CASESTUDY: HRD Scheme: A bone of contention
Should ITL enlarge the of the scheme to include under –graduate and non- engineering graduate employees for taking admission in management diploma/ degree course offered by various national institutions?
Case Background: ITL is a company that has implemented a Human Resource Development (HRD) scheme for its employees, specifically targeting engineering graduates. The scheme provides financial support for employees to pursue management diploma/degree courses offered by various national institutions. However, there is a growing debate within the company on whether the scheme should be expanded to include under-graduate and non-engineering graduate employees as well.
Arguments for enlarging the scheme to include under-graduate and non-engineering graduate employees:
1. Equal Opportunity: By including under-graduate and non-engineering graduate employees in the scheme, ITL can provide equal opportunities for development and growth to all employees, regardless of their educational backgrounds. This can help create a more inclusive and fair work environment.
2. Skill Diversification: ITL can benefit from diversifying the skills and knowledge of its workforce beyond engineering. By encouraging employees from various educational backgrounds to pursue management courses, the company can foster a more well-rounded and versatile workforce capable of tackling diverse challenges.
3. Talent Retention: Offering the HRD scheme to under-graduate and non-engineering graduate employees can serve as a retention tool. It can demonstrate the company's commitment to the growth and development of all its employees, increasing their loyalty and motivation to stay with the company.
4. Succession Planning: By investing in the management education of under-graduate and non-engineering graduate employees, ITL can groom potential leaders from within the organization. This can help in succession planning and ensure a pool of capable managers for future leadership positions.
Arguments against enlarging the scheme to include under-graduate and non-engineering graduate employees:
1. Cost Concerns: Expanding the HRD scheme to include a larger pool of employees can significantly increase the costs for ITL. Offering financial support to a larger number of employees for management education can strain the company's budget, potentially affecting other areas of investment and growth.
2. Focus on Core Competencies: ITL might argue that its core business and expertise lie in engineering-related fields. By limiting the HRD scheme to engineering graduates only, the company ensures that its resources are directed towards developing and nurturing professionals who directly contribute to the company's core competencies.
3. Limited Seats: Admission seats in management courses offered by national institutions are often limited. If under-graduate and non-engineering graduate employees are included in the scheme, it may reduce the chances of engineering graduates receiving this support, potentially creating a sense of inequality and dissatisfaction among this group.
4. Relevance of the Scheme: It could be argued that management education may not be as relevant or beneficial to employees who do not have an engineering background. Therefore, ITL might prefer to focus on providing specialized training and development opportunities that directly align with the skill requirements of these employees.
Ultimately, the decision whether to enlarge the HRD scheme to include under-graduate and non-engineering graduate employees is a complex one that should consider the company's goals, financial capabilities, and the potential benefits and drawbacks of such an expansion. ITL needs to carefully evaluate the arguments for and against before making a final decision.