Файл: Влияние кадровой стратегии на работу службы персонала (Теоретические основы работы с персоналом в организации).pdf

Over the last several decades, though, technology has whittled away the underpinnings of the nation state. National economies have become so intertwined that economic security depends less on national armies than on financial transactions around the world. Global corporations play nations off against each other to get the best deals on taxes and regulations.

News and images move so easily across borders that attitudes and aspirations are no longer especially national. Cyber-weapons, no longer the exclusive province of national governments, can originate in a hackers garage.

Nations are becoming less relevant in a world where everyone and everything is interconnected. The connections that matter most are again becoming more personal. Religious beliefs and affiliations, the nuances of ones own language and culture, the daily realities of class, and the extensions of ones family and its values -- all are providing people with ever greater senses of identity.

The nation state, meanwhile, is coming apart. A single Europe -- which seemed within reach a few years ago -- is now succumbing to the centrifugal forces of its different languages and cultures. The Soviet Union is gone, replaced by nations split along tribal lines. Vladimir Putin cant easily annex the whole of Ukraine, only the Russian-speaking part. The Balkans have been Balkanized.

Separatist movements have broken out all over -- Czechs separating from Slovaks; Kurds wanting to separate from Iraq, Syria, and Turkey; even the Scots seeking separation from England.

The turmoil now consuming much of the Middle East stems less from democratic movements trying to topple dictatorships than from ancient tribal conflicts between the two major denominations of Isam -- Sunni and Shia.

And what about America? The worlds "melting pot" is changing color. Between the 2000 and 2010 census the share of the U.S. population calling itself white dropped from 69 to 64 percent, and more than half of the nations population growth came from Hispanics.

It s also becoming more divided by economic class. Increasingly, the rich seem to inhabit a different country than the rest.

But Americas new tribalism can be seen most distinctly in its politics. Nowadays the members of one tribe (calling themselves liberals, progressives, and Democrats) hold sharply different views and values than the members of the other (conservatives, Tea Partiers, and Republicans).

Each tribe has contrasting ideas about rights and freedoms (for liberals, reproductive rights and equal marriage rights; for conservatives, the right to own a gun and do what you want with your property).

Each has its own totems (social insurance versus smaller government) and taboos (cutting entitlements or raising taxes). Each, its own demons (the Tea Party and Ted Cruz; the Affordable Care Act and Barack Obama); its own version of truth (one believes in climate change and evolution; the other doesnt); and its own media that confirm its beliefs.

The tribes even look different. One is becoming blacker, browner, and more feminine. The other, whiter and more male. (Only 2 percent of Mitt Romneys voters were African-American, for example.)

Each tribe is headed by rival warlords whose fighting has almost brought the national government in Washington to a halt. Increasingly, the two tribes live separately in their own regions -- blue or red state, coastal or mid-section, urban or rural - with state or local governments reflecting their contrasting values.

I m not making a claim of moral equivalence. Personally, I think the Republican right has gone off the deep end, and if polls are to be believed a majority of Americans agree with me.

But the fact is, the two tribes are pulling America apart, often putting tribal goals over the national interest -- which is not that different from whats happening in the rest of the world.

• использовать на несвойственных работах, на других объектах;
• направлять на длительную переподготовку и т.п.
• подготавливать работников самим или искать тех, кто уже имеет необходимую подготовку;

We are witnessing a reversion to tribalism around the world, away from nation states. The same pattern can be seen even in America -- especially in American politics."

Before the rise of the nation-state, between the eighteenth and twentieth centuries, the world was mostly tribal. Tribes were united by language, religion, blood, and belief. They feared other tribes and often warred against them. Kings and emperors imposed temporary truces, at most.

But in the past three hundred years the idea of nationhood took root in most of the world. Members of tribes started to become citizens, viewing themselves as a single people with patriotic sentiments and duties toward their homeland. Although nationalism never fully supplanted tribalism in some former colonial territories, the transition from tribe to nation was mostly completed by the mid twentieth century.

Over the last several decades, though, technology has whittled away the underpinnings of the nation state. National economies have become so intertwined that economic security depends less on national armies than on financial transactions around the world. Global corporations play nations off against each other to get the best deals on taxes and regulations.

News and images move so easily across borders that attitudes and aspirations are no longer especially national. Cyber-weapons, no longer the exclusive province of national governments, can originate in a hackers garage.

Nations are becoming less relevant in a world where everyone and everything is interconnected. The connections that matter most are again becoming more personal. Religious beliefs and affiliations, the nuances of ones own language and culture, the daily realities of class, and the extensions of ones family and its values -- all are providing people with ever greater senses of identity.

The nation state, meanwhile, is coming apart. A single Europe -- which seemed within reach a few years ago -- is now succumbing to the centrifugal forces of its different languages and cultures. The Soviet Union is gone, replaced by nations split along tribal lines. Vladimir Putin cant easily annex the whole of Ukraine, only the Russian-speaking part. The Balkans have been Balkanized.

Separatist movements have broken out all over -- Czechs separating from Slovaks; Kurds wanting to separate from Iraq, Syria, and Turkey; even the Scots seeking separation from England.

The turmoil now consuming much of the Middle East stems less from democratic movements trying to topple dictatorships than from ancient tribal conflicts between the two major denominations of Isam -- Sunni and Shia.

And what about America? The worlds "melting pot" is changing color. Between the 2000 and 2010 census the share of the U.S. population calling itself white dropped from 69 to 64 percent, and more than half of the nations population growth came from Hispanics.

It s also becoming more divided by economic class. Increasingly, the rich seem to inhabit a different country than the rest.

But Americas new tribalism can be seen most distinctly in its politics. Nowadays the members of one tribe (calling themselves liberals, progressives, and Democrats) hold sharply different views and values than the members of the other (conservatives, Tea Partiers, and Republicans).

Each tribe has contrasting ideas about rights and freedoms (for liberals, reproductive rights and equal marriage rights; for conservatives, the right to own a gun and do what you want with your property).

Each has its own totems (social insurance versus smaller government) and taboos (cutting entitlements or raising taxes). Each, its own demons (the Tea Party and Ted Cruz; the Affordable Care Act and Barack Obama); its own version of truth (one believes in climate change and evolution; the other doesnt); and its own media that confirm its beliefs.

The tribes even look different. One is becoming blacker, browner, and more feminine. The other, whiter and more male. (Only 2 percent of Mitt Romneys voters were African-American, for example.)

Each tribe is headed by rival warlords whose fighting has almost brought the national government in Washington to a halt. Increasingly, the two tribes live separately in their own regions -- blue or red state, coastal or mid-section, urban or rural - with state or local governments reflecting their contrasting values.

I m not making a claim of moral equivalence. Personally, I think the Republican right has gone off the deep end, and if polls are to be believed a majority of Americans agree with me.

But the fact is, the two tribes are pulling America apart, often putting tribal goals over the national interest -- which is not that different from whats happening in the rest of the world.

• набирать со стороны или переучивать работников, подлежащих высвобождению с предприятия;
• набирать дополнительно рабочих или обойтись имеющейся численностью при условии более рационального ее использования и т.п.

Кадровая стратегия формирует:

• требования к рабочей силе на стадии ее найма (к образованию, полу, возрасту, стажу, уровню специальной подготовки и т.п.);
• отношение к “капиталовложениям” в рабочую силу, к целенаправленному воздействию на развитие тех или иных сторон занятой рабочей силы;
• отношение к стабилизации коллектива (всего или определенной его части);
• отношение к характеру подготовки новых рабочих на предприятии, ее глубине и широте, а также к переподготовке кадров;
• отношение к внутрифирменному движению кадров и т.п.

We are witnessing a reversion to tribalism around the world, away from nation states. The same pattern can be seen even in America -- especially in American politics."

Before the rise of the nation-state, between the eighteenth and twentieth centuries, the world was mostly tribal. Tribes were united by language, religion, blood, and belief. They feared other tribes and often warred against them. Kings and emperors imposed temporary truces, at most.

But in the past three hundred years the idea of nationhood took root in most of the world. Members of tribes started to become citizens, viewing themselves as a single people with patriotic sentiments and duties toward their homeland. Although nationalism never fully supplanted tribalism in some former colonial territories, the transition from tribe to nation was mostly completed by the mid twentieth century.

Over the last several decades, though, technology has whittled away the underpinnings of the nation state. National economies have become so intertwined that economic security depends less on national armies than on financial transactions around the world. Global corporations play nations off against each other to get the best deals on taxes and regulations.

News and images move so easily across borders that attitudes and aspirations are no longer especially national. Cyber-weapons, no longer the exclusive province of national governments, can originate in a hackers garage.

Nations are becoming less relevant in a world where everyone and everything is interconnected. The connections that matter most are again becoming more personal. Religious beliefs and affiliations, the nuances of ones own language and culture, the daily realities of class, and the extensions of ones family and its values -- all are providing people with ever greater senses of identity.

The nation state, meanwhile, is coming apart. A single Europe -- which seemed within reach a few years ago -- is now succumbing to the centrifugal forces of its different languages and cultures. The Soviet Union is gone, replaced by nations split along tribal lines. Vladimir Putin cant easily annex the whole of Ukraine, only the Russian-speaking part. The Balkans have been Balkanized.

Separatist movements have broken out all over -- Czechs separating from Slovaks; Kurds wanting to separate from Iraq, Syria, and Turkey; even the Scots seeking separation from England.

The turmoil now consuming much of the Middle East stems less from democratic movements trying to topple dictatorships than from ancient tribal conflicts between the two major denominations of Isam -- Sunni and Shia.

And what about America? The worlds "melting pot" is changing color. Between the 2000 and 2010 census the share of the U.S. population calling itself white dropped from 69 to 64 percent, and more than half of the nations population growth came from Hispanics.

It s also becoming more divided by economic class. Increasingly, the rich seem to inhabit a different country than the rest.

But Americas new tribalism can be seen most distinctly in its politics. Nowadays the members of one tribe (calling themselves liberals, progressives, and Democrats) hold sharply different views and values than the members of the other (conservatives, Tea Partiers, and Republicans).

Each tribe has contrasting ideas about rights and freedoms (for liberals, reproductive rights and equal marriage rights; for conservatives, the right to own a gun and do what you want with your property).

Each has its own totems (social insurance versus smaller government) and taboos (cutting entitlements or raising taxes). Each, its own demons (the Tea Party and Ted Cruz; the Affordable Care Act and Barack Obama); its own version of truth (one believes in climate change and evolution; the other doesnt); and its own media that confirm its beliefs.

The tribes even look different. One is becoming blacker, browner, and more feminine. The other, whiter and more male. (Only 2 percent of Mitt Romneys voters were African-American, for example.)

Each tribe is headed by rival warlords whose fighting has almost brought the national government in Washington to a halt. Increasingly, the two tribes live separately in their own regions -- blue or red state, coastal or mid-section, urban or rural - with state or local governments reflecting their contrasting values.

I m not making a claim of moral equivalence. Personally, I think the Republican right has gone off the deep end, and if polls are to be believed a majority of Americans agree with me.

But the fact is, the two tribes are pulling America apart, often putting tribal goals over the national interest -- which is not that different from whats happening in the rest of the world.

Кадровая стратегия должна увеличивать возможности предприятия, реагировать на изменяющиеся требования технологии и рынка в ближайшем будущем. Кадровая стратегия является составной частью всей управленческой деятельности и производственной политики организации. Она имеет целью создать сплоченную, ответственную, высокоразвитую и высокопроизводительную рабочую силу. Кадровая стратегия должна создавать не только благоприятные условия труда, но обеспечивать возможность продвижения по службе и необходимую степень уверенности в завтрашнем дне. Поэтому, основной задачей кадровой политики предприятия является обеспечение в повседневной кадровой работе учета интересов всех категорий работников и социальных групп трудового коллектива.

Кадровая политика выступает звеном кадровой стратегии. В специальной литературе можно встретить примеры различного толкования понятия кадровая политика (авторы Л.С.Бляхман, Р.Э.Мартанкус, И.Б.Скоробогатова, Н.В.Сулицкий, И.В,Бизюков и др.). Различные определения можно свести в три группы.

Кадровая политика в работах вышеуказанных авторов трактуется как:

-подбор и расстановка работников, занятых в системе управления;

-подбор, расстановка и использование всех без исключения работников;

-процесс социального управления производственным коллективом и его

профессиональными группами для решения поставленных перед ними задач.

Обращает на себя внимание так же тот факт, что в специальной литературе нет единого мнения о месте кадровой политики в кадровом менеджменте. Некоторые признанные специалисты в области управления персоналом определяют кадровую политику как основу стратегии управления персоналом.

Автор разделяет точку зрения Травина, которая сводится к тому, что кадровая политика в целом определяет подходы к различным процедурам и функциям управления персоналом, она выступает как промежуточное звено между миссией организации и стратегией управления персоналом, с одной стороны, и повседневной деятельностью по управлению персоналом, с другой^[10].

Исходя из данного подхода, назначение кадровой политики – в своевременном формулировании целей управления персоналом в соответствии с миссией, стратегией развития организации и вытекающей из них стратегией управления персонала, постановке проблем и задач, нахождении способов и организации достижения целей.

Кадровая стратегия формирует требования к рабочей силе на стадии ее найма, отношение руководства к «»капиталовложениям» в рабочую силу, к стабилизации коллектива, к характеру подготовки и переподготовки персонала, к внутрифирменному движению кадров и т.д.

Основными разновидностями кадровыхпланов считаются план подбора сотрудников, план обучения, план оплаты труда, план формирования кадровых процедур.

Специалисты считают, что не существует идеальной модели управления и нельзя выработать универсальную кадровую стратегию.

Таким образом, кадровая стратегия ориентирована на создание таковой системы работы с кадрами, которая ориентировалась бы на приобретение не лишь экономического, но и общественного эффекта при условии соблюдения работающего законодательства.

В реализации кадровой стратегии вероятны альтернативы. Она может быть стремительной, решительной (в чем-то на первых порах, может быть, и не чрезвычайно разумной по отношению к работникам предприятия), основанной на формальном подходе, приоритете производственных интересов, или, напротив, основанной на учете такого, как ее осуществление отразится на трудовом коллективе, к каким социальным издержкам для него это может привести.

2. Анализ кадрового состава и системы работы с персоналом на АЗСТНК г. Тула

2.1 Характеристика персонала АЗС ТНК