Human resource planning in the private sector : discarded assumptions and new priorities

UNIVERSITY OF

ILLINOIS LIBRARY

AT URBANA-CHAMPAIQN

BOOKSTACKS

p>^^ u *^ o

«*. riPCULATlON BOOKSTACKS
CENTRAL ClRCULAiiu .^ ^^.

The person c^aj^J^^ ^h^'o"? its return to
sponsible for its renew ^^^ borrowed
the library irom whicn stamped

on or before the loJ«; ^ „ minimum
^«n SS ?0 C eS 'est book.

fee of $/5.W *«" j^ „e reosons

DEC 1 0 «37

previous due date.

Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2011 with funding from

University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

http://www.archive.org/details/humanresourcepla750rowl

BEBR

ijr -

THE OBRSRY OR tTHF

MAY 291986

UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
URBANA-CHAMPAIGN

FACULTY WORKING PAPER NO. 750
College of Commerce and Business Administration
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
February 1981

Human Resource Planning in the Private Sector:
Discarded Assumptions and New Priorities

Kendrith M. Rowland, Professor
Department of Business Administration

Scott L. Summers, Graduate Student

Department of Business Administration

Institute of Labor and Industrial Relations

Acknowledgment : This study was sponsored by the American
Society for Personnel Administration, Berea, Ohio. The
views expressed are not necessarily those of the Society.

Abstract

The object of this study was to investigate the state of organiza-
tion and practice of human resource planning in the private sector.
Emphasis was given to investigating the extent to which firms integrate
their human resource planning and strategic business planning practices.
Tho results of extensive interviews with representatives of twenty
medium to large US companies are summarized. The findings suggest that
some traditional human resource planning assumptions and practices have
been discarded and that many firms are proceeding to more selective
huni.in resource planning priorities.

HUMAN RESOURCE PLANNING IN TOE PRIVATE SECTOR:
DISCARDED ASSUMPTIONS AND NEW PRIORITIES

INTRODUCTION

The concepts of corporate human resource planning (HRP) have been
well represented in Che recent personnel management literature. In a
Conference Board report, Janger (1977) claimed that personnel manage-
mp": was evolving toward more of a planning and control role in many
'■o"ipanies. The increasing importance of the integration of HRP with
•^ ' -■ i t Hgic planning has been, indeed, a popular concf^pt In the literature
durink? the past few years. Exhortations that firms should involve the
human resource management function in the formulation, as well as the
' -^-^l .^Tietitation of strategic plans, have come from both practitioners
1 n I icaderatcs .

A few major companies have reported successes in linking HRP with
srrategic planning at both the business unit and corporate levels.
'How<>ver, some analysts remain skeptical of claims that HRP is an estab-
l-;-;hed practice in most companies (Bennett, 1972; Burack and Gutteridge,
1'^'''^). Although there have been many questionnaire-type surveys on
'' • 1 iV'ients of the HRP process, they have taken, for the most part, fairly
^'vil 1 iw views of the process. Only a few studies have attempted to
iistinguish between various degrees of sophistication in the HRP pro-
cess. In like manner, only a few case studies exist that have under-
t iken an intensive analysis of specific HRP programs, technologies,
organizational structures, and information flows. There is a particular
dearth of case studies analyzing the process of linking the ''"^P function
to the overall corporate strategic function.

-2-

Thls paper reports the results of a series of case studies of twenty
mediara to large U.S. companies concerning the state-of-the-art of HRP
organization and practice.

RESEARCH DESIGN
Our purpose was to undertake a fairly qualitative, applied view of
HRP. A structured interview was used to obtain information on over
twenty five different aspects of HRP. We were able to arrange for inter-
views with executives and managers in twenty companies nation-wide.
Vlthin six of the firms, we interviewed the top personnel executive and
the top strategic planning executive, as well as the appropriate managers
or staff members concerned with HRP. In the remaining firms, we inter-
vi''ved those directly involved in HRP activities. For six of the com-
,,ani.^s, our objective was to up-date an earlier investigation of HRP
(\'avas, Rowland, and Williams, 1965).

OVERVIEW OF FINDINGS

riie initial task, of course, was to identify the existence of HRP
units and activities and to determine whether they were located at the
corporate, group, divisional, or profit-center levels. This required
more than just taking a rudimentary look at departmental titles. Inter-
vie»7s with key managers were necessary in order to detect and verify
aajor activities, mandates, and approaches; i.e., to gain some sense of
reality and purpose.

Only six of the twenty firms had a formally organized and staffed
HI? unit. In these firms, the HRP unit ^as j^ositioned In a subdivi-
sions! role under tiie vice-president of personnel, human resources, or

-3-

employee relations. The major activities of these units were not always
consistent with those listed by Walker and Wolfe (1978) and Walker
(1980) as being performed by a comprehensive HRP unit, such as (1)
formulating human resource strategies, (2) collecting and analyzing
data, (3) designing and using forecasting systems, and (4) managing
career development. On this basis, only two firms had a clearly iden-
tifiable HRP unit engaged in a comprehensive set of HRP practices. In
most companies, HRP activities and programs were organizationally
located within the personnel function. No human resource planning of
significance was being initiated by the corporate strategic planning
function (although some corporate planning staffs collected numerical
Tianpower counts). None of the firms used HRP as a general framework
(ir basis for organizing and conducting their human resource management
Actl vlties.

All of the firms had implemented the standard modules of a com-
puterized Human Resource Information System (HRIS), including general
record keeping and skills Inventories, but few were considered any more
sophisticated than what Hennessey (1979) has described as an "Inte-
grated data processing" system. Performance appraisal ratings and pro-
motability information were a common data component in a majority of
ciie cases, but career planning Information from the individual's per-
•^p<^iclve was rarely Included on the automated system. Only one firm
had Implemented a corporate-level, on-line personnel data system that
could provide instantaneous feedback to facilitate decision making. In
this system, terminals with interactive capability were available to
all line managers. Hennessey (1979) would classify this as a "decision

-4-

support" system. One firm will be implementing this type of system
next year, after eight years in development and several failures.

A surprising finding, in light of the voluminous literature In the
area, was that computer-assisted, position-person matching or candidate
searching was seldom used. Most of the companies had abandoned efforts
in this regard as they were not considered cost effective. The tradi-
tional staffing methods at the Individual department, division, or
profit-center level were seen as a more viable process. For career-
tracking purposes, most companies relied either upon line management
Involvement or increased personnel staff support, which enabled more
interpersonal Interaction In career and promotion planning.

Forecasting and Modeling

This area of HRP was given top priority in our Investigation, both
bec.iuse of Its apparent central nature in human resource management and
because of the size and preeminence of the companies visited. The fln-
diii;^s are limited and simple to report. Only one firm was using an
on-goi.ig, computerized, corporate-level demand and supply modeling pro-
cess. This was described as a simulation tool, which interfaced with
t'ne annual departmental "bottom-up" six-year forecast of staffing
requirements by job title and pay grade. (This firm was one of the two
tiriiis considered to have a comprehensive HRP unit.) The human resource
ini.ii.-IiiK process was integrated into the annual corporate planning pro-
cess and was considered a major staff responsibility within the opera-
tion. Another firm was experimenting with the forecasting of internal
supply with the aid of a stochastic model, but it was deemed a "side
project" and provided no direct input to top management planning.

-5-

Jadgmental, "bottom-up" projections were collected up to the cor-
porate level in ten additional firms, but the planning horizon was
generally only one year, and rarely beyond two (except in the case of
four of the largest firras, where it was five years). Neither personnel
managers nor the corporate planners could see any need for a longer
planning horizon. Along with total numbers, which were grouped into
occupational categories, trainee estimates and affirmative action plans
were usually included in the budget-year projections.

It was learned that corporate-level personnel departments had little
or no input or control in this bottom-up process. It was almost uni-
^►'rsally part of the corporate planning cycle, adminlsterpd hv a dLf-
f-^rent department under a different vice-president (usually corf)orate
i^/.innlng or strategic planning). In no case could this process be con-
strued as linking HRP with strategic planning.

Beyond the issues of planning horizons and numbers projections was
that question for which we repeatedly found no answer — What uses were
the supervisory manpower estimates being put to by the corporate
"l.TPnlng staff and ultimately top management? Aside from a brief, low-
prlirlty review by the corporate planning director, it was extremely
Joubtful that the manpower numbers were even considered in the long-
ran^e strategy development. The myth that top management uses these
numbers to interactively simulate various human resource cost strategies
tor five or three years, or even one year, seems a little ludicrous to
us. This myth has been perpetuated in the literature for at least the
Its': decade.

-6-

DespiCe the continuing rhetoric in the personnel management litera-
ture, quantitative human resource forecasting, we believe, continues to
be of low priority and interest to the key strategy and tactical planners,
Furthermore, we see no evidence based on our extensive interviews that
this situation will change in the near future. This conclusion does not
encompass two other forecasting areas that will be discussed later in
this paper — corporate-level environmental scanning, and key management
succession or continuity planning.

None of commonly editorialized techniques of demand and supply pro-
jections were being utilized for corporate-wide analysis by firms in
our sample (other than the one firm noted earlier). There is Che pos- -
sihllity, of course, that these methodologies are being used at the
division level, but we found no evidence of this in Interviews with
representatives from four divisions. A representative list of manpower
forecasting techniques would include:

1. Markov/stochastic processes

2. Renewal models

3. Optimization models

a) linear programming

b) nonlinear programming

c) dynamic programming
^. Goal programming

5. Assignment models

6. Time series

7. Regression analysis

-7-

8. Computer simulations and multiple scenarios

9. Delphi

Most of the firms had attempted and implemented "top-down," aggre-
gate demand and supply forecasting in the past fifteen to twenty years,
but had subsequently abandoned this practice for lack, of top management
Interest or apparent need. Following are two examples of the history
of forecasting in the past two decades; they are illustrative of our
findings:

A major manufacturer made a seven-year projection in
1960 of company-wide managerial staffing requirements
based on a market forecast of sales for that period.
In 1967, a projection was made for the following
three-year period. A "bottom-up" supervisory estimate
was also tabulated annually for the ten-year period
and the two projection results (top-down and bottom-
up) were compared, and appropriate adjustments made.
Upon visiting this company again in 1980, it was im-
possible to find anyone who even knew anything about
the previous forecasting program. It was later
learned that these managerial manpower projections had
been cancelled in the late sixties as being a super-
fluous paper exercise.

In 1962, another firm prepared a ten-year projection
of managerial and professional staffing needs based
mainly on sales. The corporate personnel department

-8-

collaborated with each division's president and staff
to provide human resource plans for future plant expan-
sions. The firm expanded far beyond the market projec-
tions during the decade of the sixties. As a result,
the aggregate manpower projections were grossly incor-
rect, and manpower forecasting beyond one year was
terminated.

Kenarkably similar histories were uncovered in at least four other firms
in our investigation.

Noteworthy was one major corporate headquarter' s effort to provide
ti'.e firm's operating divisions with access to a goal programming model.
The rnodel was developed by the operations research staff under the
direction of the manager of human resource planning. It represented an
excellent effort to provide a valid mathematical device which would pro-
ject the effects of numerous factors on future staffing requirements and
hiring policies for up to fifteen years. Three types of goals were
addressed in the model: budget, affirmative action, and promotability.
rhH> oiirput presented the best possible solution (or the one with the
lowest aggregate total deviations) under the chosen constraints, and
included manpower levels, hiring levels, promotions, EEO goal compari-
sons, promotability goal comparisons, and budget goal comparisons.
^It^ough the model was perceived as an effective, multiple-scenario
contingency planning tool for division management, little interest was
shown in the model. A computerized simulation model was also developed
to aid In five-year decision making on staffing levels and promotability

-9-

altematives. It was possible to interface this model with one-year
projections to obtain five-year overviews of such areas as recruitment,
promotion, training, and development. In accordance with the basic
trend traced throughout the course of our investigation, there was again
only nominal interest in this activity.

The majority of the managers we interviewed felt that long-range
(beyond one year), top-down human resource forecasting probably reached
Irs apex several years ago and may now no longer be a priority in, or
even an element of, human resource management in the private sector.

Management Succession Planning

The one activity that was found to be pervasive and well-accepted
in all twenty firms was managerial replacement, succession, or con-
tinuity planning. This concept has been discussed in the literature
^or well over fifteen years (Mahler and Wrightnour, 1978; Monroe, 1963;
Cstrowski, 1963; Walker and Armes, 1979; Walker, 1980). We learned
r rom our interviews that a significant percentage of human resource
'^'inageraent time was spent in planning for, and developing, future mana-
ieri.4l talent; furthermore, that the range of managerial personnel
c >vered under succession planning was, except for one large firm,
limited to a few top-level groups. These groups generally represented
less than the top ten percent of all managerial personnel. A planning
horizon of up to five years was common.

Extensive and detailed review meetings by management development
and succession committees at the corporate level were considered a top
priority, and were given full support by all top managements in our

-10-

investigation. This process had been adequately integrated into each
rnnpanv's Strategic business planning system (which included organiza-
tional planning). This was the only area of HRP Cas noted In the next
section) that had a proven record of success in achieving the contem-
porary "linking" concept with strategic business planning.

This activity could be construed by an outsider as tending toward
elitism, but the potential advantages are fairly apparent. The activ-
icv includes choosing a planning horizon, identifying replacement can-
'lld.it^'s for each key position, establishing promotabill ty readiness,
appraising performance, identifying development needs, integrating indi-
vidual career goals with company goals, and doing all of this while
sr.-^-^ning and monitoring the five-year business plan. The bottom-line
mission, of course, is to assure availability of top executive talent
for t':'^ future.

F,\'en though some firms had abandoned all other HRP practices, they
^tilL promoted traditional managerial replacement planning. In a few
Inst.mces, divisions had rejected the replacement concept because of a
p-r:eived lack of flexibility in line managerial decision making. For
ti'.'^ <ame reason, another popular concept of the past decade, career
p^t^.ine; (except at the individual level and often informally), was not
u'^t'd by 1 number of firms.

HHP Integration with Strategic Business Planning

A central theme of our interviews and, indeed, an important purpose
of the investigation was to ascertain the state-of-the-art in the formal
nni\ Informal integration of HRP and sc ri tejji <■ huslnes.; jilaiu , •. Several

-11-

relevant questions were asked, such as: How Is IIRP coordinated witli
the company's strategic planning calendar? Do human resource managers
liave any input at the early stages of alternative strategy formulation?
Is there any type of formal human resource impact statement, planning
guide, or "situational analysis" of strategic issues developed for pro-
active input into business strategy decisions? What is the extent of
HRP input into the planning of the following: new venture, plant site
selection, expansion, diversification, acquisition, divestiture, or
.ontraction?

Only five of the firms had well-integrated systems, and just three
of the four seemed to have any significant, early-stage human resource
input Into the selection of company business strategips. These three
firms are extremely large, and currently control massive markets.
Therefore, it is doubtful that any substantive inroads by human resource
management into vital, long-range business planning have generally
occurred in the private sector. In fact, after exhaustive in-depth
probing, our investigation showed negligible amounts of interaction
between personnel staffs and strategic planning committees and/or staffs.
Rarely, in terms of human resource implications, was a personnel depart-
ment ever asked to review new plant sites or other expansion facilities.
The reactive, fire-fighting role of personnel still persists in most of
the companies we visited. Recent surveys of strategic planning activities
in U.S. firms (Ang and Chua, 1979; Godiwalla, Meinhart, and Warde, 1979;
Kudla, 1978) tend to corroborate this conclusion.

Ii 1979, a corapre'aensiva survey of the corporate planner \nd i^lan-
ning function was conducted by Stuart "latlins Associates, lac. (1979)

with assistance from Che North American Society of Corporate Planners,
Inc. The survey was sent to approximately 300 of the largest companies
in the U.S. that had a formal corporate planning function. The twenty
largest Fortune Industrials were excluded on the basis of dispropor-
tionate size. The report identified those corporate functions that
reported directly to the chief corporate planner. None of the almost
200 top companies that responded to the survey reported communications
between the chief corporate planner and the personnel/human resource
management function.

We found in our interviews with company strategic planning VP's
and/or directors that planning staffs typically had one person who
reviewed a limited number of human resource forecasts once a year.
Indeed, a 1979 survey of 334 najor corporations by Deutsch, Shea &
Evi.is, Inc. (1979) indicated that only four percent of the 334 respon-
dents to the survey even projected their human resource needs for over
a five-year period, and 42 percent of the firms projected their human
r-source needs for only one year or less. Aside from this specific
planning activity, only a modicum of attention and review is usually
s^iven to human resource numbers.

■v'=' also found that a few firms had established high-status planning
and control staffs for environmental scanning and surveillance of key
strategic issues that impacted on human resources and thus on the con-
tingency planning of the company.

In 3 1980 update of the earlier survey by Stuart Matlins Associates,
jn^. n'^'^'^), the human resource function was .i,.;a[n not liiL.^iI .i:^ r.ipcjrLLng
to die chief planner, despite the fact that there were aihlLtlons of a

-13-

broad range of other functions Including legislative analysis, federal
government affairs, and corporate communications.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

This investigation sought to identify the determinants of effective
HRP organization and practice in twenty companies of different sizes,
industry associations, and environments. In this regard^ we concur
with the critical assessment of HRP by Craft (1980), who argues that
an Inadequate theoretical framework has been built for specifying and
understanding the concepts of corporate HRP. After discovering such a
dearth of HRP implementation and sophistication among the companies we
visited, it may seem presumptuous on our part to attempt to identify a
few of these determinants. We found, ho'.;3ver, that size and market con-
centration do not seem to be relevant factors in the level of sophisti-
cation of human resource forecasting, management succession planning
ind development, and career planning. Size does seem to be positively
related to the level and amount of coordination and Integration of HRP
and business planning.

After encountering a great deal of negativism from practitioners
concerning the assumptions Inherent in traditional, top-down, statisti-
cal forecasting, we tend to question the viability of this approach.
Human resource projections, of course, are only one part of HRP, but
beyond that, it is a fantasy in our opinion to believe that HRP ever
was a systematic (rational) process in business decision making. Many
of the HRP concepts in the literature that related to the private sec-
tor have stemmed from human resource scheduling programs devf^" ped in

-14-

the aerospace industry. Because of a reliance on government contracts,
aerospace companies were forced to develop detailed, long-range staffing
and occupational-mix plans as part of the contract proposal process.
These HRP techniques were deemed by many to be transferable and even
generalizable to all of business.

Regarding the linking of HRP and strategic business planning, there
again exists great incredulousness on the need for formal integration
processes. Most practitioners indicate that integration may be neces-
sary only in times of rapid expansion or contraction, diversification,
acqilsition, divestiture, or various corporate "crisis" contingencies.
It is presumed that HRP will help alleviate or avert "crisis" conditions,
but. after fifteen or more years of intellectual bantering on the sub-
jei^C, it is apparent that top management gives little raore than lip
ser^^lce to the subject.

The "new wave" in HRP that does have a real possibility of formally

intei^rating HRP and business planning concentrates around two inter-

r-^lrited areas, strategic issue management (Ansoff, 1980; Brown, 1979;

Charan and Freeman, 1980) and environmental scanning practice (Brown,

ig:":*; Kleln and Newman, 1980; Smith and Druzic, 1976; Starling, 1980;

Thomas, 1980). Simmons (1979) relates a brief history of this in

general corporate planning:

Traditionally, the role of the corporate planner
has been to project business trends, primarily on
the basis of historical data. This perspective on
the future performance of a business has become
hopelessly short with the tremendous growth in com-
munication techniques, public information technology
and the effects on a company's operating environment
of the social unrest of the 1960s. Planners have

■15-

had Co adjust their sights to focus on external
forces; thus, the twin disciplines of trend analysis
and issue management carae into being. Initiated in
the '60s, these studies didn't Segln to affect busi-
ness operating policy until the early '70s. Unfor-
tunately, when the planners began to cry "wolf" in
the late '60s, "wolf" was not exactly the right cry
and management was not ready to listen. Very few
planners translated the impact of social and economic
trends into action plans and even fewer could convince
management to do so until the '70s. (p. 16)

Issue management is rapidly becoming recognized as the central theme of
human resource management in the '80s. English (1980) sees that the
"two critical objectives [for human resource managers] are to simul-
taneously optimize human resources and minimize liabilities stemming
from social legislation" (p. 39). AT&T has recently released documents
describing the activities of their "corporate planning emergency issues
group" (American Telephone & Telegraph Co., 1980). Human resource
Issues play a major role in AT&T's annual cycle of "Forecasts and
Assumptions."

The two other leading developments in HRP that should be mentioned
are electronically automated management succession planning, and a new
generation of packaged computerized analytical tools. Automated suc-
cession planning has been highly successful for a major New York-based
corporation included in our investigation. Automated succession plan-
ning enables, among other things, the simulation of projected organiza-
tional charts, career pathing, mobility analysis (including projection
of blocked-progression lines), identification of surplus or shortage
conditions relating to a particular position, as v;ell as replacement
planning. Representative of another leading development is Comshare's
revolutionary HRP computer package (Frantzreb, 1930).

-16-

One Interpretation by Nkomo (1980) of the history of HRP postulates
and outlines three stages of U.S. business practices. Nkorao concludes
that "It was the cumulative impact of governmental, economic, socio-
cultural, and demographic changes that played a large part in the end
of 'manpower planning' and the emergence of the third stage — one that
will . . . focus attention on strategic human resources planning . . ."
(Nkomo, 1980: 72).

Our findings concur with the notion that personnel management does
seem to be moving into this "stage three" posture. This posture goes
beyond employment planning; it is marked by environmental scanning
practices, issue management and, ultimately, infusion into corporate
strir^gy and tactics. It is interesting that formal business planning
svsteras have gone through a similar evolution; from Phase I, basic
financial planning, to Phase II, forecast-based planning, to Phase III,
externally-oriented planning, and finally to Phase IV, which encompasses
strategic management and orchestration of resources to create competi-
tive advantage (Gluck, Kaufman, and Walleck, 1980).

The promise of increased visibility in strategic business planning
Is a strong career motivation for a personnel manager. This may explain
s.iine of the resurgence of interest in human resource planning practices.
But, to reiterate, at this point it seems that no significant integra-
tion between human resource planning and strategic business planning has
occurred on a wide scale.

-17-

REFERENCES

American Telephone & Telegraph Co.

1980 The Bell System Emerging Issues Program (Internal Report).
Basking Ridge: AT&T.

Ang, James S., and Jess H. Chua

1979 "Long range planning In large United States corporations — A
survey." Long Range Planning, April: 99-102.

Ansoff, H. Igor

1980 "Strategic issue management." Strategic Management Journal,

1: 131-148.

Bennett, James E.

19 72 "What went wrong with manpower planning?" The Business
Quarterly Summer: 54-61.

Brown, James K.

1^79 The Business of Issues: Coping with the Company's Environ-
ments. New York: The Conference Board.

"-•irack, Elmer H. , and Thomas C. Gutteridge

]'*78 "Institutional manpower planning: Rhetoric versus reality."

California Management Review, Spring: 13-22.

Charan, Ram, and R. Edward Freeman '

l')SO "Planning for the business environment of the 1980s." Journal
of Business Strategy, Fall: 9-19.

Craft, James A.

1980 "A critical perspective on human resource planning." Human
Resource Planning 3: 39-52.

Mpiitsch, Shea & Evans, Inc.

1*^79 "Corporate human resources planning is short range limited,
new survey finds." (Summary Report.) New York, New York.

English, Jack W.

1980 "The road ahead for the human resources function." Personnel,
March-April: 35-39.

Fr.intzreb, Richard B.

;vSO "Comshare's applications library on HRP." Manpower Planning,
3 (11): 1,7.

Godiwalla, Yezdi, Wayne A. Meinhart , and William D. Warde
1979 "Corporate planning and the chief executive." Long Range
Planning, April: 2-15.

-18-

Gluck, Frederick W. , Stephen P. Kaufman, and A. Steven Walleck
1980 "Strategic management for competitive advantage." Harvard
Business Review, July-August: 154-161.

Hennessey, H. W. , Jr.

1979 "Computer applications in human resource Information systems."
Human Resource Planning, 2: 205-213.

Klein, Harold, and William Newman

1980 "How to use SPIRE: A systematic procedure for identifying
relevant environments for strategic planning." Journal of
Business Strategy, Summer: 32-45.

Kudla, Ronald

1978 "The components of strategic planning." Long Range Planning,
December: 48-52.

Mshler, Walter R. , and William F. Wrightnour

1973 Executive Continuity. Horaewood, Illinois: Dow Jones-Irwin.

Monroe, Willys H.

1963 "Strategy in the management of executives." Business Horizons,
Spring: 35-44.

N'n'is, Albert M. , Kendrith M. Rowland, and Edgar G. Williams
iQni Managerial Manpower Forecasting and Planning. Berea, Ohio:
American Society for Personnel Administration.

Vkomo, Stelle M.

1980 "Stage three in personnel administration: Strategic human
resource management." Personnel, July-August: 69-77.

Ostr)>^ski, Paul S.

1968 "Prerequisites for effective succession planning." Management
of Personnel Quarterly, Spring: 10-16.

Slnmons, W. W.

19 79 "Issue management — Challenge and opportunity for planning
executives." Planning Review, November: 15-19.

Smith, James B., and P. G. Druzic

197h Analyzing Future Business Environments — Research Report No.

585, Business Intelligence Program. Menlo Park, CA: SRI

International.

Starling, Grover

1980 The Changing Environment of Business. Boston: Kent.

Stuart Matlins Associates, Inc.

1979 The Corporate Planner — Career Development, Compensation and
Staffing — 1979 Survey Summary Report. Mew York: Johnson,
Smith, & Knisely, Inc.

-19-

StuarC Matlins Associates, Inc.

1980 The Corporate Planner — Compensation, Staffing and Activities-

1980 Survey Summary Report. New York: Johnson, Smith, &

Knisely, Inc.

Thomas, Philip S.

1980 "Environmental scanning — The state of the art." Long Range
Planning, February: 20-28.

Walker, James W.

1980 Human Resource Planning. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Walker, James W. , and Robert Armes

1979 "Implementing management succession planning in diversified
companies." Human Resource Planning, 2: 123-133.

Walker, James W. , and Michael N. Wolfe

1978 "Patterns in human resource planning practices." Human
Resource Planning, 1: 189-202.

n/6 3

HECKMAN IX
BINDERY INC. |§

JUN95

wa.To.P,.^N^MANCHESTER,