STRATEGIC HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES IN MALAYSIA: WHAT IS YOUR OPINION?Note:-4 pages does not include referencesAPA STYLEWith reference
STRATEGIC HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES IN MALAYSIA: WHAT IS YOUR OPINION? Note:- 4 pages does not include referencesAPA STYLEWith reference
See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this public ation at: https://www .rese archg ate.ne t/public ation/331541673 Strategic Hu man Resource Management: A Research Overview Book · March 2019 DOI: 10.4324/9780429490217 CITATIONS 11 READS 10,771 3 author s , including: Some of the author s of this public ation are also w orking on these r elated pr ojects: HR Fle xibility Vie w pr oject HRM actions in the T urmoil of Economic Crises Vie w pr oject John St orey The Open Univ ersity (UK) 197 PUBLICA TIONS 7,495 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE P atrick Wright Univ ersity of South Car olina 193 PUBLICATIONS 27,584 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE All c ontent f ollowing this p age w as uplo aded by John St orey on 24 A ugust 2020. The user has r equested enhanc ement of the do wnloaded file. Strategic Human Resource Management The field of Strategic Human Resource Management (SHRM) has burgeoned over the past thirty years. Over this time there has been a shift towards a strategic concep- tion which posited workers as ‘assets’ rather than ‘costs’. These ‘human resources’ were reconceptualised as a key source of competitive advantage. As such, these assets were to be treated seriously: selected with care, trained and developed, and above all, induced to offer commitment. The concept of ‘human capital’ came to the fore, and in the decades following these developments, research output has been voluminous. Strategic Human Resource Management: A Research Overview , authored by global research leaders, provides an expert summary of this crucial element of organi – zational performance. This new shortform book develops the argument that one of the crucial elements of organizational performance is the way work is organized in skill and talent packages both within an organization’s boundary and across global competency clusters. Secondly, it focuses on current and emergent challenges. The ‘package’ of HR approaches has changed over time and patterns can be observed. This new volume pays special regard to the HR implications arising from radically altering contexts – economic, social, and technological. This concise volume covers crucial themes of lasting interest, and as such is essential reading for business scholars and professionals. John Storey is Professor of Human Resource Management at The Open University, UK. He has served as Principal Investigator on numerous research council projects concerning strategy, innovation, organizations, and human resource management. Patrick M. Wright is faculty director of the Center for Executive Succession in the Darla Moore School of Business at the University of South Carolina, USA. From 2011 to 2017, he was named by HR magazine as one of the 20 “Most Influential” Thought Leaders in HR. Dave Ulrich is Professor of Business at the Ross School of Business, University of Michigan, USA. He has been ranked by Business Week as the Number 1 manage – ment educator and listed in Forbes as one of the top five business coaches. State of the Art in Business Research Edited by Professor Geoffrey Wood Recent advances in theory, methods, and applied knowledge (alongside structural changes in the global economic ecosystem) have presented researchers with challenges in seeking to stay abreast of their fields and navigate new scholarly terrains.State of the Art in Business Research presents shortform books which provide an expert map to guide readers through new and rapidly evolving areas of research. Each title will provide an overview of the area, a guide to the key literature and theories, and time-saving summaries of how theory interacts with practice. As a collection, these books provide a library of theoretical and concep – tual insights, and exposure to novel research tools and applied knowledge, that aid and facilitate in defining the state of the art, as a foundation stone for a new generation of research. Business Models A Research Overview Christian Nielsen, Morten Lund, Marco Montemari, Francesco Paolone, Maurizio Massaro and John Dumay Mergers and Acquisitions A Research Overview David R. King, Florian Bauer and Svante Schriber Strategic Human Resource Management A Research Overview John Storey, Patrick M. Wright, and Dave Ulrich For more information about this series, please visit: www.routledge.com/ State-of-the-Art-in-Business-Research/book-series/START Strategic Human Resource Management A Research Overview John Storey, Patrick M. Wright, and Dave Ulrich First published 2019 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business 2019 John Storey, Patrick M. Wright, and Dave Ulrich The right of John Storey, Patrick M. Wright, and Dave Ulrich to be identified as authors of this work has been asserted by them in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Storey, John, 1947- author. | Ulrich, David, 1953- author. | Wright, Patrick M., author. Title: Strategic human resource management : a research overview / John Storey, Dave Ulrich and Patrick M. Wright. Description: First Edition. | New York : Routledge, 2019. | Series: State of the art in business research | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2018057137| ISBN 9781138591998 (hardback) | ISBN 9780429490217 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Personnel management. | Strategic planning. Classification: LCC HF5549 .S8786 2019 | DDC 658.3/01—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018057137 ISBN: 978-1-138-59199-8 (hbk) ISBN: 978-0-429-49021-7 (ebk) Typeset in Times New Roman by Swales & Willis Ltd, Exeter, Devon, UK Contents List of figures vi 1 Mapping the field of strategic human resource management 1 2 Strategic human resource management and performance outcomes 15 3 Key practice areas and the key levers 27 4 HR competences and the HR function 43 5 The changing contexts of strategic human resource management 58 6 Fit, flexibility, and agility 71 7 A stock-take and a forward view 82 References 91 Index 109 Figures 3.1 The cycle of HR practices 28 3.2 Idealized model of HR planning 30 3.3 Key elements of a performance management system 34 4.1 HR competency model 50 4.2 Nine dimensions of an effective HR department 53 4.3 Waves of HR value creation 56 1 Mapping the field of strategic human resource management Human Resource Management (HRM) has become the predominant term to describe the theory and practices relating to the way people are managed at work. In previous times (and indeed even now in some places) other terms have been used which, in varying degrees, broadly correspond. These other terms include personnel management, personnel administration, people management, employee relations, human capital management, industrial relations and employment management. Each of these terms reflects the diverse antecedents of HRM and they also reveal aspects of the differ – ent ideologies associated with these approaches. For example, some early forms of personnel management had a ‘welfare’ parentage, others carried traces of a social-psychological ‘human relations movement’ history (Mayo 1949). Each of these traditions reflected a primary focus on individuals and small groups. Conversely, the terms ‘industrial relations’ and ‘employment relations’ reflect the collectivist (pluralist) approach to management-worker relations which, at times and in places, were dominant throughout much of the 20th century in Europe, North America and beyond (Clegg 1979; Dunlop 1958; Flanders 1964; 1970; Fox 1974). This tradition was devel – oped in North America and beyond with ideas about mutual gains and union-management partnerships (Kochan and Osterman 1994). The disci – plinary roots of the field include aspects of labour economics, industrial sociology, psychology and law. The term ‘Strategic Human Resource Management’ (SHRM) is used to emphasise the strategic character of a particular approach to talent and organization management – though some commentators would argue that HRM itself is inherently strategic in nature. Hence, the terms HRM and SHRM are often used interchangeably. The field of HRM/SHRM has burgeoned over the past thirty years. Its roots can be found in American literature of the 1980s, which re-framed people issues away from conceptions that cast people-management as an 2 Mapping the field of SHRM afterthought that could be handled in an ad hoc, reactive way, or managed through formal institutions such as collective bargaining and regulation (Beer et al. 1985). In place of this traditional conceptualisation, there was a shift towards a strategic conception which posited workers as ‘assets’ rather than ‘costs’ (Storey 1992). The workforce was therefore a ‘resource’ and recognised as a key source (arguably the key source) of competitive advantage. As such, these assets were to be treated seri – ously: the composition planned with care, selected with care, trained and developed, and above all, induced to offer commitment. Indeed, the overall shift was memorably described as a journey ‘from control to com – mitment’ (Walton 1985). Alongside all of this, and indeed providing an economics underpinning to it, the concept of ‘human capital’ came to the fore (Becker 1964). This reconceptualization coincided with the emergence of the ‘resource-based view’ in the strategy domain (Wernerfelt 1984; Grant 1991; Peteraf 1993). Emphasis was given to the importance of maintain – ing a link between business strategy and human resource strategy. The human resource approach displaced ‘personnel management’ and gave emphasis to the importance of establishing both vertical and horizontal alignment in HR policies and practices. Influential new models and frameworks were developed including the Harvard Model (Beer 1985), which established a flow from environment to business strategy and to human resource choices and onwards to out – comes. In parallel, important contingency models and frameworks emerged (Fombrun et al. 1984; Kochan and Barocci 1985; Schuler and Jackson 1987), which made links between appropriate HR strategies and a firm’s location in relation to such contingencies as business stages and variations in product/service characteristics (e.g., low cost, innovation or service quality). Empirical research traced how major mainstream companies and public sector organizations were responding to these ideas (Storey 1992). The role of general managers and line mangers alongside human resource and personnel/IR specialists was assessed. This theme of the nature of the HR function’s profile was elaborated and developed by Ulrich in a series of influential publications (Ulrich et al. 1995; 1997; Ulrich et al. 2017). Based on global research, his classification of the HR function into different segments: business partner, shared services and centres of expertise became the dominant model among practitioners. A related development in the field has been the impact of SHRM on firm performance. Ulrich (1997) has also made a significant contribution here, as has Patrick Wright who traced the link between HR resources, capabilities and performance (Wright and Snell 1998). Mapping the field of SHRM 3 A reincarnation of many of the underlying premises of HRM can be found in the influential work of economists investigating the sources of productivity (Bender et al 2018; Bloom and Van Reenen 2007; Bloom et al 2012; Sadun et al 2017). This body of work takes a step back and asks which, if any, ‘management practices’ impact on productivity. They use the World Management Survey which has been administered across thirty-four countries (see https://worldmanagementsurvey.org/). They make the case for recognising the vital importance of management competence, central to which, they accept, is competent management of human resources. The key practices are identified as: target setting, the use of incentives, monitoring of performance, and talent management. Achieving managerial competence ‘requires sizable investments in peo – ple and processes’ (Sadun et al 2017, p. 122). This new wave of research and associated practical interventions replays many of the core themes in classic HRM. The above paragraphs give a synoptic view of the emergence and devel – opment of the field. Now we proceed to dig deeper. Defining the field Based on a review of SHRM theorizing and research, Wright and McMahan (1992) defined SHRM as ‘the pattern of planned human resource deploy – ments and activities intended to enable an organization to achieve its goals,’ (p. 298). They noted that this entails vertically linking the strategic manage – ment process to HRM practices, and horizontally creating coordination and congruence among those HRM practices. They then noted that the major variables of concern in SHRM are the determinants of decisions about human resource practices, the composition of the human capital resource pool (i.e., skills and abili – ties), the specification of required human resource behaviors, and the effectiveness of these decisions given various business strategies and/ or competitive situations. (pp. 298–299) It is important to emphasise that currently the term ‘Human Resource Management’ is used in two different ways. In one usage, which we can term the generic , it is used to encompass all of the forms of employment management in its infinite variety. In this first sense it is just a new label for personnel management or employment management in general. But there is a second usage. In its second form the term has at times denoted 4 Mapping the field of SHRM a particular approach to employment management. Thus, the term in this second sense refers to one of the many ways of managing labour and is used to demarcate it from other ways. Not surprisingly, the existence of two different usages has caused considerable confusion in the academic literature with commentators often talking at cross-purposes. So, what is this second, more specific and narrow meaning? In this particular sense it has been defined as follows: Human resource management is a distinctive approach to employment management which seeks to achieve competitive advantage through the strategic deployment of a highly committed and capable workforce using an array of cultural, structural and personnel techniques . (Storey 2007, p. 7) The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) the UK-based professional body for HR practitioners, appears to reflect these same ideas in its own definition: Strategic human resource management (strategic HRM, or SHRM) may be regarded as an approach to the management of human resources that provides a strategic framework to support long-term business goals and outcomes. The approach is concerned with longer-term people issues and macro-concerns about structure, quality, culture, values, commit – ment and matching resources to future need. (CIPD Factsheet 2013) The key elements in both these definitions are: long-term focus, a strong link with business goals and a concern with ‘macro’ issues such as culture and values. Notably, apart from the reference to business goals, there is no specific mention of contextual issues such as changes in product market conditions, labour markets, regulation, innovations in technology or social changes. This may or may not imply a one-best way or universalist approach. As noted, it is an approach which openly seeks to secure a ‘competi – tive advantage’. This declared objective is not to every ideological taste. This element alone indicates that the approach shares a similar stance as American strategy theorists such as Michael Porter (Porter 1980). Many critics of HRM have been, and are, uncomfortable with this first element. They posit the idea that economic activity does not to have to be quite so single-mindedly dedicated to free market competition. They also contend that even within a capitalist framework, collaboration as well as com – petition can operate and that other objectives in addition to competitive Mapping the field of SHRM 5 advantage such as wellbeing, equity and multiple stakeholder interests could be pursued. And they are of course correct. But some of these critics have failed to recognise that an identification and description of a movement and an idea should not be confused with an endorsement of that idea. Second, the definition points to the distinctive means through which the objective will be sought. These include, crucially, the element of a ‘strategic’ approach. This means that the management of people and of the workforce in general is approached not in an ad hoc, tactical and merely reactive way but in a manner which regards this aspect of management as of central impor – tance. HRM practices helped deliver strategic objectives. Different strategies require different employee skills. As with other aspects of the definition, the interesting features are in noting not only what this form of HRM is, but also what the meaning suggests HRM is not. The counterfactual is important. For the HRM debate and the emergence of HRM only makes sense when it is recognised as part of the history of its time. HRM emerged at a time when labour management, in broad characteri- sation, might be described as a secondary, Cinderella-like, management practice (‘Personnel Management’ was often described in these terms). Markets were defined, finance arranged, production plans drawn up – and only then was the request for certain units of labour issued, often at short notice. Similarly, as industrial conflict was of concern in the post-second world war period, the skills in subduing and ‘managing conflict’ were to the fore in the then field of personnel/IR management. It was into this climate when western product markets were coming up against international competition – and often losing out – that this ‘new’ approach to managing labour emerged and presented a challenge to existing assumptions and practices. Third, the definition refers to the deployment of a ‘highly committed and capable workforce’. This is an important feature of the distinctive approach. As we know, very large sections of the economy operate on very differ – ent principles. The high commitment approach is relatively unusual in large swathes of the employment scene. Hire and fire, short-term contracts, even zero-hour contracts, outsourcing, agency work and many other such methods to treat labour as a mere transaction are relatively commonplace. Recent talk of ‘employee engagement’ or ‘employee experience’ can be seen as a latter-day attempt to (re)capture some of that high commitment agenda. The distinctive high commitment mode of HRM equates with what is termed the ‘High Road’ approach to employment management. The ‘Low Road’ approach relates to the precarious forms of employment (Osterman 2018). The links between high pay/high productivity versus low pay/low productivity models have been explored in the disciplines of economics (Abowd et al. 1999) 6 Mapping the field of SHRM and employment relations (Holzer et al. 2004). HRM, in the distinctive sense, is expressive of the High Road approach. This high road/high com – mitment perspective is likewise integral to the theory of High Performance Workplaces (Appelbaum et al. 2000) Fourth, the ‘array of cultural, structural and personnel techniques’ refers to the mutually-reinforcing ways in which a truly thought-out strategic approach can deploy a wide range of methods which would have internal ‘fit’ and would complement each other (a further instance of the strate – gic nature of the idea). These techniques include attempts to: ‘win hearts and minds’ rather than merely enforce a contract; to de-emphasise custom and practice in favour of instilling values and mission; pluralism is also downplayed in favour of an implied unitary perspective where employers, managers and employees are seen to share at least one similar interest: to keep the enterprise in business. Thus, a set of beliefs and assumptions underpin this distinctive form of HRM. Other dimensions stress the role of strategy in that the business plan becomes pertinent to the way that employees and workers in general are managed; and an emphasis on the role of line managers as crucial to the practice and experience of HR poli – cies. Then there is a set of key levers such as serious attention to selection (in place of hire and fire), performance related pay, an attempt to move from ‘temporary truces’ in labour negotiations to management through cul – ture and shared goals. When viewed holistically, is this package to be regarded as a ‘soft’, ‘human relations’, approach with employee welfare at its core? There are facets such as an emphasis on training and development and the winning of hearts and minds that might lean in that direction. But there are also ‘hard’ aspects to this model of HRM (Storey 2007). Labour is seen as a strategic resource. As such it is to be planned-for, measured carefully, and used as an asset. HRM sits alongside the resource-based view of the firm as strategic perspective on how to manage the employment relationship (Storey 1992; 2007). What about practice? While the HRM label has become so ubiquitous and has, in the main, replaced personnel management in many organizations (contrary to expectations and indeed contrary to empirical evidence dur – ing its early days – as revealed by the WERS surveys 1), the management of work has, over the past couple of decades, not been a steady journey to the wider diffusion of the best practice HRM model. In the wider, generic sense, Human Resource Management continues, but the nature of its practice is very varied. This variation is reflected in terms such as ‘High Road and Low Road’ practices, ‘polarized work’ and in the metaphor of the ‘hourglass economy’. These variations might seem to suggest the degree of strategic choice fac – ing HR professionals. Yet, research across major economies indicates that, Mapping the field of SHRM 7 for many workers, the erstwhile trend towards good practice has shifted into reverse (Kalleberg 2013; 2018). Theory and practice As currently conceived, HRM is constituted by both research and practice. These two are related but they are not the same. It is a truism that practice often differs from theory in the sense that everyday practices do not always live up to some theoretically-derived prescription of an ideal or a ‘best’ way. But the practice-research distinction can be exaggerated. Much research in human resource management is simply the identification and cataloguing of practice. For example, they include statistical and descriptive summa – ries of the state of play with regard to what human resource specialists do, how they are distributed, what influence they exercise, and so on, which are research-based mirrors of practice. The same can be said for those examples of HR research which draw a picture of recruitment and selection practices, appraisal methods, reward systems and the like. This type of research reflects practice. It is descriptive. But, there is another type of research which seeks to identify ‘good practice’ and even ‘best practice’. This type tries to identify the causal links between context, practices and outcomes. For example, this goes beyond describing what HR professionals do and moves on to study the impact of what they do on key outcomes such as employee well-being or business performance. Theory then, explains why these outcomes might occur by building conceptual frameworks. As a result, it follows that in many instances, actual practice will often differ from ‘theory’. Yet additionally, many practitioners pay regard to research when seeking to develop their practice and so theory and practice can become closer as a consequence. Thus, the question ‘what is HRM?’ can then be answered in terms of both theory and practice. The nature of strategy in HRM A strategic approach to HR could normally be expected to include ele – ments such as: a longer-term perspective; a concern with big issues that go beyond operational detail; an approach which scans, and factors-in, relevant information about the environment and about changes within it; the construction of policies which seek to align HR practices to the needs of the business often expressed as mission, vision, strategy or goals; and the construction of HR policies which bring each of the elements of HR into mutual, reinforcing, alignment. Thus, decisions in relation to recruitment 8 Mapping the field of SHRM and selection priorities should be consistent with priorities in the areas of goal-setting, performance management, reward, training and development, and promotion and exit. So, whereas an operational decision might be confined to a one-off interaction with an employee (for example, how to handle a particular appraisal interview) and may require some tactical skill, SHRM is con – cerned with the wider issues and usually involves making choices about matters which will have longer-term consequences and will affect the success or otherwise of the business. The alignment of HR components has been termed ‘internal fit’, while the alignment of HR with business strategy and the wider business environment has been termed ‘external fit’. Strategic HR should aspire to both types of fit (Miles and Snow 1994). SHRM is concerned with both policies and practices. Ideally, these work in tandem, but appropriate policies can be undermined by poor prac – tices, and conversely, good practice may, to some extent, compensate for defective policies. It is a field which comprises practice, prescription and empirical study. Although one might desire and assume a strong connec – tion between these, in reality, there is sometimes a considerable disconnect between these three elements. An important question is who generates HR strategy? It might be a specialist HR Director and team but not all organisations have these. Even if the senior business team have created a separate HR function (in the form of a unit or department), it is possible that they may not necessar – ily devolve all big decisions in this area to that department. Indeed, the choices about whether to have such an HR department can be seen as one of the strategic decisions we are talking about here. Research evidence suggests that key integrated business decisions (which include HR and finance and marketing strategies) are formulated by executive groups (not Boards) and that the members of these groups multitask and are most effective when they adopt a business orientation and not a functional orientation. A business orientation ‘makes strategic deci – sion makers comfortable to deal with issues outside their business function’ (Kelly and Gennard 2007, p. 114). Classic definitions include the idea that ‘business strategy’ is: The determination of the basic long-term goals and objectives of an enterprise and the adoption of courses of action and the allocation of resources necessary for those goals. (Chandler 1962, p. 13) Mapping the field of SHRM 9 Thus, from one perspective, strategy requires systematic rational assessment of contexts and resources. Some approaches to doing strategy focus mainly on finding the optimal space or location in a market. So, these approaches tend to look outwards to the characteristic features of a market such as price, quality and the distinctiveness of offers for goods or services. A business strategy (and by extension an HR strategy) that focuses more on utilising internal resources than on locating the best market position is known as ‘the resource-based view’ (RBV). This was advanced most fully by Prahalad and Hamel (1990) and Grant (1991). These analysts were mainly talking about business strategy but their approach has profound implications for HR. The re-focusing on internal resources is an approach which is closely aligned to the idea of an HRM strategy because it gives emphasis to the importance of leveraging resources to gain a competitive advantage. As noted above, it regards labour as assets rather than in the conventional accounting view as costs. And, of course, one implication of this is that one tends to invest in and to nurture assets, whereas one nor – mally tends to try to cut costs. This idea of the workforce as assets gets to the heart of many approaches to SHRM. It involves seeking to build human capability and to gain competitive advantage from workforce skills, crea – tivity and commitment. Strategy as plan? Another issue that has been central to debates in business strategy and also has much relevance to HR strategy, is whether a ‘strategic approach’ requires a formal plan. There is often a tendency to think about strategy as requiring the compilation of information and as a formal process of decision making that culminates in a series of plans. But there is another view; the view that suggests strategy can be inferred from a pattern that emerges from a long series of decisions, even in the absence of a formal written plan or strategy document. This could be termed a ‘de facto strategy’. This idea of an ‘emergent strategy’ is normally associated with Henry Mintzberg (1978). So, an enterprise may have no formal strategy document and yet still have a de facto emergent strategy. Or it may even be that an enterprise has a formal and lengthy strategy document which is largely ignored in practice while a different de facto strategy is pursued. A de facto strategy which has been built up incrementally and found to ‘work’ (in the sense that the organisation has proved to be sustainable and no major chronic problems are occurring) may add up to a coherent strategy. 10 Mapping the field of SHRM But not all ad hoc approaches have such optimal outcomes. ‘ Ad hocery ’ may result in a lack of forethought, inconsistencies, short-term thinking, and waste and can be very costly and lead to an uncompetitive position (e.g., paying redundancies as a reaction to economic downturn and then facing recruitment difficulties and training costs when upturn occurs). The word ‘rudderless’ is sometimes used to describe this kind of drift and lack of direction. Hence, this particular approach would be considered as non-strategic. So, what would an approach to HR look like if it was not ad hoc, rudderless and reactive? The implied alternative is some kind of strategic approach – that is, one which: • tries to build a big picture • has a sense of direction of travel • has some coherence and consistency • has mutually reinforcing elements Coherence is about fit and integration. In other words, it suggests that the parts or elements fit together smoothly rather than contradict each other or lean in different directions. A classic example of HR decisions which tend towards contradiction is where ‘team focus’ is urged and policies are put in place to promote that, but where the remuneration system is based on individual performance-related pay. But, in addition to alignment and coherence, HR strategy design requires attention to contexts – that is, the inner and outer contexts as outlined in the previous unit. The nature of the design, and the range of factors to be taken into account when attempting this design, is a matter of some debate. The skill involved in making these decisions may be a matter of good judgement – an essential quality for a competent strategist in HR. Some analysts rec – ommend an approach which amounts to a ‘design’ or ‘decision science’ (Boudreau and Ramstad 2009) with an associated emphasis on systematic concepts, frameworks and measurement, while others lean more towards an approach based on aspects of leadership and social intelligence. Why is SHRM important? The arguments relating to the importance of SHRM tend to be constructed around the claim that ‘people make the difference’. The point being made here is that other resources are available and purchasable (capital, new plant, and new equipment, etc.) on a relatively open market, but it is the Mapping the field of SHRM 11 creative utilisation of these resources and ideas by people (singularly and in combination) which lies at the root of creating a competitive advantage. These arguments are in some ways similar to those that stress the importance of the resource-based view or of the role of knowledge and the importance of organization capability (Ulrich 1997; Ulrich and Smallwood 2004) or ‘dynamic capability’ (Teece et al. 1997). Dynamic capability was defined by Teece et al. as a ‘firm’s ability to integrate, build and reconfigure internal and external competences to address rapidly changing environments’ (1997, p. 516). It suggests that intangible assets, including the knowledge and skills of the workforce, can be configured so that traditional routines do not hamper responses to rapidly changing environments. Instead, more flex – ible, meta-routines can be created which enable organisations to be capable of a higher state of responsiveness to inherently unpredictable forces. Failure to attract, retain and motivate the right numbers and right kinds of people mean that opportunities are missed and that other resources are wasted. In general, the available studies appear to reveal impressive evidence of robust impacts and outcomes (for example, Huselid 1995; Becker and Gerhart 1996; Ichniowski et al. 1997; Becker and Huselid 1998; Ichniowski and Shaw 1999). An influential idea has been that appropriate ‘bundles’ of HR practices make the real difference (MacDuffie 1995). These classic studies were mainly conducted in the USA and in the mid-1990s. They sug – gest that those firms which used ‘bundles’ of HR interventions were more likely, on a statistical basis, to enjoy better financial performance. This issue of the links between policies and performance outcomes are explored more fully in Chapter 2. The importance of dynamic capabilities and a strategic mind-set in an innovation-oriented economy heightens the need to attend to the man – agement of human resources and other intangible assets (Davenport and Leibold 2006). And resource-based theories suggest that sustainable com – petitive advantage stems from unique bundles of resources that competitors cannot, or find extremely hard to, imitate (Wernerfelt 1984; Barney 1991). Ironically, it has tended to be economists and others who have argued the case that human assets in particular can fulfil this criterion (Polanyi 1966; Davenport and Leibold 2006; Teece et al. 1997). Such accumulating evi – dence has helped advance the idea of ‘human capital’ management. Contingency models and frameworks In contrast to the best practice models considered in the previous sec – tion, contingency models of SHRM are based on the premise that what is required is a skilful alignment between HR policies and various 12 Mapping the field of SHRM organisational and contextual characteristics. Thus, best fit approaches can be located within this category. The word ‘contingency’ here refers to those theories which explain organisational behaviours and outcomes as highly dependent on some inner or outer environmental variable such as country, technology, organisational size or industry type or the fit with a particular business strategy. In some versions of contingency theory (the more deterministic ones) the interpretation would seem to chal – lenge the idea of strategic choice. In less deterministic versions, strategic choice occurs when HR policies and practices uniquely align to a particular business strategy. Types of contingency frameworks Below we summarise three main types of contingency model which link HR strategy to different ways of thinking about context (environment). The three types are: linking SHRM to business strategy; linking SHRM to busi – ness life-cycle; linking SHRM to strategy and structure. Linking SHRM to business strategy It is sometimes argued that an HR approach is only ‘strategic’ if it ‘fits’ with the organisation’s product–market strategy and if it is proactive in this regard. Most of the theorists in this category draw on Porter’s distinction between innovation, quality-enhancement or cost-reduction strategies (e.g., Schuler and Jackson 1987, or Miles and Snow 1984). For example, Schuler and Jackson (1987) suggest that where a firm has opted for innovation as a means to gain competitive advantage, this sets up certain predictable required patterns of behaviour. Prime among these req – uisite ‘role behaviours’ are creativity, a capacity and willingness to focus on longer-term goals, a relatively high level of collaborative action, a high tolerance of ambiguity and a high degree of readiness to take risks. Linking SHRM to business life-cycle The business life-cycle approach essentially seeks to tailor human resource policy choices to the varying requirements of a firm at different stages of its life-cycle, i.e., from business start-up, through early growth and maturity, and eventually on to business decline. At each stage a busi – ness might be hypothesised to have different priorities. These different priorities, in turn, require their own appropriate human resource strate – gies. There are a number of examples of the life cycle or ‘stages’ approach Mapping the field of SHRM 13 (Lengnick-Hall and Lengnick-Hall 1988; Kochan and Barocci 1985; Baird and Meshoulam 1988). Kochan and Barocci (1985) and others suggest that, at the start-up stage, new enterprises require recruitment and selection strategies that quickly attract the best talent; reward strategies that support this by paying highly competitive rates; training and development strategies that build the foundations for the future; and employee relations strategies that draw the basic architecture and put in place the underlying philosophy for the new business. Under mature conditions, the emphasis in HRM is upon control and maintenance of costs and resources. Hence, the recruitment and selection stance might be geared to a gradual introduction of new blood into vacant positions created by retirements. There might also be a policy of encour – aging enough labour turnover so as to minimise the need for compulsory lay-offs. Meanwhile, the pay and benefits policy is likely to be geared to a keen control over costs. Training and development might be expected to have the maintenance of flexibility and the adequate provision of skill levels in an ageing workforce as their priority. Linking SHRM to organizational strategy and structure The most noted example of the strategy/structure linkage of contingency theory is the work of Fombrun et al. (1984). Their model shows a range of ‘appropriate’ HR choices suited to five different strategy/structure types, ranging from single product businesses with functional structures, through diversified product strategies allied to multi-divisional organisational forms, and on to multi-product companies operating globally. For each of the five types of situation, the key HR policy choices in the spheres of selection, appraisal, reward and development, are delineated. For instance, the HRM strategy of a company following a single-product strategy with an associated functional structure is likely to be traditional in appearance. Selection and appraisal may well be conducted in a subjective fashion, and reward and development practices may veer to the unsystem – atic and paternalistic. By way of contrast, a company pursuing a diversification strategy and operating with a multi-divisional structure, is likely to be characterised by a HR strategy driven by impersonal, systematic devices which are adaptable to the different parts of the organisation. Reward systems are likely to be formula-based with a tendency towards a focus on return on investment and profitability. Selection, and even appraisal, may be found to vary between the different constituent business divisions. 14 Mapping the field of SHRM Summary This chapter has summarised the key aspects of strategic human resource management: • What is it and what does it look like? • What were its antecedents? • Why is it important? • What kind of performance outcomes have been found? • What are the main theories and frameworks? Key issues include: • That strategy can be emergent as well as planned. Either way, it can be assessed and evaluated in terms of its efficacy and appropriateness to labour and product market conditions. • Ad hoc decisions and responses which lack consistency may risk inef – ficiencies and waste. • HR strategy normally has to validate itself in terms of its contribution to the wider organisational mission. This does not necessarily mean simply following in an unquestioning way the lead taken by other directors in operations and marketing – it may be that a resource-based approach requires a HR strategy which is distinctive. In the next chapter we assess the body of research which has tried to clarify the performance outcomes arising from the deployment of strategic human resource practices. These outcomes may be behavioural in the sense, for example, of higher employee commitment or firm outcomes in the shape of higher productivity or even higher profitability. Note 1 WERS is the acronym for the highly-respected Workplace Employment Relations Surveys in the UK. Results during the 1980s and 1990s showed very low take-up of the term ‘Human Resource Management’. References Abbot, A. (1988). The System of Professions: An Essay on the Division of Expert Labor . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Abernathy, W. J. (1978). The Productivity Dilemma . Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Abowd, J. M., Kramarz, F. & Margolis, D. (1999). ‘High wage workers and high wage firms’. Econometrica , 67(2): 251–333. Mapping the field of SHRM 15 Adams L. (2016). ‘Kissing goodbye to Ulrich: Next generation HR organisation design’. Disruptive HR . Available at: http://disruptivehr.co.uk/2016/05/10/kissing- goodbye-to-ulrich/ (Accessed: January 2, 2019). Aguinis, H. & O’Boyle, E. (2014). ‘Star performers in twenty-first century organi – zations’. Personnel Psychology , 67: 313–350. Alvaredo, F., Chancel, L., Piketty, T., Saez, E. & Zucman, G. (2018). World Inequality Report 2018 . Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Andriopoulos, C. & Lewis, M. W. (2009). ‘Exploitation-exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: Managing paradoxes of innovation’. Organization Science , 20: 696–717. Angrave. D., Charlwood, A., Kirkpatrick, I., Lawrence, M. & Stuart, M. (2016). ‘HR and analytics: Why HR is set to fail the big data challenge’. Human Resource Management Journal , 26(1): 1–11. Appelbaum, E., Bailey, T., Berg, P. & Kalleberg, A. (2000). Manufacturing Advantage: Why High-Performance Work Systems Pay Off . Ithaca, NY: ILR Press. Argote, L. & Miron-Spektor, E. (2011). ‘Organizational learning: From experience to knowledge’. Organization Science , 22(5): 1123–1137. Argyris, C. & Schon, D. (1981). Organizational Learning . Reading, MA: Addison- Wesley. Arnold, J. (1997). Managing Careers in the 21st Century . London: Paul Chapman. Arthur, J. B. (1992). ‘The link between business strategy and industrial relations systems in American steel minimills’. Industrial and Labor Relations Review , 45: 488–506 Arthur, J. B. (1994). ‘Effects of human resource systems on manufacturing performance and turnover’. Academy of Management Journal , 37(3): 670–687. Arthur, M. B. & Rousseau, D. M. (1996). The Boundaryless Career: A New Employment Principle for a New Organizational Era . Oxford: Oxford University Press. Atkins, A. (2018). Inequality: What Can Be Done? Boston: Harvard University Press. Autor, D., Dorn, D., Katz, L. F., Patterson, C. & Van Reenen, J. (2017). The Fall of the Labor Share and the Rise of Superstar Firms . Boston, MA: MIT. Baird, L. & Meshoulam, I. (1988). ‘Managing two fits of strategic human resource management’. Academy of Management Review , 13(1): 116–128. Barney, J. (1991). ‘Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage’. Journal of Management , 17(1): 99–120. Barney, J. & Wright, P. (1998). ‘On becoming a strategic partner: Examining the role of human resources in gaining competitive advantage’. Human Resource Management Journal , 37(1): 31–46. Batt, R. (2002). ‘Managing customer services: Human resource practices, quit rates, and sales growth’. Academy of Management Journal , 45(3): 587–597. Batt, R. & Appelbaum, E. (2013). The Impact of Financialization on Management and Employment Outcomes . Kalamazoo, MI: Upjohn Institute. Batt, R., Holman, D. & Holtgrew, U. (2009). ‘The globalization of service work: Comparative institutional perspectives on call centres’. Industrial and Labor Relations Review , 62(4): 453–488. Beaudry, P., Green, D. A. & Sand, B. M. (2016). ‘The great reversal in the demand for skill and cognitive tasks’. Journal of Labor Economics , 34(S1): 199–247. 16 Mapping the field of SHRM Becker, B. & Gerhart, B. (1996). ‘The impact of human resource management on organizational performance: Progress and prospects’. Academy of Management Journal , 39(4): 779–801. Becker, B. & Huselid, M. (1998). ‘High performance work systems and firm perfor – mance: A synthesis of research and managerial implications’. Research in Personnel and Human Resources , 16(1): 53–101. Becker, B. E. & Huselid, M. A. (2006). ‘Strategic human resources management: Where do we go from here?’ Journal of Management , 32(6): 898–925. Becker, G. (1964). Human Capital Theory . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Beckhard, R. & Harris, R. T. (1987). Organizational Transitions: Managing Complex Change (2nd edition). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Beechler, S. & Woodward, I. (2009). ‘The global war for talent’. Journal of International Management , 15: 273–285. Beer, M., Spector, B., Lawrence, P., Mills, D & Walton, R. (1985). Human Resources Management: A General Managers Perspective . New York: Free Press. Beltrán-Martín, I., Roca-Puig, V., Escrig-Tena, A. & Bou-Llusar, J. C. (2008). ‘Human resource flexibility as a mediating variable between high performance work systems and performance’. Journal of Management , 34(5): 1009–1044. Bender, S., Bloom, N., Card, D., Van Reenen, J. & Wolter, S. (2018). ‘Management practices, workforce selection and productivity’. Journal of Labor Economics , 36(S1): 371–409. Benner, M. J. & Tushman, M. L. (2003). ‘Exploitation, exploration and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited’. Academy of Management Review , 28: 238–256. Bersin, J. (2016). ‘The HR software market reinvents itself’. Forbes . July 18. Bessa, I. & Tomlinson, J. (2017). ‘Established, accelerated and emergent themes in flexible work research’. Journal of Industrial Relations , 59(2): 153–169. Bhattacharya, M., Gibson, D. E. & Doty, D. H. (2005). ‘The effects of flexibility in employee skills, employee behaviors, and human resource practices on firm performance’. Journal of Management , 31(4): 622–640. Birkinshaw, J. & Gibson, C. (2004). ‘Building ambidexterity into an organization’. MIT Sloan Management Review , Summer: 47–55. Blau, G. J. (1986). ‘Job involvement and organizational commitment as interactive predictors of tardiness and absenteeism’. Journal of Management , 12: 577–584. Blau, P. (1964) Exchange and Power in Social Life . New York: Wiley. Bloodworth, J. (2018). Hired: Six Months Undercover in Low Wage Britain . London: Atlantic Books. Bloom, N. & Van Reenen, J. (2007). ‘Measuring and explaining management prac – tices across firms and countries’. The Quarterly Journal of Economics , 122(4): 1351–1408. Bloom, N., Sadun, R. & Van Reenen, J. (2012). ‘Does management really work?’ Harvard Business Review , November: 77–82. Boudreau, J. & Ramstad, P. (2005). ‘Talentship, talent segmentation and sustain – ability: A new HR decision science paradigm for a new strategy definition’. Human Resource Management , 44(2): 129–136. Mapping the field of SHRM 17 Boudreau, J. W. & Ramstad, P. M. (2009). ‘Beyond HR: Extending the paradigm through a talent decision science’. In Storey, J., Wright, P. M. & Ulrich, D., The Routledge Companion to Strategic Human Resource Management . Abingdon, UK, and New York: Routledge. Bowen, D. E. & Ostroff, C. (2004). ‘Understanding HRM-firm performance link – ages: The role of the “strength” of the HRM system’. Academy of Management Review , 29(2): 203–221. Boxall, P., Purcell, J. & Wright, P. M. (2008). ‘Human resource management: Scope, analysis, and significance’. In Boxall, P., Purcell, J. & Wright, P. M. (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Human Resource Management . Oxford: Oxford University Press. Boyatzis, R. (1982). The Competent Manager: A Model for Effective Performance . New York: Wiley. Bracken, D., Church, A., Fleenor, J. & Rose, D. (eds) (2018). The Handbook of Strategic 360 Feedback . Oxford: Oxford University Press. Brennecke, J. & Stoemmer, N. (2018). ‘The network-performance relationship in knowledge-intensive contexts: Meta-analysis and cross-level comparison’. Human Resource Management , 57(1): 11–36. Brockbank, T., Ulrich, D., Kryscynski, D. & Ulrich, M. (2018). ‘The future of HR and information capability’. Strategic HR Review , 17(1): 3–10, doi: 10.1108/ SHR-11-2017-0080. Brown, S. & Eisenhardt, K. (1998). Competing on the Edge: Strategy as Structured Chaos . Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Brueller, N. N., Carmeli, A. & Markman, G. D. (2018). ‘Linking merger and acquisition strategies to postmerger integration: A configurational perspective of human resource management’. Journal of Management , 44(5): 1793–1818. doi: 10.1177/0149206315626270. Available at: http://pure-oai.bham.ac.uk/ws/ files/25087153/Brueller_Carmeli_Markman_2015_Linking_M_A_strategies_ Journal_Management.pdf (Accessed: January 2, 2019). Caldwell, R. (2003). ‘The changing roles of personnel managers: Old ambiguities, new uncertainties’. Journal of Management Studies , 40(4): 983–1004. Cappelli, P. & Keller, J. (2013). ‘Classifying work in the new economy’. Academy of Management Review , 38(4): 575–596. Cappelli, P. & Neumark, D. (2001). ‘Do “high-performance” work practices improve establishment-level outcomes?’ Industrial & Labor Relations Review , 54(4): 737–775. Cascio, W. & Boudreau, J. (2011). Investing in People: The Financial Impact of Human Resource Initiatives . Upper Saddle, NJ: Pearson. Chadwick, C. & Li, P. (2018). ‘HR systems, HR departments, and perceived establish – ment labor productivity’. Human Resource Management , 57(6): 1415–1428. doi: 10.1002/ hrm.21914. Chadwick, C., Way, S. A., Kerr, G. & Thacker, J. W. (2013). ‘Boundary conditions of the high-investment human resource systems: Small-firm labor productivity relationship. Personnel Psychology , 66: 311–343. Chambers, E. G., Foulon, M., Handfield-Jones, H., Hankin, S. M. & Michaels, E. G. (1998). ‘The war for talent’. McKinsey Quarterly , 3: 44–57. 18 Mapping the field of SHRM Chandler, A. (1962). Strategy and Structure . Boston, MA: MIT Press. Chang, S., Gong, Y., Way, S. A. & Jia, L. (2013). ‘Flexibility-oriented HRM sys – tems, absorptive capacity, and market responsiveness and firm innovativeness’. Journal of Management , 39(7): 1924–1951. Chuang, C. H., Jackson, S. E. & Jiang, Y. (2016). ‘Can knowledge-intensive team – work be managed? Examining the roles of HRM systems, leadership, and tacit knowledge’. Journal of Management . 42(2): 524–554. Chuang, C. H. & Liao, H. (2010). ‘Strategic human resource management in service context: Taking care of business by taking care of employees and customers’. Personnel Psychology , 63(1): 153–196. CIPD (2010). ‘The CIPD professional map’. Available at: www.cipd.co.uk/cipd-hr- profession/hr-profession-map/professional-areas/ (Accessed: January 2, 2019). CIPD (2014). ‘HRM business partnering’. Available at: www.cipd.co.uk/hr- resources/factsheets/hr-business-partnering.aspx (Accessed: January 2, 2019). CIPD Factsheet (2017). ‘Strategic human resource management’. Available at: www.cipd.co.uk/knowledge/strategy/hr/strategic-hrm-factsheet#6744 (Accessed: January 2, 2019). Clegg, H. (1979). The System of Industrial Relations in Great Britain . Oxford: Blackwell. Coff, R. W. (1999). ‘When competitive advantage doesn’t lead to performance: The resource-based view and stakeholder bargaining power’. Organization Science , 10(2): 119–133. Collins, C. J. & Clark, K. D. (2003). ‘Strategic human resource practices, top management team social networks, and firm performance: The role of human resource practices in creating organizational competitive advantage’. Academy of Management Journal , 46(6): 740–751. Collins, C. J. & Kehoe, R. R. (2009). ‘Recruitment and selection’. In Storey, J., Wright, P. M. & Ulrich, D., The Routledge Companion to Strategic Human Resource Management . London and New York: Routledge. Combs, J., Liu, Y., Hall, A. & Ketchen, D. (2006). ‘How much do high-performance work practices matter? A meta-analysis of their effects on organizational perfor – mance’. Personnel Psychology , 59(3): 501–528. Conway, E., Fu, N., Monks, K., Alfes, K. & Bailey, C. (2016). ‘Demands or resources? The relationship between HR practices, employee engagement, and emotional exhaustion within a hybrid model of employment relations’. Human Resource Management , 55(5): 901–917. Cook, H., MacKenzie, R. & Forde, C. (2016). ‘HRM and performance: The vul – nerability of soft HRM practices during recession and retrenchment’. Human Resource Management Journal , 26(4): 557–571. Cowling, A. & Walters, M. (1990). ‘Manpower planning: Where are we today?’ Personnel Review , 19(3): 3–8. Davenport, T., Leibold, M. & Voelpel, F. C. (2006). Strategic Management in the Innovation Economy . New York: Wiley. Davenport, T. & Prusak, L. (1998). Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know . Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Dawson, J. & West, M. (2018). Employee Engagement, Sickness Absence and Agency Spend in NHS . London: NHS England and The King’s Fund. Mapping the field of SHRM 19 De Vos, A. & Bart Cambré, B. (2017). ‘Career management in high-performing organizations: A set-theoretic approach’. Human Resource Management Journal , 56(3): 501–518. Deery, S., Rayton, B., Walsh, J. & Kinnie, N. (2017). ‘The costs of exhibiting organ – izational citizenship behavior’. Human Resource Management Journal , 56(6): 1039–1049. Delery, J. E. & Doty, D. H. (1996). ‘Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource management: Tests of universalistic, contingency, and configurational perfor – mance predictions’. Academy of Management Journal , 39(4): 802–835. Delery, J. E. & Shaw, J. D. (2001). ‘The strategic management of people in work organizations: Review, synthesis, and extension’. Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management , 20: 165–197. Deloitte (2011). Business Driven HR: Unlock the Value of HR Business Partners . London: Deloitte. Available at: www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/ie/ Documents/People/Unlocking_the_value_of_HR_Business_Partners_High_ Res.pdf (Accessed: January 2, 2019). Doeringer, P. B. & Piore, M. J. (1975). Internal Labor Markets and Manpower Analysis . New York: Heath Lexington. Dunlop, J. T. (1958). Industrial Relations Systems . New York: Henry Holt. Dyer, L. (1985). ‘Strategic human resources management and planning’. Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management , 3(1): 30. Easterby-Smith, M., Lyles M. A. & Peteraf, M. A. (2009). ‘Dynamic capabili – ties: Current debates and future directions’. British Journal of Management , 20(Special Issue): S1–S8. The Economist (2018) ‘American firms reveal the gulf between bosses’ and work – ers’ pay’. May 29. Edwards, R. (1979). Contested Terrain: The Transformation of the Workplace in the Twentieth Century . London: Heinemann. Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S. & Sowa, D. (1986). ‘Perceived organizational support’. Journal of Applied Psychology , 71: 500–507. Eisenhardt, K. M. & Martin, J. A. (2000). ‘Dynamic capabilities: What are they?’ Strategic Management Journal , 21: 1105–1121. Fitz-Enz, J. (2009). The ROI of Human Capital . New York: AMACOM. Fitz-Enz, J. (2010). The New HR Analytics . New York: AMACOM. Flanagan, F. (2017). ‘Symposium on work in the gig economy’. The Economic and Labour Relations Review , 28(3): 378–381. Flanders, A. (1964). The Fawley Productivity Agreements . London: Faber. Flanders, A. (1970). Managers and Unions: The Theory and Reform of Industrial Relations . London: Faber. Fombrun, C. J., Tichy, N. M. & Devanna, M. A. (1984). Strategic Human Resource Management . New York: Wiley. Fox, A. (1974). Beyond Contract: Work, Power and Trust Relations . London: Faber. Gardner, T., Wright, P. M. & Moynihan, T. M. (2011). ‘The impact of motivation, empowerment, and skill-enhancing practices on aggregate voluntary turnover: The mediating effect of collective affective commitment’. Personnel Psychology , 64(2): 315–350. 20 Mapping the field of SHRM Gerhart, B. (2007). ‘Modeling HRM and performance linkages’. In Boxall, P., Purcell, J. & Wright, P. M. (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Human Resource Management . Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gerhart, B. (2009). ‘Compensation’. In Storey, J., Wright, P. M. & Ulrich, D. (eds), The Routledge Companion to Strategic Human Resource Management . London and New York: Routledge. Gerhart, B. & Fang, M. (2005). ‘National culture and human resource management: Assumptions and evidence’. International Journal of Human Resource Management , 16(6): 971–986. Gerhart, B., Wright, P. M & McMahan, G. (2000). ‘Measurement error in research on the human resources and firm performance relationship: Further evidence and analysis’. Personnel Psychology , 53: 855˗872. Gerhart, B., Wright, P. M., McMahan, G. C. & Snell, S. A. (2000). ‘Measurement error in research on human resources and firm performance: How much error is there and how does it influence effect size estimates?’ Personnel Psychology , 53(4): 803–834. Gibson, C. B. & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). ‘The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity’. Academy of Management Journal , 47: 209–226. Giles, W. F. & Findley, H. M. (1997). ‘Procedural fairness in performance appraisal’. Journal of Business , 11: 493–506. Glaister, A. J. (2014). ‘HR outsourcing: The impact on HR role, competency develop – ment and relationships’. Human Resource Management Journal , 24(2): 211–226. Glaister, A. J., Karacay, G., Demirbag, M. & Tatoglu, E. (2018). ‘HRM and performance: The role of talent management as a transmission mechanism in an emerging market context’. Human Resource Management Journal , 28: 146–166. Graham, M., Lehdonvirta, V. & Wood, A. (2017). The Risks and Rewards of Online Gig Work at the Global Margins . Oxford: Oxford Internet Institute. Grant, R. (1991). ‘The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: Implications for strategy formation’. California Management Review , 34 (Spring): 114–135. Greenhouse, S. (2009). The Big Squeeze: Tough Times for the American Worker . New York: Anchor Books. Groen, B. C., Wilderom, P. M. & Wouters, M. J. F. (2017). ‘High job perfor – mance through co-developing performance measures with employees’. Human Resource Management , 56(1): 11–32. Guest, D. & Bos-Nehles, A. (2014). ‘HRM and performance: The role of effective implementation’. In Paauwe, J., Guest, D. E. & Wright, P. M. (eds), HRM and Performance: Achievements and Challenges , London: Wiley. Guest, D. & MacKenzie-Davey, K. (1996). ‘Don’t write off the traditional career’. People Management , February: 22–25. Guest, D. E. (2011). ‘Human resource management and performance: Still searching for some answers’. Human Resource Management Journal , 21(1): 3–13. Guest, D. E., Bos-Nehles, A. C., Paauwe, J. & Wright, P. (2013). ‘HRM and perfor – mance: The role of effective implementation’. In Guest, D., Paauwe, J. & Wright, P.M. (eds), HRM and Performance: Achievements and Challenges , 79–96. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. Mapping the field of SHRM 21 Guest, D. E., Michie, J., Conway, N. & Sheehan, M. (2003). ‘Human resource manage – ment and corporate performance in the UK’. British Journal of Industrial Relations , 41(2): 291–314. Guest, D. E., Wright, P., Paauwe, J. (eds) (2013), HRM and Performance: Achievements and Challenges . Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell. Guthridge, M., Komm, A. & Lawson, E. (2008). ‘Making talent a strategic priority’. McKinsey Quarterly , 1: 49–59. Haggerty, J. J. & Wright, P. M. (2010). ‘Strong situations and firm performance: A proposed reconceptualization of the role of the HR function’. In Wilkinson, A., Bacon, N., Redman, T. & Snell, S., The Sage Handbook of Human Resource Management . London: Sage. Hall, P. A. & Soskice, D. (2001). Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage . Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hammonds, K. H. (2005) Why We Hate HR . Boston, MA: Fast Company. Hao, Z. & Liden, R. C. (2011). ‘Internships’. Journal of Applied Psychology , 96(1): 221–229. Harris, C. Wright, P. & McMahan, G. (2018). ‘The emergence of human capital: Roles of social capital and coordination that drive unit performance’. Human Resource Management Journal , doi: 10.1111/1748-8583.12212. Hauff, S., Alewell, D. & Hansen, N. (2014). ‘HRM systems between control and commitment: Occurrence, characteristics, and effects on HRM outcomes and firm performance’. Human Resource Management Journal , 24(4): 424–441. Hauff, S., Alewell, D. & Hansen, N. K. (2017). ‘HRM system strength and HRM target achievement: Toward a broader understanding of HRM processes’. Human Resource Management , 56(5): 715–729. Helpman, E. (2018). Globalization and Inequality . Boston: Harvard University Press. Henseke, G., Felstead, A., Gallie, D. & Green, F. (2018). Skills Trends at Work in Britain First Findings from the Skills and Employment Survey 2017 . London: Centre for Learning and Life Chances in Knowledge Economies and Societies, UCL Institute of Education. Hodgson, D., Gleadle, P. & Storey, J. (2012). ‘“The ground beneath my feet”: Projects, project management and the intensified control of R&D engineers’. New Technology, Work & Employment , 27(3): 163–177. Hofstede, G. (1993). ‘Cultural constraints in management theories’. Academy of Management Executive , 7: 81–94, doi: 10.5465/ame.1993.9409142061. Holland, P., Cooper, B. & Sheehan, C. (2017). ‘Employee voice, supervisor sup – port, and engagement: The mediating role of trust HRM’. Human Resource Management , 56(6): 915–929. Holley, N. (2016). ‘Part 1: HR business partnering: Ulrich 20 years on’. Changeboard . Available at: www.changeboard.com/content/5508/part-1-hr-business-partnering- ulrich-20-years-on/ (Accessed: January 2, 2019). Holzer, H. J., Lane, J. I. & Vilhuber, L. (2004). ‘Escaping low earnings: The role of employer characteristics and changes’. Industrial and Labor Relations Review , 57(4): 560–578. 22 Mapping the field of SHRM Homans, G. (1961). Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms . New York: Harcourt Brace. Hong, Y., Jiang, Y., Liao, H. & Sturman, M. C. (2017). ‘High performance work systems for service quality: Boundary conditions and influence processes’. Human Resource Management , 56(4): 747–767. Huselid, M. (1995). ‘The impact of human resource management practices on turno – ver, productivity, and corporate financial performance’. Academy of Management Journal , 38(3): 635–672. Huselid, M. A. (2018). ‘The science and practice of workforce analytics: Introduction to the HRM special issue’. Human Resource Management , 57: 679–684 Ichniowski, C. & Shaw, K. (1999). ‘The effects of human resource management systems on economic performance’. Management Science , 45: 704–720. Ichniowski, C., Shaw, K. & Prenushi, G. (1997). ‘The effects of HRM practices on productivity: A study of steel finishing lines’. American Economic Review , 87(3): 291–313. Ignjatovic, M. & Svetlik, I. (2003). ‘European HRM Clusters’. EBS Review , Fall: 25–39. Ingham, J. & Ulrich, D. (2016). ‘Building better HR departments’. Strategic HR Review , 15(3): 129–136. Jensen, M. C. & Meckling, W. (1976). ‘Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure’. Journal of Financial Economics , 3: 305–360. Jiang, K., Lepak, D. P., Hu, J. & Baer, J. C. (2012). ‘How does human resource management influence organizational outcomes? A meta-analytic investigation of mediating mechanisms’. Academy of Management Journal , 55(6): 1264–1294. John, S. & Bjorkman, I. (2015). ‘In the eyes of the beholder: The HRM capabili – ties of the HR function as perceived by managers and professionals’. Human Resource Management Journal , 25(4): 424–442. Johnson, G. (2004). ‘To outsource or not to outsource. . .That is the question’. Training , 41: 26–29. Kalleberg, A. (2013). Good Jobs, Bad Jobs: The Rise of Polarized and Precarious Employment Systems in the United States, 1970s–2000s . New York: Russel Sage Foundation. Kalleberg, A. (2018). Precarious Lives: Job Insecurity and Well-Being in Rich Democracies . Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Kang, S.-C., Oldroyd, J. B., Morris, S. & Kim, J. (2018). ‘Reading the stars: Determining human capital’s value in the hiring process’. Human Resource Management , 57: 55–64. Karabarbounis, L. & Neiman, B. (2013). ‘The global decline of the labor share’. NBER Working Paper No. 19136 , Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Katz, L. F. & Krueger, A. B. (2016). The Rise and Nature of Alternative Work Arrangements in the United States, 1995–2015 . Boston, MA: Harvard University. Katz, L. F. & Krueger, A. B. (2017). ‘The role of unemployment in the rise in alterna – tive work arrangements’. American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings , 107(5): 388–392. Mapping the field of SHRM 23 Kaufman, B. E. (2015). ‘Evolution of strategic HRM as seen through two found – ing books: A 30th anniversary perspective on development of the field’. Human Resource Management , 54(3): 389–407. Kaufman, B. E. & Miller, B. I. (2011). ‘The firm’s choice of HRM practices: Economics meets strategic human resource management’. Industrial and Labor Relations Review , 64(3): 526–557. Kelly, J. & Gennard, J. (2007). ‘Business strategic decision making: The role and influence of directors’. Human Resource Management Journal , 17(2): 99–117. Ketchen, D. J., Crook, T. R., Todd, S. Y., Combs, J. G. & Woehr, D. J. (2015). ‘Managing human capital: A meta-analysis of links among human resource prac – tices and systems, human capital, and performance’. In Hitt, M. A., Jackson, S. E., Carmona, S., Bierman, L., Shaley C., & Wright, P. M. (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Strategy Implementation . New York: Oxford University Press. Ketkar, S. & Sett, P. K. (2009). ‘HR flexibility and firm performance: Analysis of a multi-level causal model’. The International Journal of Human Resource Management , 20(5): 1009–1038. Ketkar, S. & Sett, P. K. (2010). ‘Environmental dynamism, human resource flexibility, and firm performance: Analysis of a multi-level causal model’. The International Journal of Human Resource Management , 21(8): 1173–1206. Khurana, R. (2002). ‘The curse of the ‘superstar’ CEO’. Harvard Business Review , September: 3–8. Kilroy, S., Flood, P. C., Bosak, J. & Chênevert, D. (2017). ‘Perceptions of high-involvement work practices, person-organization fit, and burnout: A time- lagged study of health care employees’. Human Resource Management , 56(5): 821–835. Kluger, A. N. & DeNisi, A. (1998). ‘Feedback interventions: Towards understanding of a double-edged sword’. Current Directions in Psychological Science , 7: 67–72. Kochan, T. & Barocci, T. (1985). Human Resource Management and Industrial Relations . Boston, MA: Little Brown. Kochan, T., Katz, H. & McKersie, R. (1986). The Transformation of American Industrial Relations . New York: Basic Books. Kochan, T. & Osterman, P. (1994). The Mutual Gains Enterprise . Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Kruse, D. L. (1993). Profit Sharing: Does it Make a Difference? Kalamazoo, MI: Upjohn Institute. Kruse, D. L., Freeman, R. B. & Blasi, R. J. (eds) (2010). Shared Capitalism at Work: Employee Ownership, Profit and Gain Sharing, and Broad-Based Stock Options . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Kryscynski, D., Reeves, C., Stice-Lusvardi, R., Ulrich, M. & Russell, G. (2018). ‘Analytical abilities and the performance of HR professionals’. Human Resource Management , 57(3): 715–738. Kryscynski, D. & Ulrich, D. (2015). ‘Making strategic human capital relevant: A time- sensitive opportunity’. Academy of Management Perspectives , 29: 357–369. Lado, A. A. & Wilson, M. C. (1994). ‘Human resource systems and sustained com – petitive advantage: A competency-based perspective’. Academy of Management Review , 19(4): 699–727. 24 Mapping the field of SHRM Lahteenmaki, S., Storey, J. & Vanhala, S. (1986). ‘HRM and company performance: The use of measurement and the influence of economic cycles’. Human Resource Management Journal , 8(2): 51–65. Langevin-Heavey, A., Beijer, S. E., Federman, J., Hermans, M., Klein, F., Mcclean, E. & Martinson, B. (2013). ‘Measurement of human resource practices: Issues regarding scale, scope, source and substantive content’. In Paauwe, J., Guest, D. E. & Wright, P. M. (eds), HRM and Performance: Achievements and Challenges , 129–148. London: Wiley. Lawler, E. E. III (2005). ‘From human resource management to organization effec – tiveness’. Human Resource Management , 44(2): 699–727. Lawler, E. E. III & Boudreau, J. W. (2009). Achieving Excellence in Human Resources Management: An Assessment of Human Resource Functions . Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Lawler, E. E. III & Boudreau, J. W. (2012). Effective Human Resource Management: A Global Analysis . Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Lawler E. E. III & Boudreau J. W. (2015). Global Trends in Human Resource Management: A Twenty-Year Analysis . Redwood City, CA: Stanford University Press. Lawler, E., Ulrich, D., Fitz-enz, J., Madden, J. & Maruca. R. (2004). Human Resources Business Process Outsourcing: Transforming How HR Work Gets Done . San Francisco, CA: Josey Bass. Lazear, E. P. (2000). ‘Performance pay and productivity’. American Economic Review , 90: 1346–1361. Lengnick-Hall, C. A. & Lengnick-Hall, M. L. (1988). ‘Strategic human resources management: A review of the literature and a proposed typology’. Academy of Management Review , 13(3): 454–470. Lepak, D. P., Liao, H., Chung, Y. & Harden, E. E. (2006). ‘A conceptual review of human resource management systems in strategic human resource management research’. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management , 25(1): 217–271. Lepak, D. P. & Snell, S. (1999). ‘The human resource architecture: Towards a theory of human capital allocation and development’. Academy of Management Review , 24: 31–48. Lepak, D. P. & Snell, S. A. (2002). ‘Examining the human resource architecture: The relationships among human capital, employment, and human resource con – figurations’. Journal of Management , 28(4): 517–543. Lepak, D. A. & Snell, S. A. (2003). Managing the Human Resource Architecture for Knowledge-based competition . San Francisco. CA: Jossey Bass. Lepak, D. P., Takeuchi, R. & Snell, S. A. (2003). ‘Employment flexibility and firm performance: Examining the interactive effects of employment mode, environ – mental dynamism and technological intensity’. Journal of Management , 29: 681–703. Lengnick-Hall, C. & Lengnick-Hall, M. (1988). ‘Strategic human resource man – agement: A review of the literature and a proposed typology’. Academy of Management Review , 13(3): 454–470. Mapping the field of SHRM 25 Lengnick-Hall, M. L., Lengnick-Hall, C. A., Andrade, L. S. & Drake, B. (2009). ‘Strategic human resource management: The evolution of the field’. Human Resource Management Review , 19: 64–85. Levinthal, D. & March, J. G. (1993). ‘The myopia of learning’. Strategic Management Journal , 14: 95–112. Lindert, P. H. & Williamson, J. G. (2017). Unequal Gains: American Growth and Inequality Since 1700 , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Locke, E. A. & Feren, D. B. (1980). ‘The relative effectiveness of four methods of motivating employee performance’. In Duncan, K. D. (ed), Changes in Working Life . New York: Wiley. Locke, E. & Latham, G. P. (1990). A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance . New York: Prentice Hall. London Assembly (2016). The Hourglass Economy: An Analysis of London’s Labour Market . London: London Assembly Economy Committee. London, M. & Mone, E. M. (2009). ‘Strategic performance management: Issues and trends’. In Storey, J., Wright P. M. & Ulrich D. (eds), The Routledge Companion to Strategic Human Resource Management . London and New York: Routledge. López-Cotarelo, J. (2018). ‘Line managers and HRM: A managerial discretion per – spective’. Human Resource Management Journal , 28: 255–271. Mabey, C. & Zhao, S. (2016). ‘Managing five paradoxes of knowledge exchange in networked organizations: New priorities for HRM?’ Human Resource Management Journal , 27(1): 39–57. MacDuffie, J. P. (1995). ‘Human resource bundles and manufacturing performance: Organisational logic and flexible production systems in the world auto industry’. Industrial and Labor Relations Review , 48(2): 197–221. March, J. G. (1991). ‘Exploration and exploitation in organisational learning’. Organisation Science , 2(1): 71–87. March, J. G. & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations . New York: Wiley. Marginson, P., Armstrong, P., Edwards, P. & Purcell, J. (1995). ‘Managing labour in the global corporation: A survey-based analysis of multinationals operat – ing in the UK’. International Journal of Human Resource Management , 6(3): 702–719. Mayo, E. (1949). The Social Problems of an Industrial Civilization , London: Routledge. Mayo, A. (1991). Managing Careers . London: Institute of Personnel Management. McIver, D., Lengnick-Hall, C. A. Lengnick-Hall, M. L., Ramachandran, I. (2013). ‘Understanding work and knowledge management from a knowledge-in-practice perspective’. Academy of Management Review , 38(4): 597–620. McLagan, P. A. & Bedrick, D. (1983). ‘Models for excellence: The results of the ASTD training and development competency study’. Training and Development Journal , 37(6): 10–20. Messersmith, J. G., Patel, P. C., Lepak, D. P. & Gould-Williams, J. S. (2011). ‘Unlocking the black box: exploring the link between high-performance work systems and performance’. Journal of Applied Psychology , 96(6): 1105. 26 Mapping the field of SHRM Meuer, J. (2017). ‘Exploring the complementarities within high-performance work systems: A set-theoretic analysis of UK firms’. Human Resource Management , 56(5): 651–672. Milanovic, B. (2018). Global Inequality: A New Approach for the Age of Globalization . Boston: Harvard University Press. Miles, R. E. & Snow, C. C. (1978). Organizational Strategy, Structure, and Process . New York: McGraw-Hill. Miles, R. E. & Snow, C. C. (1985). ‘Designing strategic human resources systems’. Organizational Dynamics , Summer: 36–52. Miles, R. E. & Snow, C. C. (1986). ‘Organizations: New concepts for new forms’. California Management Review , 28(3): 62–73. Miles, R. & Snow, C. C. (1994). Fit, Failure and the Hall of Fame: How Companies Succeed or Fail . New York: Free Press. Milliman, J., Von Glinow, M. & Nathan, M. (1991). ‘Organizational life cycles and international human resource management in multinational companies. Implications for congruence theory’. Academy of Management Review , 16(2): 318–339. Mintzberg, H. (1978). ‘Patterns in strategy formation’. Management Science , 24(9): 934–948. Mintzberg, H., Ahlstrand, B. & Lampel, J. (1998). Strategy Safari . New York: The Free Press. Mintzberg, H. & Lampel, J. (1999). ‘Reflecting on the strategy process’. Sloan Management Review , Spring: 21–30. Mitchell, C. M. & Murray, J. C. (2017). The Changing Workplaces Review: An Agenda for Workplace Rights . Ontario: Ministry of Labour. Nahapiet, J. & Ghoshal, S. (1998). ‘Social capital, intellectual capital and the organizational advantage’. Academy of Management Review , 23(2): 242–266. Ngo, H. Y. & Loi, R. (2008). ‘Human resource flexibility, organizational culture and firm performance: An investigation of multinational firms in Hong Kong’. The International Journal of Human Resource Management , 19(9): 1654–1666. Nishii, L. H., Lepak, D. P. & Schneider, B. (2008). ‘Employee attributions of the “why” of HR practices: Their effects on employee attitudes and behaviors, and customer satisfaction’. Personnel Psychology , 61(3): 503–545. Nishii, L. & Wright, P. (2008). ‘Variability at multiple levels of analysis: Implications for strategic human resource management’. In Smith, D. B., The People Make the Place . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Noe, R. A. & Tews, M. J. (2009). ‘Strategic training and development’. In Storey, J., Wright, P. M. & Ulrich, D. (eds), The Routledge Companion to Strategic Human Resource Management . London and New York: Routledge. Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation . Oxford: Oxford University Press. Olsen, K. M., Sverdrup, T., Nesheim, T. & Kalleberg, A. L. (2016). ‘Multiple foci of commitment in a professional service firm: Balancing complex employment relations’. Human Resource Management Journal , 26(4): 390–407. Osterman, P. (2017). Who Will Care for Us? Long-Term Care and the Long-Term Workforce . New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Mapping the field of SHRM 27 Osterman, P. (2018). ‘In search of the high road: Meaning and evidence’. International Labor Review , 71(1): 3–34. Paauwe, J. & Farndale, E. (2017). Strategy, HRM, and Performance: A Contextual Approach . Oxford: Oxford University Press. Patel, C., Budhwar, P., Witzemann, A. & Katou, A. (2017). ‘HR outsourcing: The impact on HR’s strategic role and remaining in-house HR function’. Journal of Business Research , doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.11.007. Available at: www.researchgate.net/ publication/321215412_HR_outsourcing_The_impact_on_HR%27s_strategic_ role_and_remaining_in-house_HR_function (Accessed: January 2, 2018). Patel, P. C., Messersmith, J. G. & Lepak, D. P. (2013). ‘Walking the tightrope: An assessment of the relationship between high-performance work systems and organi – zational ambidexterity’. Academy of Management Journal , 56(5): 1420–1442. Peteraf, M. A. (1993). ‘The cornerstone of competitive advantage: A resource-based view’. Strategic Management Journal , 14: 179–191. Peters, T. & Waterman, R. (1982). In Search of Excellence . New York: Harper & Row. Pfeffer, J. (1994). Competitive Advantage Through People . Boston, MA: Harvard University Press. Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the 21 st Century . Boston, MA: Harvard University Press. Piore, M. & Schrank, A. (2018). Root Cause Regulation: Protecting Work and Workers in the Twenty First Century . Boston, MA: Harvard University Press. Polanyi, M. (1966). The Tacit Dimension . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive Strategy . New York: Free Press. Posthuma, R. A., Campion, M. C., Masimova, M. & Campion, M. A. (2013). ‘A high performance work practices taxonomy integrating the literature and directing future research’. Journal of Management , 39(5): 1184–1220. Prahalad, C. K. & Hamel, G. (1990). ‘The core competence of the corporation’. Harvard Business Review , 68: 79–88. Purcell, J. (2014). ‘Disengaging from engagement’. Human Resource Management Journal , 25(3): 241–254. Quinn, J. B. (1992). Intelligent Enterprise . New York: Free Press. Rabl, T., Jayasinghe, M., Gerhart, B. & Kuhlmann, T. (2014). ‘A meta-analysis of country differences in the high-performance work system–business performance relationship: The roles of national culture and managerial discretion’. Journal of Applied Psychology , 99(6): 1011–1041. Rasmussen, T. & Ulrich, D. (2015). ‘Learning from practice: How HR analytics avoids becoming a fad’. Organizational Dynamics , 44(3): 236–242. Ready, D. A., Conger, J. A. & Hill, L. A. (2010). ‘Are you a high potential?’ Harvard Business Review , 88(6): 78–84. Roebuck, C. (2015). ‘What follows after Ulrich’s business partner model?’ HR Gazette . Available at: http://hr-gazette.com/what-follows-after-ulrichs-business- partner-model/ (Accessed: January 2, 2019). Rubery, J., Earnshaw, J. & Marchington, M. (2002). ‘Changing organisational forms and the employment relationship’. Journal of Management Studies , 39(5): 645–672. 28 Mapping the field of SHRM Russo, S. D., Miraglia, M. & Borgogni, L. (2017). ‘Reducing organizational politics in performance appraisal: The role of coaching leaders for age-diverse employees’. Human Resource Management Journal , 56(4): 769–783. Sadun, R., Bloom, N. & Van Reenen, J. (2017). ‘Why do we undervalue competent management?’ Harvard Business Review , September-October: 121–127. Salaman, G. & Storey, J. (2016). A Better Way of Doing Business? Lessons from the John Lewis Partnership , Oxford: Oxford University Press. Sanchez, R. (1995). ‘Strategic flexibility in product competition’. Strategic Management Journal , 16(S1): 135–159. Schepker, D. J., Kim, Y., Patel, P. C. & Campion, M. C. (2017). Leadership Quarterly , 28(6): 701–720. Schmidt, J., Pohler, D. & Willness, C. R. (2017). ‘Strategic HR system differentia – tion between jobs: The effects on firm performance and employee outcomes’. Human Resource Management , 57(1): 65–81. Schuler, R. & Jackson, S. (1987). ‘Linking competitive strategies with human resource management practices’. Academy of Management Executive , 1(3): 207–219. Schuler, R., Jackson, S. & Jiang, K. (2014). ‘An aspirational framework for strategic human resource management’. Academy of Management Annals , 8: 1–56. Schuler, R. S., Jackson, S. E. & Storey, J. (2001). ‘HRM and its link with strategic management’. In Storey, J. (ed), Human Resource Management: A Critical Text , 114–130. London: Thomson Learning. Scott-Jackson, W. & Mayo, A. (2017). HR with Purpose: Future Models of HR . Available at: www.henley.ac.uk/hrc (Accessed: January 2, 2019). Seetharaman, D. (April 16, 2018). ‘At Facebook, Median pay tops $240,000’. The Wall Street Journal . Available at: www.wsj.com/articles/at-facebook-median- pay-tops-240-000-1523924535 (Accessed: December 24, 2018). Shipton, H., Sparrow, P., Budhwar, P. & Brown, A. (2016). ‘HRM and innovation: Looking across levels’. Human Resource Management Journal , 27(2): 246–263. Shuck, B., Adelson, J. & Reio, T. G. (2017). ‘The employee engagement scale: Initial evidence for construct validity and implications for theory and practice’. Human Resource Management , 56(6): 953–977. Sisson, K. (1995). ‘Human resource management and the personnel function’. In Storey, J. (ed), Human Resource Management: A Critical Text . London: Routledge. Sisson, K. (2001). ‘Human resource management and the personnel function: A case of partial impact?’ In Storey, J. (ed), Human Resource Management: A Critical Text (2nd edition). London: Thomson. Smallwood, N. & Ulrich, D. (2004). ‘Capitalizing on capabilities’. Harvard Business Review . June: 119–128. Snell, S. A. (1992). ‘Control theory in strategic human resource management: The mediating effect of administrative information’. Academy of Management Journal , 35(2): 292–327. Snell, S. A. & Dean, J. W. (1992). ‘Integrated manufacturing and human resource management: A human capital perspective’. Academy of Management Journal , 35(3): 467–504. Mapping the field of SHRM 29 Sparrow, P. & Makram, H. (2015). ‘What is the value of talent management?: Building value-driven processes within a talent management architecture’. Human Resource Management Review , 25(3): 249–263. Standing, G. (2011). The Precariat: The New Dangerous Class . London: Bloomsbury Academic. Stanford, J. (2017). ‘The resurgence of gig work: Historical and theoretical perspec – tives’. The Economic and Labour Relations Review , 28(3): 382–401. Stirpe, L., Trullen, J. & Bonache, J. (2013). ‘Factors helping the HR function gain greater acceptance for its proposals and innovations: Evidence from Spain’. The International Journal of Human Resource Management , 24(20): 3794–3811. Storey, J. (1992). Developments in the Management of Human Resources . Oxford: Blackwell. Storey, J. (ed) (2007). Human Resource Management: A Critical Text (3rd edition). London: Thomson. Storey, J. & Sisson, K. (1993). Managing Human Resources and Industrial Relations . Buckingham, UK: Open University Press. Su, Z. X. & Wright, P. M. (2012). ‘The effective human resource management sys – tem in transitional China: A hybrid of commitment and control practices’. The International Journal of Human Resource Management , 23(10): 2065–2086. Su, Z. X., Wright, P. M. & Ulrich, M. D. (2018). ‘Going Beyond the SHRM paradigm examining four approaches to governing employees’. Journal of Management , 24 (4): 1598–1619. Sun, L-Y, Aryee, S. & Law, K. S. (2007). ‘High-performance human resource practices, citizenship behaviour and organizational performance: A relational perspective’. Academy of Management Journal , 50(3): 558–577. Takeuchi, R., Lepak, D. P., Wang, H. & Takeuchi, K. (2007). ‘An empirical exami – nation of the mechanisms mediating between high-performance work systems and the performance of Japanese organizations’. Journal of Applied Psychology , 92(4): 1069. Tannenbaum, S. & Woods, S. (1992). ‘Determining a strategy for evaluating train – ing’. Human Resource Planning , 15: 63–81. Tavis, A. (2018). ‘Talent management: The end of the era or the dawn of the new age?’ People + Strategy, Journal of the Human Resource Planning Association , 41(1): 4. Taylor, M. (2018). Good Work: The Taylor Review of Modern Working Practices . London: Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. Taylor, S. & Storey, J. (2016). ‘Strategic leadership development: The work of cor – porate universities’. In Storey, J. (ed), Leadership in Organizations: Current Issues and Key Trends . London: Routledge. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G. & Shuen. A., (1997). ‘Dynamic capabilities and strategic management’. Strategic Management Journal , 18(7): 509–533. Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in Action . New York: McGraw-Hill. Trullen, J., Stirpe, L., Bonache J. & Valverde M. (2016). ‘The HR department’s con – tribution to line managers’ effective implementation of HR practices’. Human Resource Management Journal , 26(4): 449–470. 30 Mapping the field of SHRM Truss, C., Delbridge, R., Alfes, K., Shantz, A. & Soane, E. (2014). ‘Introduction’. In Truss, C., Delbridge, R., Alfes, K., Shantz, A. & Soanne, E. (eds), Employee Engagement in Theory and Practice . Abingdon, UK: Routledge. Truss, C. & Gratton, L. (1994). ‘Strategic human resource management: A con – ceptual approach’. International Journal of Human Resource Management , 5: 663–686. Tsay, A. A., Gray, J. V., Noh, I. J. & Mahoney, J. T. (2018). ‘Review of pro – duction and operations management research on outsourcing in supply chains: Implications for the theory of the firm’. Production and Operations Management , 27(7): 1177–1220. Tyson, S. & Fell, A. (1986). Evaluating the Personnel Function . London: Hutchinson. Ulrich, D. (1997). Human Resource Champions: The Next Agenda for Adding Value and Delivering Results . Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Ulrich, D. (1998). ‘A new mandate for human resources’. Harvard Business Review , 76(1): 124–134. Ulrich, D. & Allen, J. (2017). ‘PE firms are creating a new role: Leadership capital partner’. Harvard Business Review . August. Ulrich, D., Allen, J., Brockbank, W., Younger, J. & Nyman, M. (2009). HR Transformation: Building Human Resources From the Outside In . New York: McGraw-Hill. Ulrich, D. & Brockbank, W. (2005). The HR Value Proposition . New York: McGraw-Hill. Ulrich, D., Brockbank, W., Yeung, A. K. & Lake, D. C. (1995). ‘Human resource competencies: An empirical assessment’. Human Resource Management , 34: 473–495. Ulrich, D., Brockbank, W. & Younger, J. (2008). ‘The next evolution of the HR organization’. In Storey, J., Wright, P. & Ulrich, D. (eds), Routledge Companion to Strategic Human Resource Management . New York: Routledge. Ulrich, D., Brockbank, W., Younger, J. & Ulrich, M. (2012). Global HR Competencies: Mastering Competitive Value from the Outside-In . New York: McGraw-Hill. Ulrich, D., Kryscynski, D., Ulrich, M. & Brockbank, W. (2017). Victory Through Organization: Why the War for Talent is Failing Your Company and What You Can Do About It . New York: McGraw-Hill. Ulrich, D. & Lake, D. G. (1990). Organizational Capability: Competing from the Inside Out . New York: John Wiley & Sons. Ulrich, D., Younger, J., Brockbank, W. & Ulrich, M. D. (2013). ‘The state of the HR profession’. Human Resource Management , 52(3): 457–471. Van Wanrooy, B., Bewley H., Bryson A., Forth, J., Freeth, S. Stokes, L. & Wood, S. (2013). Employment Relations in the Shadow of Recession: Findings from the 2011 Workplace Employment Relations Study . Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Venkatraman, N. (1989). ‘The concept of fit in strategy research: Toward verbal and statistical correspondence’. Academy of Management Review , 14(3): 423–444. Viswesvaran, C. & Ones, D. S. (1996). ‘Comparative analysis of the the reliability of job performance ratings.’ Journal of Applied Psychology . 81: 557–574. Mapping the field of SHRM 31 Walton, R. E. (1985). ‘From control to commitment in the workplace’. Harvard Business Review , 63(2): 77–84. Way, S. A. (2002). ‘High performance work systems and intermediate indicators of firm performance within the US small business sector’. Journal of Management , 28(6): 765–785. Weick, K. (1979). The Social Psychology of Organizing (2nd edition). New York: McGraw-Hill. Weil, D. (2014). The Fissured Workplace: Why Work Became So Bad for So Many and What Can be Done to Improve it . Boston: Harvard University Press. Wernerfelt, B. (1984). ‘A resource-based view of the firm’. Strategic Management Journal , 5(2): 171–180. Wheatley, D. (2017). ‘Employee satisfaction and use of flexible working arrange – ments’. Work, Employment and Society , 31(4): 567–585. Wright, P. M. & Boswell, W. R. (2002). ‘Desegregating HRM: A review and syn – thesis of micro and macro human resource management research’. Journal of Management , 28(3): 247–276. Wright, P. M., Gardner, T. M., Moynihan, L. M. & Allen, M. R. (2005). ‘The rela – tionship between HR practices and firm performance: Examining causal order’. Personnel Psychology , 58(2): 409–446. Wright, P. M., Guest, D. & Paauwe, J. (2015). ‘Off the mark: Response to Kaufman’s evolution of strategic HRM’. Human Resource Management , 54(3): 409–415. Wright, P. M. & McMahan, G. C. (1992). ‘Theoretical perspectives for strategic human resource management’. Journal of Management , 18(2): 295–320. Wright, P. M. & McMahan, G. C. (2011). ‘Exploring human capital: Putting “human” back into strategic human resource management’. Human Resource Management Journal , 21(2): 93–104. Wright, P. M., McMahan, G. C. & McWilliams, A. (1994). ‘Human resources and sustained competitive advantage: A resource-based perspective’. International Journal of Human Resource Management , 5(2): 301–326. Wright, P. M. & Nishii, L. H. (2006). ‘Strategic HRM and organizational behavior: Integrating multiple levels of analysis’. CAHRS Working Paper Series No. 06–05 . Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Center for Advanced Human Resource Studies. Available at: http://digitalcommons.ilr. cornell.edu/cahrswp/405 (Accessed: January 2, 2019). Wright, P. & Nishii, L. (2013). ‘Strategic HRM and organizational behavior: Integrating multiple levels of analysis’. In Guest, D., Paauwe, J. & Wright, P. (eds), Human Resource Management and Performance: Building the Evidence Base , 97–110. Oxford: Blackwell. Wright, P., Nyberg, A. & Ployhart, R. (2018). ‘A research revolution in SHRM: New challenges and research directions’. In Buckley, M. (ed), Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management , 36: 141–163. Wright, P., Nyberg, A., Schepker, D., Cragun, O. & Ulrich, M. (2016). The Changing Chief Human Resources Officer Role: Results of the 2016 [email protected] Survey of Chief HR Officers . Columbia, SC: Center for Executive Succession, University of South Carolina. 32 Mapping the field of SHRM Wright, P. M. & Sherman, W. S. (1999). ‘Failing to find fit in strategic human resource management: Theoretical and empirical problems’. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management , 4: 53–74. Wright, P. M. & Snell, S. A. (1998). ‘Toward a unifying framework for explor – ing fit and flexibility in strategic human resource management’. Academy of Management Review , 23: 756–772. Youndt, M. A., Snell, S. A., Dean, J. W. & Lepak, D. P. (1996). ‘Human resource management, manufacturing strategy, and firm performance’. Academy of Management Journal , 39(4): 836–866. View publication statsView publication stats
Why Choose Us
- 100% non-plagiarized Papers
- 24/7 /365 Service Available
- Affordable Prices
- Any Paper, Urgency, and Subject
- Will complete your papers in 6 hours
- On-time Delivery
- Money-back and Privacy guarantees
- Unlimited Amendments upon request
- Satisfaction guarantee
How it Works
- Click on the “Place Order” tab at the top menu or “Order Now” icon at the bottom and a new page will appear with an order form to be filled.
- Fill in your paper’s requirements in the "PAPER DETAILS" section.
- Fill in your paper’s academic level, deadline, and the required number of pages from the drop-down menus.
- Click “CREATE ACCOUNT & SIGN IN” to enter your registration details and get an account with us for record-keeping and then, click on “PROCEED TO CHECKOUT” at the bottom of the page.
- From there, the payment sections will show, follow the guided payment process and your order will be available for our writing team to work on it.