Managing Human Resources Using Social Media

Question: Describe about the Managing Human Resources for Using Social Media. Answer: The purpose of this assignment is to develop skills of using social media company. Therefore, the paper will discuss the use of social network under provide analysis based on screening recruitment, managing theories, and models. The social network is used by various people with clear intentions. While employees use the social websites to express their feeling, interest, and hobbies, employees use workers information from the internet for recruitment benefits. There is also a difference in attitude between junior workers and older employees. Companies have come up codes of conduct which is affected by the way employees make use of the online. By discussing the use of social media as a whole, ways in which employees can utilize workers information for a win-win benefit is going to be discussed. Introduction The aim of this paper is to discuss the use of social media through various users especially, employees and employers. The paper will start by analyzing issues regarding social networking such as privacy. How employees use workers, information, and ways in which such data can be utilized for the benefit of both parties will be discussed. About this, supportive factors such as strategic HRM, relational psychology, high-commitment, knowledge management and personal commitment HRM are going to be discussed based on a win-win situational use of employees information. In general, the entire analysis with significant use of social media, the privacy of employees and how employers can use workers data for the benefit of the two parties will be analyzed. While employees privacy issue is a limiting fracture in the use of social network, regulation of personal information can lead to a win-win situation. As with most employees, privacy issues, issues around social network use are simply a case of needing to balance the rights of employees with consequences for the organization. Generally, the social network is used by people for various purposes. While other people make friends out of it, others utilize it for business gain. Irrespective of the use, use of social network sites has led to a number of issues which revolve around employees privacy and self-expressions (McCarthy, Caulfield and OMahony, M. (2016). As many people believe, access to personal information by others i.e. managers, recruiters, and supervisors, invades their personal information (Dai et al., 2014). To restore rights of employees with organizations values, the Australian government has illegalized use of information from the social network to decide about the fitness of a candidate towards a given job (Brandolph, 2009). On a high note, this governmental policy is aimed at reducing the access to employees vital in formation. About the policy, Bronwyn Maynard, a senior lawyer, clarified that privacy is covered under the act; it requires that recruiters and employers should inform a candidate upon collecting his or her personal information. In the same line, the company should clarify the reasons for collecting the information. At the same time, they must state categorically ways in which the information is going to be used (Chory, Vela, and Avtgis, 2016). This should go along identifying the exact persons who are going to access the data. This policy, therefore, shows how private issues of employees are balanced with the consequences for through the organization and various issues around the social network (Twarog, 2005). While discussing the need for balancing employees privacy and group results using ideas from ethical theories and stakeholder theory, it is important to note that each moral theory has a different approach. However, all of them shape attitudes directed to others by fellows (Tahan, 2016). Before a person decides to access information belonging to other people, he should be guided by ethical theories to weigh how accessing the information can be of benefit to both parties. At the same time, consequences must also be put into consideration. Specifically, Unitarianism, one of the fundamental ethical theories, proposes that a reasonable choice should be taken to ensure that minimal harm is done to all parties; the owner and the person accessing the information (Magelssen, Pedersen, and Frde, 2016). Addressing the issue of privacy and access to another persons information without his knowledge, deontology ethical theory advises that employees should operate in line with defined obligations and responsibilities (Ferencz-Kaddari, Shifman and Koslowsky, 2016). This moral theory believes that good practice is a duty of everyone and respect to other persons properties is one way of exercising the practice (Morgan, 2016). However, this theory does not look on the other side of the story; why information is being accessed (Steele, Alvarez, 2016). All the same, it gives guidance on how to maintain boundaries and hence, how employees should relate with employers. On its side, the virtue ethical theory uses a more distinct approach to discuss the need of balancing employees privacy issues and organization consequences. This theory observes individuals character rather that the deeds (Bonner, 2016). When analyzing an unethical action (accessing other people's data by recruiters), the ethical theory of virtue considers the persons (employers) purpose and reputation of acting in a particular manner (Burwell and Huyser, 2014). On the other hand, theory of relativism deems ones moral duties based on the environment. For example, to employers, accessing recruits information through their Facebook profiles is acceptable while to the Australian government and employees themselves, such acts should not be accepted at all costs. Probably, while doing the offence as considered by the employees, the recruiters are viewing it in two dimensions both considered of benefit to the two parties. One, it aims at obtaining the right workers for the company based o n various hobbies. Two, it links different social network users to job opportunities as dictated by their hobbies. On employees sides, accessing such information violates their privacy right (Genova, 2009). For instance, some hobbies may not be acceptable in a given company; viewing such traits may deny a given person an opportunity to work. Furthermore, ones secret information may be made public. Therefore, to exercise peace between every party, each persons interests must be evaluated according to specific desires and influences. In summary, being a unifying website, some Facebook users goes to the extreme of fighting and accessing other peoples stored information. A scenario is observed in the case study how social is your network, where employers peruse workers information without the latters information. As they do this, the companies believe that they are doing what is fair to all parties; linking individuals with jobs and at the same time scrutinizing and obtaining workers of best fit for the benefit of the organization. According to the workers, this is not fare; it violates their privacy right (an issue within an issue). To balance the situation, the Australian government alongside various ethical issues, states that accessing ones information should be of benefit to both parties. Under such circumstances, the owner of the information should be made aware of who will access the data and the reason for obtaining them. To these effect, personal information extracted from social media can be utilize to be nefit both parties. Therefore, privacy issues, issues around social network use are simply a case of needing to balance the rights of employees with consequences for the organization. Younger workers have a different attitude towards work than older workers, including a different attitude towards privacy, responsibility, and commitment. If they wish to use social networking sites to discuss themselves and their jobs, then it is all right for employees to use these sites to glean information about them. Working environments such as organizations comprise of senior and junior people. Evidently, the attitude of young workers towards work is quite different from older employees. The former also have a distinct position regarding privacy, commitment, and responsibility. If they consider using social network sites to highlight and discuss their jobs and their lives, then using these sites by employers to collect information regarding them is right. In the case study of how social is your network, it is observed that through Facebook, the social network has enhanced the sharing of many things including personal data information. An incidence is drawn where employees add bosses as their Facebook friends, not considering the impact of this to their profile privacy. According to the young workers, ones profile page is a personal business; anything in wish can be posted shared with the public through the page. Apparently, old workers view some information as of great importance in the line of duty. For instance, bosses use Facebook and other social networking sites to analyze the most appropriate workers based on their hobbies. To illustrate further, while workers post hobbies on their profile, they intend to bring their identification into light. Fortunately, some information regarding hobbies is too vital to qualify one for a given job. It also helps older employees to realize area that can best fit the younger workers based on th eir hobbies. Older employees also consider using social network sites to identify traits which are beneficial enough in line of job. For example, an employee may state traveling and dancing under her or his hobbies. Probably, the intended purpose of indicating such hobbies is different from what the employer may think. However, if the employee means what the hobby list says, then an older worker may consider the former of great importance to the product promotion and advertisements department. Being is the identified department, the employee will use the hobby of traveling to reach more customers and at the same time dance to entice them to buy the products. Therefore, if junior employees consider using social network sites to highlight and discuss their jobs and their lives, then using the very sites by employers to collect information regarding them is right. While young workers may consider their social network information of less importance and for their own business, such information is highly valued by older workers. For instance, some companies have come up with codes of conduct for online behavior of employees. Such action requires that employees should not at any time post offensive information about the business and fellow workers. For the young workers, information on the internet should not be considered of economic benefit. To them, online information, especially in the social media, should remain off social benefit. Therefore, some of them may end up posting a critical information about fellow workers or the firm without knowing its economic damage. In contrary, older workers believe that every information is worth especially when conveyed by an employee. In response to employees who are too careless with information to the extent of ruining the companys image, a direct denial of the code of conduct is a clear penalty. In some instances, it may lead to demotion or even loss of the job. On a lucky part of it, young workers use the social network to market and publicizing the organization. Evidently, such moves are of economic benefit and can be responded by older workers handsomely. For example, one can be recognized as an outstanding code of conduct, promotions, and salary increments. Therefore, if young workers consider using social network sites to highlight and discuss their jobs and their lives, then using these sites by employers to gather information regarding them is right. Privacy issues are also areas in which old and young workers responds to differently. Information that can be considered private hence, should not be accessed by any other person, may not appeal privately; are public enough to be used for recruitment purposes (Martucci and Coverdale, 2003). As highlighted in the case study, during interviews workers utilize the social media to get quick access to answers to questions they are asked during interviews. Of similar advantage, recruiters check on hobbies of candidates. Their decisions are based on favorable hobbies such as running and playing. Apparently, accessing such information without ones knowledge may be annoying the young workers. They dont observe the advantages of access to such information by older workers. In the case study, an outstanding significance is shown where 83% of recruiters qualify candidates based online search (Neumann et al. 2015). Therefore, if young workers consider using the social network to indicate interest s regarding a job, then using these sites by employers to collect information regarding them is right. Rather than viewing the use of social networking sites by recruiters as an employee versus employer, win-lose situation, a growing business will turn it into a win-win situation. The organization can achieve this situational objective through various ways. Fast, the recruiters will exercise maximum privacy conduct to ensure that workers information is not violated through anyway (Mello, 2012). To assure this, a policy can be created to monitor the use of such information. Before collecting information from a workers profile, permission should be obtained by the employer. In the same line of ethics, the worker should be assured that the information will not move to the next party (Bashour and Mabsout, 2016). As stated in the government policy the employer can also clarify why the data is being collected and how they are going to be used. Upon any misuse of the information, an agreement should be laid that defines responsibility. To come up with a win-win situation under such instances , the employer should reward the owner of the information violated. From a pluralism and a Unitarian perspective, the employer will scrutinize workers information and observe their various requirements based on hobbies and interests listed in their profiles, and create a good relationship between the company and the grouped employees by providing necessities defined by the workers profile pages. This strategy will motivate the employees to work unitarily to productively for the firm hence, a win to the company. On the side of employees, it is a win because they are interested ate mate, therefore, a win-win situation. Evidently, this is also a significant practice of strategic HRM skills as it entails working workers in a collaborative way that boosts the quality of their working experience by retaining them hence, mutual benefit for both the employee and the company (Coetzer and Sitlington, 2014). Viewing profile of workers also enables the organization to identify and develop a relationship based on ones interest, hence creating a rational psychological contact (Khaydarov, and Yankovskaya, 2015). Such contracts between employer and employee create a mutual benefit. Highly committed HRM is resourceful stakeholders in an organization; they use information provided by employees through their blogs (Takeuchi and Takeuchi, 2013). While empowering the employees, such personnel also enhance the independence of workers, making more flexible to work for the benefit of the firm, and at the same time enjoying the companys empowerment (Mitchell et al. 2016). Therefore, this is a win-win situation. Lastly, acquiring employees information is beneficial to the firm in that, their skills are identified. Such skills can be utilized across various sectors within the company. By specializing the employees based on skills, workers get opportunities of boosting their experience with my result into promotions along the line of duty. This utilization makes good use human capital. At the same time, it is an exercise of knowledge management. In a win-win perspective, the firm enjoys quality service while employees obtain more experience in the line of duty. Therefore, rather than viewing the use of social networking sites by recruiters as an employee versus employer, win-lose situation, a growing business will turn it into a win-win situation. Conclusion To sum up, the social network is used for various purpose. While other people use it for social purposes, other people use it for economic benefit. For instance, employees post information if interest on their Facebook pages, employers access such information to recruit workers. However, junior workers differ in attitude, work, and privacy. According to employers, obtaining employees information should be legalized as it is used for the benefit of all parties. Apart from using the information to get highly skilled employees who can help the organization, information owners are also linked to job opportunities. Therefore, despite putting the privacy of workers at risk, it is also of benefit; their hobbies connect them to jobs. This scenario creates a win-win situation. References Burwell, R., Huyser, M. (2014). The Virtue of Generosity. Social Work Christianity, 41(2/3), 193-205. Bonner, K. (2016). Arendt, role theory and the ethical evaluation of action. Irish Journal of Sociology, 24(2), 200-225. doi:10.7227/IJS.0007 Bashour, B., Mabsout, R. (2016). Reconciling economics with naturalist ethical theory. Review of Social Economy, 74(3), 275-297. doi:10.1080/00346764.2016.1168034 Brandolph, A. (2009, October 20). Pittsburgh official to propose e-mail safeguards. Pittsburgh Tribune Review (PA). Chory, R., Vela, L., Avtgis, T. (2016). Organizational Surveillance of Computer-Mediated Workplace Communication: Employee Privacy Concerns and Responses. Employee Responsibilities Rights Journal, 28(1), 23-43. doi:10.1007/s10672-015-9267-4 Coetzer, A., Sitlington, H. (2014). What knowledge, skills and attitudes should strategic HRM students acquire? A Delphi study. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 52(2), 155-172. doi:10.1111/1744-7941.12008 Dai, C., Rao, F., Truta, T. M., Bertino, E. (2014). Privacy-Preserving Assessment of Social Network Data Trustworthiness. International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, 23(2), -1. doi:10.1142/S0218843014410044 Ferencz-Kaddari, M., Shifman, A., Koslowsky, M. (2016). Modeling Psychologists' Ethical Intention: Application of an Expanded Theory of Planned Behavior. Psychological Reports, 118(3), 691-709. doi:10.1177/0033294116647691 Genova, G. L. (2009). No place to play: Current employee privacy rights in social networking sites. Business Communication Quarterly, 72(1), 97-101. Khaydarov, R. R., Yankovskaya, V. I. (2015). Methods of determining the professional and psychological abilities of workers to their rational use. Management Issues / Voprosy Upravleni, (4), 1-7. Mello, J. A. (2012). Social media, employee privacy and concerted activity: Brave new world or big brother? Labor Law Journal, 63(3), 165-173. Mitchell, R. K., Weaver, G. R., Agle, B. R., Bailey, A. D., and Carlson, J. (2016). Stakeholder agency and social welfare: Pluralism and decision making in the multi-objective corporation. Academy Of Management Review, 41(2), 252-275. doi:10.5465/amr.2013.0486 McCarthy, O. T., Caulfield, B., OMahony, M. (2016). Technology engagement and privacy: A cluster analysis of reported social network use among transport survey respondents. Transportation Research: Part C, 63195-206. doi:10.1016/j.trc.2015.12.015 Martucci, W. C., Coverdale, B. N. (2003). New Protections in Employee Privacy Rights Regarding Usage and Disclosure of Social Security Numbers. Employment Relations Today (Wiley), 29(4), 69-77. Morgan, J. (2016). The contemporary relevance of a Cambridge tradition: economics as political economy, political economy as social theory and ethical theory. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 40(2), 663-700. doi:10.1093/cje/bev021 Magelssen, M., Pedersen, R., Frde, R. (2016). Four Roles of Ethical Theory in Clinical Ethics Consultation. American Journal of Bioethics, 16(9), 26-33. doi:10.1080/15265161.2016.1196254 Neumann, M., O'Murchu, I., Breslin, J., Decker, S., Hogan, D., MacDonaill, C. (2005). Semantic Social Network Portal for Collaborative Online Communities. Journal of European Industrial Training, 29(6), 472-487. Twarog, J. (2005). Internet monitoring at work and employee privacy. Massachusetts Nurse, 76(8), 6 Takeuchi, N., Takeuchi, T. (2013). Committed to the organization or the job? Effects of perceived HRM practices on employees' behavioral outcomes in the Japanese healthcare industry. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(11), 2089-2106. doi:10.1080/09585192.2013.767059 Steele, D., Alvarez, A. (2016). Should We Worry About the Possible Framing Effect of Ethical Theories? The American Journal of Bioethics: AJOB, 16(9), 46-47. doi:10.1080/15265161.2016.1196257 Tahan, H. M. (2016). Essentials of Advocacy in Case Management: Part 1: Ethical Underpinnings of Advocacy-Theories, Principles, and Concepts. Professional Case Management, 21(4), 163-179. doi:10.1097/NCM.0000000000000162