What Is Next for Companies with Low Human Efficiency: The Quantitative Talent Planning Model

Authors

  • Yufei Gu
  • Jovian Kan
  • Zixuan Wang
  • Rui Sun
  • Yifan Song
  • Zilu Guo
  • Caesar Xu
  • Mingyue Xie
  • Xiaojiang Dong
  • Wenlong Li
  • Xuxu Liu
  • Zhennan Wang

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54691/bcpbm.v36i.3409

Keywords:

human resources; human efficiency; workforce planning; quantitative talent planning; strategic human management; data science.

Abstract

Quantitative workforce management has become more popular since the pandemic as companies are eager to find methods to accurately locate the sources of their reducing human efficiency and ROIs of human capital. This paper aims to shed light on the applicable methods of quantitative talent planning to adjust the workforce costs and staff ratios between different departments of a company. The present study analyzed the average workforce costs and cost benefit ratios data from electronics production & design companies. The regression method was also applied to illustrate these two factors' trends and relationships. The paper's main findings are the Equal Workforce Efficiency Curve and the four-zone coordinate axis, which can help companies understand their current economic position compared to other competitors in their field. We also propose a strategic management framework to assist companies in using our methodologies more conveniently and confidently.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bartik, A. W., M. Bertrand, and Z. Cullen et al. 2020. The impact of COVID-19 on small business outcomes and expectations. The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117 (30): 17656 – 17666.

Belhaj, R. and M. Tkiouat. 2017. A new Framework of Strategic Human Resource Management (SHRM) Based on Quantitative and Qualitative Data. American Journal of Applied Sciences 14 (2): 286 - 293.

Xu, T., J. You, and Y. Shao et al. 2020. Efficiency of China’s Listed Securities Companies: Estimation through a DEA-Based Method. Mathematics 8: 589.

Behan, J., I. Milicevic, and N. Condon et al. 2009. A Quantitative Tool for Workforce Planning in Healthcare: Example Simulations. Training & Employment Authority.

Meijerink, J. and T. Bondarouk. 2021. The duality of algorithmic management: Toward a research agenda on HRM algorithms, autonomy and value creation. Human Resource Management Review: [DOI: https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2021.100876].

Fogarassy, C., K. Szabo, and J. Poor. 2016. Critical issues of human resource planning, performance evaluation and long-term development on the central region and non-central areas: Hungarian case study for investors. International Journal of Engineering Business Management 9: 1 - 9.

McCartney, S. and N. Fu. 2021. Bridging the gap: why, how and when HR analytics can impact organizational performance. Management Decision 60 (13): 25 - 47.

Boon, C., D. N. D. Hartog, and D. Lepak. 2019. A Systematic Review of Human Resource Management Systems and Their Measurement. Journal of Management 46 (6): 2498 - 2537.

Downloads

Published

2023-01-13

How to Cite

Gu, Y., Kan, J., Wang, Z., Sun, R., Song, Y., Guo, Z., Xu, C., Xie, M., Dong, X., Li, W., Liu, X., & Wang, Z. (2023). What Is Next for Companies with Low Human Efficiency: The Quantitative Talent Planning Model. BCP Business & Management, 36, 180–190. https://doi.org/10.54691/bcpbm.v36i.3409