Please help with reaching the guidelines.

1. analyse the role of strategy in contemporary human resource management and industrial relations
2. critically assess the role of principal stakeholders (trade unions, government and employer associations) as strategic actors in the business environment
3. evaluate organisations' application of strategic human resource and industrial relations interventions

Essay question

Why is human resource differentiation problematic in organisations that claim to have an inclusive culture?

Structurally, you should include the following:

• An introduction.
• Three to five main points (paragraphs). You will have identified what these are during your research.
• A conclusion.

Please assist with making it flow as an essay.

What I have so far:

Human resource differentiation, also known as talent differentiation, refers to the practice of categorizing and treating employees differently based on their perceived level of performance or potential in an organization. For the purpose of recognizing exceptional individuals and providing them with unique chances, prizes, and recognition, it is frequently utilized. On the other hand, this method may present difficulties for organizations that assert to have a culture that accepts and values diversity.

One of the major issues with HR differentiation is that it reinforces the idea of a "war for talent," where organizations compete for a limited pool of highly talented individuals. Instead of fostering a culture of collaboration and inclusiveness among employees, this might lead to a culture of competitiveness and divisiveness among them. There is also the possibility that it will result in the establishment of a hierarchical structure inside the organization, with the highest achievers being given preference over others. Consequently, this might result in animosity and a lack of motivation among workers, which in turn can form a toxic environment at work.

Moreover, HR differentiation can also result in biases and discrimination within the organization. The categorization of employees based on subjective evaluations can be influenced by factors such as gender, race, age, and ethnicity. This might result in distinct groups of employees being treated and given opportunities that are not equal to one another. Additionally, it maintains the power dynamics that are already present inside the business, with those who do exceptionally well having a greater degree of influence and control over the decision-making processes.

Furthermore, HR differentiation can have a negative impact on employee engagement and retention. When an employee is not recognized as a top performance, they may experience feelings of undervaluation and being neglected, which can result in a loss in motivation and productivity. Additionally, this can have the effect of creating a sense of isolation and alienation among employees, particularly those who come from groups that are underrepresented, which can lead to high turnover rates.

In organizations that claim to have an inclusive culture, HR differentiation can also undermine this claim. Putting people into separate categories and treating them in different ways is in direct opposition to the concept of treating all employees in the same manner and promoting diversity and inclusiveness. Not only does it deter employees from voicing their concerns or presenting new ideas, but it can also prevent them from doing so because they may be afraid of being labeled as low achievers.

In conclusion, HR differentiation may have its benefits in identifying and developing top talent, but it can create several issues in organizations that aim to have an inclusive culture. Instead of fostering competitiveness and hierarchy, firms should prioritize the creation of a work atmosphere that encourages collaboration and inclusion for all employees. This will help organizations avoid the problems that have been described. In addition to this, they should have performance evaluation procedures that are both fair and transparent in order to prevent discrimination and bias. In addition, organizations should take into consideration the possible influence that HR distinctiveness may have on employee engagement and retention, and they should work toward developing a more inclusive HR architecture that takes into account the requirements and viewpoints of all stakeholders.

References

Kwon, K., & Jang, S. (2022). There is no good war for talent: A critical review of the literature on talent management. Employee Relations: The International Journal, 44(1), 94-120.

Triana, M. D. C., Gu, P., Chapa, O., Richard, O., & Colella, A. (2021). Sixty years of discrimination and diversity research in human resource management: A review with suggestions for future research directions. Human Resource Management, 60(1), 145-204.

Dobusch, L. (2021). The inclusivity of inclusion approaches: A relational perspective on inclusion and exclusion in organizations. Gender, Work & Organization, 28(1), 379-396.

Explanation:

Introduction

Human resource differentiation, also known as talent differentiation, is a practice that involves treating employees differently based on their perceived level of performance or potential in an organization. It is frequently utilized for the purpose of locating and cultivating elite talent, with the intention of enhancing the contribution that they make to the firm. On the other hand, this method may present difficulties for organizations that assert to have a culture that accepts and values diversity. As a result of taking into consideration the ideas of strategic choice and human resource architecture, as well as the impact that these concepts have on a variety of stakeholders in dynamic organizational contexts, this essay will address the challenges that are associated with HR differentiation in such organizations.

HR Differentiation Reinforces the "War for Talent" Mentality

One of the major issues with HR differentiation is that it perpetuates the idea of a "war for talent" within the organization. As opposed to fostering a culture of collaboration and inclusiveness among employees, this approach has the potential to foster a culture of competitiveness and divisiveness. According to Kwong and Jang (2022), this competition can lead to a toxic work atmosphere, in which employees may view each other as competitors rather than colleagues. This toxicity can be detrimental to the workplace. The general performance of the company may also be negatively impacted as a result of this, as it may lead to a drop in teamwork and cooperation.

Moreover, HR differentiation can also form a hierarchical structure within the organization, with top performers being favored over others. Employees may become disengaged and underperforming as a result of this, which can lead to feelings of resentment and demotivation among them. The hierarchical structure can also result in an imbalance of power, with the highest performers having a greater degree of influence and control over the decision-making process inside the organization. When this occurs, it has the potential to marginalize the viewpoints and contributions of other employees, which ultimately results in a culture that is exclusive rather than inclusive.

Potential for Biases and Discrimination

HR differentiation relies heavily on subjective evaluations and judgments of employees' performance and potential. As a consequence of this, it may be susceptible to prejudice and biases, whether they are aware of their existence or not. The findings of research conducted by Konrad (2006) have demonstrated that prejudices and stereotyping can have an impact on decisions about performance evaluation, promotion, and reward. It is possible that this will lead to unequal chances and treatment for employees who belong to different groups, such as women, employees of racial minorities, and employees who are older.

Moreover, HR differentiation can perpetuate existing power dynamics within the organization. As Kwong and Jang (2022) note out, the top achievers are typically representatives of more privileged groups inside the firm. These categories include white employees, male employees, and younger employees, all of whom already enjoy greater authority and privilege within the organization. It is possible that this may result in the further marginalization of groups that are already underrepresented and will perpetuate systemic prejudice within the setting of the organization.

Impact on Employee Engagement and Retention

HR differentiation can also have a negative impact on employee engagement and retention. When an employee is not recognized as a top performance, they may experience feelings of undervaluation and being neglected, which can result in a loss in motivation and productivity. Additionally, this can have the effect of creating a sense of isolation and alienation among employees, particularly those who come from groups that are underrepresented, which can lead to high turnover rates. It is possible for the firm to suffer considerable costs in terms of recruitment and training if it loses valuable individuals as a result of HR differentiation.

Undermining an Inclusive Culture

Organizations that claim to have an inclusive culture should focus on treating all employees equally and valuing diversity and inclusivity. This approach is in direct opposition to HR differentiation, which includes the categorization and treatment of personnel in distinct ways. The idea that employees should be treated with equal respect and value is undermined by the fact that it establishes a distinction between "high performers" and "low performers." This might also deter employees from speaking up about their problems or presenting new ideas, as they may be afraid of being labeled as low achievers and not being included in future opportunities with the possibility of being excluded from those possibilities.

Conclusion

In conclusion, HR differentiation can be problematic in organizations that aim to have an inclusive culture. The mentality of a "war for talent" can be reinforced, biases and discrimination can be perpetuated, and it can have a detrimental influence on employee engagement and retention. It is important for businesses to prioritize collaboration, fairness, and transparency in their human resource architecture in order to establish a more welcoming and inclusive working environment. The implementation of performance evaluation systems that are fair and unbiased, the promotion of diversity and inclusivity, and the appreciation of the viewpoints and contributions of all employees are all included in this objective. By taking into account the requirements and viewpoints of all stakeholders, firms are able to steer clear of the problems that are brought about by HR differentiation and establish a culture that is more welcoming to everybody.