A new mandate for human resources

Should we do away with HR? In recent years, a number of people who study and write about business--along with many who run businesses--have been debating that question. The debate arises out of serious and widespread doubts about HR's contribution to organizational performance. Dave Ulrich acknowledges that HR, as it is configured today in many companies, is indeed ineffective, incompetent, and costly. But he contends that it has never been more necessary. The solution, he believes, is to create an entirely new role for the field that focuses it not on traditional HR activities, such as staffing and compensation, but on business results that enrich the company's value to customers, investors, and employees. Ulrich elaborates on four broad tasks for HR that would allow it to help deliver organizational excellence. First, HR should become a partner in strategy execution. Second, it should become an expert in the way work is organized and executed. Third, it should become a champion for employees. And fourth, it should become an agent of continual change. Fulfilling this agenda would mean that every one of HR's activities would in some concrete way help a company better serve its customers or otherwise increase shareholder value. Can HR transform itself on its own? Certainly not--in fact, the primary responsibility for transforming the role of HR, Ulrich says, belongs to the CEO and to every line manager who works with the HR staff. Competitive success is a function of organizational excellence, and senior managers must hold HR accountable for delivering it.     

Why do rich countries prefer free trade over free migration? The role of the modern welfare state

"According to traditional trade theory (Heckscher-Ohlin), free trade and free migration are equivalent measures of economic integration leading both to an equalization of factor prices. This prediction is in sharp opposition to the observed preference of rich countries for free trade over free migration. We provide an explanation for this inconsistency: the redistribution policies in the countries. Social welfare in countries with a relatively small number of low-skilled native workers is higher with free trade than with free migration due to redistribution of income towards immigrating workers."