Out of manifold features and write-ups of human resource publications, reviews, journals and books are the significant role that have been bestowed upon the line and subordinate managers for the implementation of various employment policies of the organization which are determined to raise the productivity and overall performance of the personnel of different levels. In the context of British management, the role of line managers is identified as the central element of the human resource management. It is seen that the attitude of line managers and their practice of behaviour, were crucial if the emphasis of human resources was to be appropriately recognised and thereafter integrated into the organisation as necessitated in the work section. Virtually, line managers should agreed to their responsibilities to practice human resource management functions although they may depute experts to assist in developing policies, solving problems, required training and to offer advice and guidance with a view to achieving vision of the enterprise.
Expert says that human resource management is vested in line management as the manager in business responsible for overall coordination and direction to all resources in the business unit for earning profit from product sale and effective management techniques. Arguments were derived against it that this approach differs from the classic personnel model in which the line’s role simply reflected the view that most of the managers were responsible in general sense for personnel management since they all accustomed to management people over the past years. According to Legge that most specialists personnel work still to be implemented within various line management departments by a dedicated function, By contrast, managers in the department of human resource management, handled such responsibilities themselves in various occasions, which meant that the human resource dimension is an integral part of business strategy rather than something which flowed from it. In concise, the argument goes that if human resources are really so critical and complex then human resource management, is too important to be left to personnel experts. Under the context of British tradition, this has been depicted as a devolution of certain activities of personnel to line mangers after a voluntary relocation of responsibilities by the experts, possibly as part of a strategic review of their activities. Besides, rampant ambiguity is prevalent over their mode of operation and how an organisation or its employees function, would devolve its activities in practice as a whole.
Likewise, line management has an important role to play in human resource management, should be transparent, specific and goal-oriented, some questions may be raised about the assumptions behind this. In spite of this, there is various ambiguities over what this actually means in reality. It could be thought first that the distinction between the role of the line managers under personnel management and under the purview of human resource management might be somewhat thin and level based. There might be some basis for such a distinction when comparing stereotypes of personnel management and human resource management at an abstract level, there is little empirical evidence to support the existence of the stereotypes within the companies or enterprises. The prime feature of the front-line supervisors has always been the direct control which they applied over the output of the personnel under their command as per job schedule. The types of activities include: hiring, performance evaluation, firing of employees. Secondly, the idea that line managers should comprehended the emphasis of human resources and deal accordingly, suggests that should also engage in good and favorable employee management trends that include interpersonal skills, team-building, morale development, counseling practice and knowledge management. Thirdly, there are no indications of what the role of the supervisor should be under human resource management. Although, it was suggested by an expert that the predominant management style and approach might be that of a mentor, coach, enabler, motivator and an effective facilitator.
Although, there is of course many books and literatures on the manager’s jobs and workers behaviour, but there are inadequate materials on the role of managers working in the department of Human Resource Management in comparison to other areas of personnel function. We can see an exception in the innovative survey of Paul Edward (1987) where the factory managers who were examined how they managed their subordinates and how they themselves were managed in different situation in the workplace.. But, it has a criticism that Edward’s survey-based analysis of manager’s role provides limited information on the actual practice of employee management.
The research conducted on the line managers under human resource management has produced rather mixed results in relation to the process of devolution and the knowledge and the ability of line managers.
Besides, a research by Storey (1992) manifested that line managers were becoming for more important in the determination of how human resources would be used across a sample of manufacturing and public sector organizations. They were really more important as a delivery mechanism for human resource policies as well. However, these changes did not emerge from a formal re-division of human resource responsibilities between human resource specialists and the line as a whole. Many of them, from the traditional supervisor to the first line manager, who was expected to introduce a new style of management that included involving, developing and communication with employees on various matters. It was found that technical change has also led to increased line manager involvement in the issues of employee relations.
Over the passed years, it was also revealed also that line managers were not sufficiently consulted about the devolution responsibilities and were, unaware about their real role and detailed responsibilities. Moreover, many human resource departments were also reluctant to devolve responsibilities to the line managers.
Regarding the knowledge, skill, efficiency and ability of line managers to take on these responsibilities are rather dismal. Various case studies indicated that devolution to line management was severely impeded by the pressure of the business and low educational and technical skill base of the supervisors. This problem creates constraint to focus on the developmental or soft approach to the utilization of labour and process management. One research shows that there has been a lack of training and competence amongst line managers and supervisors in the sensitive key areas, though this was something which they were aware of. Devolving hard and soft practices to the line are also undermined by limited resources, particularly for training and the equation of performance.
Among manifold concerns, the first of these concerns is the existing state of line management practice in the present days. It might be provided here that the evidence on the practice of performance appraisal as a hindrance to our decision of the factors which enable and impede line involvement. Firstly, performance appraisal represents an example “par excellence” of the direct involvement of managers with their staff and subordinates. Secondly, this area combines both the soft and hard elements of human resource management since it requires certain professional skills of the managers and is concerned with the monitoring and control system of employees. Thirdly, this frequently feeds into other policies such as training, career development, promotion, facilities and remuneration. Lastly, it is to be mentioned that the selection of performance appraisal is not based on the assumption that it is a practice whose design and delivery recently been devolved to line managers.
The second critical issue that concerns the configuration of incentives and constraints which shape the level of line management involvement in this area (performance appraisal). Deep concerns are emerged with the implementation of human resource policies particularly the consistency and standard of practice among managers of various departments.
The second concern indicates that the degree of management involvement and on the factors which influence the involvement of line managers.
From the above discussion, it is revealed that managers and line managers should be be able to control the whole management process in consultation with each other to determine the appropriate system of operation in relation to human resource management to achieve the goal of the organisation. Commitment, dedication and innovation to work of the employees are must to direct the organisation to bring grand success in the years to come.
Mohammad Mosaddek Hussain is a freelance writer on social and corporate issues |