-a comparative analogy-Human resources have become the politically correct way of dealing with the most precious resource on Earth… the human being. There is a long history of attempts to understand human behavior in the workplace. Since the early 1890s, academics and practitioners developed theories and practices to explain and influence employee behavior in the workplace. William R. Tracey's Human Resources Glossary defines human resources as: "The people who make up and manage an organization." The people who work within an organization are the subject of common analyzes for political economy, economics, business and psychology. In economic policy and economics, employees are considered as one of the four factors of production: Labor, while in the corporate world they are known as Human Resources or Human Capital and do not refer to the people within an organization as physical matter. , but what these people bring and contribute to organizational success. It is sometimes called intellectual capital when it reflects creativity, knowledge, skill and motivation. The level of authority that deals with this is called Human Resources Management. (SITE1). The original term, People Management, was used to describe "the specialized management function that determines and implements policies and procedures that influence phases of the work cycle" (BOOK). It first appeared in the early 20th century and was administrative in nature, dealing primarily with payroll, employment law and the management of related activities. The term Human Resource Management is the result of the famous Hawthorne experiment by Elton Mayo of the Harvard School of Business Administration. This experiment was intended to demonstrate the connection between the theory and practice of personnel management with psychology. The term began to be used in the 1950s, to designate the expansion of traditional personnel management to include modern psychology. (Site 2) The term defines a managerial perspective that supports the need to establish an integrated set of personnel policies to support organizational strategy (Buchannan, 2004). Numerous authors highlight the difficulty of identifying clear differences between personnel management and human resources management and argue that the most obvious change is a "relabeling process" (Legge, 1989). Some experts, such as Lowry (1990) and Fowler (1987), argue that there is no substantial difference between human resources and personnel management and go further, suggesting that "human resource management is the continuous process of managing personal"”.