Human Resource Planning

The identification of variables and their influence on human resource planning at the territorial level in Human resource management (HRM), is very important in contemporary administration, showing its evolution in various approaches that contribute to the foundations of the current concept. This feature is characterized by significant interconnectedness processes since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution (Marrero-Fornaris, 2002; Sánchez-Rodríguez, 2005; Cuesta-Santos, 2010, Martínez-Vivar, Marrero-Fornaris & Pérez-Campdesuñer, 2013; Ramesh, Kumar-Ghosh , Prakash, Sharma, Rajaram, Kar et al., 2015; Lajos, Tedesco, Passini, Dias, Nomura, Rehder et al., 2015), managing activities related to recruitment, attendance control, maintenance of discipline and payroll. From the last five years of the last century, a renewed oriented style regards humans as the end result of this process, valuing with greater emphasis on knowledge as an asset of successful organizations and the processes that ensure the approach is highlighted. sed is basically at the organizational level, showing a limited range of authors consulted dealing with issues from the ground up. Separately, the quantitative planning process is approached through the method of balancing labor resources and rewards (incentives) (Resolución 132,2004; Armstrong-Stassen, 2009). Similarly, training processes and qualitative to quantitative integration analyzes are included (Law, Wong & Wang, 2004; Pérez-Izquierdo, 2010; Cribeiro-Díaz, 2011); observes the purely qualitative nature of planning in which the training process only discusses, without considering the subject’s treatment at the territorial level (Resolución 132, 2004). This is a testament to the shortcomings, as the systemic nature of HRM is not guaranteed. The authors consulted, although considered in their analysis of the general environment, failed to relate to the process at this level the status of HRM, the interests of the department and their relationship and/or relationship with the training center. These aspects limit the realization of strategic contributions, nor do they understand the business elements that determine activity levels; demonstrating both systemic breakdown as strategic and not conducive to viewing HRM as a necessary process of interest at the territorial level. The new style of HRM is confident in the method of involving them to humans as the end result of the Revolutionary process (Morales-Cartaya, 2009; Cuesta-Santos, 2010) allows to improve HRM as the basis of human, organizational and territorial development from economic, political and social as natural advantage in the setting in which this is done. This makes it possible to improve human resource planning (HRP) (Cribeiro-Díaz, 2011; Bffill Vega, 2009) as the initial variable in which the remaining HRM processes will drive the elements outlined above, from their impact on optimizing workforce productivity work based on continuous and progressive innovation. realization of the latest trends of HRM, among which stand out prospectively and systemically, as well as to facilitate the prospect of control in making decision making (Cuesta-Santos, 2010). These elements, integrated and adapted to the particularities of each context, enable empowerment outcomes that determine the identification, strengthening and use of endogenous capacities and exogenous opportunities. It imposes conscious development of individuals, organizations and territories in a consistent, permanent and harmonious manner. The results of these theoretical observations, among others, led to the phenomenon of the movement of people (Nagla, 2011; Paromita, 2009). Among the authors consulted two schools for proven analysis, one that focused his theory from the territorial level (Cuesta-Santos, 2010; Torres-Cala, 2011; Cribeiro-Díaz, 2011) and the other from the organizational level. The first approaches the subject of the population by migration from human resource (HR) analysis and the general population, and the second from the fluctuations in the workforce that HR experiences in organizations in a given period of time. This analysis makes it possible to raise the variable root groups that cause this behavior, related to economic, political, social and natural aspects; which although specifically manifested in each stream, they are not isolated for analysis at the territorial level.