Human resource management (HRM) is a formal function used in an organization for managing the employees and their performance towards achieving desired organizational success (Albrecht et al., 2015). Human resources are considered to the most valuable organizational assets for getting organizational success (Shahzadi et al., 2014). This study will discuss the human resource issues in Samsung. The news story chosen in this study has revealed the reward system issues residing within Samsung. Moreover, the study will identify the human resource issues of the news story in respect to Samsung. The issues of the news story will also be aligned with relevant theories of human resource management. Apart from that, the study will provide appropriate solution to Samsung for reducing their issues of human resource management.
Description of News Story
The news story of Samsung is based on the matter of providing maximum reward to the employees of mobile division despite of their poor performance. As per the news story, Samsung typically does not pay so adequately and fantastically. Moreover, the organization supplements the base salary of the employees with their annual salary. Samsung usually provides bonus of 50% of employees’ salary and it is usually paid on exceeding the internal profit of each division (Android Authority, 2016). However, this news story has revealed that the employees of Samsung’s mobile division are getting maximum bonus despite of the poor performance of the division. As per the management executives, the employees are getting maximum bonus for their sincere contribution in keeping the division running in spite of various challenges. Moreover, the management executives of Samsung provided maximum bonus to the employees of mobile employees for preventing mass exodus of employees (Android Authority, 2016).
The rise of cheap Chinese vendors has become an extreme challenge for the mobile division of the Samsung. Such challenge has also reduced the profit level of the organization. The employees of this division still got maximum bonus despite of its less earnings. In such situation, the maximum bonus to the mobile division employees has been a bitter pill to swallow for the employees of other divisions of Samsung. Moreover, the employees of Samsung’s Electronic have not been treated so favorably. Furthermore, the employees of Samsung’s battery division have got just 3% bonus because of their poor performance through the year 2015 (Android Authority, 2016). Such discrimination of bonus distribution can reduce the motivation of the employees from other divisions of Samsung. Such lack of proper reward to the employees of other division can also influence on the performance level of those employees and their retention trends. Cost cutting is another issue for Samsung’s employees, where the organization has earned increased profit through reducing the salary structure of the employees (Android Authority, 2016). Such cost cutting can also lower the morale of the existing employees and lead them to seek better job opportunities in other organizations having better job security.
Identification of Problem and Theoretical PerspectiveInadequate Pay Structure
From the news story, it has been revealed that Samsung does not pay fantastically to its employees. The organization supplements the base salary of the employees with their annual rewards. Such inadequate salary structure has reduced the motivation level of the employees. According to Jackson et al. (2014), as per the equity theory of pay structure, the employees always compare the fairness of their pay structure with those of employees in other organizations in the same industry. However, in this case, the pay structure is not just as per the equity theory, as the employees are getting quite less salary as compared to other organizations (Anitha, 2014). Moreover, the statement of one official of Samsung in this news story has revealed the adequate pay structure of the employees. In this statement, the official has declared that Samsung should try to motivate their employees through proper compensation. On the other hand, Cerasoli et al. (2014) opined that Maslow’s theory of motivation suggest adequate pay as the basic and physiological needs of the employees. As per this theory, Samsung is not even fulfilling the basics needs of the employees. Hence, the employees are highly de-motivated to perform better and seeking to leave the organization for getting better job opportunities.
Lack of Proper Reward Structure
Samsung is more likely supplement the basic salary of the employees with their annual bonuses. It means that the reward structure of the organization is not fair enough and not as per the actual reward system. The organization has no intension to improve the performance level of the employees for their poor performance (Bhuvanaiah & Raya, 2015). Moreover, it is more likely to penalize the employees for their poor performance through reducing their annual bonuses. However, the mobile division of the organization is not following this trend of bonus distribution, where the employees in this division are getting maximum bonuses despite of poor performance (Alagaraja & Shuck, 2015).
As per Malik et al., (2015), the distributive justice theory suggests distribution of rewards as per the contribution level of the employees. However, in this case, apart from the employees of mobile division, all other employees are getting less reward because of their poor performance. They are not being provided adequate rewards despite of their sincere contribution in keeping up the business (Van De Voorde & Beijer, 2015). Hence, such employees are getting high de-motivated and the organization is facing challenges for retaining such employees. On the other hand, Bradler et al. (2016) opined that Hertzberg’s Two Factor Theory suggests that rewards act as the motivators for the employees towards better performance. However, in this case, the employees of Samsung are not getting proper rewards for their sincere contribution, which is actually hampering their motivation level (Nica, 2016). Hence, it would be extremely difficult for Samsung to retain sincere employees in long run for getting sustainable business profit.
Discrimination among Divisions
The news story of Samsung is clearly indicating that the organization is discriminating among different divisions in terms of providing bonuses. In has been found that the employees of mobile division are getting maximum bonuses despite of their poor performance. However, the employees of other division are getting very less bonuses for their poor performance. Such discrimination of bonuses is creating disruption of employee relation among the employees of different division (Yoon et al., 2015). Such clashing employee relation can hamper the willingness of the employees towards staying in the organization for longer period. As per the theory of ProMES (Productivity Measurement and Enhancement System) theory of performance appraisal system, the employees are get paid on the basis of the overall performance level of organization as a team (Nyberg et al., 2016). However, the organization is not providing bonuses to the employees as per the overall performance level of the organization. Such ineffective performance appraisal system is actually hampering the performance level of the employees on other divisions.
Cost Cutting Issue
As per the financial report of Q4, 2015, Samsung earned 15% increased profit from their previous earning volume. The reason behind such increased profit level was cost cutting, where the organization has reduced the pay structure of the employees (Boxall & Macky, 2014). Such cost cutting system of the organization was quite frustrating for the employees, which hampered the performance level of those employees. Moreover, De Gieter and Hofmans (2015) stated that the cost cutting system is just ineffective against employee motivation as per procedural justice of compensation. The organization is not fair enough in their method to determine the contribution level of the employees apart from the employees of mobile division. Hence, the organization can face extreme challenge in managing the performance level of the employees and retaining them for longer period.
Practical Solution for Future: Competitive Salary Structure
As per the news story, the pay structure of Samsung is not attractive enough for motivating the employees. Hence, the employees are more inclined to seek for better job opportunities in other organizations, which are providing competitive pay structure. In such situation, Samsung should immediately set competitive salary structure for the employees. Such competitive salary structure would competently meet the physiological needs of the employees. Moreover, the organization would be able to retain the talented employees for longer period for long term organizational success through competitive salary package. Moreover, competitive salary package would also encourage the employees towards high level of performance for organizational success.
Fair Reward Structure
It has been found that Samsung does not provide adequate reward to the employees. The employees of mobile division are getting maximum bonuses despite of their poor performance. However, the employees of other divisions like consumer electronic and battery division are getting very less bonuses as per their low performance level. The organization is more inclined to penalize the employees for their poor performance through providing very less bonus. However, such reduced bonuses are actually hampering the retaining rate and performance level of the employees in Samsung. Hence, the organization should provide adequate reward to the employees for respecting their sincere contribution just like mobile division towards keeping up the business. It will help the organization in long run towards long term retention of the employees and their increased performance level. It will give the hope to the organization to keep up the business despite of several challenges in the market.
Equal Bonus Pay
From the news story, it can be seen that Samsung is discriminating among the employees from different divisions. It has been found that the employees of mobile division are getting maximum bonuses despite of their poor performance. However, the employees from other divisions are getting little bonuses for their poor performance. Such situation is indicating discrimination of rewards system among the employees. Moreover, the organization has no clear structure for providing rewards to the employees. It is actually creating clashing employee relation among the employees, which is de-motivating the employees through hindering their performance level. Hence, the organization should immediately initiate equal bonus system, where the employees of each division would get equal bonuses as per overall profit of the organization. It would definitely reduce the clashing relation among the employees from different divisions, which would ultimately enhance their performance level.
Effective Performance Appraisal
The new story of Samsung suggests that apart from mobile division, most of other divisions are more likely to penalize the employees as per their poor performance level. However, such penalize system is actually disrespecting the sincere contribution of the employees despite of different challenges. Moreover, the organization has no intension to improve the performance level of the employees through enhancing their skills and knowledge level. In this way, motivation level of the employees is getting down gradually and they are being more inclined towards leaving their current jobs. In such situation, despite of cost cutting, the organization should arrange proper training and employee development programs for improving their performance level. Such training and development program would definitely encourage the employee towards working hard for organizational success. Hence, training and development program would help the organization to enhance the performance level of the employees and retain them for longer period.
While concluding the study, it can be said that Samsung is providing maximum bonus to the employees of mobile division despite of their poor performance. However, the employees from other divisions are getting less amount of bonus because of their poor performance level. In this way, such discrimination of bonuses is creating clashing relationship among the employees from different divisions. Such clashing employee relationship is actually hampering the performance level of the employees. Apart from that, Samsung does not provide competent salary to the employees. Hence, the employees are more inclined to leave their current job, which may create challenge for the organization towards retaining the employees. Hence, the organization should distribute annual bonuses to the employees of different divisions equally. It would reduce the clashing relationship of the employees, which can help them in concentrating in their work for increasing their performance level. On the other hand, the organization should also increase the compensation package for the employees, which will encourage them to stay in the organization for longer period.
Alagaraja, M., & Shuck, B. (2015). Exploring organizational alignment-employee engagement linkages and impact on individual performance: A conceptual model. Human Resource Development Review, 14(1), 17-37.
Albrecht, S. L., Bakker, A. B., Gruman, J. A., Macey, W. H., & Saks, A. M. (2015). Employee engagement, human resource management practices and competitive advantage: An integrated approach. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance, 2(1), 7-35.
Android Authority. (2016). Android Authority. Retrieved 6 February 2018, from
Anitha, J. (2014). Determinants of employee engagement and their impact on employee performance. International journal of productivity and performance management, 63(3), 308.
Bhuvanaiah, T., & Raya, R. P. (2015). Mechanism of improved performance: Intrinsic motivation and employee engagement. SCMS Journal of Indian Management, 12(4), 92.
Boxall, P., & Macky, K. (2014). High-involvement work processes, work intensification and employee well-being. Work, employment and society, 28(6), 963-984.
Bradler, C., Dur, R., Neckermann, S., & Non, A. (2016). Employee recognition and performance: A field experiment. Management Science, 62(11), 3085-3099.
Cerasoli, C. P., Nicklin, J. M., & Ford, M. T. (2014). Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic incentives jointly predict performance: A 40-year meta-analysis. Psychological bulletin, 140(4), 980.
De Gieter, S., & Hofmans, J. (2015). How reward satisfaction affects employees’ turnover intentions and performance: an individual differences approach. Human Resource Management Journal, 25(2), 200-216.
Jackson, S. E., Schuler, R. S., & Jiang, K. (2014). An aspirational framework for strategic human resource management. The Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 1-56.
Malik, M. A. R., Butt, A. N., & Choi, J. N. (2015). Rewards and employee creative performance: Moderating effects of creative self?efficacy, reward importance, and locus of control. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(1), 59-74.
Nica, E. (2016). The effect of perceived organizational support on organizational commitment and employee performance. Journal of Self-Governance and Management Economics, 4(4), 34-40.
Nyberg, A. J., Pieper, J. R., & Trevor, C. O. (2016). Pay-for-performance’s effect on future employee performance: Integrating psychological and economic principles toward a contingency perspective. Journal of Management, 42(7), 1753-1783.
Shahzadi, I., Javed, A., Pirzada, S. S., Nasreen, S., & Khanam, F. (2014). Impact of employee motivation on employee performance. European Journal of Business and Management, 6(23), 159-166.
Van De Voorde, K., & Beijer, S. (2015). The role of employee HR attributions in the relationship between high?performance work systems and employee outcomes. Human Resource Management Journal, 25(1), 62-78.
Yoon, H. J., Sung, S. Y., & Choi, J. N. (2015). Mechanisms underlying creative performance: Employee perceptions of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards for creativity. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 43(7), 1161-1179.