The more that corporate work force strategy dictates unit-level policies - that is, the more that unit-level human resources simply involves implementing policies and practices set down at the corporate level the more sense there is in having a direct reporting relationship from unit-level to corporate human resources. But on balance, people tend to favor having a unit report to a top management, with a dotted-line relationship to corporate relations. The reasons are: to encourage customization, to fit the specific environment, strategy, demography, and technological needs of the unit; and to reinforce the idea that it is general management at the appropriate level that should formulate and implement human resources strategy. If specialists advise top management, then they should report to unit-level top management. We can only envision a good case for having unit-level report directly to corporate when consistency of personnel practices throughout the organization is ultra-important-say, because people and information move across unit boundaries all the time - or when corporate reputation and even survival is at stake in the actions of any unit (for instance, some global financial and transportation companies meet these conditions).
As for the allocation of responsibility between corporate - and unit-level, we imagine that the forces of centralization will often push toward formulating strategy, policies, and procedures at the corporate level, with unit-level left to handle minor adaptations and implementation. But there are some implementation matters that should properly be left with corporate human resources. leia todo o artigo
