A MALAYSIA CHAPTER
Essays on Industrial Relations
What is management strategy and identify the different strategies? Distinguish the nature
and impact of human resource management on Industrial relations.
Management strategy is a key concept for a corporation to survive and grow by
responding to environmental changes. Any form of corporation without management
strategy or with poor management strategy will not able to perform efficiently to bring
profits up to its merits.
Management strategy refers to the art of planning business at the highest
possible level. It is the duty of the company‟s top management Strategic
management focuses on building a solid underlying structure to the business.
Management strategy hinges upon answering three key questions:
a) What are the business‟s objectives?
b) What are the best ways to achieve those objectives?
c) What resources are required to make that happen?
Answering these questions require serious thought about what the corporation
ultimate goals are for the business. What is the company trying to make happen?
What are steps that the management attempting to facilitate or enable? What is the
best possible outcome the corporation company can aspire to?
Therefore management strategy can be defined as a collective designation for
every strategy correlated with corporation management and actions and can be
conceived at each level of organizations and activities. Management strategy has a
function to harmonize decisions made by a variety of corporate people and served
as a guideline for decision making. Picture one shows how management strategy
consists of the three levels of hierarchies:
Three Levels of Hierarchies in Management Strategies
2.0 THREE DIFFERENT STRATEGIES IN MANAGEMENT
2.1 Company-Wide Strategy or Corporate Strategy
Company-wide strategy or commonly known as corporate strategy is a
strategy relative to the whole corporation. It is the decision made at the top
management level and consist of corporate questions such as “How to constitute a
business contexture of the whole corporation” and “Where should profit be made?”
Analytical strategies in this type of management will take focus on works
progressed in the early phase of the management such as company-wide resource
allocation, product portfolio management, degree of diversification and degree of
2.2 Business Strategy or Competitive Strategy
It is strategy made by business operation division such as “How to establish
competitive advantages in each respective market” It is a decision at the level of
each operation division manager which presents an effective analytical framework
that set the pillars for the operation and levels of productivity in the corporation.
2.3 Functional Strategy
Functional strategy can be defined as strategy by each functional field that
play the roles in the corporation. It is also the decision which is made at the level of a
person responsible for respective function. This include decision on R&D strategy,
production strategy, personnel strategy, sales or marketing strategy and sometime
financial strategy. While some functional strategies are concluded within each
business unit, strategies which are related to technologies and overseas are deeply
linked with the company-wide ones.
3.0 NATURE AND IMPACT OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ON
Human resource management (HRM) can be identify as means of achieving
management objectives which is the utilization of the human resource in achieving
competitive edge. Human resource management is closely linked to motivation,
leadership and work behaviour of the employee. It is a corporation or an enterprise's
policies and practices where the human resource is being managed in order to
achieve goals set by the management.
The goals of the basic objectives of industrial relations (IR) are:
1) The efficient production of goods and services and determination of adequate
terms and conditions of employment, in the interests of the employer,
employees and society as a whole, through negotiation.
2) The establishment of mechanisms for communication, consultation and
cooperation in order to resolve workplace issues at organization level.
3) Avoidance and settlement of disputes and differences between employers,
employees and their representatives.
4) To provide social protection where needed in the areas of social security,
safety and health and welfare.
5) Establishment of stable and harmonious relations between employers and
employees and their organizations
The nature and impact of human resource management on industrial relation are
varies from corporation to corporation depending to the understanding of the
management on the issues arises. In order to balance that, the management must:
1) Always keep abreast of industrial law such as legislation and precedents and
to advise the managers about their responsibilities. This include matters in
relation to discipline and redundancy at the same time determine
organizational policies relevant to legal and moral requirements
2) To conduct or assist in the conduct of either local negotiations or similarly to
act as the employer's representative in national negotiations.
3) To ensure that agreements reached are interpreted so as to make sense to
those who must operate them at the appropriate level within the organization.
4) To monitor the observance of agreements and to produce policies that
ensures the agreements are followed within the organization. For example in
relation to the offered salary where there is a choice of increments to be given
for experience, ability or qualification.
5) To correct the situations and provide the impetus for the introduction of joint
consultation and worker participation in decision-making in the organization.
Human resource management is very involved in promoting and originating
ideas in this field.
6) To provide statistics and information about workforce numbers, costs, skills as
relevant to negotiations. For example the cost of pay rises or compromise
proposals, effect on differentials and possible recruitment or retention
7) To keep track and maintain personnel records of training, experience,
achievements, qualifications, awards and pension and costs of welfare.
As conclusion, the nature and impact of human resource management on
industrial relations is increasingly has been seen to have a strategic role in the
development of the organization. The future of industrial relation may as well
depends on the capacity to develop more collaborative relations with the
management and at the same time must works as a means of achieving the
management-employee common objectives.
Belanger, P., Giles, A. and Murray, G. (2002). “Workplace innovation and the role of
institutions” in G. Murray, J. Belanger, A Giles and P. Lapointe (Eds.) (2003) Work
and Employment Relations in the High Commitment Workplace. London: Continuum.
Boxall, P. and Purcell, J. (2003). Strategy and Human Resource Management.
London: Palgrave Macmillan
Fombrun, C., Tichy, N.M. and Devanna, M.A. (1984). Strategic Human Resource
Management. New York: John Wiley & Sons
Guest, D.(2001). “Industrial relations and human resource management” in J. Storey
(Ed) (2003) Human Resource Management: a Critical Text. (2nd Edition). London:
Unitarism and pluralism represent two differing ways in which the employment relationship
may be viewed. If you are a manager and being given options to choose, which perspectives
you will choose in developing relationship with your subordinate. Justify your choice or
There are several analytic perspectives that can be brought to bear on the
topic of industrial relations. One of the perspectives in developing relationship with
subordinate is pluralism. Pluralism can be seen as a pragmatic, effective alternative
to the unitarist approach to resolve conflicts of interest and disagreements between
managers and employees.
In pluralism the organization is perceived as being made up of powerful and
divergent sub-groups, the management and trade unions. This approach sees
conflicts of interest and disagreements between managers and workers over the
distribution of profits as normal and inescapable. Consequently, the role of manager
and management would lean less towards enforcing and controlling and more
toward persuasion and co-ordination. Trade unions are deemed as legitimate
representatives of employees. Conflict is dealt by collective bargaining and is viewed
not necessarily as a bad thing and if managed could in fact be channeled towards
evolution and positive change. As manager, they should accept conflict to occur.
There is a greater propensity for conflict rather than harmony. They should anticipate
and resolve this by securing agreed procedures for settling disputes.
In the development of relationship with subordinate, several steps should be made
1. The organization should have industrial relations and personnel specialists
who advise managers and provide specialist services in respect of staffing
and matters relating to union consultation and negotiation.
2. Independent external arbitrators should be used to assist in the resolution of
3. Union recognition should be encouraged and union representatives given
scope to carry out their representative duties
4. Comprehensive collective agreements should be negotiated with unions
Pluralism perspective assumes that achievement of consensus and long-term
stability in management and employee relations is the best way to balance the
demands of competing groups. Mechanisms and channels must be designed and
introduced so that the frustration and anger associated with conflict can be vented
and given relief rather than harmfully repressed. Management should thus adopt
policies and agree to procedures and codes which recognize that conflicting interests
exist. In order to achieve that, the management should be willing to negotiate
Here, the managers may allow and actively foster freedom of expression and the
development of groups, which establish their own norms and elect their own informal
leaders. In this way, power and control arise in several areas of the organization and
loyalty is commanded by the leaders of the groups, which are often in competition
with each other for resources. The managers achieve results by joining the groups,
encouraging participation, motivating employees and coordinating their work efforts.
Pluralism reflects a stakeholder model of power sharing and distribution of
influence. In general however the application of a pluralistic policy to industrial
relations encourages planning, orderliness and consistency in the management of
relations with a unionized workforce. Steps, roles and procedures for conflict
resolution, for example pay claims must be well understood by managers. Issues
can be legitimately raised by worker representatives. Management in recognizing the
union has agreed to listen. When a challenge to managerial action is raised the
status quo of the business operation will, more than likely, is maintained until
consultations have been concluded. Therefore pluralism perspective only works at its
best when a concerned management is agreeing that its decisions can be subject to
appeal agreeing mechanisms for resolution of conflicts of right and interest.
Pluralism allows any alternative points of view to be explored by the
management. Arguably formalised consultation and communication procedures
improve the flow of feedback from staff. Stability is sought through compromises that
are acceptable to all the parties to a dispute. This will result a well balances in the
interests of the various stakeholders such as owners, management, workers
involved in the creation of the firm's wealth. Pluralism assumes a balance of power
between interest groups.
As conclusion, how industrial relations are conducted within a particular
organization is determined by the frame of perspective through which its managers
able to perceive the formal and healthy industrial relationship with employees and
their representatives. The pluralism perspective holds that the peaceful resolution of
conflict is a better way forward. Whilst it is recognized that management hold the
balance of power, pluralism holds that institutions and processes of organizational
relations should seek to resolve any conflicts arising from this power by reaching a
workable compromise acceptable to all stakeholders
Ackers, P. and Wilkinson, (2003) Understanding Work and Employment: Industrial
Relations in Transition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Budd, J. (2004) Employment with a Human Face: Balancing Efficiency, Equity and
Voice. Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press.
Edwards, P. (2003) Industrial Relations: Theory and Practice. Malden MA: Blackwell.
Johnson, M. (2004) The New Rules Of Engagement: Life–Work Balance and
Employee Commitment. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.
PART B (1)
What are the industrial relations implications on the growth of multi-national organization in
Growing globalization is a big challenge for multi-national organizations to
operate in multiple countries such as Malaysia, especially from a managerial
perspective of human resource and industrial relations (Kristensen and Zeitlin,
2005). Sometimes in their attempt to meet the requirements of local environments
(institutions, markets, cultural values.) at the subsidiary level, multi-national
organizations have to differentiate their management structures especially in term of
industrial relations. On the other hand, multi-national organizations are pushing to
integrate management structures to reduce costs, increase productivity and
maximize global efficiency.
Industrial relations is probably more than other managerial practices such as
human resource management, is subject to such conflicting demands. These multi-
national organizations has an interest in developing their human resource
management and industrial relations policies that are broad enough and appropriate
enough for several local units to adapt to their local environmental and competitive
The diversity of industrial relations systems in Malaysia poses another
challenge to multi-national organizations operating here. In fact the local industrial
relations systems set the framework for what kind of management of these foreign
companies can implement. The overall conclusion seems to be that multi-national
organizations in Malaysia are tends to adjust their understanding on industrial
relations to the requirements of local institutional environments and differentiate their
practices. If the unions are strong or if labor market legislation is strict, the leeway
for industrial relation is limited or sometime vice versa.
Any country‟s industrial relations system could be defined as a balance
between the state (governmental agencies), employers (employers‟ organizations)
and employees (employees‟ organization or unions).
Dunlop (1958) describes it as
“The actors are: (1) a hierarchy of managers and their
representatives in supervision, (2) a hierarchy of workers
(non-managerial) and any spokesmen, and (3)
specialized governmental agencies (and specialized
private agencies) created first by the first two actors.”
The strengths of each of the three parties can vary considerably. In Malaysia,
the role of the governmental agencies can be seen allowing direct relations between
employers and employees organizations. The Malaysia industrial relation system has
a liberal approach to ownership practice. The level of social security and union
density remains high with social partners such as unions and employers‟
organizations have a big say in any major welfare changes, even though they may
be initiated by the state.
The main argument of this more could be described to the scope of multi-
national organization‟s control over economic resources and activities of some major
business in Malaysia. This shift occurs since the entry of these foreign companies
where can be seen to affect the ongoing shaping of the identities and power
positions of the traditional industrial relations climate, employers‟ and employees‟
It is also at the same time provides opportunities to institutional local industrial
players to redesign their roles in ways that take into account types of threats and
opportunities of the globalizing employment management agenda. But high inward
foreign direct investment (FDI) and capital-market internationalization may
sometimes affect the “rules of the game” in the Malaysia business system.
In Malaysia, industrial relations systems are always centered on high trust
between the state, employer and employee organizations, which has been built and
sustained over the years. Most of the foreign companies invested here while
employing their own originated work organization practices are seen not to interfere
with the trust and questioning the resilience of the existing industrial relation
systems. To a certain degree, management seems to accept the local written and
unwritten rules of the game of employee participation.
Hodson (2002) defines employee participation as five different forms of
1) worker ownership
2) union partnership (joint union-management programs)
3) traditional teams
4) management mandated teams
5) no participation (defined as labour under very traditional forms of
management and supervisory control.
The term involvement implies the human resource management influence, while the
operational measures of the concept are recognized as industrial relations terms.
Managerial control and motivation are associated with efficiency argues while
alienation to work is easily associated with more democratic oriented values in
So the challenges from multi-national organizations in Malaysia can be up to
the some extent on types of management-labor cooperation. There are:
Type One: Foreign organizations control all areas except industrial relation issues.
Not only human resource policy, but also the actual work organization
at line level is decided by the parent company with no regard to local
tradition and culture. Industrial relation issues such as the wage and
working conditions if decided by collective agreements are not touched
upon directly by the parent company.
Type Two: Foreign organizations control over all issues, including the industrial
relation traditions of the country in which the subsidiary is inscribed.
This is potentially the most critical case since the takeover of a
company might undermine the national industrial relation and the local
resistance might be strong. However, the latter is dependent on the
strength of unions and the national government‟s attitude towards
But still there are numbers of industrial relations initiatives put by the multi-
national organizations are within the reign of management prerogative indirectly
affect relations between employees and local management. The shifts from a
stakeholder to shareholder management style and the increased degree of control
have an effect on the whole co-operative atmosphere in each of the companies.
For example, company employments restructuring plan in Ambank Berhad
after the share take over by ANZ Group of New Zealand which seen the continuous
protests by National Union of Bank Employee (NUBE) throughout the country. Even
though the matter was finally solved with a mutual agreement on VSS Scheme and
overall industrial relations system was not affected by the takeover, by exercising
their management prerogative, the ANZ Group as a multi-national organizations
management can disturbs the finely tuned balance between management and
employees to such a degree that it undermines a long and strong tradition for
cooperation, possibly giving rise to long-term consequences for national industrial
relations systems. It may affect the collective bargaining system in a long time.
If the employees‟ “voice” is unheard and foreign management continues
tightening up work organizational practices, employees pull back flexibility which was
previously reached in local agreements between management and employees‟
representatives. This can jeopardizes the fine-tuned balance achieved between the
centralized and decentralized agreements that are at the core of the Malaysia
As multi-national organizations operate in multiple countries such as
Malaysia, the top management must take into account differences in local settings
when seeking the means to coordinate and control subsidiaries. The local system of
industrial relations can become platform for the framework for type of human
resource management (HRM) a multinational corporation wants to implement.
Whether these multi-national companies can change the existing systems of
industrial relations is another question.
Adler, N. (1986), International Dimensions of Organizational Behavior, Belmont, CA:
De Silva, S. (1998), Human Resource Management, Industrial Relations and
Achieving Management Objectives. ILO:
Dunlop, J. (1958), Industrial Relations Systems. New York: Henry Holt and
Hodson, Randy (2002), Worker Participation and Teams: New Evidence from
Analyzing Organisational Ethnographies, Economic and Industrial Democracy, Vol
23 (4): pp 491-528, SAGE (London, Thousand Oaks and New Dehli)
Kristensen, P. and Zeitlin, J. (2005), Local Players in Global Games. The Strategic
Constitution of a Multinational Corporation, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rees, C. and Edwards, T. (2006), International Human Resource Management,
Pearson Education Limited
Kristensen and R. Whitley (eds.), The Multinational Firm: Organizing Across
Institutional and National Divides, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 27-68.
PART B (2)
1. Based on the chosen journal articles highlight the main issues in the articles.
2. Discussion on relationship with any theory or model discussed in the course.
3. Discuss and relate or compare the findings with the organization in which you are
4. Finally you should include views and comments.
THE THEORY OF THE CONFLICT BETWEEN INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS AND
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN MALAYSIAN PUBLIC SECTOR
This review emphasis on the theory of conflict between human resource
management and industrial relations and the author‟s view with regards to the
Malaysian public service. This issue was highlighted in S.R, de Silva‟s paper on
Human Resource Management, Industrial Relations and Achieving Management
Objectives published on 1993 in International Labour Organization ACT/EMP
In considering the theory of conflict and its relationship between human
resource management and industrial relations in Malaysian public service sector, two
central concerns are: in what way does human resource management pose a
challenge to industrial relations and how can conflicts between the two, if any, be
reconciled so that they can complement each other?
According to Godard and Delaney (2000) the field reflects a new paradigm in
industrial relations: “….new work and human resource management practices have
replaced unions and collective bargaining as core innovative force in industrial
Employee participation is held to be good for business by most of the modern
government organization concepts. In public sector, employee participation has
becomes synonymous with terms like involvement and commitment in service
delivery and improvements. This is reflected in public sector development programs
as well as in parts of the studies within the field of industrial relations. Employee
participation in these developments is to a great extent in improvement and
efficiency of organization in order deliver the best service to the public. Employee
participation thus seems to be compatible to management logics in the working life of
Industrial relations are traditionally covering relations between unions and
management. This includes employee participation in a broader sense than the
traditional “industrial relations” by adopting forms of employee participation that
stems from management theories with focus on efficiency more than democratic
Involvement is a key concept in human resource management models. To a
public servant, involvement means to invest attitudes, competencies and creativity
and personal “ownership” in projects, for example, employee participation in favor of
managerial objectives set by the organization or department. Human, social and
cultural relations will come in focus more than structures, positions and group
interests. Miller and Monge (1986) made a division of cognitive, affective and
contingency models of participative effects on human resource management. Their
analysis gave evidence that participative climate had more substantial effect on
satisfaction than participation in specific decisions, and that participation in goal
setting did have a strong effect on productivity and industrial relations in public
The goals of human resource management in public sector have already been
identified in the previous section. It remains to consider some of the basic objectives
of industrial relation, which could be said to include the following:
1. The efficient production of services delivery by the public sector and,
determination of adequate terms and conditions of employment, are at in the
interests of the employer, employees and society as a whole is made through
a consensus achieved through negotiation.
2. The establishment of mechanisms for communication, consultation and
cooperation in order to resolve workplace issues at enterprise, organization,
department and industry level can only be achieved through a tripartite
process, consensus on labour policy at national level.
3. Avoidance and settlement of disputes and differences between employers
(the government), employees (public servant) and their representatives (union
i.e. CUEPACS), are only possible through negotiation and dispute settlement
4. To provide social protection where needed such as in the areas of welfare
social security, health benefit, safety and pension.
5. Establishment of stable and harmonious relations between the government,
organizations and its employees.
The industrial relations perspective in public sector pays attention to
institutionalized and organized groups and bodies like unions, works councils and
mandated employee representation to bargaining, codetermination, consulting,
communication and sometimes involvement. This can be seen as interpretations of
employee participation. In short: institutional elements are left out in favor of
individual relations and affective and cognitive aspects of integration between
management (the government) and employees (public servant) individually. The
existence of diverging group interests has been a major concern in sociology ever
since Karl Marx‟s introduction of the concept of social classes, and must be
considered a part of the industrial relations theoretical inheritance (Rinehart.J:1996).
Diverging group interests reasoned labour organizations and employer organizations
as a response to that, and are the origin of institutionalization of industrial relations.
Industrial relations perspectives are centered on the concepts of participation.
Industrial relations are traditionally carrying elements of institutionalization, for
example the role of laws, bargaining schemes and regimes, main agreements, wage
formation and employee benefit, which is in contrast to the analytical schemes of
human resource management theory. Accordingly in public sector, the actors are
institutions like unions, work councils, negotiation bodies and workers and employers
federations. This is well reflected in industrial relations studies in the relations
between employee participation and work performance.
In public sector, sometimes human resource management needs to deal with the
management of human resources, rather than with the management of collective
relations. But sometimes, individual grievance handling falls within the ambit of both
disciplines, but dispute settlement of collective issues more properly falls within the
scope of industrial relations. Government policies and practices relating to
recruitment, selection, appraisal, training and motivation form a part of human
resource management Team-building, communication and cooperation, though
primarily human resource management initiatives, have always represent a
collectivist side of the bargain.
Conflict arises as employee participation has its own opposite in employee
resistance, and employee indifference as a “neutral” in-between category. Observing
resistance and indifference in addition to participation would reintroduce interest
conflicts in the study of effects on performance. Employee participation is assumed
to improve performance by management as well as industrial relations perspectives.
But that belongs to what employees participate in. Any implementation of bad
managerial strategies or decisions may certainly contribute to bad results, and the
other way round: resistance to implementation of bad decisions may reduce losses
and thus improve performance.
Therefore to understand the conflict between human resource management and
industrial relations, we need to look deeper. Human resource management differs
from industrial relations in the sense that it does not deal with such procedures and
rules, but with the best way to use the human resource through. Proper selection
and recruitment, induction, appraisal, training and development, motivation,
leadership and intrinsic and extrinsic rewards are examples associated with human
resource management. Managerial control and motivation are associated with
efficiency argues while alienation to work is easily associated with more democratic
oriented values. The study concludes that employee involvement results in increased
skills and autonomy reduced supervisory abuse, and greater pride and satisfaction in
work, all terms normally associated with human resource management in form of
public sector perspectives. Furthermore that difference between various types of
participation is of less significance than the simple contrast between participation
and lack of participation.
In industrial relations of public sector, the central monetary reward is
wages/salaries and work benefits. This is one of its central themes, given effect to by
collective bargaining of being internal equity and distributive justice and, often,
standardisation across relationship between government and public service. Today,
human resource management in public service is increasingly replaces emphasis on
monetary rewards linked to performance and skills. This is achieved through the
development of performance and skills-based pay systems, some of which seek to
individualise monetary rewards such as individual bonuses, service grading and
gratuity. Human resource management strategies to secure individual commitment
through communication, consultation and participatory schemes underline the
The studies demonstrate that industrial relations and human resource
management perspectives may not be considered as opposites. The combination of
industrial relations and human resource management may lead to new approaches
in studies of participation and performance of employee in public service. On the
other hand, it is also legitimate to argue that human resource management does not
focus exclusively on the individual and, as such, does not promote only individual
employment relations. Though much of human resource management is more
directed at the individual compare to industrial relations, at the same time there is a
parallel emphasis on team work, whether in the form of quality circles or functional
flexibility. Above all, it is the individual commitment to the organization, represented
as the sum of the individuals in it rather as an organic entity with an interest in
Some of the tensions between industrial relations and human resource
management arise from the outlook of human resource management which sees a
commonality of interests between managements and employees. Industrial relations
see the potential for conflict in the employment relationship come from different
interests. Human resource management is the visual embodiment of the frame of
reference both in the sense of the legitimation of managerial authority and in the
imagery of the government as an enterprise with committed employees working with
managers for the benefit of the country. But it can only be done through balancing
these conflicting interests and to avoid or to minimize conflicts through promotion of
negotiation systems such as collective bargaining, joint consultation, dispute
settlement mechanisms within the enterprise and at national level in the form of
conciliation, arbitration and labour courts in order to achieve a harmonious industrial
relations system is one central task of industrial relations and human resource
management in public sector.
Therefore, the individualization of human resource management in public sector
must reflected in its techniques which focus on direct employer-employee links rather
than with employee representatives, constitutes one important difference between
industrial relations and human resource management. It has been observed that the
empirical evidence also indicates that the driving force behind the introduction of
balance industrial relations and human resource management. Human resource
management appears to have little to do with industrial relations; rather it is the
pursuit of competitive advantage in the market place through provision of high-quality
services among public servant through competitive performance and high
productivity, to innovate and manage change in response to changes in time. Its
underlying values would appear and reflected in government policies and practices
However, collective bargaining should not be understood only in the narrow
sense of negotiation of terms and conditions of employment leading to a formal
agreement. It should be viewed as a process, and as including all mechanisms
introduced to arrive at a consensus on matters affecting the two social partners,
even if they do not result in formalised agreements. If viewed in this way, it reduces
the conflict between industrial relations and human resource management within this
area. Human resource management is said to pose a challenge to industrial relations
is on the issue of flexibility- critical in human resource where a degree of
standardisation for purposes of internal equity has been an objective of industrial
The effects on performance will not depend on what employees take part in
alone, but also how they participate: what are the employee contributions, and who
deliver the contributions? Is there an organized participation system, like works
councils, board representation, or do we talk about direct individual participation?
Both kinds may be present simultaneously at the workplace. Participatory contexts
will matter as well. Bad work organization and poor work environments correlate
positively with absenteeism, sick leaves and high turnover according to the studies.
Relations between employees in public sectors will be affected by their attitudes
towards each other. Level of education will probably affect performances and
distance between them.
The key to competitiveness is quality. The quality of government delivery system
depends more on the commitment of every individual in public service than on their
acquired technical skills, on the way these individuals behave and their team spirit
than on the passive execution of orders received. A good human resource
management in public sector lies in the behaviour of each public servant within the
As conclusion, industrial relations and human resource management must work
hand by hand to develop a strong organization culture. It not only gives direction to
an organization, but it mediates the tension between individualism and collectivism,
as individuals socialised into a strong culture are subject to unobtrusive collective
controls on attitudes and behaviour.
David E. Guest "Human Resource Management and Industrial Relations" in (1987)
Vol.24 Journal of Management Studies 503 at 504-505.
Godard, J. and Delaney, J. T. (2000), “Reflections on the „High Performance‟
Paradigm‟s Implications for Industrial Relations as a Field”, Industrial and Labor
Relations Review 53.3, pp 482-502
Miller, K. and Monge, P. (1986), “Participation, satisfaction and productivity: a meta-
analyses review”, Academy of Management Journal 29, pp 727-753
Pateman, Carole (1970) Participation and Democratic Theory. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press
Rees, C. and Edwards, T. (2006), International Human Resource Management. New
York: Pearson Education Limited
Rinehart. J (1996) The Tyrant of Work: Alienation and Labour Process, 3rd edition.
Toronto: Harcourt Brace.
Barney, J.B. (1995). Looking Inside for Competitive Advantage. Academy of Management
Executive, 9, 49-61.
Brewster, C. and Larson, H.H. (1993), „Human resource management in Europe - evidence
from ten countries? In European Developments in Human Resource Management, Ed. A.
Hegewich & C. Brewster, London: Kogan Page
Buyens, D. and de Vos, A. (1999), The added value of the HR department? In International
HRM - contemporary issues in Europe, Ed. C. Brewster & H. Harris, London: Routledge
Hilary Harris, Chris Brewster, Paul Sparrow (2003) International Human Resource
Management London: CIPD Publishing
Noe, R., Hollenbeck, J., Gerhart, B., & Wright, P. (2003). Human Resource Management:
Gaining a Competitive Advantage (4th ed.). Boston: McGraw Hill.
Official web site of Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam Malaysia (JPA) at www.jpa.gov.my.
Retrieved on 3 June 2009
P. C. Tripathi (2002), Human Resources Development, Sultan Chand & Sons: Delhi
Storey, J. (1992), Developments in the Management of Human Resources, Oxford: