SHRM futurist task force - Society for Human Resource Management

HR Magazine, March 15, 1998 by Maureen Minehan

In the fall of 1997, the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) created the Futurist Task Force to develop a research report on the future of the human resource function. Led by Bruce Ellig, 1996 chair of SHRM, the project was conducted as a Delphi study in which experts in a variety of fields provided written input to a series of questions posed by SHRM. Areas of consensus among the group were summarized in a three-section report, and the project culminated in a meeting in Florida in December to discuss the report and to highlight any areas of strong agreement or disagreement. The wide variety of experiences and expertise of the participants brought great breadth and scope to the study (see attached box for a list of participants).

In developed countries, the roles of business and government will remain relatively separate. Given the extremely competitive nature of today's business environment, only government functions and actions that add value to a business organization and help it compete will be supported. Few government activities meet this criterion.

Some overlap will exist, however. Assumption or support of a governmental function will be more likely if it helps an organization become more competitive. For example, assuming an education function by establishing electronic labs in China will improve the quality of education for Chinese engineers while simultaneously exposing them to a company's technology. Business-government dialogue also will be evident as certain activities are discussed and implemented, such as partial privatization of pension/social security systems, ownership of health care systems in the United States, experiments in the U.S. with purchasing educational services from for-profit organizations and applying "business reengineering" methods to government.

In the future, it is possible that businesses may gain advantage by more actively sharing their efficiency/effectiveness methods, knowledge and measurement techniques with government. In some countries, this cooperation might be provided in lieu of taxes or job guarantees.

In developing and emerging market countries, the roles of business and government will be more closely intertwined. In those countries where the basic form of foreign investment is through joint ventures with companies controlled by the state or the military, governments presumably will continue to have greater influence over local decision making, including employment decisions. In addition, governments interested in becoming a world economic power, such as China, may also want to influence the global strategies of corporations doing business within their borders.

In other emerging markets, investors win probably continue to have more leeway, as long as they are not perceived as threatening the local power structures. Developing countries will feel constrained from taking actions such as confiscatory tax hikes or other arbitrary actions, as long as the overall trend toward globalization remains strong and there is strong competition among developing countries attracting foreign investment.

There is a sense from the business side that the government, at least in the United States, does not always understand business realities. At times, the government is perceived as somewhat from the real world, with little appreciation of what it takes to compete. Recent examples supporting this belief include the veto of the TEAM Act and proposed legislation to restrict legal immigration. While these issues were complex and had supporters on both sides, they contributed to the perception that the government does not fully recognize the effect of its decisions on facilitating competition.

Governments will continue to see themselves as regulators whose existence is necessary to rein in potentially destructive business practices. Deregulation of financial markets has put into the hands of global investors greater power to destabilize governments, businesses and die nature of employment. The result is likely to be greater effort to control or regulate the freedom to "play markets." In addition, governmental oversight of patents, copyrights and other outgrowths of intellectual capital will help governments maintain some authority over business development.

New businesses will be most welcome in developing countries when they can provide jobs. Countries with high birth rates and constant or growing productivity will find it difficult to provide adequate jobs in the next few decades. The sub-Saharan African countries are good examples of countries facing the dilemma of potential underemployment. For the Third World, the optimal situation will be access to production and service technology that allows the country to expedite its development process while providing large numbers of jobs. Note that this is the opposite of the objective in richer countries; the developed world seeks technology that increases input with less labor.

Contributing to a country's development process also win be critical. Examples include primary exploration for raw materials and development of a communications infrastructure. Companies will have no choice but to develop local capabilities in developing countries. The keys will be education of the local workforce, development of the infrastructure and introduction of leading-edge technology. Developing country businesses and governments do not want "hand-me-down" technology -- they want the latest and greatest.