Approaches

Employment Relations defined by (Rose, 2008) as the guideline of employment relationship relating the member of staff and organisation in a collective and individual manner, at the same time, recognising functional and bureaucratic issues at workplaces and organisation. For that reason, as discussed on (Storey, 2007) model of HRM, M&S strategies and policies on employee relations should have a straightforward rapport with the business strategy and have to be novel, well-defined and action-oriented.

According to (Jenkins & Delbridge, 2013), unitary theory sees the firm as drawing attention towards a particular or integrated consultant and trustworthiness structure. For instance, M&S UK follows in the unitary perspective, simply because they have collective values, interests, and objectives, thereby M&S refer to all its employees as a team or a family as suggested by (Williams , 2014).

M&S sees conflicts as nonsensical and the dismissal of striking employees is favoured to discussion or dialogues. M&S trails the dimension of collectivism management style they pursue a sophisticated paternalistic approach that turns down the recognition of any trade unions (Bratton & Gold, 2012). The trade un ion is forbidden and repressed as it is seen as an unlawful disturbance or else an infringement on management and the HR function s right to be in charge (Indranil & Mudgal, 2016).

(Ram, et al., 2008), also point out that unitary perspective viewed trade unions as an interruption interested in the firm starting from external, rivalling with the organisation for the faithfulness of workforces.

However, M&S have powerful internal Human Recourses Management (HRM) policies that help the firm to ensure all the employees` goals and complaints are met and dealt with, without the interfering or involvement of trade unions according to (Dundon & Rollinson , 2011). (M&S, 2015) Plan A strategy and Work Well Programme point out that the firm is unified by a common purpose and believe that they have such good employees, they rely on offering ethical working conditions, fair rates of pay and assume of no conflicts of interests between the employee and employer. The strategies are introduced to stabilise efficiency and healthful environment, they allow employees to speak out about any concerns as noted in (M&S , 2013) website.

For instance, (Burke & Cooper, 2008) noted that concerns could be in the form of workload pressure, employer-employee relationship, work stress, or roles and responsibilities. In the event, an employee makes a complaint with regard to general M&S procedures, the internal Business Involvement Group (BIG) will handle such problems according to (M&S Employee Handbook, 2014).

However, if it is a shared issue and the grievance is familiar with other workers, then the M&S UK BIG communicates with the HR to review the strategy and a penned reply will be forwarded to the employees who had elevated the complaint according to (M&S, 2012). Maybe it is another reason why the voice arrangement covering the wholesale and retail sector workplace is 3.2% low compared to sectors such as public and electricity which have 29.9% and 42.5% where organisations support the activities of trade unions as indicated on (Brigid, et al., 2013) study.

(Salaman & Storey, 2008), point out that the understanding of HRM is centred on combing either a soft developing humanist approach or a hard situational approach. M&S has adopted soft model approach as (Marescaux, et al., 2013) suggests that soft approach is resourceful to HRM and perceived undoubtedly to entail an attention upon the development of employee motivation and loyalty.

As applied in M&S, soft approach recognises the significance of HRM to the targets of the organisation, while signaling attempts by the M&S to form a workplace setting that put emphasis on employees development, in methods such as training, involvement and interaction, and the impact of tolerating innovative, flexibility, and dedicated employees who are cherished resources as suggested by (Henderson, 2008) in the research.

M&S also utilise a mixture of management styles such as consultative and democratic as an outline of conduct that managers displays when carrying out organisation tasks over a period of time as suggested by (Buchanan & Huczynski, 2007). These variety mixtures of management styles continually provide an excellent choice to the M&S management but that depends upon where they are on the hierarchical scale.

For instance, M&S leader consult with others before making any decisions, and the group around will influence the outcome of the decision even the leader to have a final say according to (Benincasa, 2013). If the marketing department wants to launch a new range of products, they consult the managers of other departments first as to understand if it is advisable while encouraging their culture of consultation.

M&S also ask employees what that they think before making any business decisions, and allow them to contribute their ideas to the business as this gives individuals and team accountability to make choices as a way of authorising them as indicated in (Bolden, et al., 2013) study. Yet, (Bawany, 2010) in the research indicated that may be a waste of time if teams are inexperienced, not trained or unmatched to their jobs qualifications.

Eriven though M&S attempts to satiate jobs with their existing employees as a way of motivating staffs to headway to the next level, the HR always publicise the job role and requirements to warrant the right candidate is enticed to apply for the role and to avoid problems in the future (Ulrich, et al., 2008).

However, transactional is a key management style used in Mark & Spencer, the CEO of the firm is dedicated to attaining the business s aims by guaranteeing high carrying out of tasks continually by the teams at each level of the chain of command at stated in ( (M&S, 2014) website. M&S invest heavily in technology as they are in a creative industry, for instance, advertising, and perhaps moving towards pluralism as suggested by (Chillingworth, 2009).

This is reverberated by (Paauwe, 2004) who suggest that systems used by businesses cannot instinctively work in other countries. For example, M&S forced to unionise its 98% with Mandate and SIPTU trade unions in Ireland. The change was influenced by M&S organisation policies that are not well-suited with the Ireland local government as the ethos of United Kingdom (UK) are not similar to other nations as indicated by (Marchington & Wilkinson, 2005).

Unionising in Ireland might also have been influenced by M&S s 80% of women employees, as (DBIS, 2014) point out that women are more likely to join trade unions than man. (Miller, 2010a), point out complications at the beginning between M&S UK and employee relationship, and the firm had to implement a changed employee relation approaches that encourage employees ethic.

Key issues in employment relations strategy/policy

M&S managerial change is Storey s model the employee involvement approach that is vital to the business s successful change, particularly in circumstances that need attitudes and cultural change of soft approach as stated by (Schuler & Jackson, 2007). Its rapid changes have been successful because they have focused on structural as contrary to cultural change (Wolcott & Lippitz, 2007). M&S setup precipitous business change that was centred on a vision executed on the firm in a primarily directive fashion down from the top according to (M&S, 2016) annual and financial statement.

This move to change was a gamble or an uncertain action and would create an immense misperception for the workforce and put pressure on their performances according to (ACAS, 2011). It was a developing change where employees ought to change and adapt to new methods of a horizontal managerial structure and new approaches of strategies under new business units that are intended to generate profit and to emphasise on employees success on the departments suggested by (Brewster, et al., 2007). This has allowed M&S to successfully control its strategies and see where developments need to be applied and to continuously monitor its new approach to corporate practices while contemplating on future HRM problems.

As (Miller, 2010b) pointed out, this has given M&S an opportunity to change its working times as they formed elastic shifts patterns to accommodate opening on Sundays, with the majority employees working 36-38 hours per week and more. They continuously followed the characteristics of Miles and Snow s strategic types where they continuously equal employees salaries with the market, employees have a 20% discount on all what they buy from M&S stores nationwide, employees have attractive retirement welfares, health, and dental care packages if employees have been employed by M&S for more than a year as indicated by (Staff Writer, 2007).

M&S has adapted to Guest s Theory of SHRM, and they invested in a varied range of education and development, retaining of exceptional workforces, and innovation that assists staffs to develop through M&S firm, at the same time also achieving their goals as shown in (M&S, 2009) website.

In relation to (Dessler, 2013) study, it shows that M&S has also adopted Cargill s corporate strategy and has moved from old-fashioned employees management categorised by bureaucracy and control and have welcomed the concept of strategic HRM. (Leopold, et al., 2010), in their research pointed out that Cargill s corporate strategy has been backed by the researchers (Boxall & Purcell, 2011a) who recommends firms to merge both human capital and human process improvement in order to increase human resourcing advantage.

M&S workforces continue to deliver good consumer service and guaranteeing their dedication to outstanding consumer service that empowers the business s core values focused on long-term and daily operations, and the approach has been supported by (Karnes, 2009) who suggested that efficacious organisations must continue inspiring employees.

However, change and its influence on the structural strategy presents numerous challenges for the employee relations specialists. For instance, employee resourcing, M&S business is threatened by ongoing uncertainties in developing policies on recruitment and selection according to (Brannick, et al., 2007) research. M&S has to adopt soft approaches as the positive application of changes required for the business s short, medium and long-term triumph strategies and every person in the firm have to collaborate and comprehend the significance of the changes or new policies as stated by (Boxall & Purcell, 2011b) in their study.

So it is key for M&S UK s HR departments to ensure that resources are allocated as per firm s budget reminiscing the M&S s sustainable future strategy (Dowling, et al., 2008).

Failure, any errors will simply disturb the flow of work and productivity. M&S currently dispense of enough resources on departments where required, and it assures employees morale and they will feel looked after and believed to be performing to their best of ability according to (Kramar & Syed, 2012). There is a talk about different skills shortages predicted by a CIPD study in the coming decade and most importantly that there are skills gaps as the ageing workers are retiring and taking their attained skills and experience with them which leave organisations with skills shortages as mentioned (Willmott, et al., 2012) in their research.

Hence, M&S HRM function has to deal with the unstable labour market of age structure as this trend drives the need for employment relations, therefore the HRM specialists has to reflect on the proposed strategy, while applying systems that aid the firm to adjust to new age retirement legislation in an effort to promote longer working lives for ageing workforce as suggested by (McNair, et al., 2012). However, it will take long for M&S to recruit as they will face challenges from the competitors in the market, which will put a strain on the business strategy.

Its short-term business strategies which require new staff to join the company could be an HR strategy implication which will be how quickly they can bring in staff according to (Paauwe, 2009). So one of the potential elements of that will be to look at what staffs M&S have, and who have the potential to up skills and how quickly they can actually do that as suggested by (OCED, 2010). So if there are challenges of scales and actually having skills shortages, M&S can address that internally instead of going out to the external local market by actually having a much more focused approach, for instance, a Harvard Analytical Framework for Human Resource Management to the resource development process within the organisation (Laff, 2006).

One of the challenges may be financial, because M&S may need to bring in consultants who are really expensive, because their HR function may not have the knowledge and skills to put the program based internally but to achieve the business strategy and respond to the external department that is going to be important according to (Mussie, & Soeters, 2006). They have to expand their HR budget because they know that there is a higher demand for skills and because of this it is going to take them longer. This is driven from the HR in terms of the strategy, and the HRM professionals have to think if they need to go to the external labour market or if they look at bringing in or developing their own people as stated by (Sims, 2007) in the writer s book.

They also have to consider what happens if they did not have the skills to do that in-house and how quickly can they bring in consultants to bring their employees up to the skills level required. As (Khanna & New, 2008) note that performance results are analytical part of training interrelated to performance in their research. It is also important for M&S HRM to recognise if it is skills shortage lacking within and need to think of it strategically and make it a demand according to (Bossche, et al., 2010).

If M&S require a long-term or short-term turnaround in terms of achieving the employee skills that could be difficult because they end up having to actually train and develop employees and end up utilising those skills in 10 years as noted in (CIPD, 2009) study. However, M&S have to embed those skills to employees so they can become confident with them and that is one of the big challenges. So it is very much training on the job and this associates mistakes and errors, and the question is, can M&S business strategically afford those errors according to (Brewster, et al., 2011). See appendix 1 of brief summary and appendix 2 on other key points for task 3.

Appendices

Appendix 1: Brief Summary

M&S organisation is one of the foremost UK retailers of wide-ranging merchandise and food. The firm also functions in Europe, the Middle East and Asia. It operates through both wholly-owned stores and franchise stores, and has 852 stores in the UK, and 480 worldwide in 59 countries abroad. Its headquarters is in London and had 83,069 workforces, on average, as of March 28, 2015.

M&S recorded revenues of £10,311.4 million in the financial year finished March 2015, reaching a marginal upsurge equalled to FY2014. The operating profit of the firm was £701.3 million in FY2015, a growth of 1% over FY2014. The net profit of the business was £486.5 million in FY2015, a reduction of 7.3 compared to FY2014 (M&S Group plc, 2016). The author focuses on M&S UK general merchandise stores that deal with men, women and children s clothing, beauty products, lingerie, and home-related products such as kitchenware, dining room accessories and furniture.

M&S also offers its products online as well in flagship stores, high street stores, retail park stores, M&S outlets. Furthermore, to general merchandise and food, the firm runs financial services, such as credit cards home and travel insurance, personal loans, and banking services. The author chose M&S because its employment relations has together positive and negative aspects. Adding to that, M&S s employee relations has been continuously motivated by the conservative system of industrial relations.

The organisation also has been acknowledged for its moral approaches in the direction of all the suppliers they are working with, the sustainability of their products, the involvement to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and in taking lead on other businesses and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGO) to abide by.

In the time of ever-increasing internal and external uncertain environment, M&S have to focus on contemporary issues that impact its employment relations, HRM, and the value of investing in human resources as a key basis of competitive advantage. Having researched the development of strategy formulation for M&S business and now set sights on how it links into employee relations in specific, also not overlooking that there should be a relation with other facets of the employment relationship, employee resourcing, employee reward and employee development.

No matter what method M&S firmly chooses for carrying out its strategy, either at corporate or business level, lessening the firm s competitive advantage has to be the key topic. As anticipated the firm should continuously re-evaluate the changes in order to allow its HR to withstand any required developments (Johnson, et al., 2009). Therefore, senior management and heads of the business units to HMR for M&S devote themselves to the firm to operate in an effective force.

It is a must M&S HRM benchmarking the strategic map, HR Scorecard and digital dashboard and compare with their current skills and knowledge to set-up a reliable HRM programme in the firm. Prior to M&S s medium-term achievement, they should duplicate and abide by these HRM approaches (Sullivan, 2006). To be aware of stated mission, how does it fits, and if it does not, then how do they re-express the mission so that it converges the need to be understandable, attainable and challenging.

In (Mayo, 2004) study the researcher discusses how employee relations will be influenced by the firm s decision on whether to engage the motivation theory. The adoption of the theory enables M&S HR function to communicate effectively as it is important to change management while improving relational interacting skills of all managerial co-workers. In the research, (Lawter, et al., 2015) noted that McGregor s theory of motivation shows how workers are most likely to be encouraged by the desires of success and self-esteem. Through rewarding employees and directing of individuals that would shape M&S s management that leads to medium-term success.

Even though M&S pursue to establish preparedness and a keenness for change, they should be conscious that emphasising on certain aspects of the anticipated change may perhaps devise a lot of negative impact on the employee relations, HR and the organisation s performance. So it is important for M&S s HR function to make sure every person involved is totally informed of the pressure of change and how it could pause as a concern during the employee s interchange. Therefore, updating and assuring of employees at all the time is key as some will be resisting change as it is derived from the fear of unknown as stated by (Markwell, 2004).

Appendix: 2: Key issues in employment relations strategy/policy

However, most likely the nature of M&S strategy and the environment is mainly driven by different aspirations of the parties in government and because of that they change in 4 or 5 years cycles. Looking at it in simple terms, with regard to government approaches in government parties, they tend to have two skulls of thought with regards to how government view legislated and regulated employment laws and how employment regulations should be and at that stage M&S function is affected according to (Lee, 2013) s research.

So one side there is a right wing agenda which could be the party is driven by conservative party in the UK Which has a strong free market approach to how it sees the economy, or expect M&S organisation to operate.

Then there is the left wing side with the socialist ideology, and these tend to be cultured by the labour party and the labour movement, and they have a philosophy that employees will benefit from growth and expansion through their organisation, employers have to be trustworthy and not manipulate their employees and they will give them fairness and it will be something which has to be represented in their workplace (Hakhverdian, 2010).

They have an element where they believe that regulated work requires a third party to form a relationship with employers and that the third party under the labour party movement are trade unions and they get people a collective voice and collectivism to protect the workers. Of course because of that, there is challenge between the labour movement, the labour government traditionally and the major corporation M&S as they would try to influence employees to join the trade unions.

Furthermore, it is key for HRM to find out what has happened to the external environment of the business strategy which is going to change if there are reported skills shortages, is it short term or long term. (Wang & Swanson, 2008), stated that it is key for HR department to ensure that a firm maintains transparent employee relations. So M&S HR function has adopted the approach to maintaining transparency with employees and it allows the HRM to deal with sensitive operations firm data in the limits of the business.

The approach enables M&S to build trust with employees and the management, while HR function playing an important part to ensure that they have fostered a link on the organisation levels (Price, 2007). Then to take into relationships with very important consumers M&S should actually have employees who are engaging with the customers quickly without being late otherwise they are going to lose those customers as stated by (Berger & Berger, 2011).

So what M&S have to make it clear to the customers is that, this staff has just been trained and that they are going to be some issues and how they are going to manage these in verbal issues according to (Foot & Hook, 2008). Furthermore, (Frauenheim, 2008) point out that it is actually consequences that employees know one technology system and to adapt to the new system for many of them it could take a period of time and get to a certain extent where it is infuriating and it will be very frustrating as well.

As soon as M&S invest in new technology they want to see that technology is being fully utilised as suggested by (Hartel, et al., 2007) because investing in new technology is very expensive and challenging to maintain as it changes at all the time. So it is important to make sure that people in M&S organisation can use it and then customers get a good experience in stores or online too as reported on (M&S Group plc, 2016) website.

In addition, the fear of unknown on certain employees would empower them to complain and ask if they can revert to the old system which they think is much better or why can t they have enough coverage on the old system in stages rather than being taught overnight stated by (Furst & Cable, 2008).

(Guest, 2011), also note that linking with employees at an emotional level will attach their feelings with the organisation s achievements. While (Shen, et al., 2009), suggests how keeping on employee issues at the forefront will change the accomplishment of any organisation and decision making. It is viewed by (M&S, 2007) that M&S s contribution in aptitude resourcing has exceeded government s allocated resourcefulness of building a knowledgeable culture.

References

ACAS, 2011. The future of workplace relations An Acas view, s.l.: ACAS.

Bawany, S., 2010. Leadership that gets results: Impact and Measurement of Emotional Intelligence on Leadership Effectiveness. Harvard Business Review, March, 10(4), pp. 1-6.

Benincasa, R., 2013. Leadership Styles, and when you should use them. 1 June.p. 2013.

Berger, L. A. & Berger, D. R., 2011. The Talent Management Handbook: Creating a Sustainable Competitive Advantage by Selecting, Developing, and promoting the Best People. 2 ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Bolden, R., Gosling, J., Marturano, A. & Dennison, P., 2013. A Review of Leadership Theory and Competency Frameworks. Open Research Exeter (ORE).

Bossche, V. d. P., Segers, M. & Jansen, N., 2010. Transfer of training: the role of feedback in supportive social networks. International Journal of Training and Development, 14(2), pp. 81-84.

Boxall, P. & Purcell, J., 2011a. Strategy and Human Resources Management. 3 ed. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Boxall, P. & Purcell, J., 2011b. Strategy and Human Resource Management. 3 ed. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Brannick, M. T., Levine, E. L. & Morgenson, F. P., 2007. Job Work Analysis: Methods, Research, and Applications for Human Resources Management. 2 ed. Los Angeles: Sage.

Bratton, J. & Gold, J., 2012. Human resource management: theory and practice. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Brewster, C., Croucher, R., Wood, G. & Brookes, M., 2007. Collective and Individual voice: convergence in Europe?. International of Journal Resource Management, 17(7), pp. 1246-62.

Brewster, C., Sparrow, P., Vernon, G. & Houldsworth, E., 2011. International Resource Management. 3 ed. London: CIPD.

Brigid, V. W. et al., 2013. Employment Relations in the Shadow of Recession: Findings from 2011. Basingstoke(Hampshire): Palgrave Mcmillan.

Buchanan, D. & Huczynski, A., 2007. Organisational Behaviour: An Introductory text. 5 ed. London: Financial Times/Prentice Hall.

Burke, R. J. & Cooper, C. L., 2008. The long Hours Culture: Causes, Consequences and Choices. s.l. Emerald Group.

Chillingworth, M., 2009. Property investments put on hold as IT investment surges up the management agenda. [Online]
Available at: http://www.cio.co.uk/it-leadership/marks__spencer-announce-400m-it-investment-strategy-116041/
[Accessed 12 December 2016].

CIPD, 2009. CIPD, London: s.n.

DBIS, 2014. Trade un ion Membership 2013 Statistical Bulletin. [Online]
Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/313768/bis-14-p77-trade-union-membership-statistical-bulletin-2013.pdf
[Accessed 3 December 2016].

Dessler, G., 2013. Human Resource Management. 13 ed. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

Dowling, P. J., Festing, M. & Engle, A. D., 2008. International Human Resources Management: Managing People in Multinational Context. 5 ed. London: Thomson Learning.

Dundon, T. & Rollinson, D., 2011. Understanding Employment Relations. Maidenhead(Berkshire ): McGraw-Hill Education.

Foot, M. & Hook, C., 2008. Introducing human resource management. 5 ed. Harlow(Essex): Prentice Hall.

Frauenheim, E., 2008. Society for Human Resources Management, Workplace Trends: An Overview of the Findings of the Latest SHRM Workplace Forecast, Workplace Visions. 3 ed. s.l.:s.n.

Furst, S. & Cable, D., 2008. Employee Resistance to Organisational Change: Managerial Influence Tactics and Leader-Member Exchange. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(2), p. 453.

Guest, D. E., 2011. Human resource management and performance: still searching for some answers. Human Resource Management Journal, 21(1), pp. 3-13.

Hartel, C. E., Fujimoto, Y., Strybosch, V. E. & Fitzpatrick, K., 2007. Human Resources Management: Transforming Theory into Innovative Practice. New South Wales: Pearson Education.

Henderson, I. S., 2008. People management: Personnel management and human resource management. In: Human Resource Management for MBA Students. s.l.:CIPD, pp. 1-32.

Indranil, B. & Mudgal, R. K., 2016. Changing Perspectives of Employment Relations in the Globalised World: a Critical Review. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 1 July, 52(1), pp. 50-57.

Jenkins, S. & Delbridge, R., 2013. Context matters: examining soft and hard approaches to employee engagement in two workplaces. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 6 March, 24(14), p. 2670 2691.

Johnson, G., Scholes, K. & Whittington, R., 2009. Fundamentals of strategy. Pearson Education. Harlow(Essex): Prentice Hall.

Karnes, R. E., 2009. A Change in Business Ethics: The Impact on Employer Employee Relations. Journal of Business Ethics, June, 87(2), p. 189 197.

Khanna, S. & New, J. R., 2008. Revolutionising the workplace: a case study of the future of work program at capital one. Human Resource Management, 47(4), pp. 795-808.

Kramer, R. & Syed, J., 2012. Human resources management in a global context: a critical approach. Basingstoke(Hampshire): Palgrave Macmillan.

Laff, M., 2006. Talent Management: From Hire, Training and Development. s.l.:s.n.

Lawter, L., Kopelman, R. E. & Prottas, D. J., 2015. McGregor`s Theory X/Y and Job Performance: A Multilevel, Multi-source Analysis. Journal of Managerial Issues, 1 March, 1(4), pp. 84-101.

Leopold, J., Harris, L. & Watson, T., 2010. Strategic Human Resources: Principles, Perspectives and Practices. London: Financial Times Pitman Publishing.

M&S, 2013. Marks and Spencer Wellbeing Programme and www.planAhealth.com. [Online]
Available at: http://www.bitc.org.uk/our-resources/case-studies/marks-and-spencer-wellbeing-programme-and-wwwplanahealthcom
[Accessed 2 December 2016].

M&S Employee Handbook, 2014. M&S Employee Handbook. [Online]
Available at: https://www.hsbc.co.uk/1/PA_esf-ca-app-content/content/pws/content/personal/pdfs/employee-handbook-ms-bank.pdf
[Accessed 4 December 2016].

M&S Group plc, 2016. Mark and Spencer Group plc. [Online]
Available at: https://corporate.marksandspencer.com/investors/953e9de1289f441fa30a80f695b60139
[Accessed 2 December 2016].

M&S, 2007. Mark and Spencer to revamp final pension Scheme. [Online]
Available at: http://www2.marksandspencer.com/thecompany/mediacentre/pressreleases/2007/fin2007-01-23-00.shtml
[Accessed 2 December 2016].

M&S, 2009. Employee Handbook. [Online]
Available at: http://corporate.marksandspencer.com/documents/specific/howwedobusiness/our_people/employeehandbook
[Accessed 2 December 2016].

M&S, 2012. The Marks and Spencer Work Well Programme. [Online]
Available at: http://www.resourcesystems.co.uk/Conferences/WorkWell%20Handouts.pdf
[Accessed 3 December 2016].

M&S, 2014. M&S Leadership. [Online]
Available at: http://corporate.marksandspencer.com/aboutus/our-leadership-team
[Accessed 5 December 2016].

M&S, 2015. Plan A /Our Approach /People. [Online]
Available at: https://corporate.marksandspencer.com/plan-a/our-approach/people
[Accessed 5 December 2016].

M&S, 2016. M&S Annual Report & Financial Statements. [Online]
Available at: http://annualreport.marksandspencer.com/M&S_AnnualReport_2016_StrategicReport.pdf
[Accessed 2 December 2016].

Marchington, M. & Wilkinson, A., 2005. Human Resources Management at Work: People Management and Development. 3 ed. London: CIPD.

Marescaux, E., De Winne, S. & Sels, L., 2013. HR practices and HRM outcomes: the role of basic need satisfaction. PERSONNEL REVIEW, 42 (1-2), pp. 4-27.

Markwell, J., 2004. The Human Side of Science Education: Using McGregor`s Theory Y as a Framework for Improving Student Motivation. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, September, 32(5), pp. 323-325.

Mayo, E., 2004. The human problems of an industrial civilisation. New York: Routledge.

McNair, S., Flynn, M., Worman, D. & Willmott, B., 2012. Managing a Healthy Ageing Workforce: A National Business Imperative, London: CIPD.

Miller, Y., 2010a. An Analysis of Employee relations at Marks and Spencer. [Online]
Available at: An Analysis of Employee relations at Marks and Spencer, available from http://www.articleblast.com/Advertising_and_Marketing/General/An_analysis_of_employee_relations_at_Marks_and_Spencer
[Accessed 2 December 2016].

Miller, Y., 2010b. An Analysis of Employment Relations at Mark and Spencer. [Online]
Available at: http://www.articleblast.com/Advertising_and_Marketing/General/An_analysis_of_employee_relations_at_Marks_and_Spencer
[Accessed 2 December 2016].

Mussie, T. T. & Soeters, J. L., 2006. Challenges and prospects of HRM in developing countries: testing the HRM performance link in the Eritrean civil service. The international journal of human resource management, 17(1), pp. 86-105.

OCED, 2010. A Skilled Workforce for Strong, Sustainable and Balanced Growth: A G20 Strategy. November, pp. 1-48.

Paauwe, J., 2004. HRM and Performance: Achieving long-term viability. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Paauwe, J., 2009. HRM and performance: Achievements, methodological issues and prospects. Journal of Management studies, 11 December, 46(1), pp. 129-142.

Price, A., 2007. Human Resources Management in a Business Context. 3 ed. London: Thomson Learning.

Ram, H., Yoram, M. & Eugene, J. D., 2008. Communicating a new corporate image during privatisation: the case of El Al airlines. Corporate Communications: an International Journal, 13(4), pp. 380-393.

Rose, E. D., 2008. Employment Relations. 3 ed. Harlow(Essex): Pearson Education.

Salaman, G. & Storey, J., 2008. Understanding Enterprise. The organisation, May, 15(3), pp. 315-323.

Schuler, P. & Jackson, S., 2007. Strategic Human Resource Management. 2 ed. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Shen, J., Chanda, A., D`netto, B. & Monga, M., 2009. Managing diversity through human resource management: An international perspective and conceptual framework. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 1 January, 20(2), pp. 235-251.

Sims, R. R., 2007. Human Resource Management: Contemporary Issues, Challenges, and Opportunities: Contemporary Issues, Challenges, and Opportunities. s.l. Information Age.

Staff Writer, 2007. Marks and Spencer: Neat Pension fund arrangement. Insurance Business Review.

Storey, J., 2007. Human Resources Management: A critical text. 3 ed. s.l.: Thompson.

Sullivan, J., 2006. Benchmarking for Functional HR Metrics, HR Focus. 83(11), p. 1.

Ulrich, D., Younger, J. & Brockbank, W., 2008. HR competencies: Mastery at the intersection of people and business. Society for Human Resource. Human Resources Management, 47(4), p. 829 850.

Wang, G. G. & Swanson, R. A., 2008. Economics and human resource development: A rejoinder. Human Resource development review, 7(3), pp. 358-362.

Williams, S., 2014. Introducing Employment Relations: A Critical Approach. s.l. Oxford University Press.

Willmott, B., Worman, D., Flynn, M. & Stephen, M., 2012. Managing a Healthy Ageing Workforce: A Guide for Employers, London: CIPD.