1. Introduction
A human resources management audit can assess how current human resources and employment management arrangements contribute to the purpose and aims of the organisation and how these arrangements support stability and manage the obligations and expectations. It is essentially a comparison of ‘‘what is’’, and ‘‘what should be’’. This presents two fundamental challenges – measuring ‘‘what is’’, and defining ‘‘what should be’’. We argue that traditional models are too insular to achieve this, and most processes too limited in their scope. We therefore propose a new model and process to human resources
(HR) audit.
1.1 Traditional approaches to HR audit
An HR audit can be described as ‘‘a systematic, formal evaluation of all human resource policies and programmes in an organization’’ (Hercus and Oades, 1983), which is an internally focused review of the HR activity. Rothwell and Kazanas (1994) take a wider view, suggesting that the audit concerns itself with the extent to which the HR activity supports, and is consistent with, the purpose of the organisation it serves – a more external approach.
Yet our experience, the many documented models, and the approaches offered by those who promote HR audit, do not bear this out.Traditionally, the approach has been internally focused – assessing the compliance of the
HR function to regulatory requirements, efficiency of processes and staff, the effectiveness of processes when measured against ratios eg staff turnover, and the service levels to the organisation. The models proposed by Weisbord (1978 (Six Box Model)); Hornstein and
Tichy (1973), and Lawrence and Lorsch (1967) all follow this approach. Some early models do look beyond the internal operations of the HR function, for example Levinson’s (1972)
Clinical Approach, the Nadler and Tushman (1977) model , and Kotter’s (1978) Seven Circle