Reputation Construction in Human Resources - A study by Artur Victoria

The demands of a job vary over time and with the circumstances of the moment. When the employer insists that an "eager beaver" employee move to the night shift, is this an attempt at exploitation of the employee's relative eagerness, or is it a legitimate response by the employer to some changed circumstance? When an employee is sent out on the road for the fourth time in a month (when the implicit understanding has been two trips on average per month), is this exploitation or a temporary increase reflecting scheduling irregularities?

If employees can't tell the difference, they don't know whether to carry out threats against the employer or how to reassess her reputation. Doing nothing invites exploitation; perhaps the employer is pushing the envelope, to see if the employees will respond. But overreacting is bad for both: Threatening to quit, or actually quitting, costs both sides. Withdrawing cooperation only shrinks the pie the two sides have to split. Insisting on written guarantees in place of implicit agreements reduces flexibility and pads the pockets of the lawyers. Employers and employees both benefit when balance-of-power and reputation-based guarantees can be monitored easily and without too many mistakes being made. leia todo o artigo

Discretion In Human Resources - A study by Artur Victoria

In the hierarchical caricature of employment, we have supposed that the employer retains the bulk of authority to determine the terms of trade in the employment relationship as events unfold; the employee can trust the employer not to abuse that authority despite the lack of market-based discipline because of goodwill, a balance of power, or the employer's desire to protect her reputation.

This - the boss demands and the worker accedes - is the standard caricature image of employment; why else use the term boss? Yet although it is the standard caricature, in other employment relationships, custom and law dictate other decision-making procedures or what, in the jargon of economics, is called governance. There are cases, for example, in which the employee has most of the discretion. One example of this is the relationship between the CEO and the board of directors; the CEO is the employee of the Board, (in large part) it is the CEO who determines what to do on a day-to-day basis. A second example is the relationship between client (employer) and lawyer or physician (employee); the latter will in many, if not most, instances decide what tasks to perform and even what fees to charge. leia todo o artigo