Describe about the Introduction to Human Resource for Aristotles Rhetoric.
Aristotle’s rhetoric is a concept that dates back to the 4th century B.C. It has been noticed that ever since the advent of the concept there has been a crucial development in the art of rhetoric. The Aristotelian doctrine has been used by researchers, to, incorporate the rhetorical arguments in ethical, logical and psychological findings. The present study deals with the debate and counter arguments based on the rhetorical elements or Aristotle with relation to a study of Qantas group. The study would deal in understanding the concept of reasoning along with different types of employment arrangements in aviation organisation like Qantas (Shanahan and Seele 2015).
Discussion and analysis
Aristotle’s rhetorical triangle includes there models or components. These are ethos, pathos and logos. Ethos in the elementary stage deals with the character that is projected by the speaker. In order to be credible a speaker must be competent, should have empathy and good intention. Pathos deals with the concept of values, beliefs and audience. This element is to understand the emotional influence of the speaker on the spectators or the audience. The emotional quotient is important and serves as the base in the present component of rhetoric. The final component includes the logos that are the reasoning. In this case, the speaker wants to influence the audience with the help of the logical reasoning. Hence, in nutshell it may be said that the three steps or components illustrates the interrelation of the credibility of the speaker along with his reasoning power to establish a mark in the mind of the audience.
In the article by Sarina and Wright, it has been found that there are different hybrid measures that have been taken by the organisation Qantas to deal with organisational performance and workplace conflict (Sarina and Wright 2015). In the competitive world where luxurious airline system has to be prompt, there are different pivotal strategies that are to be taken by the organisation. It is mentioned by the top-level management that this helps in retaining “relational co-ordination”. In this regard, it can be stated that Qantas has taken neither the high road approach nor the low road approach but the hybrid approach of maintaining employment relations. It can be inferred that Quantas has the reasoning of meeting the organistional goals as they take a mid way approach. This method would help both the employer and the employees in the organization (Nicolae 2015). However, this concept can be contradicted by the fact that hybrid model of employment might not be the correct method of organistional performance. It can be contradicted that the hybrid strategies might not be effective in the changing market condition. Human resource management and framework needs to be flexible in dealing with the changing products in the market. However, in the current article the reasoning of the article is missing the point of persuasion. Hybrid employment framework cannot be the only solution to the issue of employee subsystem (Mshvenieradze 2013). The human resource management must take a way that is flexible in taking the suitable approach of high road approach, low road approach and flexible approach as and when required.
The main argument of the article is to understand the methods that are to be used in the changing employment relation strategies. In the article, it is found that the ethos or the credibility of the speaker is missing. The main reason being the author is not open to flexible ideas for Qantas. It is found that he is mostly trying to incorporate the idea of hybrid employment. The interest of the article is vague at some points as the authors have tried to implement too many ideas for the organisation. This might lose the interest of the readers half way in the article. The integration of the values and beliefs are not strongly inculcated in the article. The issue of the organisational performance and employment relations outcomes could have been analyzed in the first half of the article. This could have been followed by the flexible approaches that Qantas might take (Nicolae 2015). However, the authors have created confusion in the minds of the readers by not only applying too many approaches but also, confusing the readers about which approach might be fruitful for an aviation organisation. The best approach with the support of data could have served the purpose of the readers. Hence, the arguments of the article could have been better and clean (Lefsrud, Graves and Phillips 2015).
In the article few of the areas are convincing like the authors’ approach towards making a strategies that are both integrative and disruptive. However, in this regard it might be said that the avoidance approach might not work as per the expectations. In any service industry it is important to understand that employees should be effective in dealing with organisation’s change (Heracleous and Klaering 2014). In the changing situation of the employment relation in the Quantas it has been found that the authors have missed the reasons of the way unions can bring in the change. The work of the unions has been given in a general way but a comparison of the work of the unions through graph could have supported the reasoning for the readers (Sarina and Wright 2015).
It could be said that finally inferred the article could have been better by comparing more dat. That would have sufficiently worked in keeping the interest of the readers along with reasoning. Secondly, the article could have been sub divided with different aspects of the employment structure like the issues that may be faced with the high road approach. The same part could have been made better with the analysis of data of atleast last five years. The similar method could have been used in the low road approach. Finally, a paragraph could have been added with the help of the hybrid approach and the way a flexible approach would have been essential for the Quantas. The issue organizational performance could have been dealt with the specific strategies that other competitive companies have applied. Similarly, the way these strategies or other specific measures of Quantas could have been discussed with proper management theories. The above mentioned aspects would have helped in creating the element of ethos, pathos and logos.
Heracleous, L. and Klaering, L.A., 2014. Charismatic Leadership and Rhetorical Competence: An Analysis of Steve Jobs’s Rhetoric. Group & Organization Management, p.1059601114525436.
Lefsrud, L.M., Graves, H. and Phillips, N., 2015. Analyzing Visual Rhetoric in Organizational Research. Forthcoming in Handbook of Innovative Qualitative Research Methods: Pathways to Cool Ideas and Interesting Papers edited by Kimberly D. Elsbach and Roderick M. Kramer.
Mshvenieradze, T., 2013. Logos ethos and pathos in political discourse. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(11), p.1939.
Nicolae, A.O., 2015. Leaders banking on ethos. Persuasive Games in Political and Professional Dialogue, 26, p.217.
Sarina, T. and Wright, C.F., 2015. Mutual gains or mutual losses? Organisational fragmentation and employment relations outcomes at Qantas Group. Journal of Industrial Relations, 57(5), pp.686-706.
Shanahan, F. and Seele, P., 2015. Shorting Ethos: exploring the relationship between Aristotle’s Ethos and Reputation Management. Corporate Reputation Review, 18(1), pp.37-49.