Best Fit Versus Best Practice

Best Fit Versus Best Practice

Name:

Institution:

Best Fit Versus Best Practice

Authors and scholars have developed different critiques and studies on the concepts of “best fit” and “best practice,” specifically with respect to the effect they impose in terms of attaining prearranged business objectives and other aspects that usually determine an organization’s performance. These may comprise corporate aims or operational objectives of organizations functioning at a national or multinational level while applying human resources management as a measure. While both strategies may prove effectual when implemented in an organization, the respective discourse compares the implications of best fit” and “best practice” on notions such as compensation based on Hsieh and Chen’s best fit and Milkovich, Newman, and Gerhart’s viewpoint respectively. Due to the different effects they impose on organizations, the notions of the best fit and the best practice rationally possess different structures especially in terms of their effect on compensation.

Comparison between Best Fit and Best Practice

In relation to the scope of human resources management (HRM), several measures, and approaches are usually implemented to inform a decision or guideline that will be applied to a respective firm or organizational entity. As a strategic perspective, the aspect of compensation, as a notion, possesses many bearings with respect to the HRM context as well as the competitive edge of a particular organization (Long & Shields, 2005; Hsieh & Chen, 2011). Accordingly, more concentration is inclined to the demands and prerequisites of an organization, which are used as the guidelines for determining the type of practices that should be followed (Hsieh & Chen, 2011). In addition, the model operates in a way that it enables the present setting and situation of an organization determine the directions concerning the best possible alternatives and measures.

In contrast, the concept of best practice functions better for a provided number of proper actions or activities that are particularly transferable within the organization. Such activities normally lead to amplified organizational performance as evidenced by increased relations, production efficiency, output or yield, and attitudes or behaviors (Long & Shields, 2005). In addition to this, they also exhibit a reduction in the rates of employee turnover and inefficiencies within the production (Milkovich, Newman, & Gerhart, 2014). More specifically, the notion functions in a way that allows transferable values and traits to impose similar outcomes especially when relocated to other organizations (Milkovich, Newman, & Gerhart, 2014). Consequently, the notion of best practice, after implementation within an organization, may influence outcomes such as better employee dedication and high levels of motivation contrary to the aspect of competitive advantage, which results from the application of the best fit (Long & Shields, 2005).

Google’s Compensation Strategy

Based on the dimensions of the pay model, it is evident that Google’s objectives involve a predisposition towards innovation. Additionally, the firm focuses on the demonstration of respect for talent and unrestricted potential, especially exuded by a significantly motivated group. Google also concentrates on endorsing considerable levels of originality, excellence, passion for the discovery process, and a readiness to assume risks. On the aspect of internal alignment, the firm’s disparities in terms of pay are positively impactful since they create a mutually respectful environment and highlight high expectations. Regarding the dimensions of external competitiveness and employee contribution, the firm applies a standard pay base for all the employees and implements a bonus and personal pool with respect to the organization’s financial performance and individual performance respectively. Lastly, the firm places emphasis on a goal-oriented, team-based, and self-managed group with respect to the management dimension.

Best Fit Strategy for the Company

Google “fits” well in an innovator strategy due to its status as a technology-based organization as well as its focus on the development of novel products for the market. As a tech firm, Google is usually inclined towards the provision of new products and services that it can introduce to the external environment on a routine basis. This is further evidenced by the significant strides it has accomplished in activities such as the design and development of autonomous vehicles, the creation of the Android software for phones, and its several partnerships with internet-based companies. Concerning the approach to compensation, Google places less emphasis on assessment skills and occupations and concentrates significantly on the provision of incentives, which aid in encouraging innovations. The provision of incentives to employees that consistently create and produce new ideas for the company is imperative since it allows the organization to maintain a sizeable competitive edge over its competitors within the same marketplace.

Conclusion

To this end, the present competitive environment has encouraged organizations to devise and implement strategies capable enough of augmenting their competitive edge apart from gratifying the intended aims and prospects. Numerous disparities are evident between the notions of the best fit and the best practice in regards to the HRM environment. Under the former, the notion of best fit operates on the positioning of emphasis on particular measures regarding practices for specific groups. Contrary to the notion of best fit, concept of the best practice operates in a manner that adds significance to the implications of an organization’s values and qualities.

References

Hsieh, Y. H., & Chen, H. M. (2011). Strategic fit among business competitive strategy, human resource strategy, and reward system. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 10(2), 11-32.

Long, R. J., & Shields, J. L. (2005). Best practice or best fit? High involvement management and base pay practices in Canadian and Australian firms. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 43(1), 52-75.

Milkovich, G., Newman, J., & Gerhart, B. (2011). Compensation. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.