A Comparison of Human Resource Management in Korea and Taiwan
A comparison of human resource management in Korea and Taiwan
(Draft 3) Nowadays, human resource management (HRM) has been highly valued little by little, because human resource is the most precious resource in enterprise. No matter to do the simple works such as running errands or to map out whole organization’s plan, all need “human” to execute and manage. Human resource is not only assets of an organization but key resource. As a result, the influential of HRM has increased toward company management. Currently, more and more companies make personnel department become independent from general services department. Even instead of personnel department companies change its name into human resource management department. According to an article in a website named Management Study Guide, it claims that personnel management is essentially “workforce” centered whereas human resource management is “resource” centered. In the other words, personnel management is often considered an independent function of organization. It provides a response to demands and concerns as it is presented. On the contrary, human resource management is said to incorporate and develop personnel management tasks, while seeking to create and develop workers for the benefit of organization. Its primary goal is to enable employees to work to a maximum level of efficiency. Toward HRM activity, there are many categories from different scholars. In my paper, I would base on Huang’s idea to classify HRM activity into four categories ─ staffing, training, and maintenance to compare the HRM between Korea and Taiwan. I believe that a completed HRM system is pretty one of the most important impulse to Korea’s companies and economic development. The motivation makes me compare Korea and Taiwan is the impressive economical
development of Korea. First, last three decades the outstanding economic development of South Korea is hailed as” Miracle on the Han River”. I regard that there is certainly some
(Draft 3) Nowadays, human resource management (HRM) has been highly valued little by little, because human resource is the most precious resource in enterprise. No matter to do the simple works such as running errands or to map out whole organization’s plan, all need “human” to execute and manage. Human resource is not only assets of an organization but key resource. As a result, the influential of HRM has increased toward company management. Currently, more and more companies make personnel department become independent from general services department. Even instead of personnel department companies change its name into human resource management department. According to an article in a website named Management Study Guide, it claims that personnel management is essentially “workforce” centered whereas human resource management is “resource” centered. In the other words, personnel management is often considered an independent function of organization. It provides a response to demands and concerns as it is presented. On the contrary, human resource management is said to incorporate and develop personnel management tasks, while seeking to create and develop workers for the benefit of organization. Its primary goal is to enable employees to work to a maximum level of efficiency. Toward HRM activity, there are many categories from different scholars. In my paper, I would base on Huang’s idea to classify HRM activity into four categories ─ staffing, training, and maintenance to compare the HRM between Korea and Taiwan. I believe that a completed HRM system is pretty one of the most important impulse to Korea’s companies and economic development. The motivation makes me compare Korea and Taiwan is the impressive economical
development of Korea. First, last three decades the outstanding economic development of South Korea is hailed as” Miracle on the Han River”. I regard that there is certainly some
References: English Chang, C. S., & Chang, J. C. (1994). The Korean management system: cultural, political, economic foundations. Westpost, CT: Quorum. Conard, M.A., & Ashworth, S.D.(1986). Recruiting source effectiveness: A meta-analysis and re-examination of two rival hypotheses. Paper presented at the First Annual Meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organization Psychology, Chicago: IL. Lee, Y.I., & Trim, P. R.J. (2008). Strategic Marketing Decision-Making in Japanese and South Korean Companies, Chando. McGehee, W., & Thayer, P. W. (1961) Training in business and industry. N. Y: Wiley. Moore L. F., & Jennings P. D.(1995).Human resource management on the pacific rim-institution, practices, and attitudes. New York: de Gruyter. Samsung Human Resource Development Center.(2011) A letter from CLO In-Hee Sung (sec.1) Retrieved from: http://hrd.samsung.co.kr/esub1_3.html 中文 台塑集團 (2008)。台塑相關企業 2008 社會責任報告。台北市:台塑集團。 李在方(2008)。韓國崛起─駐韓大使旅韓 20 年的觀察與見證。台北：財團法人亞 太文化學術交流基金會。 李梨君(2003)。跨國企業在台子公司人力資源管理制度之比較。國立中央大學人力 資源管理研究所未出版碩士論文。 林博華 (2002)。IT 韓潮：不容忽視的韓國 IT 競爭力。台北:經濟新潮社。 秦璐、王垒(2004)。中韓管理比較。China Academic Journal Electronic Publishing House, 3(27)，39-41。 張宏杰(2004)。滾滾韓流－中國人比韓國人少了什麼。台北:知本家文化事業公司。 程嘉文(民 96 年 11 月 21 日)。勞委會：韓大學生起薪「僅」4.8 萬。經濟日報。民 100 年 6 月 12 日，取自: http://pro.udnjob.com/mag2/pro/storypage.jsp?f_ART_ID=37528。 賴建宇 (2010)。尋找台灣新平衡藥方。天下雜誌。民 100 年 6 月 12 日，取自: http://www.cw.com.tw/article/article.action?id=5000717&page.currentPage=1。 彭慧鸞(2008)。番薯與泡菜─亞洲雙龍台韓經驗比較。台北:財團法人亞太文化學 術交流基金會。 國立政治大學商學院(1996)。商學總論。台北：麥田出版股份有限公司。 戴國良(2004)。人力資源管理─企業實務導向與本土個案實例。台北：鼎茂圖書。