Personnel Controlling as a Tool of HRM in the Public Entities

Theoretical background: This article will consider three research areas: central personnel controlling, human resources management (HRM), and public entities. For purposes of this article, the following definitions of these terms have been adopted for consideration. Personnel controlling (PC) fulfills two main roles in the company: the informational function consists of gathering, processing and preparing information necessary for making decisions related to personnel, as well as steering function which consists of coordinating plans and other personnel-related projects and exercising constant control over them. HRM – defined as strategic and coherent approach to the management of the most valued assets of organization – the people, who individually and collectively contribute to the achievement of organizations’ objectives. Public entities is a natural person, legal entity, or organizational unit with certain rights and obligations under public law. Public law entities are related to public administration and work for the public weal. Purpose of the article: The main aim of this article is to identify the role and importance of PC in the context of HRM tools in public entities. Research questions are as follows: RQ1: What are the main functions of personnel controlling in public institutions, and how do they affect HRM; RQ2: What are the biggest challenges of implementing personal controlling as an HRM tool in the public sector, and how can they be overcome; RQ3: How does personal controlling influence HRM decision-making in public institutions? Research hypothesis: The implementation of personnel controlling in public entities lacks a systemic and holistic approach to the application of the concept. Research methods: Systematic literature review and case study. Main findings: Main findings include: 1. Conscious use of PC as an HRM tool. 2. The need to identify optimal and universal indicators/performance measures of PC activities. 3. Undertaking PC activities from a systemic/complex/comprehensive perspective. 4. Conscious noticing of cooperation of HR entities with other stakeholders of public entities. 5. Focusing on the qualitative aspect of PC and not just the quantitative aspect. 6. Noticing the role of PC as an early warning system of deviation from established activities. 7. Noticing the importance of benchmarking the HR indicators against industry standards and best practices; specific benchmarking and analysis of best practices.