International Organizational Behavior: Strategic Human Resource Management - Research Paper Example

Running Head: International Organizational Behavior/Strategic Human Resource Management International Organizational Behavior/ Strategic Human Resource Management Abstract The purpose to carry out this research is to find sufficient evidence backed by relatively accurate data to answer the question that what should be the combination of fit and flexibility to be adopted and practiced by an organization when it is implementing HRM strategically. Scholars in the field of strategic human resource management (HRM) focus specifically on "the pattern of planned human resource deployments and activities intended to enable the firm to achieve its goals," (Wright & McMahan, 1992: 298). The concept of fit underlies numerous theories at the individual, group, and organizational levels of analysis (Wright & Snell 1998). Nadler and Tushman define congruence or fit as "the degree to which the needs, demands, goals, objectives and/or structure of one component are consistent with the needs, demands, goals, objectives, and/or structure of another component" (1980: 40). In contrast, Sanchez defines flexibility as "a firm's abilities to respond to various demands from dynamic competitive environments" (1995: 138). Flexibility provides organizations with the ability to modify current practices in response to non-transient changes in the environment (Wright & Snell 1998). At first glance, it might appear that the desirability of strategic fit and the need for organizational flexibility conflict. Indeed, the relationship between fit and flexibility in the context of strategic HRM is not well understood, and little agreement exists regarding the definitions and the value of each (Wright & Snell 1998). Introduction The birth of the field of "Strategic Human Resource Management" (Strategic HRM) arguably took place less than 20 years ago with an article titled "Human Resources Management: A Strategic Perspective" (Devanna, Fombrum, & Tichy 1981). In such a short time, however, an explosion has occurred in writing and research on Strategic HRM (Wright 1998). In 1996 both Academy of Management Journal and Industrial Relations devoted special issues to the topic of HRM practices and firm performance and in 1997 International Journal of Human Resource Management published a special issue on Strategic HRM and firm performance (Wright 1998). The almost exponential growth of interest in understanding the strategic role that HRM can play in firm performance implies a mindset of "more, more, more" with regard to research on Strategic HRM. However, before we heed the simplistic call for more, more, more, perhaps we need to step back and reflect on where we've been, where we are, and where we need to be. The purpose of this issue is to identify the current state of the art in Strategic HRM research, and to propose a future research agenda for the field as we approach the 21st Century (Wright 1998). Consistent with this idea, SHRM has been based in large part on the notion that a firm must align its human resource management (HRM) practices to support business objectives (Delery 1998). As such, researchers have focused predominantly on two forms of "fit," vertical and horizontal (Wright & McMahan 1992). Horizontal fit refers to the alignment of HR practices into a coherent system of practices that support one another. Vertical fit refers to the alignment of HR practices with the specific organizational context. Although there have now been several empirical investigations of the effectiveness of both forms of "fit," there is relatively little empirical evidence to suggest that such alignment is necessary or beneficial (Delery 1998). Despite this small but growing support for the effectiveness of the horizontal fit of HRM practices, there is still much to be learned (Delery 1998). First, researchers need to assess HRM systems throughout the organization. Research has demonstrated that HRM systems differ within organizations yet most research has only measured either the average system used by an organization or the HRM system for only one job or group of jobs (Delery & Doty 1996; Ichniowski et al. 1997). Second, the focal independent variables in SHRM research, HRM practices, have been ill-defined (Delery 1998). Researchers must more clearly define the HRM practice and systems constructs to fully understand the underlying processes at work. Third, the assumptions underlying the techniques some researchers have used to combine individual HRM practices into systems measures have not been fully explored (Delery 1998). Clarifying these assumptions and developing better methods to identify HRM systems may be the most critical issue for the future of SHRM research. Fourth, it is clear from SHRM research and theory that HRM practices and systems influence organizational performance through their influence on other organizational characteristics, possibly the resources of the organization. Yet, few studies have attempted to measure any of these mediating constructs (Delery 1998). Fifth, research in SHRM has focused on organizational effectiveness and empirical studies have measured effectiveness in many different ways. While it is helpful to have multiple measures of effectiveness, researchers must more clearly articulate the relationships among these measures. An HRM system that minimizes turnover, for instance, may not maximize productivity. Much greater attention to these five issues is needed over the next decade (Delery 1998). Proposed Methods Research Design This research will be a cross sectional study as we shall try to collect data about the implementation of SHRM from various respectable organizations and also conduct interviews of the involved employees. Extensive meta-research of previous works about the same topic has been carried out to understand and grasp the true essence of the topic. The research will be conducted in two phases. The first phase will cover the acquisition of data from various organizations regarding the past SHRM achievements trends and the overall impact (benefits) of its implementation in the organization. The second phase will be carried to conduct brief interviews form employees preferably from HRM department so that direct relevance of the data can be studied and appreciated. Subjects The database of the study will include various organizations of different sizes. Since we want to study the function of SHRM therefore, employees in HRM departments will be the subjects of our study. As shown in the introduction earlier, general information from the organization is of considerable importance therefore, valuable information will be acquired from various other departments and they can safe be termed as our secondary subjects for this study. Analysis of Data The data shall be analyzed by finding how the organizations make a tradeoff between fit and flexibility when they strategically implement HRM. This will require the scrutinizing of replies acquired from the questionnaires and the answers received from the interviews. The relevance of theories which have been proposed in the past needs to be examined with the current practices and maybe for certain cases recommendations for improvement can also be provided to the concerned organizations. The main part of research of how actually the organizations find the tradeoff between fit and flexibility requires sophisticated analysis of all the data collected of past researches and from organizations. Instrumentation Apart from the usual sources of knowledge acquisition, namely, magazine or journal articles, website links and books, a detailed survey of organizations needs to be carried out as mentioned before. The primary instruments to use as identified in earlier sections are surveys for data from organizations which shall require visits and acquiring various informational documents. As mentioned before this will be a cross sectional research therefore, a round of brief interviews with the employees shall also be conducted which require properly formulated questionnaires. Reflections Wright and McMahan defined Strategic HRM as "the pattern of planned human resource deployments and activities intended to enable the firm to achieve its goals." (1992,p. 298). This definition implied at least four components to Strategic HRM (Wright 1998). First, it focuses on a firm's "human resources" (i.e., people) as the primary resource to be strategically leveraged as a source of competitive advantage. Second, the concept of "activities" highlights HR programs, policies and practices as the means through which the people of a firm can be deployed to gain competitive advantage. Third, both "pattern" and "plan" describe the goal and process of strategy; a consistent alignment or design which could also be described as "fit." The authors noted that this fit could consist of both vertical (with the firm's strategy) and horizontal (all of the HR activities aligned with one another) aspects. Finally, within this definition, the people, practices, and planned pattern are all purposeful, that being "goal achievement." Clearly, within the realm of research on Strategic HRM, at least within the U.S., consensus seems to have emerged around maximizing organization performance as the major goal to be achieved (Wright 1998). Sanchez (1995) notes that there are two basic types of flexibility (Wright & Snell 1998): (1) resource flexibility and (2) coordination flexibility. Resource flexibility refers to the extent to which a resource can be applied to a larger range of alternative uses, the costs and difficulty of switching the use of a resource from one alternative use to another, and the time required to switch from one use to another. Coordination flexibility consists of the extent to which the firm can resynthesize the strategy, reconfigure the chain of resources, and redeploy the resources. These types of flexibility are particularly applicable for exploring the concept of flexibility in strategic HRM (Wright & Snell 1998). The fit deals with whether the practices used by an organization fit into a coherent system' or "bundle" (Delery & Doty 1996) of practices that enhance and support the effectiveness of one another (Delery 1998). The basic assumption is that the effectiveness of any practice depends on the other practices in place. If all of the practices fit into a coherent system, the effect of that system on performance should be greater than the sum of the individual effects from each practice alone (Ichniowski et al. 1997). Taylor and Russell (1939) long ago realized that valid selection devices only improve the work force to the extent that the firm is able to hire a small percentage of those who apply (Delery 1998). To get the most out of a valid selection device it is essential to ensure that recruiting practices that increase the number of qualified applicants, thereby decreasing the selection ratio, are also in place (Shaw, Delery, Jenkins, & Gupta 1998). This highlights the fact that HRM practices may work together in a synergistic interdependent relationship (Delery 1998). Other HRM practices may also enhance skills, however, in different ways. For instance, training practices may enhance skills regardless of the use of valid selection devices. From this brief discussion it is clear that HRM practices may work together in a system in a number of different ways. In other words, individual HRM practices may show different relationships with each other in producing valuable, rare, and inimitable resources (Delery 1998). Conclusions To the extent that bureaucracy and inertia can be minimized, HRM practices can be changed quickly to meet the needs of a changing environment (Wright & Snell 1998). To the extent that the workforce possesses a variety of skills and behavioral repertoires, the firm's flexibility is increased. Thus, the key role of strategic HRM is to ensure fit among a subset of strategically relevant variables while simultaneously seeking to build generic organizational capabilities that can be applied toward both discovering and implementing a variety of diverse strategic initiatives. Given the increasing importance of strategic HRM in creating firm competitive advantage (Wright & Snell 1998), much more theoretical development is necessary in the field (McMahan, Virick, & Wright, in press; Wright & McMahan, 1992). In this research the primary focus has been on delineating more specifically the treatments of fit and flexibility in the strategic HRM literature (Wright & Snell 1998). As we approach the 21st Century, we need to critically assess the current state of the art in Strategic HRM research in order to lay out a plan for future research which will add to our knowledge base. Timetable Activity Time Required Expected Start Date Expected End Date Meta Research Collection of Info Form Organizations Interviews of employees Preliminary Analysis of Data Formation of Hypothesis Statement Detailed Analysis of literature in meta-research Analysis of data collected from Organizations Analysis of interviews’ feedback Construction of Data Analysis and Conclusions & Recommendations References Delery, J. E., & Doty, D. H. 1996. Theoretical frameworks in strategic human resource management: Universalistic, contingency, and configurational perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 39: 802-835. Delery, John E., 1998. Issues of Fit in Strategic Human Resource Management: Implications for Research. Human Resource Management Review, 10534822, Fall98, Vol. 8, Issue 3 Devanna, M, C. Fombrum, and N. Tichy. 1981. "Human Resources Management: A Strategic Perspective." Organizational Dynamics (Winter): 51-67. Ichniowski, C., K. Shaw, and G. Prennushi. 1997. "The Effects of Human Resource Management Practices on Productivity: A Study of Steel Finishing Lines." American Economic Review 87: 291-313. McMahan, G., Virick, M., & Wright, P. In press. Alternative theoretical perspectives for strategic human resource management revised: Progress, problems, and prospects. In P. Wright, L. Dyer, J. Boudreau, & G. Milkovich (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Nadler, D., & Tushman, M. 1980. A diagnostic model for organizational behavior. In J. R. Hackman, E. E. Lawler, & L. W. Porter (Eds.), Perspectives on behavior in organizations: 83-100. New York: McGraw-Hill. Sanchez, R. 1995. Strategic flexibility in product competition. Strategic Management Journal, 16: 135-159. Shaw, J. D., J. E. Delery, G. D. Jenkins, Jr., and N. Gupta. 1998. "An Organizational-Level Analysis of Voluntary and Involuntary Turnover." Academy of Management Journal 41: 511-525. Wright, P. M., & McMahan, G. C. 1992. Theoretical perspectives for strategic human resource management. Journal of Management, 18: 295-320. Wright, Patrick M., 1998. Introduction: Strategic Human Resource Management Research in the 21st Century. Human Resource Management Review, 10534822, Fall98, Vol. 8, Issue 3 Wright, Patrick M., Snell, Scott A., 1998. Toward a Unifying Framework for Exploring Fit and Flexibility in Strategic Human Resource Management. Academy of Management Review, 03637425, Oct98, Vol. 23, Issue 4 Read More