Comparative HRM Research Articles

International comparative studies in HRM and performance – the Cranet data

Research in the field of international and comparative HRM is becoming ever more available. The International Journal of Human Resource Management now usually publishes 12 issues per year, and the enormous range of the field is apparent from the scope of the topics covered. The papers published in this special issue are all drawn from the Cranet project. Cranet is a network of scholars from universities across the world, representing over 40 countries. Cranet conducts a survey of HRM in member countries approximately every four years, enquiring into policies and practices in people management through a set of common questions. In this introduction, we locate Cranet within this research field, and say how Cranet seeks to contribute to this growing body of knowledge.

Comparative HRM: European views and perspectives

The US originated notion of HRM has been widely accepted across the world – and also widely criticized. The underlying features of the European economy are different from those of the USA and it is argued that these have led to a different approach to HRM being developed in Europe. Differences in features such as more limited individualism, a greater role for the State, different patterns of consultation and patterns of ownership, are linked to these different practices and have led to more varied patterns of research and a more critical literature.

Applying employment systems theory to the analysis of national models of HRM

The paper presents a model of employment systems as the basis for a systematic comparative analysis of HRM. Such a model has particular value for international HRM, where a stronger theoretical anchor would allow for better explanations concerning the origins and impacts of emerging practices and trends. Having established a typology of employment systems, which describes how organizations all over the world manage employment, the paper highlights a series of characteristic ‘boundary tensions’, around which change in employment practices takes place. These change processes can also be seen all over the world, driven by economic and institutional influences. By focusing on these boundary tensions, we can see how changes in the external environment act as a lever to change approaches to employment. The paper argues that comparative international HRM should look at the impacts of change on groups of employees managed through particular models and at the adjustments firms make in relation to these. The focus for explanation and research is then on developments that reinforce, weaken or reframe archetypal systems of employment. The paper concludes by identifying three ways in which this can be done – focusing on change in particular elements of employment practice, change in the psychological contract and employee behaviour and change in the institutional environment.

Building the Theory of Comparative Hrm

The study of comparative HRM is needed to complement and condition the field of international HRM. But the task of building a theory of comparative HRM is not a simple one. This article argues that the goal of such theory should be to account for differences in workforce capability and labour productivity across nations. Suggesting what ought to be explained, however, is much easier than providing credible explanations. the article argues that it is important to identify dominant models of HRM in each country, recognising that there is significant variation both within and between nations. Management in firms plays a critical role in shaping models of labour management but analysis must also take account of the impact of other actors such as the state and labour.