Evaluate LBM's decision to use two different approaches to HRM.

Mark scheme

Marking points from the official mark scheme (Oct/Nov 2025). The mark or mark type is shown in brackets.

1. [1] Understanding of 'hard HRM: viewing employees as inputs for the business, close monitoring, and control, training to improve business performance, little delegation of decision making.
2. [1] Hard HRM: leadership style likely to be autocratic
3. [1] Hard HRM: power for leader comes from rewards, position or coercion.
4. [1] Hard HRM: little space for emotional intelligence.
5. [1] Hard HRM: One-way formal communication (top down)
6. [1] Understanding of ‘soft' HRM: employees are individuals, to be developed, e.g. by appraisal and training, consultation and delegated decision making.
7. [1] Soft HRM: leadership style likely to be democratic or laissez-faire.
8. [1] Soft HRM: leader likely to use contingency leadership
9. [1] Soft HRM: power for leader comes from expertise, information or charisma.
10. [1] Soft HRM: transformational leadership possible.
11. [1] Soft HRM: emotional intelligence employed.
12. [1] Soft HRM: Two-way communication, possibly informal.
13. [1] Soft HRM is used for the 35 graduate employees.
14. [1] These graduates have delegated powers and decide their own work patterns (autonomy).
15. [1] Graduates are involved in R&D, mapping technology, and developing techniques.
16. [1] Hard HRM is used for the 150 new machine operators at the hot water mine.
17. [1] These new employees are closely supervised by ten technology specialists.
18. [1] Changing HRM approaches takes time and cost to plan details.
19. [1] Using Soft HRM for graduates increases their motivation and creativity, which is crucial for maximizing the efficiency of mapping technology and generating innovative mining technique, thereby increasing LBM's competitiveness.
20. [1] Small number of graduate employees should be easy to manage and soft approach will reduce need for middle management therefore reducing costs.
21. [1] Hard HRM focuses on tight control and efficiency for the 150 machine operators. This approach ensures standardisation and low labour costs, which is important for LBM, as it is currently an unprofitable company.
22. [1] The stark difference in treatment (delegation vs. close supervision) risks creating resentment and conflict between the two groups, potentially leading to poor morale and resistance among the machine operators, threatening operational stability.
23. [1] Production requires clearly defined tasks so more control/autocracy can be more efficient.
24. [1] Very tight time scale for hard rock project means HRM changes must be well planned.
25. [1] Supported judgement as to the likely effectiveness of the approach.
26. [1] The decision to use dual approaches is largely appropriate because the nature of the jobs is vastly different (creative R&D vs. standardised machine operation). The soft approach is essential for knowledge workers (graduates) to foster innovation, while the hard approach is effective for large groups performing repetitive tasks in a controlled industrial environment like a mine.
27. [1] Factors that the impact might depend on: The degree of separation between the two employee groups;
28. [1] Factors that the impact might depend on: LBM's ability to minimise perceived unfairness;
29. [1] Factors that the impact might depend on: the specific skills required by the machine operators (if tasks are complex, hard HRM may lead to high error rates and reduced quality).
30. [1] Factors that the impact might depend on: Can LBM afford to change? In time for recruiting and starting production?
31. [1] The decision is strategically sound but requires careful management. LBM must ensure communication and compensation systems do not exacerbate the cultural divide, or the benefits of high R&D output might be negated by industrial relations problems at the mine site.