Contemporary People Management: Ethical Considerations in HRM

This essay delves into the application of utilitarianism within contemporary people management, examining its ethical implications and practical considerations in human resource management. It begins by introducing the crucial role of HRM in enhancing organizational performance through strategic alignment of HR functions with company objectives. The essay discusses the challenges in implementing HRM strategies, including poor coordination and employee understanding. It then explores Jeremy Bentham's theory of utilitarianism, focusing on the "greatest happiness principle" and its emphasis on consequences over intentions. The analysis extends to the difficulties in applying this theory to individual choices and its potential to neglect moral actions. The essay further examines rule-utilitarianism and its effectiveness in legislation and public policy, particularly in areas like property laws, healthcare, and economic inequality. It also acknowledges the flaws of utilitarianism, such as the inability to predict future outcomes and the potential to justify harm to minorities. Finally, the essay connects utilitarianism to CPM, emphasizing its role in maximizing profits and benefits for both employees and the organization, while highlighting the importance of maintaining ethical standards in HRM. Desklib provides solved assignments and resources to help students understand these complex topics.

Running Header: Contemporary People Management
Contemporary People Management
Authors Name:
Authors ID:

Contemporary People Management
Introduction
For any organization, human resource management plays a very crucial role by enhancing the
performance of the employees working in that particular organization. There are various human
resource management strategies which have proven to be effective as they are designed in such a
manner that it raises the performance of the organization to maximum point. Basically in the
HRM process the human resource functions and the strategic objectives of that company are
interlinked in such a manner that it gives the best performance (Armstrong and Taylor, 2014).
The human resource management strategies play a very crucial role in the working of any
organization. In other words, it can be said that the human resource management policies act as a
pillar of support for that particular organization.
The planning of the issues of people working in any particular organization comes under the HR
strategy. This strategy plans the resources in such a manner that the organization is able to
achieve the set goals (Brewster, Houldsworth, Sparrow and Vernon, 2016). There are certain
changes and plans which are vital foe the wider environment changes of an organization; the Hr
strategy adds values to all that and all other strategic goals. It manages the changes in the overall
employment market at demographical levels.
But there are certain hurdles in the implementation of this HRM strategy. Thus it becomes
important on the part of the HRM professionals to first ensure what possible obstacles might
come in the way of implementation of this strategy. They should also ascertain the point that
what significant changes must be done in the organization to avoid such obstacles. Basically
during the implementation of any strategy, it involves a process of removing hurdles and
effectively moving towards the change (Bratton and Gold, 2017). It is natural that every strategy
requires some significant changes and there will be hurdles during its implementation. Thus all
the changes must be preplanned by the HR professionals. Poor coordination among the
employees might be one of the obstacles. There are chances that employees among the
organization might not understand the changes involved (Bolton and Houlihan, 2007). There can
be weak inter-departmental co-ordination.
Body

Contemporary People Management
Two centuries ago, Jeremy Bentham gave a theory in which he conceived utility as
human happiness. By giving this theory, he proposed new moral principles. In this theory, he
wrote that in any action, goodness cannot be judged by the fact that what the intentions behind
doing it are rather he preferred the utility of the consequences over it (Costea, Amiridis and
Crump, 2012). In a simple way, it can be stated that the destination matters, not the path of
reaching that particular destination. For this he proposed a phrase; which is “greatest happiness
of greatest numbers”. Basically Bentham described happiness as an overall achievement after
experiencing pleasures and pains. It is the sum of both pleasures and pains. It is a psychological
experience, and the entire philosophy is known as Utilitarianism. This term was given because
this theory laid greater emphasis on the utility achieved due to the consequences of the actions.
According to Bentham utility is seen as the contribution to happiness. This theory could also be
referred as “happyism”.
This theory encounters various difficulties when it is applied to individual choices often,
it can be seen can be seen that the effects of any action cannot be foreseen by the doer. Ne cannot
balance the effect of the actions on the ultimate happiness. In fact the theory neglects the moral
actions involved while approaching the consequences. It deems the well-indented behavior of
any individual involved in that particular process (Evertson and Weinstein, 2013). This can be
perfectly explained by the example of motherhood. It is natural that a mother can go to any
extent to save her sick child, she would do any possible thing, and this is the unconditional love
of a mother. What if that child grows up and become a criminal. The mother was not aware of
this. One cannot foresee the future. But even this cannot prevent the unconditional love of a
mother. At this approach, this theory fails.
This theory can be proven effective, if it is seen in the context of general rules. For
example, in the case of the mother it can be easily applied on the notion that a mother should
take care of the sick child (Hall, Pilbeam and Corbridge, 2012). If the individual follows this
particular rule, it will lead to happiness. Ultimately when the mother will take care of the child,
she would be happy by her actions and maybe its consequences. If such general rules are
followed, then it would be morally correct on the behalf of the individual. Although there are
equal probability of the negative consequences also, but then also the theory would stand out to
be morally correct. The variation of the theory in this form, is known as, rule-utilitarianism. This

Contemporary People Management
variation has given significant results in the legislation process. In the cases of property laws and
death-penalty, the theory has proven to be of great success.
Not just legislation or general rules, but this theory has proven to be effective in many
wider issues such as public policy. It can be used while deciding what degree of economic-
inequality can be acceptable (Hollander, 2016). The main point of the argument is that inequality
is not a bad thing within itself as long as it does not hamper the overall happiness of the common
masses. This theory of happiness can also be utilized in the situation while taking any major
decision about the health care services or therapies. Treatment strategies should be formulated on
the basis of happiness principle. Any strategy would be right if it proves to be beneficial for
greater number of masses. The consequences of the strategy should have maximum utility, and
then only it would be in the favor of the masses.
As it has been discussed above that the greatest happiness principle has certain flaws and
it is the case with any other ethical system (Kramar, 2014). The main flaw lies in the inability to
predict future by the individuals according to their actions. It is often the case that the results are
far different from what one indented to achieve. The theory works with the assumptions that one
can alter the future by varying the actions. There are certain factors which cannot be foreseen
and in the consequences of any action, these generally backfire. And if this is seen according to
utilitarianism then everyone would be immoral as their actions are leading to pain. There will be
not even a single person in the world that could be called moral.
There is also the allowance to cause pain to the minority, as the greatest principle of
happiness focuses on the happiness of majority (Veenhoven, 2014). This could be illustrated
like; if resources are stolen or taken away from small countries and given to the country with
more population. Then majority of people would be happy but an entire nation will be brought to
crisis. Also many social crimes such as robbery, slavery, murders, exploitation, and all others can
be easily justified if the majority of the population prefers it. When the populations of murderers
come under majority, then killing someone would no longer be a crime. Hence this theory fails at
the moral grounds.
And at last, many of the rules and regulation becomes invalid, if utilitarianism is applied in that
context. Even if the actions lead to greater utility, it does not mean that they are right. Many laws

Contemporary People Management
would be broken, if this theory is to be followed (Aswathappa, 2013). People would no longer
care for traffic rules, if that gives them happiness. Majority is not always right; morals and ethics
should be considered.
CPM is contemporary people management and it is basically managing a group of people
in any particular organization. Ethics and utilitarianism plays a crucial role in the management of
people in any organization. This theory deals with consequences and results of human resource
management of the employees working there. The main aim of the theory is to maximize the
profits. It helps in achieving the set targets and goals of the organization. The aim of the manger
is also to maximize the utility and benefit both the people and the organization (Marchington,
Wilkinson, Donnelly and Kynighou, 2016). The rules for the workers must be formulated on the
basis of majority. It leads to welfare of workers.
Conclusion
From the above analysis, it can be seen that the main aim of the theory of utilitarianism is to
provide happiness and pleasure to the masses. This can be done by taking up the right action.
When the actions which lead to happiness are considered, that rights actions can be reversed by
wrong actions, still the theory proves to be effective. The theory fails at the moral and ethical
grounds. The human resource manager can use this theory to achieve the set goals and targets of
the organization. But at the same time, it is the duty of the HR manger to maintain the ethics of
that particular organization. The main desire of the employees is that their salary gets increased.
Under this theory, there are both harsh and soft methods. It depends on the person if he is able to
apply it affectively or not.

Contemporary People Management
References
Armstrong, M. and Taylor, S. (2014) Armstrong's handbook of human resource management
practice. Kogan Page Publishers.
Aswathappa, K. (2013) Human resource management: Text and cases. Tata McGraw-Hill
Education.
Bolton, S. C., and Houlihan, M. (Eds.). (2007) Searching for the human in human resource
management: Theory, practice and workplace contexts. Palgrave Macmillan.
Bratton, J. and Gold, J. (2017) Human resource management: theory and practice. Palgrave.
Brewster, C., Houldsworth, E., Sparrow, P. and Vernon, G. (2016) International human resource
management. Kogan Page Publishers.
Costea, B., Amiridis, K., and Crump, N. (2012) Graduate employability and the principle of
potentiality: An aspect of the ethics of HRM. Journal of business ethics, 111(1), 25-36.
Evertson, C. M., and Weinstein, C. S. (Eds.). (2013) Handbook of classroom management:
Research, practice, and contemporary issues. Routledge.
Hall, D., Pilbeam, S., and Corbridge, M. (Eds.). (2012) Contemporary themes in strategic people
management: a case-based approach. Palgrave Macmillan.
Hollander, S. (2016) Ethical Utilitarianism and The Theory of Moral Sentiments: Adam Smith in
Relation to Hume and Bentham. Eastern Economic Journal, 42(4), 557-580.
Kramar, R. (2014) Beyond strategic human resource management: is sustainable human resource
management the next approach?. The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 25(8), 1069-1089.
Marchington, M., Wilkinson, A., Donnelly, R. and Kynighou, A. (2016) Human resource
management at work. Kogan Page Publishers.
Veenhoven, R. (2014) Greatest Happiness for the Greatest Number. InEncyclopedia of Quality
of Life and Well-Being Research (pp. 2612-2613). Springer Netherlands.

Contemporary People Management