There seems to be a popular notion that upon the mention of
increasing Human Capital, it is then almost by default the term
would refer to yet another series of skills or technical expertise
retraining again.
But if we were to redefine the spirit of that phrase, the eventual
desired end result is simply just that management wants higher
productivity or level of effectiveness to be attain.
Whereby a work scope is routine, and of low to moderate levels of
complexity, yes, it is feasible for human capital to be increase to
perhaps a slightly higher value.
Within position whereby the scope is non-routine and of high to
extreme levels of complexity however, then mere skill increment
would have thus lost out in itÂ’s miracle to the former.
There is ultimately, still a limited range of space for employees
to be stretched. Like a string strung on a zither, you can produce
a variety of different notes when the strig is struck.
But when the string is sometimes stretched just too tightly, it
will simply snap without warning upon the next striking of the
cord, leaving the zither spoilt.
The concept of managing Human Capital shares similar philosophies
as the tuning of a zither string.
Sometimes dependent on the requirements of the surrounding and
needs, it may alternatively be more fruitful if the reverse of
asking staff to do more, is being done.
When Mayo proposed the Human Relations movements to challenge the
then dominant Time-Motion Studies by Taylor, he understood fully on
why he was doing it.
