Respond to classmates
URGENT ASAPasapGraduate level
Respond to at least two of your classmates’ postings by Day 7. Each of your responses should be at least 250 words and should expand on a point made by your classmate, pose a pertinent question about your classmate’s posting, and/or debate an opinion or fact presented by your classmate.
Additionally, provide the relative advantages and disadvantages of working from a position within an organization
and from a position external to an organization as described by your classmate.
Respond to classmate
hope everyone is doing well and staying safe! Given an option to select between working as a practitioner or an employee for the organization, I will choose the latter. Indeed, I am more inclined to be associated full-time with an organization as an internal HR professional. This is because working in the organization would expose company culture and policies more. Furthermore, I would be able to develop a strong relationship with the employees, which is critical in performing the work that demands teamwork and collaboration.
I firmly believe that HR professional needs to comprehend the inner workings of business more deeply to add value to the company. As a result, one would get more access to information that will enable them to make sound decisions and help develop strong relationships with important stakeholders. Suppose I delve into the given scenario. In that case, the consultant’s success as an individual usually depends on knowledge, skill, and ability to collaborate with others to bring synergies to the system. Thus, working as an internal HR professional will help me to identify the key opportunities to design, implement and change that can enable businesses to overcome current challenges.
The three research paradigms, as explained by Brannick and Coghlan, involve the tradition of positivist, realist, action tradition, and hermeneutic traditions. Firstly, the positivist tradition is based on the notion that external reality exists and that an independent value researcher can evaluate the truth. The second critical approach revolves around the hermeneutic tradition, which is based on the concept that there is no coherent external reality. Essentially, this framework considers the researcher a pivotal element of the research, not an outer part. Both action research and critical realism are interconnected with each other.
The practitioner’s position has a deep relationship concerning the information access, purpose, and capability of creating and maintaining core work relationships. Core objectivity is critical to comprehending the working culture and essential roles/responsibilities within the organization. For instance, if a person is working as an internal employee, they have access to vital knowledge sources and can easily approach the senior management for strategies/decision-making activities. Therefore, I would like to conclude that I would like to work as an internal employee who offers the insights and understanding to solve the problem rather than acting as an external consultant. As mentioned before, working as an internal employee is much more effective in developing a solid rapport with other stakeholders working in the company. It also provides a cohesive environment to work together and co-create value in the workplace. Although tasks performed by an external consultant and internal employee might be the same, it will make a lot of difference in the personal connections developed in the process. Furthermore, working with the organization also offers medical and insurance benefits that an external consultant doesn’t provide.
Brannick, T., & Coghlan, D. (2007). In defense of being “native”: The case for insider academic
research. Organizational Research Methods, 10(1), 59-74. (ProQuest Document ID:
1188969481) UNCF Special Programs Corporation (n.d.). Developing your professional portfolio [PDF file]. Retrieved
from http://www.mmgconnect.com/userfiles/files/resource_profportfolio_2012 (Links to an
external site.)Links to an external site
Respond to classmate
After completing my degree, I am still planning to work inside my organization as a leader. My relationship with the organization does not affect my decisions regarding policies, procedures, and practices that govern how the organization should operate and has proven to be successful if followed correctly. I wouldn’t allow my position to gain information that may get seen as invalid. Yet, working within an organization comes with advantages and disadvantages. Brannick and Coghlan’s (2007) article explains that preunderstanding your organization could mean that you know who to turn to for information and that you have a piece of knowledge of how the organization works. Yet thinking objectively as an individual who works inside the organization in which they are doing research, they may assume too much and not probe as much as they were when interviewing.
A researcher may feel knowledgeable in certain areas and can answer the respondent’s question for them and not expose their current thinking to alternative refraining (Brannick and Coghlan, 2007). The researcher could struggle to find information that gets seen as relevant if denied access. Yet access to information could get limited or could be available depending on how it gets used within the research and if it highlights the organization in a positive or negative light. Also, getting information from staff members could pose a issue. They may disclose information because of your position, yet the information they give might cause them to act differently around you in the future because maybe they felt like they had to share even if they didn’t want to share because of the researcher’s position.
Developing and maintaining effective working relationships can be seen as a challenge if not done correctly. Leadership within an organization sets people apart; however, the gap gets smaller when the leader becomes the researcher and can cause variations in the staff’s character and ability to be open and restricted. A researcher’s relationship with those within the organization can affect the data gathered from working day to day with them.
Brannick, T., & Coghlan, D. (2007). In defense of being “native”: The case for insider academic research. Organizational Research Methods, 10(1), 59-74. (ProQuest Document ID: 1188969481)