INTRODUCTION “Management guru Tom Peters once joked that if you want to insult a Human Resources director ask him if HR stands for 'Human Remains.' The fact is HR is a universally misunderstood discipline whether you are a large or small company. But bringing in an HR presence into your growing business could be one of the most sensible decisions you ever make.”
Source: (http://www.mybusiness.co.uk/Yc0-nCFoc2BfBw.html)
This report has been designed to investigate the traditional view of personnel management and the new approach of human resource management; as well as to evaluate the procedures and practices used for recruiting and selecting suitable employees.

SECTION 1 Distinguishing between ‘personnel management’ and ‘human resource management’ and discussing the historical development and changing context in which they operate Introduction
‘When the flexible concept of HRM emerged in the 1980s, in the times of
Thatcherism and Reaganomics, it “could not help but look more desirable than personnel management” (Hope-Hailey et al 1997: 5). The attractiveness of the theory of managing personnel led to a proliferation of HRM language. Nonetheless, it remains to be seen if there is more to HRM than only a new and shining rhetoric.
A number of authors stress the difficulties of identifying clear differences between personnel management and HRM, and maintain that the most obvious change is a “re-labelling process” (Legge 1989: 20). Torrington (1989: 64) agrees that “a change of label” is obvious, though one cannot be sure that the content of differentiates to any extent. However, the new terminology may at least rid personnel management from its unfavourable welfare image and other “negative connotations” (Sisson 1990: 1) and thus, save the ailing