Human resources integration generally means aligning decisions about people within an organizational framework to achieve certain specified results within a given period. It is essentially incorporating human resources products into organizational planning processes with the broad objective of achieving agency mission goals through building a strong management network between policies and the managing workforce. In other words, integration ensures that the managerial aspects of human resources channel the products towards the accomplishment of the mission goals by holding all human factors accountable for every decision made.
Human resource products define organizational cultures, which helps in promoting particular organizational goals. A 'strong organizational culture' aims at uniting the workforce through a set of shared values that are managerially sanctioned including quality service delivery driven by 'innovativeness. Indeed, organizational cultural identity defines in plain terms the employee, as well as, the employer interests and aligns them within the mission goals set forth. Organizational culture eases tensions that may hitherto influence workforce flexibility and the adaptability to the changing circumstances. Changes in the external environment often triggers organizational responses in the form of restructuring, cost cutting, mergers, splits, and acquisitions, which in turn demands products of human resource responses reflected in the adoption of new strategies carried out in customer relations, employer-employee relationships, employment patterns , just to mention, but a few (Pinnington and Edwards, 2000).
In the context of human resource management, human resource functions and activities are geared towards organizational success. John Storey defines human resource management as “a distinctive approach to managing the workforce in an effort to achieve competitive advantage by developing a culture of commitment in the workforce, through integration of structural, cultural, and personnel techniques (Storey, 1992:5). Therefore, as partners, HR people stationed in various departments within an organization carry out their operations in a manner that do not hinder progress in other quotas. Partners support each other as they focus on the mission to achieve common objectives.
At the important aspect, human resource relies on the integration of the decisions that people in management are trying to make to steer the organization in the desirable direction. The integration of human resource management into the agency planning process goes to ensure the support for the agency mission goals and supports the relationship between HR and management. These agencies are, thus, able to ensure that the management of human resources contributes to the accomplishment of necessary goals.
However, at the heart of human resource management, the style of management in this environment is one that exercises a lot of self-control, as well as, initiative and commitment to the goals that are set. In so doing, this transforms managers into something quite different. According to (U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 1999), they become enablers and facilitators whereby they are able to make things happen in an efficient manner instead of just typical enforcers that delegate duties to their subordinates and expect results as they relax in a different area. This use of human resource attempts to find a different direction to employment management.
In this way, it seeks to employ a competitive advantage that is used in the strategic use of a skilled workforce in the most effective way possible. This can be done by use of personnel, cultural, as well as, structural methods to obtain the desired results. However, it cannot work in a lone setting it must be fitted to the overall business strategy and this is where the part on integration appears. The strategy obviously cannot exist in a vacuum hence the need for flexibility and relation to the overall method.
At this point, it would seem pertinent for HRM to look for policy that would identify and promote the commonality of interests (Silva, 2011). There are examples such as the training that would enhance the employment security of the individual, as well as, the earning capacity in a vast number of situations. This would create a good environment for the employee to carry on improving his or her standard of life and improving employee morale. This does not resemble the factory situation where the employee has slim chances for promotion and an almost fifty percent chance of dismissal depending on the fluctuation whims of the local economy.
Similarly, this would increase employee value to the enterprise’s goal for better productivity because they become investments through organizational training and so on. In this way, pay systems that promote pay increase without a large increase in the cost of labor encourage better performance and diligence. Thus, the goal setting is not only carried out through the perspective of the employer, but as a participatory process with the employee and this establishes the unified goals and objectives needed and, thus, provides intrinsic rewards for the employer through a participatory process.
In the enterprises that tend to have corporate philosophies that or missions, whereby there are underlying values that shape the cooperate culture, the HRM policies become a part of the strategy that achieves the objectives set ahead. If there is, a strategic thinking related to human resource management then the units are probably engineered to develop the employee relations policies that are based on high individualism paying above the market rates to ensure the recruitment and retaining of the best labor. In other words, HR is a concept that establishes the realization that labor is a resource worthy of investment with high returns.