SHRM and context: why firms want to be as different as legitimately possible

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to raise awareness that despite many calls for attention to a firm’s context in considering consequences for human resource management (HRM) and performance, research progress to date has been limited at best, although promising signs of change are emerging. Moreover, what has been defined as “performance” is coming under increasing scrutiny, with a more holistic concept emerging that balances both a firm’s financial performance and employee well-being. The question remains whether this is a mutual gains or conflicting outcomes situation for the firm vis-á-vis the employee. Design/methodology/approach This paper presents a framework that facilitates a broader context-centric analysis of the HRM and performance relationship. In so doing, the authors posit that context should no longer merely be an obligatory control variable in a research design, but instead should be explicitly incorporated in both theory development and empirical model testing. Findings The Contextual SHRM Framework demonstrates how key organizational actors can balance competitive, heritage and institutional mechanisms to create an appropriate strategic HRM (SHRM) system capable of delivering organizational outcomes that balance financial and employee well-being outcomes, which in the long run impact societal well-being that, in turn, recreates the firm’s operating context. At the heart of the framework is an iterative process between context and the SHRM system, achieving an appropriate level of dynamic fit across the various components. Practical implications In addition to empirical research, the framework has to date been widely used in executive development training, serving as a force field analysis tool allowing simultaneous consideration of the external and internal elements of a firm’s context, key organizational actors and SHRM system outcomes. HR professionals applying the framework to their organization can add value by demonstrating the clear linkage between the business strategy, the HRM system and the firm’s operating context. Originality/value This paper is designed to encourage new directions in future research and practice. The Contextual SHRM Framework is presented as a novel tool to facilitate advancement of the HRM and performance field of study.

[1]  R. Peccei,et al.  The Application of the Multilevel Paradigm in Human Resource Management–Outcomes Research: Taking Stock and Going Forward , 2019 .

[2]  Gary Johns,et al.  Reflections on the 2016 Decade Award: Incorporating Context in Organizational Research , 2017 .

[3]  D. Guest Human resource management and employee well-being: towards a new analytic framework , 2017 .

[4]  M. Beer,et al.  Back to the Future: Implications for the Field of HRM of the Multistakeholder Perspective Proposed 30 Years Ago , 2015 .

[5]  Randall S. Schuler,et al.  Human resource management and organizational effectiveness: yesterday and today , 2014 .

[6]  S. Jackson,et al.  An Aspirational Framework for Strategic Human Resource Management , 2014 .

[7]  P. Wright,et al.  HRM and Performance: Achievements and Challenges , 2013 .

[8]  Jaap Paauwe,et al.  Employee Well‐Being and the HRM - Organizational Performance Relationship: A Review of Quantitative Studies , 2012 .

[9]  David P. Lepak,et al.  How Does Human Resource Management Influence Organizational Outcomes? A Meta-analytic Investigation of Mediating Mechanisms , 2012 .

[10]  James G. Combs,et al.  HOW MUCH DO HIGH-PERFORMANCE WORK PRACTICES MATTER? A META-ANALYSIS OF THEIR EFFECTS ON ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE , 2006 .

[11]  Stephen Procter HRM and performance: Achieving long term viability , 2006 .

[12]  G. Dietz,et al.  Commonalities and contradictions in HRM and performance research , 2005 .

[13]  Brian E. Becker,et al.  COMMENT ON “MEASUREMENT ERROR IN RESEARCH ON HUMAN RESOURCES AND FIRM PERFORMANCE: HOW MUCH ERROR IS THERE AND HOW DOES IT INFLUENCE EFFECTSIZE ESTIMATES?” by GERHART, WRIGHT, MC MAHAN, AND SNELL , 2000 .

[14]  Stephen Wood,et al.  Human resource management and performance , 1999 .

[15]  David L. Deephouse To Be Different or to Be the Same? It's a Question (and a Theory) of Strategic Balance , 1998 .

[16]  Patrick M. Wright,et al.  Toward a Unifying Framework for Exploring Fit and Flexibility in Strategic Human Resource Management , 1998 .

[17]  John E. Delery,et al.  Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource management: Tests of universalistic, contingency, and configurational performance predictions , 1996 .

[18]  J. Barney Looking inside for competitive advantage , 1995 .

[19]  Mark A. Huselid The Impact of Human Resource Management Practices on Turnover, Productivity, and Corporate Financial Performance , 1995 .

[20]  J. Pfeffer Competitive Advantage Through People , 1994 .

[21]  J. Barney Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage , 1991 .

[22]  C. Oliver STRATEGIC RESPONSES TO INSTITUTIONAL PROCESSES , 1991 .

[23]  Chris Hendry,et al.  Human Resource Management: An Agenda for the 1990's , 1990 .

[24]  C. J. Lammers,et al.  Sociology of Organizations Around the Globe. Similarities and Differences Between American, British, French, German and Dutch Brands , 1990 .

[25]  C. Bartlett,et al.  Managing across Borders: The Transnational Solution , 1990 .