HUMAN RESOURCE PRACTICE

New Forms of Career: The Challenge to

Human Resource Management

Polly Parker and Kerr Inkson*

University of Auckland

Keywords: boundaryless careers, labour mobility, career structure, self-development, role of HRM

The concept of career has recently undergone massive change. Traditionally, careers have been, in Kanters (1989) terms, either bureaucratic- constructed on a logic of loyalty to an employing organization and ascent of a hierarchy of status and responsibility; or professional- constructed on a logic of increasing competence within a specific occupational frame of reference. To secure and maintain a stable workforce, companies have come to rely on predictable career behavior built around stable organizational and occupational institutions.In recent years, however, the comfortable accommodations between organizations seeking stable workforces and individuals seeking secure careers have been disrupted by massive restructuring, downsizing, outsourcing; flexible forms of organization, rapid growth of new technology, obsolescent occupations, and shifting occupational boundaries (Inkson, 1997). The new mobile careers are interorganizational and, to an extent, inter-occupational: Kanter (1989) characterises a third career form as entrepreneurial, with a logic of career development through the growth of organizational and personal value. In boundaryless careers (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996), individuals careers take them across organizational boundaries, and career assets are acquired and developed through cumulative learning across organizations.

The change reflects a shift from long-term to short-term commitment, from noncontingent to contingent rewards, from company ownership to individual ownership of the career, and from permanent mutual loyalty to temporary opportunistic alliance (Arthur, Claman, & De Fillippi, 1995). Career progress comes not from intracompany hierarchical advancement, but from inter-company self-development.

For HR managers, the most obvious result of the change is the problem of labour turnover. How does one plug holes in an edifice which is in constant movement? However, the changes and problems go far beyond this. Associated difficulties are loss of commitment by the workforce, continuity problems in specific areas, instability in the organization culture, loss of intellectual property, negative returns on investments in initial socialization and training, and the disruption of intraorganizational teams and extra-organizational relationships. The potential consequences for human resource management (HRM) are momentous.

In this paper we consider how well current theories and systems of HRM stand up in an environment where more and more participants in the labour market, rather than relying on corporate action for their career development, seek to assert control over their own careers. We also consider the appropriateness of corporate action -typically embodied in HRM activities-in the context of the new career environment. We ask, and attempt to answer, the question, How should the HR function respond to these changes?* The authors would like to thank Prof. Michael Arthur, Suffolk University, Boston, MA, for his comments on an earlier draft.

HUMAN RESOURCES AS A SOURCE OF COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE

The early 1980s were marked by rapid and dramatic change, which affected both. host economies and their associated employment structures (Miles & Snow, 1984). The traditional means of competitive advantage-economic, strategic, and technological-were no longer sufficient. Organizational capability to change and adapt was proffered as a source of competitive advantage (Ulrich, 1987). In focusing on better deployment of human resources to create organizational capability, Ulrich (1987) signalled the elaboration of the Harvard framework of HRM (Beer, Spector, Lawrence, Quinn & Mills, 1985) to emphasize competency-based behaviour.The emphasis is evident in the resource-based view of the firm. Attention moved from the properties of the industry environment (e.g. Porter, 1985) to the internal resources of the firm (Wright, McMahan, & Williams, 1994). Human capital was recognized as a key asset for investment and development (Beer et al., 1985; Boxall, 1994). In the resource-based view, competitive advantage is facilitated through the development of firm-specific competencies within the repository of the companys HRM system (Lado & Wilson, 1994).Descriptions of competencies remain consistent on two themes: (a) the source of competencies is always internal to the firm, and (b) competency is produced by the way a firm utilises its internal skills and resources, relative to the competition (Reed & DeFillippi, 1990: 89). It is these assumptions which we now question.The resource-based view claims that because the company competencies on which strategies are based are assembled from the motivations, knowledge, skills, and networks of individual employees, HRM (as a philosophy, though not necessarily as a discrete function) must have a primary influence within an organizations strategic framework (Boxall, 1994; Schuler & Jackson, 1987; Wright et al., 1994). Sustained competitive advantages cannot be purchased on open markets: instead, such advantages must be found in resources already controlled by a firm (Barney, 1991: 117).This matching model ignores the possibility that employee interests might make a difference to their prescriptions (Boxall, 1992: 68). In the model, the emphasis in HRM is to retain members and limit mobility: HR practices such as reward systems, communication systems, training programs and socialisation systems can be levers to develop the human capital to behave in ways congruent with firm goals, the essence of &dquo;strategic&dquo; human resource management (Wright et al., 1994: 319).HRM AND CAREERS

By its nature, HRM theory gives primacy to a single level of analysis: the organization. People are seen as elements in a pool of relatively inert human resources, who can be induced by appropriate HRM policies to remain members of the organization, to work in organizational roles, and to develop their competencies for the organizations benefit.Many organizations continue to conceive of careers as company constructs designed to facilitate stability, commitment, and the development of desired employee skills and behaviour. Therefore, organizations build HR systems with strategic HR plans, career development programs, and succession plans, which provide hierarchical career paths to build company-relevant expertise and encourage loyalty. The organization intent on retaining a stable workforce recruits and socializes potentially stable members, offers training and development to fill organizational roles, promotes from within, and encourages people to seek higher status. It offers inducements for loyalty, defers rewards until higher status levels are reached, and provides service bonuses and pension provisions.These HRM policies, developed to encourage employee commitment, carry implicit signals of career expectations. They encourage career dependency of the employee on the organization. While both parties are claimed to benefit, it is assumed that competency development is firm-specific, embedded in a firms history and culture, and generates tacit organizational knowledge (Lado & Wilson,1994: 699). This suggests that the responsibility for the individuals career development lies with the organization. Thus, it is possible for the organization to sustain competitive advantage through the long-term accumulation and development of human capital in corporate careers.The variances between the ideals and the realities of careers propose a central challenge. Careers may be viewed from the perspective of either the organization or the employee (Gunz, 1989). From an employees perspective, he or she is not a resource for the achievement of organizational goals, but an autonomous actor striving to reach personal goals. From this perspective, organizations are resources for people. Thus, career actors reverse the assumptions on which much HRM thinking is grounded. They recognize the career advantages that accrue from mobility and versatility, and engage in inter-company boundaryless careers (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996). In so doing, they create the labour turnover problems of which HR managers complain.Career mobility is facilitated by moves to more flexible organizational forms. In the search for new ways of working, the traditional boundaries of hierarchy, function and geography disappear, and restructuring, alliance building and flexibility result in the development of corporations without boundaries (Hirschom & Gilmore,1992: 104). The blurring of boundaries is apparent in the new world labour market (Johnston, 1991); in workforce flexibility (Parker & Hall, 1993), and in new structures of work (Bridges, 1994). Delayering removes hierarchical boundaries. Team development and multi-skilling remove specialization boundaries. Outsourcing and joint venturing remove external boundaries. Downsizing and flattening break the security and the commitment of middle managers (Heckscher, 1995). Cross-functional teams demand reconfiguration of roles as new groups form and disband around project work.Employees aspirations are also changing. Increasingly, the focus for most members of the workforce is not on employment security but on potential employability (Kanter, 1989; Waterman, Waterman & Collard, 1994). Employability dependsless on detailed company knowledge, and more on flexibility and versatility. Employees become aware that the kind of personal development they experience in a single organization or role may become problematic in preparation for taking on new roles elsewhere. As they become more and more expert in a single organizations competencies and idiosyncracies, they may progressively dis-equip themselves for alternative employment.These new organizational forms and workforce aspirations have transformed employment relationships and careers (Inkson, 1997). Traditional maps for career paths no longer describe reality. Career ladders are disappearing (Inkson & Coe,1993). Instead, alternative metaphors such as hopping from job to job (Kanter,1989: 299) or climbing on a jungle gym (Gunz, 1989) describe careers that are neither linear nor incremental.Druckers (1994) description of the knowledge age as one of social transformation, in which the mobility of knowledge workers is of the essence, presents a challenge to society to create a sense of community for workers beyond their employing institutions. Significantly, Drucker has reversed his longstanding position that organizations should take care of long-term employee welfare. Individual boundaryless career behaviour is characterized by marketability outside of the present employer, inter-firm mobility, extra-organizational networks and subjective rather than objective criteria of success (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996). This career model may become prototypal in the new millennium.

DEALING WITH CAREER MOBILITY

Boundaryless career and similar paradigms call into question the philosophical underpinnings of HRM and its implications in practice. In seeking to answer these questions, we were assisted by case material gathered from, and reflections by, four HR managers occupying senior positions in major companies in the Auckland area. Each was the senior HR manager in his or her company, each was involved in toplevel company strategy, and each indicated that career mobility, particularly among skilled and professional staff was a major problem. Some details about their companies are set out in table 1.Inter-organizational career mobility by employees affects organizations most obviously through labour turnover and the loss of talent. The HR managers reported that few new employees arrived with a clear expectation of a long-term organizational career. For example, Astrid reported:

The average age is 30 and only 8% are over 40. The average service is about 18 months now-were having to ramp up recruitment. But typically people we talk to say, I am really pleased with the opportunity ... I will probably stay here for 18 months and then move on.Staff discontinuities frequently preclude the provision of career support. HR managers find themselves preoccupied with plugging gaps rather than thinking strategically. Creating a stable organizational core in terms of competencies and culture is difficult in such a fluid situation. In considering possible responses to these problems, examining the literature, and gathering information from the four informants as to how their companies were responding, we found it convenient to group our ideas under four headings:

1 Reduce internal boundaries

2 Encourage loyalty by supporting mobility

3 Educate management in the new realities

4 Reconceptualize HRM, both as a philosophy and as a functionReduce Internal Boundaries

One approach to slowing turnover is to encourage the reduction or removal of boundaries within the organization. These boundaries are often created by the formalizing apparatus of organization structure, such as hierarchical levels, job descriptions, and specialist departmentation, which attempt to focus expertise and discourage individuals from learning or progressing outside tight parameters. The employees desire for versatility and externally valid learning may be met by nontraditional internal career moves. The expressed desire for people to cross internal boundaries has been endorsed by several recent authors (e.g. Ashkenas, Jick, Ulrich & Kerr, 1995) who emphasize staff liquidity to be responsive to changing organizational circumstances.Natasha reported:Loyalty today is to the role rather than to the company. Once someone has been in a role for 2-3 years they start to get edgy and after 5 years they ask why havent I been moved? Company loyalty is only there if they see their role as one in which they can develop. They want to be in a role for 2-3 years for their CV.Natashas company used monthly individual feedback and coaching meetings to identify competency developments and as a means of stretching people further within their roles for development. The company also went to some trouble to ensure that when people feel there is nothing more to learn from their role ... they get away from that role.The retail company had found it useful to increase the use of the more flexible terminology of roles rather than jobs. It also tried to ensure that it gave people responsibility for core plus project work, i.e. temporary assignments facilitating fresh individual development in addition to regular work routines. The changed philosophy was assisted by the fact that the company was in a turnaround situation.In initiatives such as these, the organization recognizes that it can, through its involvement of the individual in role extension and project activity, help the individual to add to his or her career capital and become a co-investor with the individual in his or her career. In the longer-term, the mobility of the individuals career may well mean that another employer reaps the benefits of the new learning. In the short-term, however, the employees observation that there is ongoing careerrelevant learning helps to maintain his or her loyalty to the organization. As the professional services company HR manager put it:

People are sensible. Theyre not so much worried about the dollar market but about the opportunities. Those who dont have a short-term horizon are being sensible economists. Theyre saying, This stuff on my CV is going to make me an investment in a few yearstime.Encourage Loyalty by Supporting Mobility

Astrid reported a case where an engineer who had external opportunities was upfront and signalled the issue to his manager. The manager tried to get him kicked out. This type of loyalty syndrome is frequently counter-productive, because it precludes honest exploration between individuals and their organizations around the reality that the individuals may aspire to careers beyond the organizations boundaries.In contrast, Bartlett and Ghoshal (1996) envision a new corporate era grounded in career processes that are specifically individualized rather than hierarchically constrained. An appropriate policy is to encourage employees, who often conceal their aspirations for career mobility for fear of being thought disloyal, to be honest and open about these aspirations. This allows the organization the chance to conduct authentic discussions with them about their futures and to respond to their real needs. As John put it: ,

I would rather have somebody that was open about what they want to do. If we cannot give them the opportunity at least we know about it ... I prefer them to discuss opportunities, be open about when theyre going to leave. Theres a need for openness, otherwise you get surprised.Paradoxically, providing the development inside the company that people feel they will need for their futures outside the organization may strengthen their loyalty. As Harvey reported: In the skills we invest in developing [people], we make them more marketable elsewhere. But in general, the more you provide opportunities for personal growth, the less likely they are to leave.Educate Managers about Careers

Because an individuals career development is intimately tied up with his or her day-to-day on-the-job activities, the involvement of those managing such activities is critical. Line managers must therefore be ready to engage with employees career concerns. This calls for consciousness-raising, particularly about the long-term role a manager can play in understanding subordinates career concerns and in providing career development opportunities.However, the focus needs to be not just on utilizing individuals career concerns so that organizational interests are directly met, but also on supporting individuals self-determined career aspirations. As Natasha stated:

They [employees] are the drivers. We [the company] can help with advice, direction, support and ideas but the prime motivation must come from them. There is no way we should try and sell something to them that isnt a win-win.

A major issue for long-serving managers concerns changing their own loyalty assumptions. Cultural caste systems where long-service core employees are regarded as a natural aristocracy and more mobile staff and temporary contractors as pariahs should be discouraged. Aspects of the employment system designed to encourage managerial loyalty may have to be changed. Harvey stated: Were changing [employees] shareholding from a superannuation model to a value model. We are moving it to how much value are you to us? rather than up in a straight lineThe disloyalty syndrome may be treated by a new platform of employment relationship grounded in communal interests and short-term project arrangements. These retain the basis of employment close to prevailing external market mechanisms for peoples security and mobility. Accordingly, managers are encouraged to engage through different forms of employment contracting by rebalancing traditional relational assumptions with more realistic transactional ones (Rousseau,1995), and internalizing a new paradigm set of employment principles which reverse traditional loyalty-based assumptions (Arthur, Claman & DeFillippi, 1995). In this context, the manager ceases to be an agent of bureaucratic control and instead becomes a career coach (Heckscher, 1995; Bartlett & Ghoshal, 1995).Reconceptualize HRM, both as a Philosophy and as a Function

To this point we have emphasized the role of the organization as a whole and of rank-and-file managers in facilitating new approaches to people management based on the recognition and acceptance of the mobile career phenomenon. But another confronting question concerns the relevance of HRM in the new era. What is the specific role of HRM in new careers environment, beyond that of consciousness raising?A recent Fortune magazine article recommended dismantling the HRM function. The central argument was that the so-called personnel function was the last bureaucracy within the contemporary corporation. To circumvent bureaucratic impediments, HRM could more usefully be devolved to line managers or contracted to outside suppliers (Stewart, 1996). The counter argument is for HRM to embrace the new career forms explicitly, and to shift emphasis from bureaucracy-based to knowledge-based activities. The problem for contemporary HRM is that it appears to be caught between these alternative positions.How well equipped is a conventional, internally located and focused HRM function to handle an increasingly unstable, uncontrollable, internal and external labour market? With high labour turnover and increasing mobility across the organizations boundaries, it may become necessary for the organization to develop better knowledge of, and sensitivity to, the external labour market. Rather than emphasizing control over, and planned development of, the organizations permanent workforce, HRM may increasingly have the role of developing temporary joint ventures with mobile career actors (including contractors, interim managers, and consultants). These relationships are also likely to involve external agencies such as employment agencies, training and development consultants, and suppliers of temporary labour, which act as go-betweens and match-makers in the labour market.Can the HRM function itself be outsourced? John, the head of an HR department employing 16 people, saw major possibilities:

Were reviewing four temp. agencies now. All of them are raising the issue of development. They all have programs. They say, we can help you manage your temps. You can outsource everything. You can contract in training and development. You can get employment relations specialists when you need them. In our organization you could get rid of most of the HR people. Youd need someone like me in a go-between role. But even I could be on contract. The same model applies to finance, IT, property. We dont need people. We could run the company by phone or set up the CEO in Vanuatu and contract everything else out. HR specialists arent needed in-house.

This radical solution perhaps underestimates the importance of retaining a strategic consideration of HR issues within the organizations core.Understandably, HR managers, whose job tends to be to fill the gaps, typically see career mobility, at least in the context of their organizations, as a problem to be solved. In doing so, they reflect conventional HRM assumptions. But career mobility is also an opportunity to be grasped. Mobility provides an opportunity not only for temporary relationship-makers such as external agencies, but also for organizations which seek to build their competencies in the long term. The HR managers to whom we spoke reflected some ambivalence between their roles as would-be controllers of labour mobility and of their employees careers, and as promotors of new, flexible types of employment relationships.Incoming employees in a high-mobility organizations bring with them valuable, and often novel, expertise, learning, values, and contacts. How can these be transferred and trapped within the organization, after the almost inevitable departure of the employees who first introduced them, so that they become part of its culture, its strategy, its institutions and its networks? The emphasis in building and retaining resources must refocus from the people who bring in knowledge to the knowledge which they bring. Should the HR manager become, or be replaced by, a KR manager (knowledge resource manager)?It appears that HRM, whether practised from within the organization or sourced from elsewhere, may become less an acquirer, developer and controller of a company-owned labour force, and more a broker between firms evolving boundaryless strategies and individuals ursuing boundaryless careers.CONCLUSION

According to Miles and Snow (1996), the twentieth-century structure of pyramid organizations created second wave careers characterized by the incremental acquisition over time of responsibility, status and formal rewards. More recently, network organizations with fluid and permeable boundaries have generated third wave careers, identified by horizontal rather than vertical movement. For the future, it is possible to conceive of careers developing more reciprocal relationships with organizational forms. Miles and Snow (1996) describe employment relationships of the future as a fourth wave of enterprise development in which individual work patterns will drive organizational form rather than following it.Conventional HR theory makes the assumption that organizations create careers. It is equally arguable that people, through their career behaviour, create organizations ; that the career is not an artefact of organization strategy and structure, but, rather, that the organization, and even the industry, is a dynamic nexus of interacting careers (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996; Arthur, Inkson & Pringle, in press).Do organizations create careers, or do careers create organizations? Both statements are true simultaneously. Organizations and careers must remain mutally supportive, but the dynamic between them must emphasize that the employees contribution is not dependent on the organization but is interdependent with it. The new dynamic creates constantly evolving networks and partnerships. This conceptualization implies that organizations, rather than viewing employees and contractors as human resources, to be managed, must view them as partners in a joint venture. If the HR function has a purpose, it is not to manage a resource but to build relationships with business partners.

Polly Parker has had a career in health education, tertiary lecturing, and career consultancy. Currently she holds a university scholarship from the University of Auckland where she is completing a PhD in the area of career communities as sites of self-organizing and learning.

Kerr Inkson (PhD, Otago) is professor of management studies at the University of Auckland. He has been active in research in organizational behaviour in the UK and New Zealand for over 30 years. His recent work has been concerned with career mobility and economic and organizational change.

RANGKUMAN

Dalam beberapa tahun terakhir, bagaimanapun, akomodasi yang nyaman antara organisasi mencari tenaga kerja yang stabil dan individu mencari karir aman telah terganggu oleh besar restrukturisasi, perampingan, outsourcing; bentuk fleksibel organisasi, pertumbuhan yang cepat dari teknologi baru, pekerjaan usang, dan pergeseran batas kerja (Inkson, 1997). Dalam 'berbatas karir' (Arthur& Rousseau, 1996), karir individu membawa mereka melintasi batas-batas organisasi,dan aset karir diperoleh dan dikembangkan melalui pembelajaran kumulatif di organisasi.Kemajuan karir tidak datang dari intracompany kemajuan hirarkis, tetapi dari antar-perusahaan pengembangan diri. Untuk manajer HR, hasil yang paling jelas dari perubahan adalah masalah 'tenaga kerja omset '. Namun, perubahan dan masalah jauh melampaui ini. Kesulitan yang terkait adalah kehilangan komitmen tenaga kerja, masalah kesinambungan di daerah tertentu, ketidakstabilandalam budaya organisasi, hilangnya kekayaan intelektual, hasil negatif padainvestasi dalam sosialisasi awal dan pelatihan, dan gangguan intraorganizational tim dan hubungan ekstra-organisasi. Konsekuensi potensial untuk manajemen sumber daya manusia (SDM) yang penting.

SUMBER DAYA MANUSIA SEBAGAI SUMBER KEUNGGULAN KOMPETITIFDalam model, penekanan dalam HRM adalah untuk mempertahankan anggota dan membatasi mobilitas: 'praktik HR seperti sistem reward,sistem komunikasi, program pelatihan dan sistem sosialisasi dapat tuasuntuk mengembangkan sumber daya manusia untuk berperilaku dengan cara kongruen dengan tujuan perusahaan, esensi & strategis sumber daya manajemen manusia (Wright et al, 1994:. 319).HRM DAN KARIRBerdasarkan sifatnya, teori HRM memberikan keunggulan untuk satu tingkat analisis: organisasi. Orang dilihat sebagai elemen dalam genangan relatif inert 'sumber daya manusia', yang dapat disebabkan oleh kebijakan HRM yang tepat untuk tetap anggota organisasi, untuk bekerja dalam peran organisasi, dan mengembangkan kompetensi mereka untuk Manfaat organisasi.Banyak organisasi terus membayangkan karir sebagai perusahaan konstruksidirancang untuk memfasilitasi stabilitas, komitmen, dan pengembangan dari yang diinginkan keterampilan karyawan dan perilaku. Oleh karena itu, organisasi membangun sistem HR dengan strategi Rencana HR, program pengembangan karir, dan rencana suksesi, yang menyediakan hirarkis 'jalur karir' untuk membangun keahlian perusahaan yang relevan dan mendorongloyalitas. Organisasi bertekad mempertahankan rekrutan tenaga kerja yang stabil dan sosialisasi anggota berpotensi stabil, menawarkan pelatihan dan pengembangan untuk mengisi organisasi peran, mempromosikan dari dalam, dan mendorong orang untuk mencari status yang lebih tinggi. BERURUSAN DENGAN KARIR MOBILITASKarir berbatas dan paradigma yang sama mempertanyakan filosofisdasar-dasar dari HRM dan implikasinya dalam praktek. Dalam upaya untuk menjawab pertanyaan-pertanyaan, kami dibantu oleh bahan kasus yang dikumpulkan dari, dan refleksi oleh, empat Manajer HR menduduki posisi senior di perusahaan-perusahaan besar di wilayah Auckland. Masing-masing adalah manajer HR senior dalam perusahaan nya, masing-masing terlibat dalam toplevelstrategi perusahaan, dan masing-masing menunjukkan bahwa mobilitas karir, khususnya di kalangan staf ahli dan profesional adalah masalah besar. Beberapa rincian tentang perusahaan mereka ditetapkan dalam tabel 1. Karir antar organisasi mobilitas karyawan mempengaruhi organisasi yang paling jelasmelalui perputaran tenaga kerja dan hilangnya bakat. Manajer HR dilaporkanbahwa beberapa karyawan baru tiba dengan harapan yang jelas dari jangka panjang organisasi karir. Misalnya, Astrid melaporkan: Aku Empat manajer HR senior yang meja dan perusahaan mereka Usia rata-rata adalah 30 dan hanya 8% lebih 40. Layanan rata-rata sekitar 18 bulan sekarang-kita harus untuk meningkatkan perekrutan. Tapi biasanya orang yang kita berbicara untuk mengatakan, 'Saya benar-benar senang dengan kesempatan ... Saya mungkin akan tinggal di sini selama 18 bulan dan kemudian bergerak '. Diskontinuitas staf sering menghalangi penyediaan dukungan karir. Manajer HR menemukan diri mereka sibuk dengan memasukkan kesenjangan daripada berpikir strategis. Membuat stabil organisasi 'inti' dalam hal kompetensi dan budaya sulit dalam situasi seperti cairan. Dalam mempertimbangkan kemungkinan respon terhadap masalah ini, memeriksa literatur, dan mengumpulkan informasi dari empat informan bagaimana perusahaan mereka menanggapi, kami menemukan itu nyaman untuk kelompok ide-ide kami dalam empat judul:1. Mengurangi batas internal2. Mendorong loyalitas dengan mendukung mobilitas3. Mendidik manajemen dalam realitas baru4. Reconceptualize HRM, baik sebagai filsafat dan sebagai fungsi Mengurangi Batas internal.

Salah satu pendekatan untuk memperlambat perputaran adalah untuk mendorong pengurangan atau penghapusan batas dalam organisasi. Batas ini sering dibuat oleh meresmikan aparat struktur organisasi, seperti tingkat hirarki, pekerjaan deskripsi, dan spesialis departementasi, yang mencoba untuk fokus keahlian dan mencegah individu dari belajar atau kemajuan luar parameter ketat. Itu Keinginan karyawan untuk fleksibilitas dan belajar eksternal yang valid dapat dipenuhi oleh nontradisional karir internal yang bergerak. Keinginan menyatakan bagi orang untuk menyeberang intern batas telah didukung oleh beberapa penulis baru-baru ini (misalnya Ashkenas, Jick, Ulrich & Kerr, 1995) yang menekankan staf 'likuiditas' menjadi responsif terhadap perubahan organisasi keadaan.Natasha melaporkan: Loyalitas hari ini adalah untuk peran daripada perusahaan. Setelah seseorang telah di Peran selama 2-3 tahun mereka mulai mendapatkan gelisah dan setelah 5 tahun mereka bertanya 'mengapa saya tidak pernah pindah? 'loyalitas Perusahaan hanya ada jika mereka melihat peran mereka sebagai salah satu di mana mereka dapat berkembang. Mereka ingin berada dalam peran selama 2-3 tahun untuk CV mereka. Perusahaan Natasha digunakan pertemuan umpan balik individu dan pembinaan bulanan untuk mengidentifikasi perkembangan kompetensi dan sebagai sarana peregangan orang lanjut dalam peran mereka untuk pembangunan. Perusahaan juga pergi ke beberapa kesulitan untukmemastikan bahwa 'ketika orang merasa tidak ada yang lebih untuk belajar dari peran mereka ... mereka menjauh dari peran '. Perusahaan ritel telah menemukan itu berguna untuk meningkatkan penggunaan lebih fleksibel terminologi 'peran' daripada 'pekerjaan'. Hal ini juga mencoba untuk memastikan bahwa itu memberi orang tanggung jawab untuk 'inti ditambah pekerjaan proyek', yaitu tugas sementara memfasilitasi pengembangan individu segar selain rutinitas pekerjaan tetap. The berubah Filosofi dibantu oleh fakta bahwa perusahaan berada dalam situasi 'perputaran'. Dalam inisiatif seperti ini, organisasi mengakui bahwa itu bisa, melalui keterlibatan individu dalam ekstensi peran dan kegiatan proyek, membantu individu untuk menambah modal karir 'nya dan menjadi co-investor dengan individu dalam karir nya. Dalam jangka panjang, mobilitas karir individumungkin berarti bahwa majikan lain menuai manfaat dari pembelajaran baru. Dijangka pendek, bagaimanapun, pengamatan karyawan yang ada careerrelevant berkelanjutan belajar membantu untuk mempertahankan atau kesetiaannya kepada organisasi. Sebagai profesional perusahaan jasa manajer HR mengatakan:Orang-orang yang masuk akal. Mereka tidak begitu banyak khawatir tentang pasar dolar tetapi tentang peluang. Mereka yang tidak memiliki horizon jangka pendek sedang ekonom masuk akal. Mereka mengatakan, 'barang ini pada CV saya akan membuat saya investasi dalam beberapa tahun' waktu '. Mendorong Loyalitas oleh Pendukung Mobilitas Astrid melaporkan kasus di mana 'seorang insinyur yang memiliki peluang eksternal dimuka dan mengisyaratkan masalah ini ke manajernya. Manajer mencoba untuk mendapatkan dia menendang out '. Jenis loyalitas sindrom 'sering kontra produktif, karena menghalangi eksplorasi jujur antara individu dan organisasi mereka di sekitar realitas bahwa individu dapat bercita-cita untuk karir di luar organisasi batas. Sebaliknya, Bartlett dan Ghoshal (1996) membayangkan era baru perusahaan membumi dalam proses karir yang secara khusus individual daripada hirarki dibatasi. Sebuah kebijakan yang tepat adalah untuk mendorong karyawan, yang sering menyembunyikan merekaaspirasi untuk mobilitas karir karena takut dianggap 'tidak setia', jujur danmembuka tentang aspirasi ini. Hal ini memungkinkan organisasi kesempatan untuk melakukan diskusi otentik dengan mereka tentang masa depan mereka dan untuk menanggapi mereka yang sebenarnya membutuhkan. Seperti John mengatakan:, Saya lebih suka memiliki seseorang yang terbuka tentang apa yang mereka ingin lakukan. Jika kita tidak bisa memberi mereka kesempatan setidaknya kita tahu tentang hal itu ... Saya lebih suka mereka untuk membahas peluang, terbuka tentang kapan mereka akan pergi. Ada kebutuhan untuk keterbukaan, jika tidak Anda mendapatkan terkejut. Paradoksnya, menyediakan pengembangan di dalam perusahaan bahwa orang merasa mereka perlu untuk masa depan mereka di luar organisasi dapat memperkuat loyalitas mereka. Sebagai Harvey melaporkan: "Dalam keterampilan kita berinvestasi dalam mengembangkan [orang], kami membuat mereka lebih berharga di tempat lain. Tapi secara umum, semakin Anda memberikan kesempatan untuk pertumbuhan pribadi, semakin kecil kemungkinan mereka untuk meninggalkan '. Mendidik Manajer sekitar Pemilik Karena pengembangan karir individu sangat terkait dengan nya on-the-job kegiatan sehari-hari, keterlibatan mereka yang mengelola kegiatan tersebut sangat penting. Oleh karena itu manajer lini harus siap untuk terlibat dengan karir karyawan keprihatinan. Ini panggilan untuk peningkatan kesadaran, terutama tentang peran jangka panjang manajer bisa bermain dalam memahami kekhawatiran karir bawahan 'dan dalam memberikan peluang pengembangan karir. Namun, fokus harus tidak hanya pada memanfaatkan kekhawatiran karir individu ' sehingga kepentingan organisasi secara langsung bertemu, tetapi juga untuk mendukung individu ' aspirasi karir ditentukan sendiri. Sebagai Natasha menyatakan: Mereka [karyawan] adalah driver. Kami [perusahaan] dapat membantu dengan saran, arah, dukungan dan ide-ide tapi motivasi utama harus datang dari mereka. Tidak ada cara kita harus mencoba dan menjual sesuatu kepada mereka yang bukan win-win. Masalah utama bagi manajer lama-porsi kekhawatiran mengubah kesetiaan mereka sendiri asumsi. 'Kasta' budaya sistem di mana karyawan-layanan panjang 'inti' yangdianggap sebagai aristokrasi alami dan staf lebih mobile dan kontraktor sementarasebagai paria harus berkecil hati. Aspek dari sistem kerja yang dirancang untukmendorong loyalitas manajerial mungkin harus diubah. 'ketidaksetiaan sindrom' dapat diobati dengan platform baru dari hubungan kerja didasarkan pada kepentingan komunal dan pengaturan proyek jangka pendek. Ini mempertahankan dasar dekat kerja ke mekanisme pasar eksternal yang berlaku untuk keamanan rakyat dan mobilitas. Dengan demikian, manajer didorong untuk terlibat melalui berbagai bentuk kontrak kerja dengan menyeimbangkan tradisional asumsi relasional dengan lebih realistis yang 'transaksional' (Rousseau, 1995), dan internalisasi sebuah 'paradigma baru' seperangkat prinsip kerja yang sebaliknya asumsi berbasis loyalitas tradisional (Arthur, Claman & DeFillippi, 1995). Dalam konteks ini, manajer berhenti menjadi agen kontrol birokrasi dan bukannya menjadi pelatih karir (Heckscher, 1995; Bartlett & Ghoshal, 1995). Reconceptualize HRM, baik sebagai Filsafat dan sebagai Fungsi Untuk saat ini kami telah menekankan peran organisasi secara keseluruhan dan manajer peringkat-dan-file dalam memfasilitasi pendekatan baru untuk manajemen orang berdasarkan pada pengakuan dan penerimaan dari 'karir mobile' fenomena. Tapi lain menghadapi pertanyaan menyangkut relevansi HRM di era baru. Apakah yang peran spesifik dari HRM di lingkungan karir baru, di luar itu dari Sebuah artikel majalah Fortune baru-baru ini direkomendasikan membongkar fungsi HRM.Argumen utama adalah bahwa yang disebut fungsi personil adalah 'terakhir birokrasi 'dalam korporasi kontemporer. Untuk menghindari birokrasihambatan, HRM bisa lebih berguna akan diserahkan kepada manajer lini atau dikontrak kepada pemasok luar (Stewart, 1996). Argumen counter untuk HRM untuk merangkul karir baru membentuk eksplisit, dan menggeser penekanan dari birokrasi berbasis kegiatan berbasis pengetahuan. Masalah bagi HRM kontemporer adalah bahwa hal itu muncul ditangkap antara posisi ini alternatif.Seberapa baik dilengkapi adalah konvensional, internal terletak dan terfokus fungsi HRM untuk menangani tenaga kerja yang semakin tidak stabil, tidak terkendali, internal dan eksternal pasar? Dengan perputaran tenaga kerja tinggi dan meningkatkan mobilitas di seluruh organisasi batas, itu mungkin menjadi perlu bagi organisasi untuk mengembangkan pengetahuan yang lebih baikdari, dan kepekaan terhadap, pasar tenaga kerja eksternal. Daripada menekankankontrol atas, dan rencana pengembangan, tenaga kerja 'permanen' organisasi,HRM dapat semakin memiliki peran mengembangkan usaha patungan sementaradengan aktor ponsel karir (termasuk kontraktor, manajer interim, dan konsultan).Hubungan ini juga cenderung untuk melibatkan lembaga eksternal seperti kerjalembaga, pelatihan dan pengembangan konsultan, dan pemasok tenaga kerja sementara, yang bertindak sebagai perantara-perantara dan pertandingan-keputusan di pasar tenaga kerja. Dapat fungsi HRM sendiri outsourcing? John, kepala departemen HR mempekerjakan 16 orang, melihat kemungkinan besar:Kami meninjau empat temp. lembaga sekarang. Semua dari mereka yang mengangkat isu pembangunan. Mereka semua memiliki program. Mereka mengatakan, 'kami dapat membantu Anda mengelola temps Anda'. Andadapat outsource segalanya. Anda dapat kontrak dalam pelatihan dan pengembangan. Anda bisa mendapatkan spesialis hubungan kerja ketika Anda membutuhkannya. Dalam organisasi kami Anda bisa menyingkirkan sebagian besar orang HR. Anda akan membutuhkan seseorang seperti saya di go-antara peran. Tapi bahkan aku bisa di kontrak. Model yang sama berlaku untuk membiayai, IT, properti. Kita tidak perlu orang. Kita bisa menjalankan perusahaan melalui telepon atau mengatur CEO di Vanuatu dan kontrak segala sesuatu yang lain keluar. Spesialis HR tidak diperlukan di rumah. Solusi radikal ini mungkin meremehkan pentingnya mempertahankan strategis pertimbangan masalah SDM dalam inti organisasi. Maklum, manajer SDM, yang tugasnya cenderung untuk 'mengisi kesenjangan', biasanya melihat mobilitas karir, setidaknya dalam konteks organisasi mereka, sebagai masalah menjadi dipecahkan. Dalam melakukannya, mereka mencerminkan asumsi HRM konvensional. Tapi mobilitas karir juga merupakan kesempatan untuk digenggam. Mobilitas memberikan kesempatan tidak hanya untuk Hubungan pembuat sementara seperti lembaga eksternal, tetapi juga untuk organisasi yang berusaha untuk membangun kompetensi mereka dalam jangka panjang. Manajer HR kepada siapa kita berbicara tercermin beberapa ambivalensi antara peran mereka sebagai calon pengendali mobilitas tenaga kerja dan karir karyawan mereka, dan sebagai promotor baru, fleksibel jenis hubungan kerja. Karyawan yang masuk dalam organisasi-mobilitas tinggi membawa dengan mereka yang berharga, dan sering baru, keahlian, belajar, nilai-nilai, dan kontak. Bagaimana hal tersebut dapat ditransfer dan terjebak dalam organisasi, setelah kepergian hampir tak terelakkan karyawan yang pertama kali memperkenalkan mereka, sehingga mereka menjadi bagian dari budaya, strategi, lembaga dan jaringan yang? Penekanan dalam membangun dan mempertahankansumber harus kembali fokus dari orang-orang yang membawa pengetahuan untuk pengetahuan yang mereka bawa. Harus manajer SDM menjadi, atau diganti dengan, manajer KR (Pengetahuan manajer sumber daya)? Tampaknya HRM itu, apakah dilakukan dari dalam organisasi atau bersumber dari tempat lain, mungkin menjadi kurang pengakuisisi, pengembang dan pengendali dari Perusahaan-'owned 'tenaga kerja, dan lebih broker antara perusahaan berkembang berbatas strategi dan individu mengejar karir berbatas.ANALISIS

Menurut Miles dan Snow (1996), struktur abad kedua puluh piramida organisasi menciptakan 'gelombang kedua' karir ditandai dengan akuisisi tambahan dari waktu ke waktu tanggung jawab, status dan imbalan formal. Baru-baru ini, jaringan organisasi dengan batas-batas cairan dan permeabel telah menghasilkan 'gelombang ketiga' karier, diidentifikasi oleh gerakan horisontal bukan vertikal. Untuk masa depan, itu adalah mungkin untuk memahami karir mengembangkan hubungan yang lebih timbal balik dengan organisasi bentuk. Miles dan Snow (1996) menggambarkan hubungan kerja dari masa depan sebagai gelombang keempat pengembangan usaha di mana pola kerja individual akan mendorong bentuk organisasi daripada mengikuti itu. Teori HR konvensional membuat asumsi bahwa organisasi membuat karir. Hal ini sama dikatakan bahwa orang, melalui perilaku karir mereka, membuat organisasi ; bahwa karir bukanlah artefak strategi dan struktur organisasi, namun, bukan, bahwa organisasi, dan bahkan industri, adalah perhubungan dinamis berinteraksi karier (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996; Arthur, Inkson & Pringle, di tekan). Apakah organisasi membuat karier, atau karir membuat organisasi? Kedua pernyataan benar secara bersamaan. Organisasi dan karir harus tetap mutally mendukung, tetapi dinamis antara mereka harus menekankan bahwa karyawan kontribusi tidak tergantung pada organisasi tetapi saling tergantung dengan itu. Itu dinamika baru menciptakan terus berkembang jaringan dan kemitraan. Konseptualisasi ini menyiratkan bahwa organisasi, daripada melihat karyawan dan kontraktor sumber daya manusia, untuk dikelola, harus melihat mereka sebagai mitra dalam usaha patungan. Jika fungsi SDM memiliki tujuan, tidak untuk mengelola sumber daya tetapi untuk membangun hubungan dengan mitra bisnis. Polly Parker telah memiliki karir dalam pendidikan kesehatan, kuliah tersier, dan konsultasi karir. Sekarang ia memegang beasiswa universitas dari Universitas Auckland di mana ia menyelesaikan PhD di bidang masyarakat karir sebagai situs mengorganisir diri dan belajar. Kerr Inkson (PhD, Otago) adalah profesor studi manajemen di Universitas Auckland. Dia punya aktif dalam penelitian di perilaku organisasi di Inggris dan Selandia Baru selama lebih dari 30 tahun. Karya baru-baru ini telah peduli dengan mobilitas karir dan perubahan ekonomi dan organisasi.

Referensi

Arthur, M.B., Claman, P.H. & DeFillippi, R.J. (1995) Cerdas perusahaan, cerdas karir. Akademi Manajemen Eksekutif, 9 (4): 7-20.Arthur, M.B. Inkson, K. & Pringle, J.K. (In press) Pemberlakuan karir. London: Sage.Arthur, M.B. & Rousseau, D.M. (1996) The berbatas karir: Prinsip kerja baru untuk baru era organisasi. New York: Oxford University Press.Ashkenas, R., Jick, T. Ulrich, D. & Kerr, S. (1995) Organisasi berbatas: Breaking rantai struktur organisasi. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass.Barney, J. (1991) sumber Badan dan berkelanjutan keunggulan kompetitif. Jurnal Manajemen, 17 (1): 99-20.

Bartlett, C.A. & Ghoshal, S. (1995) Mengubah peran manajemen puncak: Beyond sistem untuk orang. Harvard Business Review, Mei-Juni: 132-42.Beer, M., Spector, B., Lawrence, D., Quinn Mills, D. & Walton, R. (1985) Mengelola aset manusia. Baru York: The Free Press.Boxall, P. (1992) Strategis manajemen sumber daya manusia: Awal dari kecanggihan teoritis baru? Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia Journal, 2 (3): 32-5.Boxall, P. (1994) Menempatkan strategi HR di jantung keberhasilan bisnis. Manajemen Personalia, 4 (3): 32-5.Jembatan, W. (1994) JobSbift: Bagaimana untuk mencapai kesejahteraan di tempat kerja tanpa pekerjaan. Membaca, MA: Addison-Wesley.Drucker, P. (1994) Usia transformasi sosial. Atlantic Monthly, November: 53-80.Gunz, H.P. (1989) Makna ganda karir manajerial: tingkat Organisasi analisis. Jurnal Studi Manajemen, 26: 225-50.Heckscher, C. (1995) Putih biru kerah. New York: Basic Books.Hirschorn, L.G.T. (1992) Batas-batas baru dari perusahaan bounaryless '. Harvard Business Review, Mei-Juni: 104-15. Inkson, struktur K. (1997) Organisasi dan transformasi karir. Dalam T. Clark (ed.), Kemajuan dalam perilaku organisasi (pp. 165-85). Aldershot, Inggris: Ashgate Publishing.

Inkson, K. & Coe, T. (1993) Apakah tangga karir menghilang? Majikan multinasional, 10 (6): 14-17. Johnston, W.B. (1991) tenaga kerja Global 2000: Pasar tenaga kerja dunia baru. Harvard Business Review, Maret-April: 115-19.Kanter, R. (1989) Ketika raksasa belajar menari: Menguasai tantangan strategi. New York: Simon & Schuster.Lado, A. & Wilson, M. (1994) sistem sumber daya manusia dan keunggulan kompetitif berkelanjutan: competency- A perspektif berbasis. Academy of Management Review, 19 (4): 699-727.Miles, R.E. & Snow, C.C. (1984) Merancang strategis sistem sumber daya manusia. Organizationl Dynamics, 13 (8): 36-52.Miles, R.E. & Snow, C.C. Karir abad dua puluh pertama (1996). Dalam M.B. Arthur dan D.M. Rousseau (eds), The berbatas karir: Prinsip kerja baru untuk era organisasi baru. New York: Oxford University Press. Fleksibilitas Kerja Parker, V. & Hall, D. (1993): yg bukan-bukan atau fundamental? Dalam P. Mirvis (ed.), Building tenaga kerja yang kompetitif. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Porter, M. (1985) Keunggulan kompetitif: Menciptakan dan mempertahankan kinerja yang unggul. New York: Gratis Press.Reed, R. & DeFillippi, R.J. (1990) kausal ambiguitas, hambatan imitasi dan berkelanjutan kompetitif keuntungan. Academy of Management Review, 15 (1): 103-12.Rousseau, D.M. (1995) Mengubah kesepakatan sementara menjaga orang-orang. Akademi Manajemen Eksekutif, 10 (1): 50-8.Schuler, R. & Jackson, S. (1987) Menghubungkan strategi kompetitif dengan praktek manajemen sumber daya manusia. Akademi Manajemen Eksekutif, 1 (3): 207-19.Stewart, T.A. (1996) Sumber daya manusia menggigit kembali. Fortune (9): 111-12.Ulrich, D. (1987) kemampuan organisasi sebagai keunggulan kompetitif: profesional sumber daya manusia sebagai mitra strategis. Manusia Resource Planning, 10 (4): 169-84.Sampan, R.H., Waterman, J.A. & Collard, B.A. (1994) Menuju tenaga kerja karir-tahan. Harvard Business Review, Juli-Agustus: 87-95.Wright, P., McMahan, G. & McWilliams, A. (1994) Sumber daya manusia dan berkelanjutan keunggulan kompetitif: Sebuah perspektif berbasis sumber daya. International Journal of Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia, 5 (2): 301-26.