1980
DOI: 10.1016/0305-0483(80)90005-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A review of mathematical models in human resource planning

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

1982
1982
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 42 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Some of the previous results have been reviewed in (Bowey 1977;Price et al 1980;Purkiss 1981;Edwards 1983;Ernst et al 2004). The models for manpower planning can be classified into two categories (Purkiss 1981).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…Some of the previous results have been reviewed in (Bowey 1977;Price et al 1980;Purkiss 1981;Edwards 1983;Ernst et al 2004). The models for manpower planning can be classified into two categories (Purkiss 1981).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…The above Renewal model, assumes that promotion occurs from a lower level to the next higher. A manpower system that restricts recruitment to the lowest grade was discussed in [2]. Equations of the type, Where the subscripts in x denote the desired number in each state at a given time, the variables denote the expected promotions between the states at the given time, the ′ refer to the wastage levels at the given state and time while h(t) refers to new employees were obtained.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The discussion was restricted to systems where promotions take place from a lower level to the next higher level. Apart from [1], [2], [3], [4] and [5], all the other works mentioned earlier are based on the principle of push flow. In systems that operate according to push principles, promotion may occur when there is no vacancy in the system.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations