rewards
   
• Developing leadership

The SMART objectives Activities are planned on the basis of 6 months. The deliverables are assigned and the action plan is thus provided through a Gantt chart.

TASKS	DELIVERABLES Save Time On Research and Writing Hire a Pro to Write You a 100% Plagiarism-Free Paper. Get My Paper	JAN	FEB	MARCH	APRIL	MAY	JUNE	JULY
Carry out a situational analysis	A survey sheet and reports or documents
Complete a project risk analysis	A sheet listed with the risks
Selection and Recruitment	The CVs and joining letters
Team building and training	The working sheets of each week
Monitoring and developing	The working sheets of each week
Progress Review	A progress chart of the teams or in some cases for individuals
Review the level of participation in the Employee Engagement Survey	The Survey sheet
Analyse the findings	A list of issues and progress
Resolving any unexpected issues	Proof of any kind of issues
Present Report to CEO	The final report designed by the HR department

The PESTLE and Porter’s 5 forces analysis is to done to understand how the Company is fairing in the external micro and macro environment (Mathis and Jackson, 2003).

Political scenario of UK is stable and organized won’t affect the business much.

The socio-economic condition although can influence the R&S procedure. High employment rate is good but turnover in the industry will be negative for the project.

The technological advancement will have little to do with the project but the people to be recruited should be technologically savvy.

The company must abide by the legal regulations and norms of managing and recruiting human resource.

The people to be recruited must believe in environmental stability and the project hence has to be sustainable.

The bargaining of suppliers would determine the financial requirements of the company and has thus little to do with the HR process

The bargaining power of customers can create pressure on the company and hence the employees should be aware of this power

The threat from new entrants in the market will increase the competition and the project must take account of how this pressure could be minimized.

Industrial pressure in the form of threat from rivals must be also being paid attention to. Hence the HR department should take note of how to retain employees.

Threat of substitute industries with more opportunities and better pay scale is an impending threat.

Strength- the CEO supports the process and is backing the project. Also the current team is encouraging the R&S procedure.

Weakness- is the resistance from other teams or departments and old employees.

Opportunities- the reduced cost in R&S and retaining employees, the involvement of employees.

Threats- are other companies providing competitive packages whisking away the employed.

The five main threats that are present in the organization are the management issues like organizational changes in the form of policy change, change of authority etc. The other kind of threats is to the company’s reputation which could be marred by a variety of factors. Financial factors like low budgets, loss and down revenues could lead to downfall of the business and the project. Technological threats are substitute equipments and products which are a looming threat. Finally the new procedures in the processes and methods of R&S can lead to complications. Hence from the Situational analysis the threats identified are (Rouse, 2004):

Action Plan

Risk 1: a risk or threat is present due to the organization due the assigning of a new CEO. The organization was used to work in a known way. The introduction of new set of rules, objectives and ambitious goals by the new CEO might not be accepted by the employees resulting to chaos, dissatisfaction and poor performance at work.

This is an organizational threat, which could be perceived by the lack in enthusiasm, grievances and poor performance of the employees. The issue is to be resolved by communicating with the employees, making them understand the need for change and the new activities and a letter of motivation provided to every employee written on behalf of the CEO. Understanding their problems, helping them out, providing enough scope for development and responding to the queries are other methods (Topchik, 2007).

Risk 2: another risk is present in the form of financial limitations which might hamper the R&S project. The company must take an elaborate process of recruiting, developing and team building process. The idea is to increase the employee engagement ratio; hence a lot of funding is required to complete these programs. A high turnover rate in the industry can lead to a loss of the investment in the project.

This is identified when the budget is limited but a lot of employees are to recruited, trained and retained. The employees would be disappointed if there is any lack of remuneration and reward and that would be evident through a number of resignations or absence from office. It could be sorted by proper planning and management of the system of recruiting within specific intervals so that enough time is available within recruiting each group (Woods, 2011).

This criterion is undertaken to create or design team building activities which will ensure that the people recruited are grouped under likeminded and specialized skilled groups. The process would require activities which will ensure bonding and will solve issues. Creative thinking is also encouraged in the team so that it will enhance the productivity of the work (Miller, 2004).

Firstly defining the problem- the pestle and swot analysis could be undertaken to understand the problems and identify them (Stewart and Powell, 2004).

Secondly the alternatives are to be generated through brainstorming sessions and through De Bono’s 6 hats. The groups or individuals are to be assigned specific tasks like White for  research of facts, Yellow for probing the benefits, Black for assessing the difficulties, Red for suggesting the intuition on the assignment, Green for exploring new ideas and  Blue to manage the thinking process.

Situational Analysis

The third part of the aspect is the evaluation process and determining the best suitable solution. It is also called the decision making process. It includes the cost benefit analysis and force field analysis.

The Cost benefit analysis determines whether-

The investment on the project was effective; it is also to be used by the teams to assess the investment in each assignment.

The cost of each assignment is to be compared with the total or expected benefit of the project. A suitable ratio would tell that the project was successful .

The force field analysis determines how the project performs under the positive and negative pressure exerted on it. The positive forces are the forces for change and the employee driving forces. On the other hand the negative forces are the forces resisting change like old employees, annoyed employees and the restraining forces like lack of expertise or enough funding and motivation. It could understand with a diagram.

The next step is to ensure that there is enough bonding and team work within the working groups. Team work is also needed to resolve the issues and conflicts that might arise due to personal or professional reasons (Arai, 2015).

The Tuckman and Belbin team building model is used form the Team and manage it (Trompenaars and Coebergh, n.d.).:

Forming- first the team is established and tasks are assigned to each individual. People behave independently and time is spent on forming bonds, planning activities and information collecting.

Storming- the team addresses the task by suggesting ideas; brainstorming session forges a stronger bond. There might be chances of conflict here and the task might get stuck due to lack of consensus. If the team is more focused on having a consensus that plan might turn out to be weak and ineffective. The team must engage in clear decision making while reaching a consensus and need effective leadership from the Project leader.

Norming- in this phase the team moves towards harmonious practices of abiding by the rules and values on which they will operate. The members start to put their faith on each other and trust the consensus and each others contribution. It’s an ideal stage but issue may arise as the team might turn complacent and loose the fervor of creative edge (Brand, 2003).

Performing- here the team forms an optimism and performs the task by delegating duties. A range of conflicts might arise when the actual task is being done, hence a leadership personality should ensure that the issues are resolved to have a work flow.

PESTLE

Adjourning- is when the team disbands after task completion and joins separate teams or work individually for future assignments.

Reforming- is to be done if the task is failed or needed to be done again, it might include some changes in the plans and process and the people involved.

The process to resolve conflict is described through Kilman Model:

Compete- the individuals compete against each other on the same assigned task and takes and assertive stance, believing one’s own process to be correct.

Accommodating- the next stage is when the individual in spite of his believes chooses to agree with the other to reach a consensus or resolve the issue to resume task.

Avoiding- it is not a very good option yet often to resolve the issue and continue with the task, the team members decide to avoid the conflict that arose, or withdrawing the claims.

Compromising- it is a both assertive and cooperative option as all the parties included in the conflict decides to step down a bit and agrees to reach an unified compromised decision.

Collaborating- finally it is where all the parties are listening to each other, respecting each other views or understanding the issue. They work together to find the best possible idea or solution.

As a Team manager the model that should be approached is the HEAT model of (Miller, 2015):

• Hearing to the problems and queries
• Empathizing on the issue
• Apologize if there is any fault or lack of opportunity on part of the Company
• Take ownership of the action and lead the team on times of crisis .

The behavior of people is a driving force of the projects and the political behavior of the other people or teams influence the project. The other team or people exert different kind of pressure on the people working in the project thus either disrupting the process or influencing the way the project is being done (Lawler and Bacharach, 2009).

Political behavior is the result of power. This powers which influences the activities of the team are (Sreenivas, 2015):

Coercive Power- that is forcing to act against will

Reward Power- providing reward to behave in certain way, that is either work hard or disband from the team.

Legitimate power- is the power hold by official like the CEO and the managers who will influence the team activity.

Referent Power- is when the team is influenced by the positive, successful and fame of some other personality or group

Expert Power- is when a person having more knowledge than the team members influencing the decisions and the way the team was performing.

Informational Power- is when the other person provides information to either enhance the project or create disputes.

Porter’s 5 Forces

First the other people or team may create disruptions in the working of the project by influencing individual members (Kaplan, n.d.) None is cooperating on helping or providing relevant information or sources to the working team. Also Often not providing any kind of appreciation or remuneration and motivation may also lead to the team members getting disappointed and will influence the success of the project in a negative way.

The second example of political behavior could be higher professional and well wishers or stakeholders and shareholders who want the project to succeed and guidelines the team members or provide funding for remuneration and reward so that the people involved feel more empowered and appreciated and gets the right amount of enthusiasm to make the project a success.

Hence the political behavior influences the success of the project; as a result it is needed that the effect of such kind of behavior is minimized through influencing, persuasion and negotiation.

The team members are to be influenced to convince them that the project would be successful and they would benefit from it. Cialdini’s 6 principles of influence are used. It consists of Reciprocity or getting a benefit out of the project, a consistent commitment to the project, critical acclamation through social proof of the projects success, liking of the other team members and an amicable relation with the project leader, authority of the project leader and the scarcity of opportunity to work in something big.

The persuasion could be done using the rational model, which suggests that the beliefs of the people about the project and the values of the person as well as of the team and /or motive of the project will lead to a positive and enthusiastic attitude among the team that their behavior will be to strive to work harder to make the project a success .

Finally negotiation needs to be done in some cases to ensure that people are bound to make the project a success. The RADPAC model suggest that establish rapport, analyse the situation, debate over the solutions and issues, Propose ideas, Agree on the best solution and then close the deal with the agreed upon way of resolving the issue

Following these methods will ensure that in spite of the obstacles the Project will run smoothly.

After critical analysis of the process of recruiting, selecting, team building, developing, training and close monitoring systems of the project it is to be decided that which process would be most suitable for the organization and which will yield better results. Also it has to be seen that the models of identifying and resolving issues and conflicts are also taken under consideration. Ultimately the outline of the improvement process that is to be adopted is presented to the CEO for applying it in the Human Resource department and project development.

SWOT analysis

Hence the cost benefit model is adopted to find out which idea is most cost effective and sound in making the project a success (Staff, 2015). Also the cost of each little task is too compared with the expected outcome and the one with less cost yet better cost needs to be shortlisted. Next the ideas are to be sorted through the force field analysis of the positive driving forces and the restrain forces that are present for each idea. The ideas with least restraining forces and more driving force of change are to be adopted.

Hence at last the shortlisted ideas along with the cost budget and SWOT analysis are presented to the CEO to take the final decision.

Conclusion

The report was a brief study of the models and theories of team building and professional development. As a manger of a new project the actions that need to be undertaken and the processes that re to be followed were stated under this report. Finally assessing all the possible methods of managing team building and maintaining activity as well as the project a recommendation process idea is generated which will help in sorting the ideas that will improve the Project process (Mondy, Noe and Gowan, 2005).

References

Arai, T. (2015). Engaging Conflict History: Toward an Integrated Method of Conflict Resolution Dialogue and Capacity Building. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 32(3), pp.277-298.

Brand, M. (2003). Consensus building and ?Smart Growth?. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 21(2), pp.189-209.

Brunot, T. (2015). Human Resource Accounting’s Cost-Benefit Analysis. [online] Business & Entrepreneurship – azcentral.com. Available at: https://yourbusiness.azcentral.com/human-resource-accountings-costbenefit-analysis-27747.html [Accessed 17 Jul. 2015].

Clements, J. (2015). TU-CD-213-02: Communication, Negotiation, and Persuasion: Approaches for Better Results. Medical Physics, 42(6), pp.3598-3598.

Everyday Life – Global Post, (2015). Examples of Human Resources Goals & Objectives. [online] Available at: https://everydaylife.globalpost.com/examples-human-resources-goals-objectives-39961.html [Accessed 17 Jul. 2015].

Kaplan, E. (n.d.). The Iceberg Theory of Campaign Contributions: Political Threats and Interest Group Behavior. SSRN Journal.

Lawler, E. and Bacharach, S. (2009). Organizational politics. Bingley,: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Loewen, P. and Loo, R. (2004). Assessing team climate by qualitative and quantitative approaches. The Learning Organization, 11(3), pp.260-272.

Mathis, R. and Jackson, J. (2003). Human resource management. Mason, Ohio: Thomson/South-western.

Miller, B. (2004). Quick team-building activities for busy managers. New York: AMACOM.

Miller, T. (2015). Engaging leadership. [online] https://www.trainingjournal.com/. Available at: https://www.belbin.com/content/page/9196/When%204%20Worlds%20Collide%20TJ%202014.pdf [Accessed 17 Jul. 2015].

Mondy, R., Noe, R. and Gowan, M. (2005). Human resource management. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Rouse, M. (2004). Knowledge Translation and Risk Management. Risk manag (Bas), 6(2), pp.9-15.

Sreenivas, A. (2015). Does People Behavior Impact Projects? How? And what do we do about it?. [online] Projecttimes.com. Available at: https://www.projecttimes.com/articles/does-people-behavior-impact-projects-how-and-what-do-we-do-about-it.html [Accessed 17 Jul. 2015].

Staff, E. (2015). Cost-Benefit Analysis. [online] Entrepreneur. Available at: https://www.entrepreneur.com/encyclopedia/cost-benefit-analysis [Accessed 17 Jul. 2015].

Stewart, B. and Powell, S. (2004). Team building and team working. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 10(1/2), pp.35-38.

Topchik, G. (2007). The first-time manager’s guide to team building. New York: AMACOM.

Trompenaars, A. and Coebergh, P. (n.d.). 100+ management models.

Ury, W. (2013). The Five Ps of Persuasion: Roger Fisher’s Approach to Influence. Negotiation Journal, 29(2), pp.133-140.

Woods, M. (2011). Risk management in organizations. New York, NY: Routledge.