Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
manufactured auto parts for Toyota had just opened in an adjacent county; and several of his
departmental managers had been forced to spend time driving trucks, running the plant and
the like. Because of a work-related accident in which an employee lost an arm, Kevin had to
cancel a trip to Europe that he and his family had been planning for two years. While ten of
the 35 full-time employees have been with the organization for over ten years, records show
that last year 18 new people were hired. The plant employees have no benefi ts other than
those required by law. The fi rm obviously has an employee turnover problem, and Kevin
expects this situation to only get worse given the benefi t package offered by the new auto
parts plant. He also knows that Culpen is not hiring employees that have the experience and
work attributes that they need to keep the cooperative competitive.
Culpen County Farmers' Co-op has no formal or written human resource policies. Just a
few short years ago, the fi rm had only one location and a dozen employees, and such a policy
seemed like a lot of red tape. A rudimentary form is used as a job application. Applicants are
interviewed and hired by whatever manager has the time to talk to the individual applying
for the job. There are no well-defi ned job qualifi cations, and job functions have not been
described formally. Training and orientation consists of, “You go out and help in the plant—
whoever is there will show you the ropes.” Because total employee costs are high, the wage
policy consists of “pay as little as you can.” Except for a token raise each year for everybody,
raises are generally given only when a person wants to resign, as an inducement to stay. At
that point, it is often too late to change the employee's decision.
Larger fi rms can also be guilty of having human resource programs almost as haphazard
as those of the Culpen County Farmers' Co-op. Sheer size often forces a much more fully
developed, formal human resource program in larger companies, but such a program can be
almost as ineffective as Culpen's if poorly organized and managed. A relatively large agri-
business with over 2,000 employees provides a good example. The current personnel direc-
tor was promoted to his job some 15 years ago, primarily because he was available at the
time. He had been in the training department (which was not well run) and had no formal HR
management training. More importantly, since taking the position, he has never tried to learn
more about the job in any organized way. His appointment clearly mirrors the attitude of top
management—who believe the HR function is relatively unimportant. “Find the bodies” and
“pay them as little as possible” are the two implicit, but primary, personnel objectives. In this
fi rm, the HR director is not regarded as top management, and is not included in important
planning and policy-making processes. In fact, the warehouse superintendent and mainte-
nance supervisor have far more infl uence than the HR manager does. Labor productivity is
down, turnover and absenteeism are high, grievances continue to increase, strikes are antici-
pated, and top management wonders why!
Clearly, things must change in both fi rms. Without major changes in their human resource
management approaches, both fi rms will continue to lose business to competitors or fail to
survive. People problems affect productivity, costs, and profi ts. Both of these fi rms provide
examples of the major issues (size, skill, and knowledge of the HR staff, and managerial
philosophy and attitude) that must be addressed in successfully managing the human resource
area. Let's dig a bit deeper into the human resource management function and explore ways
to help the agribusiness manager maximize their returns from investment in people.
The functions of human resource management
There are a number of steps in an effective human resource management program.
These steps focus on fi nding the right people for the right jobs, and then providing for their
