Blackwell Publishing Ltd.Oxford, UK and Malden, USAIJTDInternational Journal of Training and Development1360-3736Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2005200591620ArticlesBenchmarking HR practices
International Journal of Training and Development 9:1 ISSN 1360-3736
Benchmarking the HR practices of an engineering institute with public sector industry for performance enhancement Lewlyn L. R. Rodrigues and A. M. Chincholkar This study has been undertaken to compare the human resource development climate (HRDC) in an engineering institute with that of public sector industry in India, based on seven dimensions reflecting the nature of HRDC, and making suggestions to improve the HRDC in the institute. A sample size of 100 individuals each from the public sector and the institute was selected on a proportionate representative random sampling basis. Besides the mean and standard deviation, t-test test has been carried out to test the hypothesis, which investigates the difference applicable to HRDC. Based on the results, suggestions are made to enhance the HRD mechanisms of the engineering institute.
Introduction Education and training are the primary systems by which the human capital of a nation is increased and preserved. Higher education in general, and technical education in particular, have a direct bearing on a country’s economy. The era of human resource development (HRD) has begun, and speaking in terms of engineering and
r Lewlyn L. R. Rodrigues, Lecturer, Department of Mechanical & IP Engineering, Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal, Karnataka – 576 104, India. Email:
[email protected]. A. M. Chincholkar, Professor, Department of Mechanical & IP Engineering, Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal, Karnataka – 576 104, India. Email:
[email protected] © Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2005, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main St., Malden, MA 02148, USA.
6 International Journal of Training and Development
technology, the demand for qualified engineers is increasing globally. In response to this, there has been a proliferation of engineering institutes in India. Rao (2000a) states that the basis of higher education is the creation and dissemination of knowledge. He further asserts that academicians tend to identify much more with their discipline and scientific or professional community than with their institutional affiliation. Also according to Rao (2000a), academic decision-making structures in institutions lack speed, clear indications of responsibilities, and maintenance of group discipline. Institutional management has become of concern to various governments. The International Institute of Education and Planning (IIEP, 1992) offers two recommendations for attempts in this direction. The first is to ensure that governments exert strong pressure on higher education institutions to improve management. The second is concerned with increasing centralized planning and control. This paper addresses the second strategy for institutional management. Many developing countries have given high priority to developing human resources through the rapid expansion of secondary and higher education (Rao, 2000b). UNESCO’s figures indicate that total public expenditure on education increased in developing countries from US$8 billion (Rs. 384 billion) in 1965 to US$93 billion (Rs. 4371 billion) by 1980. In terms of percentage of GNP, this represents an increase from 3.3% in 1970 to 3.9% in 1980, although it began to decline in the 1980s in some countries. The UNESCO figures also suggest that the gap between industrialized and developing countries in terms of educational expenditure per capita narrowed from 28 : 1 in the 1970s to 15 : 1 in 1982 (Rao, 2000b). Higher education plays a critical role in developing countries in the context of globalization and market-driven economies. If developing economies are to compete in global markets and create new activities and services, basic and secondary education is insufficient; most required skills are developed through courses in engineering, technology, applied sciences, etc. While degree courses in most countries prepare people for generalized services, post-graduate education is becoming increasingly essential for providing specialized services. The contribution of higher education to HRD can take many forms: training middle and higher-level professionals, technical and managerial staff; the creation of new knowledge through research and scientific study; training and dissemination; forging a cultural identity; or fostering democratic processes by encouraging independent ideas and informed opinions. An HRD climate that is conducive to the development of knowledge workers (and the organization) is very desirable in a knowledgeintensive sector such as education. Business organizations have realized that they must transform information into knowledge; this forms the fundamental concept of ‘the learning organization’. As today’s organizations transform into learning organizations, institutions must concurrently become ‘learning institutions’, in order to serve as knowledge repositories. This is possible only through proper training, development, motivation and a shared vision among knowledge workers. The implications of research on HRD climate, as presented in this paper, can help institutions achieve their goals and objectives. A developmental climate, fostering innovation and creativity, and promoting high levels of motivation and commitment, is very desirable. HRD practices have been very well established in most industries with the advent of globalization, liberalization and privatization. In Indian engineering institutes, some HRD practices are already in use, though separate HRD departments have not yet been established. Hence, benchmarking the institutional HRDC with that of public sector industry could contribute significantly to improvements in this direction. Various studies of HRDC have been conducted in different industries (Mishra & Bhardwaj, 2002; Parthasarathy, 1988), but very few in engineering institutes.
Literature review The concept of HRD was formally introduced by Dr Leonard Nadler in 1969 in a conference organized by the American Society of Training & Development (Rao, © Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2005.
Benchmarking HR practices 7
2000a). In India, Larson & Toubro Ltd introduced the concept among private sector companies in 1975, with the objective of facilitating the growth of knowledge workers. Among public sector government companies, Bharath Heavy Electricals Limited (BHEL) introduced the concept in 1980. A survey by the Industrial Team Service in 1969 indicated that the personnel function is not viable if it does not include or give scope for employment, training, welfare measures, employee education, employee benefits, industrial relations and industrial insurance (Rao, 2000b). This has paved the way ultimately for the emergence of human resources development as a field. As Rao (2000a) put it, ‘People make things happen.’ He adds that if they are to make things happen, they need a set of circumstances. HRD is the process of enabling people to make things happen. It deals with ‘competency development’ and creates conditions through public policy, programmes and other interventions to help people apply these competencies for their own benefit and the benefit of others. Competencies may include knowledge, skills, attitudes and values. Capabilities may be developed in individuals, groups and communities or collectives. It is crucial to create an environment that encourages learning and development of required competencies in conjunction with the strategic planning of an organization. Put simply, HRD is the process of improving, moulding and changing skills, knowledge, creative abilities, aptitude, attitude, values, commitment, etc., based on present and future job and organizational requirements. HRDC is a measure of the perceptions of knowledge workers about the prevailing nature of HRD.
Research questions This study makes an attempt to answer the following questions: • • • •
What is the nature and state of HRDC in public sector industry? What is the nature and state of HRDC in engineering institutions? What would be the order of ranking of the dimensions of HRDC as perceived by the knowledge workers in public sector and the engineering institutions? Would there be a difference in perceptions of knowledge workers in the industry and the engineering institutions?
The answers to these questions would lead to workable HRDC enhancement proposals for the engineering institution.
Hypothesis As an organization’s culture is the representation of common perceptions held by its members, individuals with different backgrounds, or at different levels, would be expected to describe organizational culture in similar terms (Mayerson & Martin, 1987). This is applicable to HRDC, as it is an integral part of organizational climate (Mishra & Bhardwaj, 2002). To examine HRDC in terms of different types of organizations, the following hypothesis was formulated: ‘There is a significant difference between the levels of overall satisfaction (with regard to HRDC) of the knowledge workers in public sector industry and engineering institutions.’
Methodology (a) Target population and sampling procedures The universe of study is finite with 580 knowledge workers in the public sector, and 260 teaching faculty members at the Engineering Institute in Karnataka, India. Executives working at grades E0–E5 from public sector industry, and professors, assistant professors and lecturers from the institute are considered knowledge workers for the study. The approach of specifying precision of desired estimation first, then determining the sample size necessary to ensure it (Kothari, 2000) has been adopted, requiring a sample size of 143. This is based on a 2% defect in sample (based on the pilot study) 8 International Journal of Training and Development
© Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2005.
and an acceptable error margin of 2%. Hence, a sample size of 100 was adopted in this study. (b) Instrumentation Apart from personal discussions and deliberations with knowledge workers, a properly designed and self-administered questionnaire with 38 questions constituted the primary source of data for this study. A pilot study was conducted to make sure the questions were direct and free from ambiguity. The language was revised to make it simple and direct. (c) Data collection procedure Based on stratified sampling, 200 questionnaires were sent out to the subjects and the response rate was only about 40% to start with. However, frequent visits were made to the two organizations until the required sample size was obtained. Informal interviews constituted the secondary data, which provided input to general opinion about the HRDC and expectations of the knowledge workers. Some of the expectations have been used in making suggestions and recommendations to improve upon HRDC. (d) Data analysis The data was entered into Microsoft Excel and then transferred to Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). Reliability (Cronbach’s alpha) of the study was tested for individual items. Mean and standard deviation calculations were performed to obtain the ranking of individual dimensions. Factor Analysis using Principal Component Analysis (PCA) method using varimax rotation with Kaiser variation was used to generate factors. The t-test was used to test the hypothesis.
Results Reliability Alpha (Cronbach) reliability of the analysis is 0.95 (Industry) and 0.98 (Institute), indicating a very high internal consistency, based on average inter-item correlation. The item-wise reliability is presented in Table 1. Index of perception of HRD climate In order to assess the perceptions of knowledge workers in the industry and the institute regarding HRDC, scores on the individual variables were aggregated and classified into High, Medium and Low satisfaction categories. The results (Table 2) reveal that a majority (85% in Industry; 90% at the Institute) of knowledge workers were moderately satisfied with existing HRDC. However, as HRD practices are more established in industry, a higher percentage of knowledge workers therein were satisfied to a high degree. Factor analysis The questionnaire was subjected to ‘item validation’ (Pattanayak et al., 2002) through factor analysis, to determine the internal structure of the set of 38 items. Factor analysis is a generic name for one multivariate technique used to ascertain the underlying structure of a data matrix (Hair et al., 1995). The Principal Component Analysis (PCA) method with varimax rotation was used to generate factors. PCA is appropriate when the main concern is predicting the minimum number of factors required to account for the maximum proportion of variance with an a priori set of variables (Ghauri et al., 1995). Hence, this method was chosen to obtain the minimum number of factors from the scale (originally designed for the study of HRD climate in industry). A seven factor © Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2005.
Benchmarking HR practices 9
10 International Journal of Training and Development
Table 1: Reliability of the study Item
© Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2005.
1. The top management of this organization goes out of its way to make sure that employees enjoy their work. 2. The top management believes that human resources are an extremely important resource and that they have to be treated more humanly. 3. Development of the subordinates is seen as an important part of their job by the heads of department/administrators here. 4. The personnel policies in this organization facilitate employee development. 5. The top management is willing to invest a considerable part of their time and other resources to ensure the development of employees. 6. Senior faculty/deans in this organization take active interest in their juniors and help them learn their job. 7. People lacking competence in doing their jobs are helped to acquire competence rather than being left unattended. 8. Managers in this organization believe that employee behaviour can be changed and people can be developed at any stage of their life. 9. People in this organization are helpful to each other. 10. Employees in this organization are very informal and do not hesitate to discuss their personal problems with their superiors/heads of departments. 11. The psychological climate in this organization is very conducive to any employee interested in self-developing by acquiring new knowledge and skills. 12. Seniors guide their juniors and prepare them for future responsibilities/ roles they are likely to take up.
Scale mean if item deleted
Scale variance if item deleted
Corrected item – total correlation
Alpha if item deleted
Ind.
Inst.
Ind.
Inst.
Ind.
Inst.
Ind.
Inst.
119.84
125.58
541.77
4339.01
0.60
-0.04
0.95
0.98
119.18
125.25
559.78
4327.07
0.30
0.03
0.95
0.98
120.18
125.34
542.53
4304.61
0.61
0.19
0.95
0.98
119.43
125.33
544.24
4297.59
0.53
0.25
0.95
0.98
118.89
125.44
557.18
4280.34
0.40
0.35
0.95
0.98
119.73
125.51
537.29
4270.59
0.66
0.42
0.95
0.98
119.89
125.46
542.52
4257.38
0.58
0.54
0.95
0.98
119.70
124.83
543.16
4264.04
0.61
0.43
0.95
0.98
119.10 119.51
124.58 125.28
545.02 547.50
4251.11 4229.33
0.60 0.59
0.56 0.61
0.95 0.95
0.98 0.98
119.55
124.98
545.03
4214.24
0.61
0.72
0.95
0.98
119.84
125.41
544.11
4191.17
0.59
0.78
0.95
0.98
Industry: Reliability coefficients 38 items, Alpha = 0.95; Standardized item alpha = 0.95. Institute: Reliability coefficients 38 items, Alpha = 0.98; Standardized item alpha = 0.98.
Item
© Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2005.
Benchmarking HR practices 11
13. The top management of this organization makes efforts to identify and utilize the potential of the employees. 14. Promotion decisions are based on the suitability of the promotee rather than on favouritism. 15. There are mechanisms in this organization to reward any good work done or any contribution made by employees. 16. When an employee does good work his supervising officers take special care to appreciate it. 17. Performance appraisal reports in our organization are based on objective assessment and adequate information and not on favouritism. 18. People in this organization do not have any fixed mental impressions about each other. 19. Employees are encouraged to experiment with new methods and try out creative ideas. 20. When employees make mistakes, their superiors treat them with understanding and help them to learn from such mistakes rather than punishing or discouraging them. 21. Weaknesses of employees are communicated to them in a non-threatening way. 22. When behaviour feedback is given to employees they take it seriously and use it for development. 23. Employees in this organization take pains to find out their strengths and weaknesses from their seniors or from colleagues. 24. When employees are sponsored for training, they take it seriously and try to learn from the programmes they attend. 25. Employees returning from training programmes are given opportunities to try out what they have learnt. 26. Employees are sponsored for training programmes on the basis of genuine training needs. 27. People trust each other in this organization. 28. Employees are not afraid to express or discuss their feelings with their superiors.
Scale mean if item deleted
Scale variance if item deleted
Corrected item – total correlation
Alpha if item deleted
Ind.
Inst.
Ind.
Inst.
Ind.
Inst.
Ind.
Inst.
119.13
125.41
546.90
4177.09
0.57
0.79
0.95
0.98
118.98
125.16
546.48
4178.23
0.51
0.76
0.95
0.98
119.16
125.59
553.54
4160.04
0.42
0.81
0.95
0.98
119.65
125.33
542.77
4147.73
0.59
0.85
0.95
0.98
119.56
125.05
540.24
4142.10
0.65
0.85
0.95
0.98
119.21
125.20
558.73
4130.06
0.33
0.86
0.95
0.98
119.84
125.08
544.11
4113.73
0.59
0.88
0.95
0.98
120.27
125.03
537.06
4100.85
0.64
0.91
0.95
0.98
119.37
124.98
539.26
4096.72
0.76
0.89
0.95
0.98
119.62
124.67
547.26
4090.24
0.58
0.90
0.95
0.98
119.78
125.02
541.89
4069.19
0.59
0.92
0.95
0.98
119.81
124.61
537.18
4067.71
0.72
0.90
0.95
0.98
119.25
124.99
545.88
4036.19
0.54
0.93
0.95
0.98
120.18
125.09
542.53
4027.33
0.61
0.92
0.95
0.98
119.05 119.51
124.67 125.07
547.21 547.50
4024.82 4005.01
0.51 0.59
0.93 0.94
0.95 0.95
0.98 0.98
Industry: Reliability coefficients 38 items, Alpha = 0.95; Standardized item alpha = 0.95. Institute: Reliability coefficients 38 items, Alpha = 0.98; Standardized item alpha = 0.98.
12 International Journal of Training and Development
Table 1: Continued Item
© Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2005.
29. Employees are not afraid to express or discuss their feelings with their subordinates. 30. Employees are encouraged to take initiative and do things on their own without having to wait for instructions from supervisors. 31. Delegation of authority to encourage juniors to develop handling higher responsibilities is quite common in this organization. 32. When seniors delegate authority to juniors, the juniors use it as an opportunity for development. 33. Team spirit is of high order in this organization. 34. When problems arise people discuss these problems openly and try to solve them rather than keep accusing each other behind the back. 35. Growth opportunities are pointed out to juniors by senior faculty in the organization. 36. The organization’s future plans are made known to the teaching and non-teaching staff to help them develop their juniors and prepare them for the future. 37. This organization ensures employee welfare to such an extent that the employees can save a lot of their mental energy for work purposes. 38. Job-rotation in this organization facilitates employee development.
Scale mean if item deleted
Scale variance if item deleted
Corrected item – total correlation
Alpha if item deleted
Ind.
Inst.
Ind.
Inst.
Ind.
Inst.
Ind.
Inst.
119.51
124.81
547.50
3997.54
0.59
0.93
0.95
0.98
118.98
125.15
546.48
3982.41
0.51
0.94
0.95
0.98
119.77
125.14
536.40
3965.53
0.66
0.95
0.95
0.98
119.66
124.69
538.42
3970.96
0.63
0.94
0.95
0.98
119.64 119.62
124.82 125.18
542.79 550.31
3948.39 3928.47
0.54 0.46
0.95 0.96
0.95 0.95
0.98 0.98
119.77
125.03
536.40
3921.68
0.66
0.95
0.95
0.98
119.99
124.80
540.55
3910.60
0.69
0.95
0.95
0.98
118.98
125.27
546.48
3894.92
0.51
0.95
0.95
0.98
119.73
124.93
542.03
3895.31
0.60
0.94
0.95
0.98
Industry: Reliability coefficients 38 items, Alpha = 0.95; Standardized item alpha = 0.95. Institute: Reliability coefficients 38 items, Alpha = 0.98; Standardized item alpha = 0.98.
Table 2: Industry–institute HRDC satisfaction cross-tabulation Satisfaction
Total
Low 38
