brewster paper
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
1/36
TRANSFER OF HRM PRACTICES AROUND THE WORLD1
Chris Brewster
Paper for the conference:
Human resource Management across Countries: the cultural dimension
Athens University of Economics and BusinessOctober 17, 2002
Outline
The meaning and importance of HRM
HRM in an international context
Convergence and divergence
Integration and differentiation
What is transferred; what is not
Conclusions
Abstract
This paper briefly examines the notion of HRM and its different meanings and
emphasises its importance. It argues that increasing internationalisation raises two
key, linked, issues for HR specialists. On the first of these, the question of how
different HRM is in different countries, both similarities and differences are found
and the differences are significant. On the second issue, the question of how
organisations that operate internationally can afford to manage HRM the same way
in different countries by transferring successful HRM practices from one to another,
the paper finds that there are arguments, and evidence, on both sides. What
organisations attempt to transfer, and how they do it, are crucial.
1 This paper draws substantially on Human Resource Management: a universal
concept? by Wolfgang Mayrhofer, Michael Morley and Chris Brewster in
Mayrhofer, Morley and Brewster (eds) 2003Human Resource Management in
Europe Butterworth-Heineman, London (forthcoming); and Brewster, C., (2002)
"HRM Practices in Multinational Enterprises", in Gannon, M.J. and Newman, K.,
Handbook of Cross-Cultural Management, Blackwell
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
2/36
The meaning and importance of HRM
How are, and how should, people be managed? This is one of the most fundamental
questions to be posed within the field of business management. After all, effective
employee management is a major, if not the major, determinant of organisational
success. The people doing the work are the major operating cost for nearly all
organisations. And, on the other side of the equation, people are increasingly the key
source of competitive advantage or effective operation. The questions about how
people are managed, therefore, are the substance of "human resource management"
(HRM) and key to organisational success.
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
3/36
HRM in an international context
Management theorists have long argued that if one could develop management
systems that could be proved to be effective, these could be implemented universally.
In other words there is a belief that there is "a right way" of managing people that can
be implemented by management consultants throughout the world.
It has been pointed out elsewhere that the development of theories of HRM in the US
tended to rely on the examples of a small number of large private sector firms; was
based on a culturally typical US independent, individualistic, "frontiersman"
mentality; suffered from a poorly thought out approach to rigorous theory; failed to
link theory to general practice (or vice versa); and relied heavily for prescription on
selected aspects of what was thought to be Japanese practice (Guest 1990; Poole
1990; Pieper 1990; Bournois 1991; Beaumont 1991; Brewster 1995; Legge 1995).
Because of the hegemony of the USA in management thinking, their visions of HRM
have tended to be the touchstone for HRM in other countries. However, the US
theories, with their implications of virtually autonomous organisations, sit
uncomfortably with the European reality. And this raises the question: Is the
American vision of HRM a universal one, that will apply anywhere in the world, or is
it a US-bounded one?
For many years, institutional theory has directed the attention of students of
organisational behaviour to the influences of social processes, beyond the
organisations boundaries. Summarising the institutional perspective, Hoffman (1999,
351) states that A firms action is seen not as a choice among an unlimited array of
possibilities determined by purely internal arrangements, but rather as a choice among
a narrowly defined set of legitimate options. Obtaining legitimacy is not simply a
matter of obeying extant legislation, it also involves abiding by the unwritten, tacit
codes peculiar to the firms setting. Thus firms are located in settings not only of
legislation but also of culture and social norms to which they have to react. In short,
culture provides meaning and purpose, rules (including legislation), and norms
(ethical standards). Each nation or region constitutes a unique or idiosyncratic
institutional setting that skews firm behaviour in particular ways. From an
institutional perspective, given that HRM is a product of the North American
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
4/36
institutional setting, whether it is readily transferable to the European setting remains
a conceptual and empirical challenge.
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
5/36
Convergence and divergence
The position is summed up by Clark and Mallory (1996: 11) as follows:
American notions of HRM[since they are culturally bounded] may have
little, or limited, relevance to nations which do not possess identical or similar
cultures
And there are clear differences: in Europe HRM is less dependent, companies have
less autonomy and freedom of action, trade unionism is more important, the social
partners have more influence, legal regulations are more important, and there is a
stronger tradition of employee involvement
It is also true that whilst there are differences between the way HRM is
conceptualised and practiced in the USA and Europe (Pieper, 1990; Brewster &
Bournois, 1991; Brewster & Hegewisch, 1994; Hegewisch and Brewster, 1993), there
are also substantial regional differences within Europe authors (Filella, 1991;
Brewster and Larsen, 1992, 2000; Clark and Mallory, 1996), and substantial
differences between countries even within the same region (Brewster, Mayrhofer and
Morley 2000; Brunstein 19XX ; ; Bures & Vloeberghs, 2000; Cazal and Peretti, 1992;
Clark and Pugh, 1999 Fenton-OCreevy, 2001).
Sparrow and Hiltrop (1994) note the role of four dimensions (cultural factors,
institutional factors, differences in business structure and system, and factors related
to the roles and competences of HRM professionals), further divided into 23 factors,
resulting in distinctive national patterns of European HRM.
But having established that there are differences another key question arises: are these
differences increasing or decreasing? Is it perhaps the case that as world becomes
more global HRM becomes more similar? Or might different regions even be
becoming more distinct?
Convergence versus Divergence the Main Arguments
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
6/36
More precisely, given that policies of market deregulation and state decontrol are
spreading from the US to Europe, are European firms are moving towards a North
American HRM approach to managing their personnel? Or is it the case that, owing
to the ongoing economic and political integration of European Union countries, a
convergence towards a distinctly European practice is underway? There is, of course,
a third possibility: that European firms are so locked into their respective idiosyncratic
national institutional settings that no common model is likely to emerge for the
foreseeable future.
We briefly explore the convergence and divergence arguments. As part of this
examination we consider two distinct versions of the convergence thesis, the free
market US model and the institutional European model. Although these two theses of
convergence are very different from one another there is one underlying similarity.
They all view firms' latitude in regard to selecting and developing personnel
management strategies as being shaped, governed and given impetus by a mix of
factors which may be broadly defined as either technological, economic or
institutional. The convergence versus divergence debate has been an ongoing strand
of the literature on management in general for decades and this has more recently
been reflected in HRM theorising.
Proposition 1: The Market Forces or US Convergence Model
In brief, the convergence thesis argues that differences in management systems have
arisen as a result of the geographical isolation of businesses. The consequent
development of differing beliefs and value orientations of national cultures are being
superseded by the logic of technology and markets which requires the adoption of
specific and, therefore, universally applicable management techniques (Kidger, 1991).
Kerr, Dunlop, Harbison & Myers (1960) believed that not only was the convergence
of systems of industrial relations inevitable, but that the convergence would be toward
US practices. They argued that management systems represented attempts to manage
technology as efficiently as possible. As the United States of America was the
technological leader, it followed that US management practices represented current
best-practice, which other nations would eventually seek to emulate as they sought to
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
7/36
adopt US technology. Thus "patterns in other countries were viewed as derivative of,
or deviations from, the US model" (Locke, Kochan & Piore, 1995: xvi).
Characteristic of these various convergence perspectives is their functionalist mode of
thought. The practice of management is explained exclusively by reference to its
contribution to technological and economic efficiency. Thus it is a dependent
variable that evolves in response to technological and economic change, rather than
with reference to the socio-political context, so that "much of what happens to
management and labor is the same regardless of auspices" (Kerr, 1983).
More recently, the convergence thesis has received support from transaction cost
economics which also contends that at any one point of time there exists a best
solution to organising labour (Williamson, 1975, 1985). "Most transaction cost
theorists argue that there is one best organisational form for firms that have similar or
identical transaction costs" (Hollingsworth & Boyer, 1997:34). Likewise, parts of the
industrial organisation literature argue that firms tend to seek out and adopt the best
solutions to organising labour within their product markets, long term survival being
dependent on their being able to implement them (Chandler, 1962, 1977; Chandler &
Daems, 1980). Thus there is a tendency for firms to converge towards similar
structures of organisation.
Arguably, there is greater coherence in the US than elsewhere about what constitutes
good HRM: a coalescing of views around the concept of high performance work
systems. These have been characterised by the US Department of Labor (1993) as
having certain clear characteristics:
careful and extensive systems for recruitment, selection and training;
formal systems for sharing information with the individuals who work in the
organisation;
clear job design;
local level participation procedures;
monitoring of attitudes;
performance appraisals;
properly functioning grievance procedures; and
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
8/36
promotion and compensation schemes that provide for the recognition and
financial rewarding of high performing members of the workforce.
It would appear that, whilst there have been many other attempts to develop such lists
(see eg Storey 1992a; 1995), and they all differ to some extent, few US experts in
HRM would find very much to argue with in this list. Researchers and practitioners in
other countries, however, find such a list contrary to experience and even to what they
would conceive of as good practice. Thus, they might argue for sharing information
with representative bodies such as trade unions or works councils, for flexible work
boundaries, for group reward systems, etc. And they might argue that attitude
monitoring, appraisal systems etc are culturally inappropriate.
Many US multinationals and others, however, take the view that the US list contains
necessarily superior practices. The US is the worlds most successful economy and
therefore its organisational practices should be followed by every organisation that
wishes to be as successful. Competitive market forces will ensure that those
organisations that do not follow this model will lose out to those who do.
The model assumes that anything (laws, trade unions) which restricts management is
bad and must be opposed. For example Friedman, Hatch & Walker (1998:25) of
Arthur Andersen state:
Managers must be free to manage. Our experience all over the world shows
that the systems used for developing human capital can make a critical
difference in the survival of and success of companies. Technology and
markets are changing so fast that companies need to be in a state of change
and readiness, and they need the freedom and flexibility to change in every
area from recruitment to compliance. They must invest in their human capital -
but the nature of their investment must be driven by market and company
strategy, not government policy. (or presumably the views of their employees
or the trade unions).
Proposition 2: The Institutional or European Convergence Model
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
9/36
Whereas the market forces model regards developments in the US as a precursor of
universal developments, it has been contended that within Europe there are powerful
non-market, institutional, factors of precisely the kind that the American
commentators warn us against. Not only do these make the central features of US
HRM inappropriate to European organisations, they are arguably generating a
specifically European model of convergence in HRM (Brewster, 1995a). Let us
briefly recap the nature of these factors.
In Europe organisations are constrained at a national level, by culture and legislation
and at the organisational level by trade union involvement and consultative
arrangements. Beyond this, the countries of the European area have agreed to accept
common standards and legislation in significant areas of social conduct, including
those of employment: for the countries in the European Union this legislation over-
rides national legislation. The legislative restrictions on employment contracts in
European countries are much more extensive than are similar legal requirements in
the USA.
It is clear that, in general, European countries are more heavily unionised than the
United States, and indeed most other countries. Trade union membership and
influence varies considerably by country, of course, but is always significant. Indeed
in many European countries the law requires union recognition for collective
bargaining. In most European countries many of the union functions in such areas as
pay bargaining, for example, are exercised at industrial or national level, - outside the
direct involvement of managers within individual organisations - as well as at
establishment level. Thus in Europe, unlike in the US, firms are likely to deal with
well-founded trade union structures.
It is worth noting that studies of HRM in the US have tended to take place in the non-
union sector (Beaumont 1991). In fact a constant assumption in research programmes
in the US has been the link between HRM practices and non-unionism (see, e.g.
Kochan et al 1984; Kochan et al 1986). "In the US a number of.... academics have
argued that HRM [the concept and the practice] is anti-union and anti-collective
bargaining" (Beaumont 1991a, p.300).
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
10/36
We have also indicated that state involvement in HRM in Europe is not restricted to
the legislative role. Compared to the USA the state in Europe has a higher
involvement in underlying social security provision. Equally it has a more directly
interventionist role in the economy, provides far more personnel and industrial
relations services and is a more substantial employer in its own right by virtue of a
more extensive government-owned sector.
Finally, we would also point to developments at the level of the European Union or
the European Economic Area which impact upon all organisations in Europe. In a
historically unique experiment, European Union countries have agreed to subordinate
national legislative decision-making to European level legislation. These
developments have indirect effects upon the way people are managed and direct
effects through the EU's adoption of a distinct social sphere of activity. In particular it
would appear that the European Community Social Charter and its associated Social
Action Programme is having an increasing legislative influence on HRM.
Given these circumstances, it is unsurprising that there have been calls for specifically
European approaches (Thurley and Wirdenius 1991; Brewster and Bournois 1991).
Proposition 3: Divergence in Europe
Opposed to this institutionalist thesis of convergence in European HRM are a number
of approaches which emphasise the existence of broad, relatively inert, distinctions
between the various national contexts of personnel management within Europe which
make convergence to a European model of HRM problematic.
Attempts have also been made to identify country groupings within Europe. Due,
Madsen & Jensen (1991) distinguish between, on the one hand, countries such as the
UK Ireland and the Nordic countries in which the state has a limited role in industrial
relations. On the other hand there are the Roman-Germanic countries, such as France,
Spain, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Greece and the Netherlands in which the state
functions as an actor with a central role in industrial relations. A particular feature of
Roman-Germanic countries is their "comprehensive labour market legislation
governing various areas, such as length of the working day (and) rest periods" (Due,
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
11/36
Madsen & Jensen, 1991:90). In other words, unlike either the Anglo-Irish or the
Nordic systems, the latitude for firm-level decision making in Roman-Germanic
countries in regard to employment issues is relatively low.
Hollingsworth & Boyer (1997) focus on a different dimension, that of the presence or
absence of communitarian infrastructures that manifest themselves in the form of
strong social bonds, trust, reciprocity and co-operation among economic actors and
which they regard as being "essential for successful flexible systems of production"
(1997:27). They distinguish between social contexts characterised by self-interest and
those in which "obligation and compliance with social rules are the guiding principles
shaping human actions" (Hollingsworth & Boyer, 1997:8).2 It is their contention that
because of the pervasive market mentality that limits trust and co-operation between
workers and managers within firms, as well as between firms and their suppliers, the
UK (and likewise the USA) does not have the social environment necessary for a
successful flexible social system of production. In contrast, German and
Scandinavian firms are embedded in an environment in which the market mentality is
less pronounced with trusting relationships and communitarian obligations more
prevalent thereby making flexible production systems a viable alternative. Finally,
Hollingworth & Boyer distinguish France as an environment that, while not having a
market mentality, is nevertheless deficient in communitarian infrastructures. Instead,
the public authorities play a dirigeste role in the economy, enabling France to partially
mimic flexible systems of production. "But for flexible forms of production to
become widespread, firms must be embedded in a social environment very different
from that which exists in most of France" (Hollingsworth & Boyer, 1997:27). That is
an environment in which employer-employee conflict is endemic and there is an
absence of "a spirit of generous co-operation" (Maurice, Sellier & Silvestre, 1986:86).
Other authors have found different groupings. Filella (1991), looking at the early data
used in this book in relation to pay systems, identified a Latin model. Brewster and
Larsen (1992), using the same data, found a Latin, a Central European and a Nordic
model or, later, a Northern European model (Brewster and Larsen 2000).
2 See also Maurice, Sellier & Sivestre (1986) and their analysis of work systems in
France and Germany.
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
12/36
Perhaps there are no absolute answers here: each country is full of differences in the
way that different organisations conduct HRM; each country has a different
conception of HRM; each geographical grouping can be distinguished from its
neighbours; and Europe can be shown to be unlike the USA. The fact of dis-similarity
leaves open the question, though, of convergence or divergence.
Of course, the convergers" recognise that in practice there are many variations in
management approaches around the world. However, they argue that, in the long
term, any variations in the adoption of management systems at the firm level are
ascribable to the industrial sector in which the firm is located, its strategy, its available
resources and its degree of exposure to international competition. Moreover, they
claim, these factors are of diminishing salience. Indeed, once they have been taken
account of, a clear trend toward the adoption of common management systems should
be apparent.
Proponents of the divergence thesis argue, in direct contrast, that personnel
management systems, far from being economically or technologically derived,
epitomise national institutional contexts which do not respond readily to the
imperatives of technology or the market. According to this institutionalist perspective,
organisational choice is limited by institutional pressures, including the state,
regulatory structures, interest groups, public opinion and norms (Di Maggio &
Powell, 1983; Meyer & Rowan, 1983; Oliver, 1991). Moreover, many of these
pressures are so accepted, so taken-for-granted "as to be invisible to the actors they
influence" (Oliver, 1991:148). One observable effect of differing institutional contexts
is that "the same equipment is frequently operated quite differently in the same sectors
in different countries, even when firms are competing in the same market"
(Hollingsworth & Boyer, 1997:20). As a consequence, Kerr (1983:28), in a
retrospective analysis of his work with Dunlop, Harbison & Myers, concedes that that
they had been wrong to suggest that industrialism would "overwhelmingly impose its
own cultural patterns on pre-existing cultures. Kerr now argues that industrialism
does conquer and it does impose, but less rapidly and less totally than we implied."
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
13/36
Divergence theorists, however, refuse to subscribe even to this thesis of partial and
delayed convergence. They argue, on the contrary, that national, and in some cases
regional, institutional contexts are slow to change, partly because they derive from
deep seated beliefs and value systems and partly because major re-distributions of
power are involved. More importantly, they argue that change is path dependent. In
other words, even when change does occur this can only be understood in relation to
the specific social context in which it occurs (Maurice, Sellier & Sivestre, 1986;
Poole, 1986). Performance criteria or goals are thus, at any point in time, socially
rather than economically or technologically selected so that they first and foremost
reflect idiosyncratic principles of local rationality. Convergence of management
systems can therefore only take place if supranational institutions are able to
superimpose their influence across national contexts. Increasingly, it is being argued
that that is what is taking place in the case of the European Union (Brewster, 1994).
That is, there is an argument for an institutionally driven convergence of HRM
practices taking place within Europe.
In summary, and in broad terms, therefore, we may observe that in addition to the
divergence thesis there are two distinct versions of the convergence thesis. On the one
hand there is the traditional version of the convergence thesis that contends that
convergence of HRM practices is driven by market and technological forces making
changes in the USA a harbinger of trends elsewhere. On the other hand there is a
newer, institutional, version that argues that institutionally driven convergence is
taking place within the context of the EU. There is an ongoing debate between these
two viewpoints (Brewster 1999). We now examine these two models in more detail,
prior to presenting the divergence thesis applied specifically to the European context.
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
14/36
Integration and differentiation
This paper follows authorities such as Schuler et al (1993); Punnett and Ricks (1992);
Ghoshal (1987); and Galbraith (1987) in focusing on the tension between
differentiation and integration, sometimes referred to as the 'global vs local' dilemma
as a defining characteristic of the international perspective on HRM. This
understanding may need to be developed beyond this somewhat simplistic dichotomy
(see below), but it encapsulates a number of key questions for all organizations
operating internationally:
What freedom does an international organization have in regard to imposing its
own approaches to HRM on its operations throughout the world?
How can an international organization aware of the need to be sympathetic to
local cultures still ensure that it gains optimum value from its internationalism?
What is the relationship between the strength of organizational culture and
national cultures?
This section explores the somewhat simplistic nature of the dichotomy between
differentiation and integration, explores the antecedents of decisions which tend to
one or other end of the spectrum and then applies the concept to IHRM.
Current approaches to IHRM may tend towards different ends of the differentiation/
integration spectrum but few commentators, and even fewer practitioners, would
argue that the issue is anything other than central to IHRM. Easy answers do not exist:
the consultants advice to "think global and act local" is a meaningless mantra when it
is applied to practice. The issue still has to be teased out both theoretically and
empirically. In all cases, sensitivity to which aspects of business practices in any
particular country are emic (i.e. culture-specific aspects of concepts or behaviour) and
etic (i.e. culture common aspects) is regarded as essential to a strategic choice of HR
levers. The question of the balance of emphasis between the national cultures and the
organizational culture remains.
Of course, presenting this choice as a dichotomy, whilst of analytical value, may not
capture all the possibilities. Many international organizations are now divisionalized,
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
15/36
with each division operating as a business unit and quite possibly following different
strategies from those followed by other divisions within the same organization.
Writers such as Hedlund 1986, Bennis 1992, Ghoshal and Bartlett 1990, and Lorange
and Roos 1992 have highlighted the growth of complex dependency networks,
federalization, global strategic alliances and loose coupled linkages, all of which
confirm the variety of possibilities.
The dichotomy between integration and differentiation may therefore be too
simplistic. Organizations may need to operate simultaneously at both ends of the
spectrum. Evans and colleagues have termed this phenomenon duality. The notion
of "dualities" has been argued as being at the core of complex organizations,
particularly applied to building an international competence (Evans and Doz 1992;
Evans and Genadry 1999). Elsewhere these dualities have been termed dilemmas
(Hampden-Turner 1990) or dialectics (Mitroff and Linstone 1993). Evans and his
colleagues argue that HRM is a critically important tool for building dualistic
properties into the firm. In terms of HRM, the key mechanism through which this can
happen is layering, which involves building new capabilities and qualities into the
organizations culture while reinforcing its past cultural strengths. An additional
perspective would address the issues of building on the local cultures whilst
generating and exploiting the economies of scale and compound learning that can
arise from international integration. Organizations that are deeply layered often
operate more informally than can be seen from an examination of rules, hierarchies or
management processes. Layering often occurs through the long-term development of
key managers and professionals who are recruited for careers rather than short term
jobs and therefore the HRM functions of recruitment and selection, development,
retention and reward management are vital regulators of this process.
Furthermore, however complex a view of the differentiation/integration dichotomy is
taken, the debate is not necessarily resolved for any organization on a consistent basis.
There may well be differences between functions with, for example, R & D being
centralized or carried out in an International division whilst selling is localized
(Forsgren and Pahlberg 1992). Several researchers (Rosenzweig and Nohria 1994;
Kobayashi 1982; De Maggio and Powell 1983) argue that although this tension
between the pressures for internal consistency and local isomorphism affects all the
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
16/36
organization's functions, it is in HRM that there will be the greatest tendency to
adhere closely to local practices.
These are more than academic concerns. For the organization, the many factors which
influence the choice of 'global vs local' HR practices and policies means that there are
a myriad ways in which dysfunctional or ineffective decisions can be taken; and
perhaps a recognition that, in this immensely complex area, there may be no "right
solutions". Rather, the organization may find an ongoing need to pay careful attention
to organizational policies, and to be prepared continually to review them.
Thus, following Porter (1986), we would expect sectoral differences. There will, for
example, be variation between the operations of a private employment agencies
tightly connected with local markets even when they are part of a global chain, and
the internationally operating pharmaceutical industry. We would expect differences
between the way retail banking and merchant banking operate in terms of their
affinity to local practice. Where proximity to the market is a critical factor, there will
be a pressure towards local autonomy (Dunning 1993). A related issue concerns the
nature of the industry, with greater local isomorphism in a multi-domestic industry as
opposed to a global industry (Porter 1986; Prahalad and Doz 1987; Bartlet and
Ghoshal 1989).
A second factor in determining the extent of internal consistency or local
isomorphism is the strength of the flow of resources such as capital, information and
people between the parent and the affiliate. Conglomerates, where the different
businesses are in effect unconnected, are unlikely to have common management
systems (Marginson et al 1993). By contrast, where there are continual and critical
transfers between headquarters and the subsidiaries or, in cross-border manufacturing,
between the subsidiaries, then the need to maintain consistency becomes dominant.
A third factor concerns the degree to which an affiliate is embedded in the local
environment. This refers to its method of founding and its age, as well as its size, its
dependence on local inputs and the degree of influence exerted on it from local
institutions. Many organizations have operations that have been long established in a
foreign country, are tied in to local networks of suppliers and outlets and are linked
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
17/36
with local government. Locals there are often surprised to discover that they are not
locally owned. It is unsurprising that in such circumstances, internationalisation by
acquisition often involves the acquiring company being limited in the degree to which
it can impose common systems (Edwards et al 1993; Newman and Nollen 1998).
Integration of HRM on greenfield sites of international organizations tends to be
greater (Brooke and Remmers 1970; Hamill 1983; Bartlett and Ghoshal 1989).
Other factors, help to determine the extent of differentiation, including the parent
organizations orientation to control (Dunning 1993). Different organizations prefer
different degrees of central control. There is also a country of origin factor in play
here: some countries have a preference for uncertainty avoidance which is reflected in
the organizations based in and originating from those countries (Hofstede 1984). For
example, Japanese companies and US companies are more likely than others to have
close control from headquarters over their foreign operations (Bomers and Peterson
1977; Hamill 1983).
A linked factor relates to the differences between home and host country. These
differences may be either institutional or cultural. The power of local educational,
financial, legal, labour market and political systems remains extensive, so that policies
which ignore these issues would be futile (Whitley 1992). Thus, certain kinds of
operation may well be substantially influenced by local legislation or other local
regulations (Rozenzweig and Nohria 1994). The stronger the institutional framework,
the less options the global company may have to impose their own approaches
(Milkman 1992; Gooderham et al 1999). These approaches may also be shaped by
strong local conventions, or by local cultures. Where these are clear and unequivocal,
then the room for manoeuvre of the MNE is obviously restricted. The fact that the
anti-union US company Toys-R-Us was forced to recognise trade unions before it
could open in Sweden is a good example. Where the local cultures are less clear, more
tolerant, or simply unfocused, then the MNE has more scope to import practices if it
so wishes.
A further factor relates to the characteristics of the parent, including such elements as
the home country culture and the degree of cultural distance from the local culture.
Arguably, a high degree of distance between cultures might lead to more attempts to
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
18/36
impose internal consistency as headquarters feels less comfortable with the
possibilities of unknown approaches.
Evans and Lorange (1989) argue that in geocentric or global companies corporate
culture is especially important. The social control mechanisms provided by corporate
culture attempt to override, or to compensate for, the peculiarities of national culture.
In this sense, the corporate culture is the glue that holds the organization together.
Many of the processes which contribute to the development of this global corporate
culture are HRM processes: corporate wide training programmes, international
transfer of employees, networking through both formal and informal meetings etc
(Evans et al 1989; Edstrom and Galbraith 1977). Doz and Prahalad (1986) argued that
what they call "subtle management processes" can assist in the maintenance of
internal consistency: internal communication, corporate trouble shooting, corporate
jamborees, and opportunities for global networking, have the effect of encouraging a
global orientation.
Others, however, are more cautious. Laurent (1986), viewed the ability of even a
strong corporate culture to overcome national cultures as "illusionary". His research
among respondents from different European countries in one company found that the
national cultures remained powerful. Within the organization there are subcultures
and countercultures, there is abuse of rhetoric, and in the international organization,
the power of the national cultures of the host territories. There will often be
significant tensions where the corporate culture and the national cultures meet.
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
19/36
What is transferred; what is not
So what, in practice, is being learned, and transferred from one state to another within
Europe? The presentation will provide evidence of developments in HRM policies
and practices across Europe, whether they are moving together, and how
organizations are dealing with these issues.
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
20/36
Conclusions
The point has already been made that different management functions may have
different degrees of differentiation within one MNE, with HRM generally being one
of the most differentiated. Furthermore, within HRM some practices (pay, conditions,
holidays, retirement arrangements, participation and consultation) will be more
constrained, and issues such as management development, less constrained.
Rosenzweig and Nohria (1994) see the order in which six key practices will most
closely resemble local practices as: (1) Time Off; (2) Benefits, (3) Gender
Composition, (4) Training, (5) Executive Bonus and (6) Participation.
Many international organizations struggle with the issue of which elements of their
human resource policies and practices can be centralized and which decentralized.
This is linked to the ongoing debate in the literature about the extent to which MNEs
bring new HRM practices into a country, in comparison to the extent to which they
adapt their own practices to those of the local environment. Arguably, ethnocentric
organizations are more likely to be HRM innovators in the foreign locations
(Marginson et al 1993) while polycentric organisations are more likely to adapt to the
local environment (Evans and Lorange 1989; Marginson 1994). In practice, of course,
there is always an interplay between the two and both factors apply to some degree;
the question is one of degree. There is now considerable evidence that in HRM,
MNEs will bring in new practices but are in general likely to conform to national
practice (see, eg: De Maggio and Powell 1983; Maurice, Sellier & Silvestre, 1986;
Due, Madsen & Jensen, 1991; Rosenzweig and Nohria 1994; Hollingsworth & Boyer,
1997; Cleveland et al 1999;.Brewster, Morley and Mayrhofer 2000).
In this context, a key question underlying human resource practices in multinational
enterprises is identifying what should be decided for the organization as a whole and
what should be decided locally. At the extremes the arguments are clear: pay levels
for locally recruited and employed staff are determined locally; management
development systems for those selected as future organizational leaders should be
world-wide.
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
21/36
Relevant pay rates within the local community will be unknown to specialists at the
headquarters of the organization. They can only make such decisions by drawing on
and then second-guessing the local specialists a dysfunctional waste of resources.
Paying people the same salaries wherever they work makes little sense in a world
where living standards vary considerably between countries, though international
intergovernmental organizations such as the United Nations are close to that position.
Other MNEs may have levels of pay which vary considerably, but nonetheless
develop world-wide policies, for example that the top quartile always include a
performance related salary element, etc).
On the other hand, the organization needs to retain the right to promote and encourage
its best and brightest, beyond the local unit if necessary, wherever they are found. An
organizational objective, common to many MNEs, of drawing on the very best talent
available irrespective of country of origin, requires that the management development
systems have some cross-border coherence. Identifying the best people in each
country will be of maximum benefit if there is some way of comparing these
individuals across countries. Here, too, reality is not as simple as this statement
implies. For example, one very successful international bank, Citicorp, has a uniform
system throughout the world. This company argues that this facilitates identification
of the best wherever they are in the world: and its results would seem to suggest that
they are good at it. Another, equally successful international bank, and a direct
competitor, Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, has different systems in
different regions and countries, and compares leading individuals after they have been
identified by these different systems. This company argues that the different cultural
environments in which it operates mean that imposing a world-wide system would
mean missing people who may not be brought forward by a uniform, and therefore
probably culturally biased, system. And this company too has good people coming
through at the senior levels.
Between these extremes there is much uncertainty and significant problems arise. A
few examples will suffice to highlight the problems. Should there be a local
performance assessment system, so that performance can be related to the local pay
scales and take account of local cultures; or should the performance assessment
system be international, so that it can identify likely future leaders wherever they are
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
22/36
found in the organization? And, should the organization communicate with its
employees individually or through trade union or representative structures?
Taking performance appraisal first, we have enough knowledge of the effects of
culture to know that there is no easy answer to this question. The US-style
performance appraisal process assumes that employees will work jointly with their
boss to set targets, to assess their own performance, to comment on the extent to
which their boss has helped them with achieving their targets or made things more
difficult for them. It also assumes that they will do much of this through a face-to-face
interview. It is not likely that such performance appraisal systems will operate in the
same way in many Eastern societies, where open responses to seniors are discouraged,
where challenging the boss's expectations of what is possible would be seen as
insubordination, where admitting faults amounts to a loss of face and where, for
example, the idea of criticizing the boss's work in front of that boss would be seen as
some sort of organizational suicide.
The organization will seek to ensure the objectives which appraisal are seen as
meeting: encouraging improved performance, assessing career options and identifying
training needs. But how to do this? The more the organization attempts to enforce a
world-wide system, the more likely it is that managers will bend the system to their
local requirements. Often this will involve exaggerated or incomplete reports or even
reporting back on interviews that never in fact took place. Hence, what appears to be
exactly comparable data may be very misleading. The more the organization is
responsive to these cultural issues the less likely it is to have information which it can
use to assess people across national boundaries.
The question of communication channels is complicated by national institutions. In
Europe, for example, employers are required to recognize trade unions for collective
bargaining in different circumstances in different countries: when certain thresholds
(usually the existence of one or a certain number of union members among
employees) are reached; when employees request it; or, exceptionally, when unions
win ballots. In many European countries employers are required to establish and pay
for employee representation committees which may have extensive powers, including,
for example, the right to review appointments or to be consulted prior to major
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
23/36
investment decisions. Of course, national laws and institutions are a reflection of and
a support to national cultural values.
MNEs, therefore, have a series of decisions to make. Will they deal with the trade
unions? Will they refuse to? Will they check the legislation carefully and do the
minimum necessary to comply with the legislation? Or will they embrace the law and
the purposes behind it on the grounds that such behaviour will show them as a good
citizen and that other MNEs in that country have been successful whilst adopting the
local employment systems in full? Or will they allow individual countries (and, by
extension, individual country management teams) to make their own decisions? What,
in short, is to be the balance between the central organizational control and local
country autonomy?
The dualities identified by Evans and Doz (1992) and Evans and Genadry (1999) are a
reflection of the complications involved in managing HRM generally and the extra
level of complexity added by internationalism. The key paradox noted in this chapter,
between the need for the organization to have HRM policies responsive to local
national cultural demands and simultaneously to have the benefits of
internationalization and economies of scale through leveraging organization-wide
knowledge transfer, is a classic example of this complexity. There are unlikely to be
exact or final answers to the questions raised by IHRM. However, the resolution of
the paradox may lie in the learning process. The knowledge transfer perspective is
useful in highlighting the fact that an advantage enjoyed by MNEs is their ability to
learn from the range of ways of handling human resources available from the different
cultures in which they operate. There are few organizations that would claim they
have resolved the problems of ensuring that the messages concerningHRM have been
comprehensively transferred from headquarters to the subsidiary countries, and even
fewer that would claim that the two-way learning process is effective. In sum, there is
much to be done before we can ensure that the dual requirements of differentiation
and integration are well understood and can be managed effectively in international
human resource management, so that knowledge transfer can be leveraged effectively.
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
24/36
***********************************************************
Table 2 provides one indication of the role of the state in the Rhineland model.
Whereas public spending as a percentage of GDP in the EU averages at nearly 50%,it is only 32% in the USA.
Table 2. Public spending as a percentage of nominal GDP (1997)
Country Percentage of GDP
_______________________________________
Sweden 62
Finland 54
France 54
Italy 51Netherlands 49
EU total 48
Germany 48
Spain 42
UK 40
US 32
______________________________________
Source: OECD Economic Outlook, 1998.
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
25/36
Table 3. Union Density and Coverage.
1994 Union Density Rate 1994 Bargaining Coverage
_________________________________________________________
Austria 43 98Belgium 53 90
Denmark 76 90
Finland 81 95
Germany 30 92
Italy 39 82
Netherlands 26 81
Portugal 32 50
Spain 22 66
Sweden 91 93
UK 36 47
US 16 18___________________________________________________________
Source: OECD 1995.
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
26/36
References
Adler N.J. and Ghadar, F. 1990: "Strategic human resource management: a global
perspective", in Pieper, R. (ed), Human Resource Management: An International
Comparison, New York: de Gruyter.
Adler, N.J. and Bartholomew, S. 1992: 'Managing Globally Competent People',
Academy of Management Executive, 6: 52-64
Albert, F. J. (1989). Les ressources humaines, atout stratgique. Paris: Editions
Lharmattan.
Albert, M. (19??). Capitalisme contre capitalisme. ???
Astley, W. G.and Van De Ven, 1983: Central perspectives and debates in organization
theoryAdministrative Science Quarterly 28: 245-273
Barney, L. 1991: "Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage". Journal of
Management, 17: 99-120.
Bartlett, C.A. and Ghoshal, S. 1989: Managing across borders: New organizational
responses", Sloan Management Review: 29:1, 43-53.
Beaumont (1991)
Beer (1984)
Bennis, W. (1992) "On the Leading Edge of Change" Executive Excellence, Provo,
April, 9:4, 5-9
Bjrkman, I. and Gertsen, M. 1993: "Selecting and training Scandinavian expatriates:
determinants of corporate practice", Scandinavian Journal of Management, 9 (2): 145-
164.
Bolkestein, F. (1999). The Dutch model. The Economist, 22 May, 1999 (pp.115-116)
vol.351, no.8120.
Bomers, G.B.J. and Peterson, R.B. 1977: "Multinational Corporations and Industrial
Relations: The Case of West Germany and the Netherlands" British Journal of
Industrial Relations 15 March 1977 45-62
Bonache, J. and Brewster, C. "Knowledge Transfer and the Management of
Expatriation", Thunderbird International Business Review, 2001 forthcoming
Bournois, F. (1991). Gestion des RH en Europe : Donnes compares. Revue
Franaise de Gestion (mars, avril, mai) 68-83.
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
27/36
Boxall, P. 1995: Building the theory of comparative HRM Human Resource
Management Journal, 5 (5) pp 5-17
Boyacigiller, N. 1990: "Role of expatriates in the management of interdependence,
complexity, and risk of MNEs". Journal of International Business Studies, Third
Quarter: 357-378.
Brewster, C. (1994). European HRM: Reflection of, or Challenge to, the American
Concept? In P.S. Kirkbride (ed.) Human Resource Managment in Europe. London:
Routledge.
Brewster, C. (1994a). Developing a European model of human resource
management.International Journal of Human Resource Management4 (4), 765-84.
Brewster, C. (1995). Towards a European model of human resource management.
Journal of International Business Studies 26 (1), 1-21.
Brewster, C. (1999) Different Paradigms in Human Resource Management:
questions raised by comparative research in Wright P M, Dyer L D, Boudreau J W
and Milkovich G T (eds) Strategic Human Resource Management in the Twenty-First
Century JAI Press, Stamford, Conn
Brewster, C, & Bournois, F. (1991). A European perspective on human resource
management. Personnel Review20 (6), 4-13.
Brewster, C. and Harris, H. (eds.) 1999: International HRM: Contemporary issues in
Europe, Routledge, London
Brewster, C. and Scullion, H. 1997: A review and agenda for expatriate HRM
Human Resource Management Journal7 (3): 32-41
Brewster, C., & Hegewisch. A. (1994). Human resource management in Europe:
issues and opportunities. In C. Brewster, & A. Hegewisch (Eds.), Policy and practice
in European HRM(pp. 21). London: Routledge.
Brewster, C., & Larsen, H. H. (1992). Human resource management in Europe:
evidence from ten countries. The International Journal of Human Resource
Management3 (3), 409-434.
Brewster, C., & Larsen. H. H. (2000).Human resource management in Northern
Europe : Trends, dilemmas and strategy. Oxford : Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Brewster, C., Hegewisch. A., & Lockhart, T. (1991). Researching human resource
management: The methodology of the Price Waterhouse Cranfield Project on
European trends.Personnel Review 20 (6), 36-40.
Brewster, C., Morley, M. and Mayrhofer, W. (2000) New Challenges for Human
Resource Management, Macmillan, London
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
28/36
Brewster, C., Tregaskis, O., Hegewisch, A, and Mayne, L. (1996). Comparative
Research in Human Research Management: A Review and an Example. International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 7: 585-604.
Brooke, M.Z. and Remmers, H.L. 1970: The Strategy of Multinational Enterprise
Longman, London.
Bures A L and Vloeburghs D (2000) Cross-cultural patterns of internationalization
and human resource management issues Competitiveness Review 11 (2): 48-56
Burnham, J. (1941). The Managerial Revolution. New York: John Day.
Cazal D and Peretti J-M (1992)LEurope des Ressourses Humaines Editions
Liaiasons, Paris
Chandler, A.D. & Daems, H. (eds.) (1980).Managerial Hierarchies: Comparative
Perspectives on the Rise of the Modern Industrial Enterprise. Cambridge: HarvardUniversity Press.
Chandler, A.D. (1962). Strategy and Structure. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Chandler, A.D. (1977). The Visible Hand: The Managerial Revolution in American
Business. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Clark, T., & Mallory, G. (1996). The cultural relativity of human resource
management: Is there a universal model? In T. Clark (Ed.), European Human
Resource Management,(pp. 1-33). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Clark, T., & Pugh, D. (1999). Similarities and differences in European conceptions
of human resource management. International Studies of Management and
Organizations 29 (4), 84-100.
Cleveland, J.N., Gunnigle, P., Heray, N., Morley, M. and Murphy, K. 1999: US
Multinationals and Human Resource Management: Evidence on HR Practices in
European Subsidiaries, Paper presented at the Second Irish Academy of Management
Conference,University of Limerick, 9-10 September
Conrad, P., &. Pieper, R. (1990). HRM in the Federal Republic of Germany. In R.Pieper (Ed.), Human resource management: An international comparison. Berlin:
Walter de Gruyter.
Coviello, N. and Munro, H. 1997: Network relationships and the internationalization
process of small software firms Scandinavian International Business Review, 6 (4)
361-386
De Cieri, H. and Dowling, P. J. 1999: "Strategic Human Resource Management in
Multinational Enterprises" in Strategic Human Resource Management in the Twenty-
First Century (vol 4 Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management) Wright,
P.M., Dyer, L. D., Boudreau, J.W., and Milkovich, G.T. (eds), JAI Press, Stamford,Conn
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
29/36
DiMaggio, P.J. and Powell, W.W. (1983). The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional
Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields.American
Sociological Review, 48: 147-160.
Dowling, P.J., Schuler, R.S. and Welch, D 1994: International Dimensions of HumanResource Management, Belmont, C.A: Wadsworth.
Doz, Y. and Prahalad, C.K. 1986: "Controlled Variety: A Challenge for Human
Resource Management in the MNC",Human Resource Management, 25, Spring, pp 55-
71
Drucker, P. (1950). The New Society: The Anatomy of the Industrial Order. New
York: Harper.
Due, J., Madsen, J.S. and Jensen, C.S. (1991). The Social Dimension: Convergence or
Diversification of IR in the Single European Market?Industrial Relations Journal,vol.22, no. 2, 85-102.
Dunning, J.H (1980) "Towards an eclectic theory of international production: some
empirical tests"Journal of International Business Studies, 11, 9-31
Dunning, J. H. (1993): Multinational Enterprises and the Global Economy, Addison
Wesley Publishing Company, Wokingham
Edstrom, A. and Galbraith, J 1977: "Transfer of managers as a coordination and control
strategy in multinational organizations",Administrative Science Quarterly 22: 248-63
Edwards, P.K., Ferner, A., Sisson, K. 1993: "People and the Process of Management in
the Multinational Company: A Review and Some Illustrations" IRRU, Warwick,
Warwick papers in industrial relations
Evans, P. and Doz, Y. 1992: "Dualities: a paradigm for human resource and
organisational development in complex multinationals" in Pucik, V., Tichy, N. and
Barnett, C. (eds) Globalising Management: creating and leading the competitive
organization Wiley, New York
Evans, P. and Genadry, N. 1999: "A Duality- Based Prospective for Strategic HumanResource Management" in Wright, P. M., Dyer, L.D., Boudreau, J. W., and Milkovich,
G.T. (eds) Strategic Human Resource Management in the Twenty-First Century (vol 4
Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management) JAI Press, Stamford, Conn
Evans, P. and Lorange, P. 1989: "The Two Logics Behind Human Resource
Management" in Evans, P.A.L.; Doz, Y.; Lorange, P. Human Resource Management
in International Firms, Change, Globalization, Innovation, Macmillan, London 144-
161
Evans, P., Doz, Y. and Laurent, A. (eds) 1989: Human Resource Management in
International Firms: Change, Globalization, Innovation, Macmillan, London
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
30/36
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
31/36
Hamill, J. (1983) "The Labour Relations Practices of Foreign-Owned and Indigenous
Firms,Employee Relations, 5:1, 14-17
Hampden-Turner, C. M. 1990: Charting the corporate mind: from dilemma to
strategy Blackwell, Oxford
Harbison and Myers (1959).
Harris, H., & Brewster, C. (1999). International human resource management: the
European contribution. In H. Harris, & C. Brewster (Eds.), International HRM:
contemporary issues in Europe (pp.3-28). London: Routledge.
Hedlund, G. 1986: The hypermodern MNC - a heterarchy? Human Resource
Management, Vol. 25, pp. 9-35
Heenan, D. and Perlmutter, H. 1979: Multinational Organisation Development.Reading MA: Addison-Wesley
Hegewisch, A., & Brewster, C. (1993). Development in human resource management
in Europe An introduction. In A. Hegewisch, & C. Brewster (Eds.), European
developments in HRM (pp.15-32). London: Kogan Page Limited.
Hegewisch, A., & Brewster, C. (Eds.), (1993). European developments in HRM.
London: Kogan Page Limited.
Hendry, C. (1994). The Single European Market and the HRM response. Pp. 93-113
in Paul S. Krikbride (ed.), Human resource management in Europe: Perspectives of
the 1990s. London: Routledge.
Hendry, C., & Pettigrew, A. (1990). Human resource management: an agenda for the
1990s. International Journal of Human Resource Management 1 (1), 17-43.
Hoffman, A. (1999). Institutional evolution and change: Environmentalism and the
U.S. chemical industry.Academy of Management Journal, vol.42, no.4, 351-371.
Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hofstede, G. (1984): Culture's Consequences: International Differences In Work-
Related Values, Abridged Edition, Sage Publications, London
Hollingsworth, J. R. and Boyer, R. (1997). Coordination of Economic Actors and
Social Systems of Production. In J.R. Hollingsworth and R. Boyer (eds.)
Contemporary Capitalism. Cambridge: University Press.
Hossain, S. and Davis, H.A. 1989: Some Thoughts On International Personnel
Management as an Emerging Field in Nedd, A., Ferris, G.R. and Rowland, K.M.
(eds) Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management - International
Human Resources Management, Greenwich, London
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
32/36
Itami, H. 1987:Mobilizing Invisible Assets, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, M.A.
Karagozoglu, N. and Lindell, M. (1998) Internationalization of small and medium-sized
technology-based firms: an exploratory studyJournal of Small Business Management,
36: 1, 44-59
Kay, J. (1998). Crisis, what crisis?Financial Times, 25.11.98.
Kerr, C. (1983). The Future of Industrial Societies. Cambridge: Harvard University
Press.
Kerr, C., Dunlop, J.T., Harbison, F. and Meyers, C. (1960).Industrialism and
Industrial Man. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Kidger, P.J. (1991). The Emergence of International Human Resource Management.
International Human Resource Management, vol. 2 (2), 149-163.
Kobayashi, N. (1982) "The Present and Future of Japanese Multinational Enterprises:
A Comparative Analysis of Japanese and US-European Multinational Management,
International Studies of Management and Organization, 12:1, 38-59
Kobrin, S.J. 1994: "Is there a relationship between a geocentric mind-set and
multinational strategy",Journal of International Business Studies, 3: 493-512.
Kochan, T., Batt, R. and Dyer, R. 1992: "International Human Resource Studies: A
Framework for Future Research" in D. Lewin et al. (ed). Research Frontiers in
Industrial Relations and Human Resources (Madison: Industrial Relations Research
Association, 1992).
Kochan, T.A. and Dyer, L. (1992) Managing transformational change: the role of
human resource professionals. Sloan Working Paper 3420-92-BPS, MIT, Mass.
Kogut, B. and Zander, U. 1993: "Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of
the multinational corporation",Journal of International Business Studies, (4)625: 645.
Laurent, A. (1986). The cross-cultural puzzle of international human resource
management. Human Resource Management, 25 (1), 91-102.
Legge, K. (1989). Human resource management: a critical analysis. In J. Storey (Ed.),
New perspectives on human resource management. London: Routledge.
Legge, K. (1995). Human Resource Management. Rhetorics and Realities. London:
Macmillan.
Lengnick-Hall, C.A. and Lengnick-Hall, M.L. (1988). Strategic human resources
management: a review of the literature and a proposed typology, Academy of
Management Review, vol.13 (3): 454-70.
Locke, R., Piore, M. and Kochan, T. (1995).Introduction. In R. Locke, T. Kochan andM. Piore (eds.),Employment Relations in a Changing World Economy.
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
33/36
Lorange, P., Roos, J. and Bronn, P.S. (1992) "Building Successful Strategic
Alliances"Long Range Planning, 25: 6, 10-18
Marginson, P. 1994: "Multinational Britain: Employment and Work in an
Internationalised Economy"Human Resource Management Journal, 4, 4, 63-80
Marginson, P., Armstrong, P. Edwards, P., Purcell,J. and Hubbard, N. 1993: The
Control of Industrial Relations in Large Companies: An Initial Analysis of the
Second Company Level Industrial Relations Survey Warwick Papers in Industrial
Relations, No. 45, December 1993 Coventry: IRRU
Matlay, H. 1997: The Globalization Tendencies of Firms Operating in the Small
Business Sector of the British Economy: an overview, Second Foundation, Oxford
Matthews, C. (1997). Human resources development at the European level: the role
of the European social fund. A UK perspective. Unpublished Masters Thesis.Brugge: College of Europe.
Maurice, M., Sellier, F. and Silvestre, J. (1986). The Social Foundations of Industrial
Power. Cambridge, Mass., The MIT Press.
Mendenhall, M. and Oddou, G., (eds) 1991: International Human Resource
Management, PWS-Kent, Boston.
Milgrom, P. and Roberts, J. 1992:Economics, Organization and Management. Prentice-
Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Milkman, R. 1992 The Impact of Foreign Investment on US Industrial Relations: the
case of Californias Japanese-owned plantsEconomic and Industrial Democracy 13(2):
151-181
Milliman, J., von Glinow, M.A. & Nathan, M. 1991: Organizational Life Cycles and
Strategic International Human Resource Management in Multinational Companies:
Implications for Congruence Theory Academy of Management Review 16:2 pp 318-
339
Mintzberg, H. (1978). Patterns in strategy formation.Management Science 24 (9):
934-48.
Mitroff, I.I. and Linstone, H.A. 1993: The unbounded mind: breaking the chains of
traditional business thinkingOUP Oxford
Naumann, E. 1992: "A conceptual model of expatriate turnover", Journal of
International Business Studies, (3): 499-531.
Nedd, A., Ferris, G.R. and Rowland, K.M. 1989:Research In Personnel And Human
Resources Management International Human Resources Management, Greenwich,London.
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
34/36
Nerdrum, L. (1999). The Economics of Human Capital. Oslo: Scandinavian
University Press.
Newman, K.L. and Nollen, S.D. 1998: Managing Radical Organizational Change,
Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage
Nohria, N. and Ghoshal, S. 1994: "Differentiated Fit and Shared values: Alternatives for
managing headquarters-subsidiary relations". Strategic Management Journal, 15: 491-
502.
OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). (1995)
Economic Outlook. Paris: OECD.
OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). (1998)
Economic Outlook. Paris: OECD.
Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic Responses to Institutional Processes.Academy of
Management Review, vol. 16 (1), 145-179.
Osterman, P. (1994). How Common is Workplace Transformation and How Can We
Explain Who Adopts It? Results From a National Survey.Industrial and Labor
Relations Review (January):175-188.
Pedder, S. (1999). A Survey of France. The Economist(1999). 5 June,1999, vol. 351,
no.8122.
Penrose, E.T. 1959: The Theory of Growth of the Firm, Basil Blackwell, London.
Perlmutter, H. 1969: "The tortuous evolution of the multinational corporation".
Columbia Journal of World Business, 1: 9-18.
Pfeffer, J. & Veiga, J.F. (1999). Putting people first for organizational success.
Academy of Management Executive, vol. 13 no.2, 37-48.
Pieper, R. (ed.) (1990). Human Resource Management: An International Comparison.
Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Piore, M. & Sabel, C. (1984). The Second Industrial Divide. New York: Basic Books.
Polanyi, M. 1962:Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy University
of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
Poole, M. (1986).Industrial Relations - Origins and Patterns of National Diversity.
London: RKP.
Porter, M. 1986: Competition in Global Industries, Harvard Business School Press,
Boston.
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
35/36
Prahalad, C.K. and Doz, Y. 1987: The multinational mission: Balancing global
demands and global vision. New York: Free Press.
Pucik, V. 1984: 'White Collar Human Resource Management in Large Japanese
Manufacturing Firms'Human Resource Management, 23: 257-76
Punnett, B.J., & Ricks, D. A. 1992:, 'International Business'Pws Kent Publishing Co.
Boston.
Quinn, R.E. 1988: Beyond rational management: mastering the paradoxes and
competing demands of high performance, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco
Rosenzweig, P.M. and Nohria, N. 1994: Influences on Human Resource
Management Practices in Multinational Corporations Journal of International
Business Studies 25:2 229-252
Scherm, E. 1995:Internationales Personalmanagement, Munchen, Wien
Schuler and Jackson (1987)
Schuler, R.S., Dowling, P.J. and De Cieri, H. 1993: "An integrative framework of
strategic international human resource management"International Journal of Human
Resource Management4(4): 717- 764
Schultz, T.W. (1971).Investment in Human Capital: The Role of Education and
Research. New York: The Free Press.
Scullion, H. and Brewster, C. 1997: A review and agenda for expatriate HRMHuman
Resource Management Journal, 7 (3): 32-41
Shaw, B.B., Deck, J.E., Ferris, G.R. and Rowland, K.M. 1990:Research In Personnel
And Human Resource Management - International Human Resources Management
Greenwich, Conn, London
Smith, D. (1999). Will Europe Work? London: Profile Books.
Sparrow, P.R., & Hilltrop, J.M. (1994). Redefining the field of human resource
management: a battle between national mindsets and faces of business transitions.Human Resource Management 36 (2), 201-219.
Spender, J.C. 1996: "Making Knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm",
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17 (Winter Special Issue): 45-62.
Sundaram, A.K. and Black, J.S. 1992: 'The Environment and Internal Organization of
Multinational Enterprises'Academy of Management Review, 17: 729-57
Tallman, S. and Fladmoe-Lindquist, K. 1994: A resource-based model of the
multinational firm". Paper presented in the Strategic Management Society Conference,
Paris, France.
-
7/28/2019 Brewster Paper
36/36
Taylor, S., Beechler, S. and Napier N. 1996: "Toward an integrative model of strategic
international human resource management", Academy of Management Review, 21
(4):959-965.
Teague, P. (1994). EC social policy and European human resource management. In
C. Brewster, & A. Hegewisch (Eds.),Policy and practice in European human resource
management: evidence and analysis (pp. 216-29). London: Routledge.
The Economist(1999a). General Electric. 18 September. (pp23-30) vol.352, no.8137.
The Economist(1999b). Desperately seeking a perfect model. 10 April, 1999 (pp89-
90) vol.351, no. 8114.
The Economist. (1997). Beer, sandwiches and statistics. 12 July, 1997.
Torbiorn, I. 1982: Living Abroad: Personal Adjustment and Personnel Policy inOverseas Settings., New York: John Wiley.
Trompenaars, F. 1993. Riding the waves of culture: Understanding cultural diversity
in business. London: Economist Books.
Tung, R. 1981: "Selection and training of personnel for overseas assignments",
Columbia Journal of World Business, 16 (1): 68-78.
Weber, W., and Festing, M. 1991: Entwicklungstendenzen im internationlen
Personalmanagement: Personalfuhrung im Wandel Gables Magazine: 2: 10-16
Weber, W., Kabst, R. and Gramley, C. (1998). Does the Common Market Imply
Common Human Resource Policies? Conference Proceedings of Sixth Conference on
International Human Resource Management, University of Paderborn, June 22-25,
1998.
Weinstein, M. and Kochan, T. (1995). The Limits of Diffusion: Recent Developments
in Industrial Relations and Human Resource Practices in the United States. In R.
Locke, T. Kochan and M. Piore (eds.),Employment Relations in a Changing World
Economy. Cambridge (Mass.): The MIT Press.
Whitley, R. (1992) "Societies, firms and markets: the social structuring of business
systems" in Whitley, R. (ed) European Business Systems: Firms and Markets in
Their National Contexts, Sage, London
Williamson, O. (1975).Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications.
New York: Free Press.
Williamson, O. (1985). The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. New York: Free
Press.