International Hr m

8/12/2019 International Hr m

1/18

International human resourcemanagement: overcomingdisciplinary sectarianism

Mary Keating and Karen ThompsonSchool of Business Studies, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland

Keywords Human resource management, Multinational companies,Cross-cultural management,

Abstract International human resource management (IHRM) research is becoming anincreasingly important topic in light of the relentless pace of globalisation. Three strands of researchcontribute to our understanding of IHRM, the most dominant being research on human resourcemanagement in multinational companies. This paper categorises the literature in the eld,

highlighting disciplinary introspection within and between each strand. Argues that, by neglecting toembrace the contributions of research from cross-cultural management and comparative humanresource management, the eld lacks the necessary conceptual and methodological tools to advance.Concludes by suggesting areas where collaboration and cross-fertilisation between disciplines canoccur before embarking on the integrative process of theory building.

1. IntroductionThe body of literature on international human resource management (IHRM) hasgrown dramatically, resulting from the rapid growth in international business activity.The shift in focus from a domestic to a global business perspective has a profoundimpact on the corporate human resources management activities (Dowling et al., 1999).Human resource management (HRM) is understood in the broadest sense of the term,

encompassing all management decisions and actions that affect the nature of therelationship between the organisation and the employees its human resources (Beeret al., 1984, p. 1). The effective management of an organisations human resources isvital for the successful implementation of international strategies in multinaltionalcompanies (MNCs; Bartlett and Ghoshal, 1989). In addition, the competitiveness of companies and even nations has increasingly been recognised to stem from the calibreof their people and people management strategies (Pieper, 1990; Porter, 1990; Pucik,1992). All in all, the globalisation of business has resulted in the increasing recognitionof the value of a well-managed workforce and the evolution of the human resourcefunction from being viewed as a support function to one of strategic importance (Pucik,1992; Teagarden and Von Glinow, 1997; Scullion and Starkey, 2000).

Research on HRM in an international context has been approached from a numberof different disciplines, including amongst others human resource management,international business, cross-cultural management, strategic management,psychology, comparative management, and by both academics and practitioners.Based on a review of the literature, Clark et al. (1999) conclude a central issue concernswhat is constant and what varies across nations (p. 521). The literature covers a widespectrum of issues, ranging from comparative studies of individual HR practicesacross the countries to the source(s) of variance in HR strategies in MNC subsidiaries,and as such is a fragmented and seemingly disparate body of knowledge.

The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available atwww.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm

Internationalhuman resource

management

595

Employee RelationsVol. 26 No. 6, 2004

pp. 595-612q Emerald Group Publishing Limited

0142-5455DOI 10.1108/01425450410562191
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregisterhttp://www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htmhttp://www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htmhttp://www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister


2/18

This article attempts to categorise the varied literature within the eld. To this endwe draw upon the framework proposed by De Cieri and Dowling (1999) whichidenties three broad strands within the eld of IHRM:

(1) HRM in MNCs[1], focusing on the management of human resources ininternational companies.

(2) Cross-cultural management (CCM), dealing with the impact of culturaldifference on management practices.

(3) Comparative human resource management (CHRM), comparing HRM systemsand practices at both organisational and national levels.

We identify that each strand stems from different disciplinary areas and has its ownresearch purpose, research questions, issues, methodologies, ndings, weaknesses andstrengths. Critically, however, we discern that these three related approaches haveremained introverted, not looking beyond disciplinary boundaries for contributionstowards the theory-building and methodological design of their research.

This article will outline the case for interdisciplinary collaboration in the eld of IHRM. First, the three strands of research are described with particular attention givento analysing their strengths and weaknesses. We argue that interdisciplinarycollaboration and the cross-fertilisation of ideas between strands should be encouragedin order to facilitate the construction of an inclusive approach to theory building.Specically, we suggest that our understanding of HRM in MNCs could be improvedby incorporating some of the contributions of the other two approaches to internationalhuman resource management.

2. HRM in MNCsThe literature on HRM in MNCs is the dominant strand in the study of IHRM andexplores the strategies employed by multinational companies to manage their humanresource (Hendry, 1994; Torrington, 1994; Dowling et al., 1999; Harzing andRuysseveldt, 2003). Research on HRM in MNCs has been concerned with enabling theinternational company to effectively achieve its goals and objectives through thedevelopment of appropriate HR strategic and practice in the globally dispersedorganization (Schuler et al., 1993; Sparrow et al., 1994; Scullion, 1995; Taylor et al., 1996;De Cieri and Dowling, 1999). HRM in MNCs is essentially HRM embedded in thecontext of international business (De Cieri and Dowling, 1999). In assessing thedistinguishing factors between domestic and international HRM, Dowling et al. (1999)conclude that it is [t]he complexities of operating in different countries and employingdifferent national categories of workers that are the main factors that differentiatedomestic and international HRM, rather than any major differences between the HRMfunctions performed (p. 7). HRM in international organisations is thus moreencompassing and more complex than domestic HRM.

Discussions of HRM in MNCs deal almost exclusively with expatriate management,implying that managing international work assignments is the only way in whichHRM changes in international rms (Harris and Brewster, 1999). However, this denesthe eld too narrowly. Recent literature is evolving to take a broader, holistic and evenstrategic view of HRM in MNCs, often referred to as strategic international HRM orstrategic HRM in MNCs (Schuler et al., 1993; Taylor et al., 1996; De Cieri and Dowling,1999).

ER26,6

596


3/18

2.1 What is effective HRM in MNCs? The concept of HRM, as it originally developed in the US as an alternative totraditional personnel management, is inextricably linked with business strategy[2](Devanna et al., 1984; Schuler and Jackson, 1987). Accordingly, the raison de tre of HRM is to enable the international organisation to achieve its strategic objectives inorder to build and maintain sustainable competitive advantage for the organisation,and as such HRM in MNCs is a means to an end rather than an end in itself. MNCs facedual and conicting pressures arising from the simultaneous needs for globalintegration and local differentiation in international companies, and the strategiesdeveloped to meet these challenges have important implications for the internationalHRM function (Prahalad and Doz, 1987; Schuler et al., 1993). Conversely, HRMstrategies can, in turn, inuence the achievement of organisational strategies (De Cieriand Dowling, 1999). Striking a balance between the conicting pressures for globalintegration and local responsiveness within the MNC and creating the appropriate levelof globalness and localness is implicit or explicit in all the literature on HRM in MNCs.For instance, Sparrow et al. (1994) argue the successful global management of HR:

. . . is best dened as the possession of the skills and knowledge of formulating andimplementing policies and practices that effectively integrate and cohere globally dispersedemployees, while at the same time recognizing and appreciating local differences that impacton the effective utilisation of human resources (p. 268).

2.2 Theories and models of HRM in MNCsDespite the recognised importance of effective human resource management in MNCs,our understanding of the process and strategies of managing people in these globalorganisations remains rather limited. Theories of HRM in MNCs try to understand howMNCs organise the HR function and manage their worldwide workforce in order toachieve their organisational goals and objectives. Despite the increasingly globaleconomy, variations in approaches to the management of human resources in MNCscontinue to persist, even among MNCs operating in similar environments (Guest andHoque, 1996; Geary and Roche, 2001).

The main body of the literature seeks to establish the sources of variation in HRpractices across and between globally dispersed companies. A range of factors, i.e.country of origin, host country, MNC and subsidiary factors, have been identied (see,for example, research by Rosenzweig and Nohria, 1994). Particular attention is paid tothe extent that foreign subsidiaries behave as local rms versus the extent to whichtheir HR practices resemble those of the parent corporation, known as the host countryeffect and the country-of-origin effect, respectively[3]. The country-of-origin effect hasbeen found to exert varying degrees of inuence on different practices and in differentsubsidiaries (Rosenzweig and Nohria, 1994; Ferner, 1997). Nonetheless, the nature of the host country context affects the extent to which MNCs may implementcountry-of-origin (human resource) management practices in their subsidiaries (Ferner,1997). HR practices at subsidiary level tend to be some form of hybrid of the parent andlocal practices with the relative inuence of parent company and host contextinuences on various HRM practices being a continuum rather than an either/orscenario as is often portrayed (Weber et al., 2000; Tregaskis et al., 2001).

Typologies of different approaches to HRM in MNCs have been identied whichdifferentiate approaches to HRM in MNCs according to the level of adaptation to local


management

597


4/18

practices and/or adherence to global practices (e.g. Taylor et al., 1996; Bird et al., 1998; Jansenns, 2001). It is generally recognised that due to the differentiated nature of theorganisational and environmental contingencies facing individual subsidiaries, MNCswill not necessarily adopt a uniform approach to managing their human resourcesthroughout the global organisation.

Related to the debate regarding the inuence of the country-of-origin effect is theextent to which multinationals act as vehicles for transmitting HR practices from theparent country business culture to the host countries in which they operate (Ferner,1997). There has been particular interest in studying MNCs from highlyinstitutionalised and regulated systems such as Germany to establish if theyattempt to drop what they see as the constraining elements of their business systemsonce they leave their own borders (Ferner, 1997; Ferner and Quintanilla, 1998; Ferneret al., 2001). Reverse diffusion, i.e. the transfer of management practices fromsubsidiaries to other subsidiaries and/or MNC HQ, has also been the subject of recentexploratory case study research (e.g. Edwards, 1998). Furthermore, despite the nowwidespread recognition of cultural and institutional differences, there has been a recentresurgence in one-best-wayism in the literature (e.g. Martin and Beaumont, 1998;Belanger et al., 1999). While evidence of both best practice transfer and reversediffusion has been found, cultural and institutional appropriateness were found toregulate their implementation.

Several authors propose models of how HRM ts into the overall global strategy of the MNC. Adler and Ghadars (1990) research is one of the rst to indicate that HRMstrategy should be linked to environmental considerations and international businessstrategy. A comprehensive model of strategic HRM in MNCs was developed by Schulerand colleagues (Schuler et al., 1993) and later revised by De Cieri and Dowling (1999),whereby MNCs are understood to operate in a context of worldwide conditions(exogenous variables) including industry characteristics, country-regional

characteristics and inter-organisational networks and organisational-speciccontingencies (endogenous variables). HRM is perceived to assist the MNC inachieving its goals and concerns while these goals and concerns also inuence theMNCs approach to HRM. Although the literature advocates a strategic approach toHRM in international companies, recent evidence suggests that MNCs still take ashort-term, ad hoc and non-strategic approach to HRM (Bird and Beechler, 1995; DeCieri and Dowling, 1997), suggesting that theory has outpaced practice in this area.

2.3 Critique of the literature on HRM in MNCsThe conclusions that can be drawn from research in the eld of HRM in MNCs havebeen severely limited by the shortcomings of the research (Ferner, 1997) Whileprogress has been made in understanding HRM in MNCs (Dowling et al., 1999), manyagree that the discipline still suffers from the shortcomings identied by Scho llhammer(1975) in his review of the early work on HRM in international companies (Scullion,1995). Research in the discipline to date has been ethnocentric[4], containing anundeniable strong US bias (Adler, 1983; Clark et al., 1999). Further criticisms have beenlevelled at the managerialist nature of research (Ferner, 1997). Thispractitioner-focused problem-solving approach has also resulted in a fragmentedbody of literature (Hendry, 1994). Although it has been acknowledged that the wayforward is to integrate both practitioner and academic concerns and issues to create

ER26,6

598


5/18

practice-relevant theory (Tung and Punnett, 1993), there has been little evidence of such an approach to date. The lack of empirical data on HRM practices and policies inMNCs is also widely acknowledged (Harzing, 1999). Many of the models which havebeen developed are purely conceptual with propositions and hypotheses remaininguntested. Where empirical studies are conducted the sample tends to be small or of limited geographical dispersion. Further methodological problems are alsohighlighted. The HR manager is often the only source of information in studieswhich may result in interviewers hearing about policy rather than actual practice. Mostof the studies are survey based, often suffering from low response rates and smallsample sizes (Harzing, 1999). In addition, research has focused almost exclusively onlarge established international companies rather than small and medium-sizedenterprises (SMEs) who are only beginning to internationalise (Scullion, 1999).

The vast majority of writers on HRM in MNCs adopt a contingency perspective(Festing, 1997) whereby HR policies for differing environment conditions or businessstrategies are prescribed. While the contingency approach does highlight thecomplexities inherent in managing MNCs, it does not explain the reasons forsystematic variation between certain variables and the underlying relationships,processes and interdependencies (Festing, 1997). Furthermore, culture, the mostfrequently cited contingency factor, is often inadequately dened and operationalised.All in all, while the literature has shed some light on the inuences on HRM in MNCs,our understanding of how these inuence processes occur remains less developed.

In summary, the literature on HRM in international companies lacks empiricalstudies, in particular case-studies which can provide in-depth qualitative data onprocesses involved in managing HR in the geographically dispersed MNC subsidiaries.Recent years have witnessed an improvement in theory development in this approach(e.g. Schuler et al., 1993; Taylor et al., 1996; De Cieri and Dowling, 1999) and there is anemerging body of non-Anglo Saxon theory and research. Ferners research project on

HRM in US multinationals in the United Kingdom is promising in this regard (Ferneret al., 2004). It is our view that many of the weaknesses of this strand could beovercome if researchers were to draw on some of the contributions of research from theCCM and CHRM approaches.

3. Cross-cultural managementEarly international human resource management studies focused mainly on thecultural relativity[5] of (human resource) management practices, i.e. that thedevelopment of a companys HR policies are subject to cultural inuences and thatMNCs must take these culturally based differences into account when operatingoverseas (cf. Hofstede, 1980; Laurent, 1986; Schneider and Barsoux, 1997; Adler, 2003).Although much of this literature is not explicitly labelled IHRM, it deals with issues of cultural differences in management style (Hofstede, 1980), employee motivation (Smithet al., 1996), leadership style (House et al., 1999; Keating and Martin, 2004), negotiationstyle (Martin, 2004), as well as cross-cultural training and acculturation issues forexpatriates (Black et al., 1999). This literature has much to offer the wider eld of IHRMin terms of explaining similarities and differences in IHRM.

The objective of studies in the cross-cultural management (CCM) approach is toexplain differences in employee behaviours and attitudes as well as managementpractices using culture as an explanatory variable. This contrasts with the HRM in


management

599


6/18

MNCs literature where there may be several organisational and environmentalexplanatory variables. For explanatory and comparative purposes, culture tends tobe operationalised according to psychological dimensions. Some of the most importantwork in classifying cultures and their value orientations has been undertaken byKluckhohn and Strodtbeck (1961), and their research has been widely appropriated bycross-cultural management researchers, most notably by Hofstede (1980) and morerecently by House et al. (1999). This dimensional approach, although the most commonmethod of operationalising culture in cross-cultural studies, is not without its critics(see McSweeney, 2002).

3.1 Issues in cross-cultural management Researchers in CCM are predominantly concerned with investigating whetherorganisations and HRM practices are converging or diverging. The notion of convergence is central to the ongoing debate about the relationship betweenglobalisation and existing and evolving patterns of national management (Mayer andWhittington, 2002). There are two conicting two schools of thought on this matter.The culturalists or culture-bound theorists believe that cultural values and norms affectbehaviour and attitudes of organisations in the same way as they do day-to-day life.Studies have provided substantial evidence of cultural variety not only in managementsystems and structures but also in the perceptions of management itself (Hofstede,1980; Laurent, 1986; Smith et al., 1996; House et al., 1999). As a result, theorists of thisschool believe that there can be no universal model of management and thatmanagement theories and practices from one culture are not necessarily transferable toother cultures. In contrast, culture-free theorists argue that non-cultural environmentalfactors, such as the level of industrialisation or technological development in a societyas well as industry and organisational characteristics, can override the inuence of culture in organisations (e.g. Kerr et al., 1960; Hickson et al., 1974). These non-culturalfactors will act in the same direction upon management practices and organisations inall cultures and as the pressures for convergence get stronger, it is predicted that aworldwide convergence of management practice will occur. Some authors maintainthat neither theory alone adequately explains the research ndings and that bothsimilarities and differences are evident in organisations around the world. Adler et al.(1986), drawing on Child (1981), suggest that:

. . . perhaps [ . . .] organisations are becoming more similar in terms of structure andtechnology (macro-level variables) whereas peoples behaviour within those organisations(micro-level variables) continue to manifest culturally based dissimilarities.

Although this argument has been widely accepted in the IHRM literature,McGaughney and De Cieri (1999) have recently argued that the situation is morecomplex and that both convergence and divergence may occur at both micro- andmacro-level variables. The debate continues.

3.2 Critique of cross-cultural researchA review of the cross-cultural research consistently reveals major methodological,epistemological and theoretical deciencies (Clark et al., 1999). The problems andweaknesses of CCM research are widely discussed in the literature (Redding, 1994;Cavusgil and Das, 1997; Caligiuri and Stroh, 1995, Teagarden et al., 1995), leading tooptimism that they can be overcome.

ER26,6

600


7/18

Many of these problems have been addressed and overcome in the GLOBE[6]project (House et al., 1999). Unlike most previous cross-cultural management research,GLOBE takes a multi-methodological approach, combining both quantitative andqualitative instruments of data collection and by using a multidisciplinary, global,collaborative research team to design, conduct and analyse the research. The membersof the GLOBE project dene culture as:

. . . [the] shared motives, values, beliefs, identities and interpretations or meanings of signicant events that result from common experiences of members of collectives and aretransmitted across age generations (House et al., 1999, p. 13).

Building on Hofstedes four dimensions of culture, GLOBE constructed nine dimensionson the basis of which to describe national societal cultures[7]. Culture is measuredthrough the commonality of practices and values on the nine dimensions. Practices aremeasured by assessing what is/are common behaviours and practices in the society,whilst values are expressed in response to judgements regarding what should be inthe society. It is argued that these culturally derived values and beliefs held by themembers of a society will inuence both behaviour and institutions in that society andalso the extent to which these are viewed as legitimate, acceptable and effective (Houseet al., 1999). Teagarden et al. (1995), through their idiographic study, have begun thework of conducting cross-cultural collaborative research in IHRM. Going forward, wesuggest that GLOBE project may provide useful insights on methodology and that thendings on the dimensions of societal culture can potentially provide a robustexplanatory framework for both researchers and practitioners (House, 2004).

In summary, CCM literature uses culture as an explanatory variable to explainvariance in management practice worldwide. The major contribution of CCM has beenthe development of a method of operationalising culture on the basis variousdimensions. Despite progress on both the methodological and theoretical fronts, thecontribution of this approach is weakened by its exclusive focus on culture as anexplanatory variable and consequent exclusion of other potential inuences.

4. Comparative HRMComparative HRM (CHRM) involves the comparison of HR systems and practicesacross nations and regions around the world. Research in this eld tends to comepredominantly from Britain, and to a lesser extent from the rest of Europe. Theseresearchers have critically observed the nature of the HRM concept as it has beenimported into Europe from the United States since the 1980s, and have comparedapproaches to HRM in various countries.

The objective of CHRM research is to describe and explain differences in andidentify broad patterns of national HRM systems (Begin, 1992). The rationale forCHRM research is both pragmatic and academic (Brewster and Tyson, 1991).Pragmatically, the corporate quest for competitive advantage and new, more efcientways of managing human resources across national and cultural boundaries is amotive for undertaking comparative analysis. The academic interest in CHRM is at twolevels. At one level, academics wish to understand the economic and social systemsthat prevail in other countries, including HRM and its institutional context, while atanother level they desire to describe and explain how and why variations in nationalsystems of HRM impact rm, industry and even national competitiveness.


management

601


8/18

4.1 Issues in CHRM Comparative studies of human resource management have consistently revealed thatthere are signicant country differences in HRM around the world. Variations havebeen attributed to differences in national cultural and institutional (legal, economic andsocial) environments (Pieper, 1990; Brewster et al., 2000, Clark, 1996). Nonetheless, asresult of the increasing volume of international business and increased interaction withother cultures, studies have sought to establish whether their is any evidence of convergence in HRM models, practices and issues across national borders. While therehave been some claims of convergence (Towers Perrin, 1992; Sparrow et al., 1994), theevidence to date remains weak. Even these authors concede that some differencescontinue to persist and that convergence is not happening on such a large scale aspreviously predicted (e.g. Kerr et al., 1960; Hickson et al., 1974). There is considerablesupport for the view that both convergence and divergence are occurring, but atdifferent levels. For example, on the basis of the Price Waterhouse Craneld Study of HRM in Europe, Brewster et al. (1996) conclude that while there is an increasinglycommon understanding of the issues in HRM across Europe, organisations continue todiffer in how they deal with these issues in practice.

CHRM research has thus provided support for the cultural relativity of HRMconcepts, theories and models. The need to understand HRM from a European asopposed to a United States perspective has become a dominant theme in the literature(Geppert et al., 2002; Guest, 1990; Pieper, 1990; Brewster et al., 2000; Sparrow andHiltrop, 1997). These conclusions contradict calls for establishing best practice, as if HRinstitutions and practices are culture- and institution-specic, then their applicabilityand effectiveness in other contexts is questionable and by no means universal.

4.2 CHRM theories and modelsA number of models and frameworks have been developed in attempts to describe,understand and explain differences in national human resource management systems.Early theories of CHRM were based on existing models of comparative cross-culturalmanagement (such as that by Neghandi, 1983), or existing theories of domestic HRM:for example, Poole (1990) assesses the suitability of the model by Beer et al. (1984) todescribe HRM in an international context. In a series of publications, Brewster hassought to develop a model to explain differences in national HRM systems in Europe.The model highlights the various international and national contextual factors whichimpact upon HRM and the relationship between HRM and corporate strategy(Brewster, 1995). Clark and Mallory (1996) argue that Brewsters work is inherentlyethnocentric due to its implicit assumption that the (American) model will beuniversally applicable. They propose an alternative model of comparative HRM whichattempts to overcome the criticisms of Brewsters work by not pre-specifying a modelof HRM. The disadvantage of this polycentric approach is that in the absence of anystandards it may be difcult to compare results from different countries.

A different perspective is taken by Sparrow and Hiltrop (1997) who argue for a moredynamic and change process-oriented framework for studying comparative HRM.They maintain that an examination and understanding of the main processes whichdrive the transition in HRM, and thus ultimately convergence or divergence is requiredto understand what factors inuence national systems of HRM and how these inuenceprocesses occur.

ER26,6

602


9/18

In contrast to the above models which examine HRM at a national level, Budhwarand Debrah (2001) develop a conceptual framework for cross-national and comparativeHRM research at organisational level. They build on the work of domestic andcomparative HRM theorists and, unlike the frameworks described above, includeorganisational contingency factors such as age and stage in life cycle as well asorganisational strategies and policies. However, in its attempt to encompass allpotential variables, this model is very complex, containing 42 factors in all, and is thusmost likely to be difcult to test empirically in a comparative context.

4.3 Critique of CHRM researchCHRM research to date has been severely weakened by the failure to use theoreticalframeworks to support the design of studies conducted and their conclusions. Themethodological and conceptual problems associated with CHRM research are welldocumented (cf. Brewster and Tyson, 1991; Sparrow et al., 1994; Brewster et al., 1996;Clark et al., 1999). Although the objective of CHRM is to describe and explainvariations in national HRM systems, there appears to be little consensus amongauthors as to what HRM constitutes. As such, CHRM research lacks a fundamentalprerequisite: agreement on the denition of its dependent variable. Furthermore,comparative studies of HRM tend to be descriptive and lack analysis and explanation.Explanations, where provided, are generally extremely weak, with differences usuallyattributed to cultural or institutional factors. The use of culture as an explanatoryvariable for variations in organisational functioning and structuring has beenproblematic (Clark et al., 1999). The models lack explanatory power as to when andhow these factors exert an inuence on HRM, the strength of the inuence relative toother factors and separating the effects of the various contextual elements. Theresultant models fail to provide a systematic explanation for any differences found.Further, there is an absence of a comprehensive descriptive empirical cross-national

data on HRM as well as evidence of ethnocentric bias in much of the literature in thisapproach. In summary, researchers have been critical but not constructive inadvancing the eld. This approach would benet from the advances made by thecross-cultural group in terms of addressing the issuing of explicating culture as anexplanatory variable. Progress is being made in this direction, as evidenced by theapproach adopted by Teagarden et al. (1995) in combining the methodology of thecross-cultural and comparative literatures and building a multidisciplinary,international research team.

5. Advancing the eld: overcoming disciplinary sectarianismTable I sets out an integrative framework comparing the three strands in IHRMresearch. It summarises the research purpose, research questions, issues,methodologies, ndings and limitations of each of the three strands of research.Much of the research in the eld is introverted in nature, with disciplinary sectarianismevident both within and across each of the three strands. Although each strand isdistinct, they are not mutually exclusive. In addition, discernible similarities areidentiable across the approaches. In terms of research focus, for example, all address,albeit in differing guises, the inuence of culture on (human resource) management andpractices and whether there is any evidence of convergence or divergence in thisregard. The general consensus is that universality does not apply to management (or


management

603


10/18

H R M i n M N C s

C o m p a r a t i v e H R M

C r o s s - c u l t u r a l m a n a g e m e n t

R e s e a r c h p u r p o s e

H o w d o M N C s m a n a g e t h e i r w o r l d w i d e

w o r k f o r c e f o r m a x i m u m e f f e c t i v e n e s s a n d

c o m p e t i t i v e a d v a n t a g e ?

C o m p a r i s o n s o f H R M m o d e l s ,

a p p r o a c h e s a n d p r a c t i c e s

H o w d o e s c u l t u r e i m p a c t m a n a g e m e n t

p r a c t i c e s ?

R e s e a r c h o r i g i n s

M a i n l y A n g l o - A m e r i c a n ( e

. g . D

o w l i n g ,

S c h u l e r , P

u c i k

, F e r n e r )

U K ( e

. g . B

r e w s t e r , C

l a r k , )

a n d t o a l e s s e r

e x t e n t c o n t i n e n t a l E u r o p e ( e

. g . P i e p e r )

M a i n l y A m e r i c a n ( e

. g . A

d l e r , S c h n e i d e r )

a n d E u r o p e ( e

. g . H

o f s t e d e , L a u r e n t )

T h e o r e t i c a l

d i s c i p l i n e s

H R M

, i n t e r n a t i o n a l b u s i n e s s / M N C

m a n a g e m e n t , s t r a t e g i c m a n a g e m e n t

H R M

, s o c i o l o g y

A n t h r o p o l o g y , s o c i a l p s y c h o l o g y

G e o g r a p h i c a l f o c u s M a i n l y f o c u s o n M N C s f r o m A m e r i c a a n d

t o

a l e s s e r e x t e n t E u r o p e a n d J a p a n

C o m p a r i s o n s o f H R M i n U S A

, E u r o p e

a n d J a p a n

I n c r e a s i n g f o c u s o n A s i a - P a c i c r e g i o n

a n d f o r m e r C o m m u n i s t a n d d e v e l o p i n g

c o u n t r i e s

S t u d i e s c o v e r m o s t d e v e l o p e d c o u n t r i e s

a r o u n d t h e w o r l d

D i s t i n g u i s h i n g

c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f e a c h

a p p r o a c h

M a n a g i n g a g l o b a l w o r k f o r c e i n o r d e r t o

a c h i e v e e f f e c t i v e n e s s a n d c o m p e t i t i v e n e s s

T h e i n u e n c e o f M N C s o n h o s t c o u n t r y

a n d i n d i g e n o u s r m s

G l o b a l l o c a l i n u e n c e s o n H R M

E x a m i n a t i o n o f n a t i o n a l v a r i a t i o n i n t h e

n a t u r e a n d c h a r a c t e r o f H R M i n M N C s

D e s c r i b e a n d c o m p a r e n a t i o n a l H R M S s

A n a l y s e , e

x p l a i n a n d p r e d i c t v a r i a t i o n i n

t h e s e

F o c u s o n i d e n t i f y i n g c u l t u r a l d i f f e r e n c e s

a s a n e x p l a n a t o r y v a r i a b l e

A n a l y s e a n d p r e d i c t m a n a g e m e n t

p r a c t i c e o n t h i s b a s i s ( e

. g . d e c i s i o n

m a k i n g , l e a d e r s h i p

, e t c

. )

R e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s H o w i s H R M o r g a n i s e d i n M N C s t o a c h i e v e

m a x i m u m e f f e c t i v e n e s s ?

W h a t d e t e r m i n e s H R M i n M N C s ( i . e .

i n u e n c e s s u c h a s c o u n t r y o f o r i g i n v e r s u s

h o s t c o u n t r y , e

t c . ) ?

T h e f e a s i b i l i t y o f t r a n s f e r r i n g h o m e

c o u n t r y p r a c t i c e s o r g l o b a l M N C p r a c t i c e s

t o

f o r e i g n o p e r a t i o n s

D o M N C s i n u e n c e i n d i g e n o u s p r a c t i c e s i n

t h e h o s t c o u n t r y ?

E s t a b l i s h h o w n o t i o n s o f H R M

, H R M

s y s t e m s , H R a p p r o a c h e s a n d p r a c t i c e s

d i f f e r w o r l d w i d e

A r e t h e s e c o n v e r g i n g o r d i v e r g i n g ?

I s t h e r e a u n i v e r s a l m o d e l o f H R M ?

W h a t d e t e r m i n e s n a t i o n a l H R M S ?

H o w d o c u l t u r a l d i f f e r e n c e s i m p a c t

m a n a g e m e n t p r a c t i c e ?

A r e c u l t u r a l v a l u e s c o n v e r g i n g o r

d i v e r g i n g ?

C o n v e r g e n c e o r d i v e r g e n c e o f

m a n a g e m e n t p r a c t i c e s ( i . e . i n l i g h t o f

g l o b a l p r e s s u r e s o f c o n v e r g e n c e d e s p i t e

c u l t u r a l d i f f e r e n c e s )

U n i v e r s a l i t y v e r s u s c u l t u r e s p e c i c i t y o f

m a n a g e m e n t t h e o r y a n d p r a c t i c e

( c o n

t i n u e

d )

Table I.Integrative frameworkcomparing strands inIHRM research

ER26,6

604


11/18

H R M i n M N C s

C o m p a r a t i v e H R M

C r o s s - c u l t u r a l m a n a g e m e n t

R e s e a r c h d e s i g n

P r e d o m i n a n t l y p o s i t i v i s t

C o m p a r a t i v e s t u d i e s o f H R M i n M N C s

f r o m v a r i o u s c o u n t r i e s ( u s u a l l y

s u r v e y s / q u e s t i o n n a i r e s o r i n t e r v i e w s )

P r e d o m i n a n t l y p o s i t i v i s t

C o m p a r a t i v e s t u d i e s o f e n t i r e H R M

s y s t e m s o r s p e c i c H R p r a c t i c e s

S u r v e y s ( e

. g . C

r a n e l d ) o f H R M i n

v a r i o u s c o u n t r i e s

C a s e s t u d i e s o f H R M S s i n v a r i o u s

c o u n t r i e s

B o t h p o s i t i v i s t a n d i n t e r p r e t i v e

I n t e r n a t i o n a l c o m p a r a t i v e s t u d i e s o f

m a n a g e m e n t p r a c t i c e s

U s e s u r v e y s , q u e s t i o n n a i r e s ,

e t h n o g r a p h y a n d q u a l i t a t i v e

m e t h o d o l o g i e s

S t u d i e s o f t e n t a k e a n M N C a s t h e i r

s a m p l e a s i t e n a b l e s a c c e s s t o v a r i o u s

c o u n t r i e s ( e

. g . H

o f s t e d e s s t u d y o f I B M )

T h e o r i e s a n d m o d e l s M a n y c o n c e p t u a l a n d h i g h l y p r e s c r i p t i v e

t h e o r i e s ( o f t e n n o t e m p i r i c a l l y v a l i d a t e d )

W e a k e m p i r i c a l r e s e a r c h

E m p i r i c a l w o r k t e n d s t o b e s u r v e y - b a s e d ,

r e l a t i n g t o a s p e c i c a r e a o f H R M r a t h e r

t h a n i n - d e p t h c a s e s t u d i e s o f h o w t h e H R

f u n c t i o n i s p r a c t i c e d

D e s c r i p t i o n s o f H R M S s i n v a r i o u s

c o u n t r i e s b a s e d o n e m p i r i c a l d a t a f r o m

s u r v e y s a n d c a s e s t u d i e s

W e a k t h e o r e t i c a l f r a m e w o r k s

l a c k o f

e x p l a n a t o r y t h e o r y a n d m o d e l s

C o n c e p t u a l t h e o r i e s o f c u l t u r e a n d h o w i t

a f f e c t s i n d i v i d u a l a n d o r g a n i s a t i o n a l

b e h a v i o u r

E m p i r i c a l s t u d i e s o f c u l t u r a l d i f f e r e n c e s

a n d m a n a g e m e n t p r a c t i c e s i n v a r i o u s

c o u n t r i e s

P r e s c r i p t i v e s o l u t i o n s f o r e f f e c t i v e

c r o s s - c u l t u r a l i n t e r a c t i o n

C o n t r i b u t i o n

A t t e m p t s t o e x p l a i n s o u r c e s o f v a r i a t i o n

o f

H R M i n M N C a f l i a t e s c o u n t r y o f o r i g i n

f o u n d t o b e a s i g n i c a n t d e t e r m i n a n t o f

H R M i n M N C s u b s i d i a r i e s

H R M i n M N C s i s i n u e n c e d m a i n l y b y

l o c a l f a c t o r s

P r a c t i c e s a n d a f l i a t e s d i f f e r i n d e g r e e o f

a d a p t a t i o n o f l o c a l e n v i r o n m e n t

D e s c r i b e n a t i o n a l H R M S s a n d a t t e m p t s

t o e x p l a i n s o u r c e s o f v a r i a t i o n b e t w e e n

t h e m

N o u n i v e r s a l m o d e l o f H R M

C o n v e r g e n c e o f H R i s s u e s a n d c o n c e p t s

i s o c c u r r i n g b u t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a n d

p r a c t i c e r e m a i n d i v e r g e n t

A n u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f h o w c u l t u r e

i n u e n c e s b e h a v i o u r , a t t i t u d e s ,

e x p e c t a t i o n , e t c .

R e j e c t s t h e u n i v e r s a l i t y o f m a n a g e m e n t

t h e o r i e s a n d p r a c t i c e s

S u p p o r t s t h e c u l t u r e - b o u n d t h e s i s

T h r o u g h d e v e l o p i n g c u l t u r a l d i m e n s i o n s

p r o v i d e s a m e t h o d f o r o p e r a t i o n a l i s i n g

c u l t u r e

E m e r g i n g i s s u e s a n d

q u e s t i o n s

M e t h o d o l o g y , I

H R M p e r f o r m a n c e , e

t h i c a l

i s s u e s , h

o s t c o u n t r y d i f f u s i o n

D e v e l o p i n g r e g i o n a l m o d e l s o f H R M

,

m e t h o d o l o g y , i

n s t i t u t i o n a l a p p r o a c h ,

c u l t u r e

D i m e n s i o n s o f c u l t u r e , c

r o s s - c u l t u r a l

i n t e r a c t i o n , m e t h o d o l o g i c a l i s s u e s

Table I.


management

605


12/18

more specically HR systems) notions and practices. Evidence suggests thatinternational convergence of HR issues is occurring but interpretation of these issuesand hence actual practices continues to differ.

Methodological shortcomings are evident in all three strands of research, althoughas we can observe in Table I the researchers in each differ in how they deal with these.As discussed (Cavusgil and Das, 1997; Clark et al., 1999; Kochan et al., 1992)cross-cultural and comparative research is complex, and researchers across all of theapproaches must grapple with complex methodological issues and problems. There isconsensus in the eld that they can be overcome through better research methodology.We agree that a positivist approach is appropriate in comparative research, but stressthat it must be augmented by qualitative methods to add greater explanatorysensitivity. We also underscore the need for properly designed empirical research inorder to contribute to the development in the eld. Both CHRM and HRM in MNCapproaches would benet from progress made in the CCM in this regard.

While in general the objectives of each strand are similar to understand andexplain HRM the HRM in MNCs approach perceives HRM as a means to an end(effectiveness and competitiveness) rather than an end in itself. Therefore it regardsHRM as an intervening variable, not a dependent variable as in the case of CCM and toa lesser extent CHRM. We concur with the positioning of HRM as a means to an endand that a process model positioning HRM as an intervening variable is appropriate.The model of strategic HRM in MNCs as developed by De Cieri and Dowling (1999) is agood step in this direction.

While the cross-cultural management literature has been referred to by writers inboth the comparative HRM and HRM in MNCs elds, this has mainly been merely of the name-dropping type (Sndergaard, 1994). A more in-depth understanding of thetheories and models of culture from the CCM literature would give researchers in bothCHRM and HRM in MNCs a method for explicating exogenous variables and

operationalising culture as an explanatory variable. This would facilitate the use of specic dimensions of cultures as explanatory variables or alternatively allowing thecultural distance construct to be operationalised. In turn, contributions from theseliteratures could inform the CCM literature as to alternative endogenous inuenceswhich may moderate the effect of culture on behaviour.

Theoretical frameworks from the comparative HRM approach would giveresearchers on HRM in MNCs an understanding into the role played by both parentcountry and host country institutions, regulations, cultural norms etc. (i.e. context) onHRM approaches and practices. An understanding of comparative HRM systems isneeded to complement and inform the understanding of HRM in MNCs (Boxall, 1995;Schuler, 2000). On the other hand, the literature on HRM in MNCs could contribute tothe debate in the comparative approach on the inuence of foreign MNCs on nationalHRMS, on the transfer of MNC HRM into indigenous companies, on the ability totransfer HR practices across national boundaries or on the possibility to create globalbest practice HR standards.

We acknowledge that there is a need to begin the design and development of anoverarching theory to integrate the three strands of IHRM into a framework embracingthe related disciplinary approaches. The fertilisation of ideas and methodologiesbetween strands will result in an enrichment of research across the eld and facilitatethe construction of an inclusive approach to theory building which embraces all related

ER26,6

606


13/18

disciplinary areas. We suggest that there are benets to be gained from engaging incollaborative, inter-disciplinary, comparative, cross-cultural dialogue and research.Before embarking on the tortuous journey of theory construction, it is our view thatresearchers from the three strands must overcome existing disciplinary sectarianismby recognising and acknowledging the strengths and weaknesses of each approach. Inthis article, we have attempted to draw attention to the overlaps and gaps betweenstrands hitherto hidden from within disciplines in order to commence this process.Only by overcoming disciplinary sectarianism can the eld of IHRM advance andproduce (practice) relevant theory.

Notes1. The term IHRM is often used to refer exclusively to this stream of research, a practice

which has caused considerable confusion in the literature. De Cieri and Dowling call thisapproach HRM in MNEs. However, as the research to date on managing people in aninternational context has focused on multinational companies (MNCs) rather than global

not-for-prot or governmental organisations, which are also encompassed under the termmultinational enterprises (MNEs), the term HRM in MNCs is used here.2. The link between HRM and strategy has been proposed in the US literature. However,

lessons from the comparative literature (see section 4) should warn us about assuming theuniversality of theory. The personnel function may not necessarily be integrated withbusiness strategy in some countries.

3. The debate surrounding the impact of country-of-origin effect on HR practices in MNCsubsidiaries is of particular interest in the Irish context due to the prevalence of foreignMNCs located in the country. However, studies to date have produced conicting evidence(Geary and Roche, 2001; Turner et al., 2001; Keating, 2004).

4. Some authors refer to this as parochial rather than ethnocentric.5. Cultural relativism is a philosophical position arguing that all cultures, no matter how

different are correct and moral for the people of those cultures (Cullen, 1999, p. 54).6. Global Leadership and Organisational Effectiveness Research Programme.7. The nine variables are power distance; uncertainty avoidance; humane orientation;

institutional collectivism; in-group collectivism; assertiveness; gender egalitarianism; futureorientation and performance orientation. See House et al. (1999) for an explanation.

ReferencesAdler, N. (1983), A typology of management studies involving culture, Journal of International

Business Studies , Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 29-47.Adler, N. (2003), International Dimensions of Organisational Behavior , 4th ed., Kent Publishing

Co., Boston, MA.Adler, N. and Ghadar, F. (1990), International strategy from the perspective of people and

culture: the North American context, in Rugman, A.M. (Ed.), Research in Global Strategic Management , Vol. 1: Canadas New Research Agenda , JAI Press, Greenwich, CT,pp. 179-205.

Adler, N., Doktor, R. and Redding, S.G. (1986), From the Atlantic to the Pacic century:cross-cultural management reviewed, Journal of Management , Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 295-318.

Bartlett, C. and Ghoshal, S. (1989), Managing across Borders: The Transnational Solution ,Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.


management

607
http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0047-2506()14:2L.29[aid=340839]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0047-2506()14:2L.29[aid=340839]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0047-2506()14:2L.29[aid=340839]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0047-2506()14:2L.29[aid=340839]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0047-2506()14:2L.29[aid=340839]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0047-2506()14:2L.29[aid=340839]


14/18

Beer, M., Spector, B., Lawrence, P., Mills, D. and Walton, R. (1984), Managing Human Assets ,Free Press, New York, NY.

Begin, J. (1992), Comparative human resources management (HRM): a systems perspective, International Journal of Human Resource Management , Vol. 3, pp. 379-408.

Belanger, J., Edwards, P. and Wright, M. (1999), Best HR practice and the multinationalcompany, Human Resource Management Journal , Vol. 3, pp. 53-70.

Bird, A. and Beechler, S. (1995), Links between business strategy and human resourcemanagement in US-based Japanese subsidiaries: an empirical investigation, Journal of International Business Studies , Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 23-46.

Bird, A., Taylor, S. and Beechler, S. (1998), A typology of international human resourcemanagement in Japanese multinational corporations: organizational implications, Human Resource Management , Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 159-72.

Black, J., Gregersen, H., Mendenhall, M. and Stroh, L. (1999), Globalizing People through International Assignments , Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.

Boxall, P. (1995), Building the theory of comparative HRM, Human Resource Management ,

Vol. 5 No. 5, pp. 5-17.Brewster, C. (1995), Towards a European model of human resource management, Journal of International Business Studies , Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 1-22.

Brewster, C. and Tyson, S. (Eds) (1991), International Comparisons of Human Resource Management , Pitman, London.

Brewster, C., Mayrhofer, W. and Morley, M. (Eds) (2000), New Challenges for European Human Resource Management , Macmillan, Basingstoke.

Brewster, C., Tregaskis, A., Hegewisch, A. and Mayne, L. (1996), Comparative research in HRM:a review and example, International Journal of Human Resource Management , Vol. 7No. 3, pp. 585-604.

Budhwar, P. and Debrah, Y. (2001), Rethinking comparative and cross-national human resourcemanagement research, International Journal of Human Resource Management , Vol. 12No. 3, pp. 497-515.

Caligiuri, P.M. and Stroh, L.K. (1995), Multinational corporation management strategies andinternational human resources practices: bringing IHRM to the bottom line, International Journal of Human Resource Management , Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 494-507.

Cavusgil, S. and Das, A. (1997), Methodological issues in empirical cross-cultural research: asurvey of the management literature and a framework, Management International Review, Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 71-96.

Child, J. (1981), Contingency and capitalism in the cross-cultural study of organizations, inCummings, L. and Staw, B. (Eds), Research in Organizational Behavior , Vol. 3, JAI Press,Greenwich, CT, pp. 303-56.

Clark, T. (1996), HRM: a unied understanding or a multiplicity of meanings?, in Clark, T. (Ed.), European Human Resource Management: An Introduction to Comparative Theory and Practice , Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 244-62.

Clark, T. and Mallory, G. (1996), The cultural relativity of human resource management: is therea universal model?, in Clark, T. (Ed.), European Human Resource Management: An Introduction to Comparative Theory and Practice , Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 1-33.

Clark, T., Gospel, H. and Montgomery, J. (1999), Running on the spot? A review of twenty yearsof research on the management of human resources in comparative and internationalperspective, International Journal of Human Resource Management , Vol. 10 No. 3,pp. 520-44.

ER26,6

608
http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()3L.379[aid=1129492]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()3L.379[aid=1129492]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()3L.379[aid=1129492]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0090-4848()37:2L.159[aid=1293459]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0090-4848()37:2L.159[aid=1293459]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0090-4848()37:2L.159[aid=1293459]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0090-4848()37:2L.159[aid=1293459]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0090-4848()37:2L.159[aid=1293459]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()7:3L.585[aid=315213]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()7:3L.585[aid=315213]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()7:3L.585[aid=315213]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()7:3L.585[aid=315213]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()7:3L.585[aid=315213]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()12:3L.497[aid=6277858]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()12:3L.497[aid=6277858]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()12:3L.497[aid=6277858]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()12:3L.497[aid=6277858]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()12:3L.497[aid=6277858]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()6:3L.494[aid=341118]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()6:3L.494[aid=341118]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()6:3L.494[aid=341118]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()6:3L.494[aid=341118]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()6:3L.494[aid=341118]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()10:3L.520[aid=343500]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()10:3L.520[aid=343500]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()10:3L.520[aid=343500]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()10:3L.520[aid=343500]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()10:3L.520[aid=343500]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()10:3L.520[aid=343500]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()3L.379[aid=1129492]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()3L.379[aid=1129492]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()10:3L.520[aid=343500]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()10:3L.520[aid=343500]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()10:3L.520[aid=343500]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()10:3L.520[aid=343500]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()6:3L.494[aid=341118]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()6:3L.494[aid=341118]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()6:3L.494[aid=341118]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()12:3L.497[aid=6277858]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()12:3L.497[aid=6277858]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()12:3L.497[aid=6277858]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()7:3L.585[aid=315213]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()7:3L.585[aid=315213]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()7:3L.585[aid=315213]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0090-4848()37:2L.159[aid=1293459]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0090-4848()37:2L.159[aid=1293459]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0090-4848()37:2L.159[aid=1293459]


15/18

Cullen, J. (1999), Multinational Management: A Strategic Perspective , Southwestern Publishing,Cincinnati, OH.

De Cieri, H. and Dowling, P. (1997), Strategic international human resource management: anAsia-Pacic perspective, Management International Review , Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 21-42.

De Cieri, H. and Dowling, P. (1999), Strategic human resource management in multinationalenterprises: theoretical and empirical developments, in Wright, P., Dyer, L., Boudreau, J.and Milkovich, G. (Eds), Strategic Human Resource Management: An Agenda for the 21st Century , JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.

Devanna, M., Fombrun, C. and Tichy, N. (1984), A framework for strategic human resourcemanagement, in Devanna, M. (Ed.), Strategic Human Resource Management , Wiley, NewYork, NY, pp. 33-51.

Dowling, P., Welch, D. and Schuler, R. (1999), International Human Resource Management: Managing People in a Multinational Context , 3rd ed., Southwestern Publishing Co.,Cincinnati, OH.

Edwards, T. (1998), Multinationals, labour management and the process of reverse diffusion: acase study, International Journal of Human Resource Management , Vol. 9 No. 4,pp. 696-709.

Ferner, A. (1997), Country of origin effects and HRM in multinational companies, Human Resource Management Journal , Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 19-37.

Ferner, A. and Quintanilla, J. (1998), Multinationals, national business systems and HRM: theenduring inuence of national identity of a process of Anglo-Saxonization, International Journal of Human Resource Management , Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 710-31.

Ferner, A., Quintanilla, J. and Varul, M.Z. (2001), Country-of-origin effects, host-country effects,and the management of HR in multinationals: German companies in Britain and Spain, Journal of World Business , Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 107-27.

Ferner, A., Almond, P., Clark, I., Colling, T., Edwards, T., Holden, L. and Muller-Camen, M.(2004), The dynamics of central control and subsidiary autonomy in the management of

human resources: case study evidence from from US MNCs in the UK, OrganizationStudies , Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 363-91.Festing, M. (1997), International human resource strategies in multinational corporations:

theoretical assumptions and empirical evidence from German rms, Management International Review , Special Issue, No. 1, pp. 43-63.

Geary, J.F. and Roche, W.K. (2001), Multinationals and human resource practices in Ireland: arejection of the new conformance thesis, International Journal of Human Resource Management , Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 109-27.

Geppert, M., Matten, D. and Williams, K. (Eds) (2002), Challenges for European Management in aGlobal Context. Experiences from Britain and Germany , Palgrave-MacMillan, Basingstoke.

Guest, D. (1990), Human resource management and the American dream, Journal of Management Studies , Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 377-97.

Guest, D. and Hoque, K. (1996), The inuence of national ownership and HR practices in UKgreeneld sites, Human Resource Management Journal , Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 50-74.

Harris, H. and Brewster, C. (1999), International human resource management: the Europeancontribution, in Harris, H. (Ed.), International HRM: Contemporary Issues in Europe ,Routledge, London, pp. 1-28.

Harzing, A.-W. (1999), MNE stafng policies for the managing director position in foreignsubsidiaries: the results of an innovative research method, in Harris, H. (Ed.), International HRM: Contemporary Issues in Europe , Routledge, London, pp. 67-88.


management

609
http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.696[aid=1534872]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.696[aid=1534872]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.696[aid=1534872]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.696[aid=1534872]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.696[aid=1534872]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0954-5395()7:1L.19[aid=144917]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0954-5395()7:1L.19[aid=144917]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0954-5395()7:1L.19[aid=144917]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0954-5395()7:1L.19[aid=144917]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.710[aid=145388]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.710[aid=145388]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.710[aid=145388]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.710[aid=145388]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.710[aid=145388]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=1090-9516()36:2L.107[aid=4841118]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=1090-9516()36:2L.107[aid=4841118]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=1090-9516()36:2L.107[aid=4841118]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=1090-9516()36:2L.107[aid=4841118]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()12:1L.109[aid=1129589]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()12:1L.109[aid=1129589]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()12:1L.109[aid=1129589]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()12:1L.109[aid=1129589]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()12:1L.109[aid=1129589]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0022-2380()27:4L.377[aid=144836]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0022-2380()27:4L.377[aid=144836]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0022-2380()27:4L.377[aid=144836]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0022-2380()27:4L.377[aid=144836]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0954-5395()6:4L.50[aid=145390]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0954-5395()6:4L.50[aid=145390]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0954-5395()6:4L.50[aid=145390]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0954-5395()6:4L.50[aid=145390]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0954-5395()6:4L.50[aid=145390]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0954-5395()6:4L.50[aid=145390]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0022-2380()27:4L.377[aid=144836]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0022-2380()27:4L.377[aid=144836]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()12:1L.109[aid=1129589]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()12:1L.109[aid=1129589]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()12:1L.109[aid=1129589]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=1090-9516()36:2L.107[aid=4841118]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=1090-9516()36:2L.107[aid=4841118]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=1090-9516()36:2L.107[aid=4841118]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.710[aid=145388]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.710[aid=145388]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.710[aid=145388]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0954-5395()7:1L.19[aid=144917]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0954-5395()7:1L.19[aid=144917]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.696[aid=1534872]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.696[aid=1534872]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.696[aid=1534872]


16/18

Harzing, A.-W. and Ruysseveldt, J. (Eds) (2003), International Human Resource Management ,2nd ed., Sage Publications, London.

Hendry, C. (1994), Human Resource Strategies for International Growth , Routledge, London.Hickson, D., Hinings, C., McMillan, C. and Schwitter, J. (1974), The culture-free context of

organization structure, Sociology, Vol. 8, pp. 59-80.Hofstede, G. (1980), Cultures Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values ,

Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA.House, R.J. (2004), Cultures, Leadership and Organizations: A 62-Nation GLOBE Study , Sage

Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.House, R.J., Hanges, P., Ruiz-Quintanilla, S., Dorfman, P., Javidan, M. and Dickson, M. (1999),

Cultural inuences on leadership and organizations: Project GLOBE, in Mobley, W.,Gessner, M.J. and Arnold, V. (Eds), Advances in Global Leadership , Vol. 1, JAI Press,Stamford, CT.

Jansenns, M. (2001), Developing a culturally synergistic approach to international humanresource management, Journal of World Business , Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 429-50.

Keating, M.A. (2004), International human resource management: some evidence from Irelandand Germany, in Keating, M.A. and Martin, G.S. (Eds), Managing Cross-Cultural Business Relations: The Irish-German Experience , Blackhall Publishing, Dublin, pp. 144-75.

Keating, M.A. and Martin, G.S. (Eds) (2004), Managing Cross-Cultural Business Relations: The Irish-German Experience , Blackhall Publishing, Dublin.

Kerr, C., Dunlop, J., Harbison, F. and Myers, C. (1960), Industrialism and Industrial Man , HarvardUniversity Press, Cambridge, MA.

Kluckhohn, F. and Strodtbeck, F. (1961), Variations in Value Orientations , Harper & Row,New York, NY.

Kochan, I.A., Dyer, L. and Batt, R. (1992), International human resource studies: a framework forfuture research, in Lewin, D., Mitchell, O.S. and Sherer, P.D. (Eds), Research Frontiers in Industrial Relations and Human Resources , Industrial Relations Research Association,

Madison, WI, pp. 309-37.Laurent, A. (1986), The cross-cultural puzzle of international human resource management,

Human Resource Management , Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 91-102.McGaughney, S. and De Cieri, H. (1999), Reassessment of convergence and divergence

dynamics: implications for international HRM, International Journal of Human Resource Management , Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 235-50.

McSweeney, B. (2002), Hofstedes model of national culture differences and their consequences:a triumph of faith a failure of analysis, Human Relations , Vol. 55 No. 1, pp. 89-118.

Martin, G.S. (2004), German-Irish business negotiation: the cultural dimension, in Keating,M.A. and Martin, G.S. (Eds), Managing Cross Cultural Business Relations: The IrishGerman Experience , Blackhall Publishing, Dublin, pp. 73-105.

Martin, G. and Beaumont, P. (1998), Diffusing best practice in multinational rms: prospects,practice and contestation, International Journal of Human Resource Management , Vol. 9No. 4, pp. 671-95.

Mayer, M. and Whittington, R. (2002), For boundedness in the study of comparativeinternational business: the case of the diversied multinational rm, in Geppert, M.,Matten, D. and Williams, K. (Eds), Challenges for European Management in a Global Context. Experiences from Britain and Germany , Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.

Neghandi, A. (1983), Cross-cultural management research, Journal of International BusinessStudies , Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 115-29.

ER26,6

610
http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0038-0385()8L.59[aid=341016]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0038-0385()8L.59[aid=341016]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0038-0385()8L.59[aid=341016]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0038-0385()8L.59[aid=341016]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=1090-9516()36:4L.429[aid=6277856]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=1090-9516()36:4L.429[aid=6277856]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=1090-9516()36:4L.429[aid=6277856]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=1090-9516()36:4L.429[aid=6277856]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()10:2L.235[aid=1293544]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()10:2L.235[aid=1293544]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()10:2L.235[aid=1293544]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()10:2L.235[aid=1293544]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()10:2L.235[aid=1293544]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0018-7267()55:1L.89[aid=4133037]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0018-7267()55:1L.89[aid=4133037]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0018-7267()55:1L.89[aid=4133037]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0018-7267()55:1L.89[aid=4133037]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.671[aid=341126]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.671[aid=341126]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.671[aid=341126]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.671[aid=341126]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.671[aid=341126]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0047-2506()14:2L.115[aid=6277855]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0047-2506()14:2L.115[aid=6277855]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0047-2506()14:2L.115[aid=6277855]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0047-2506()14:2L.115[aid=6277855]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0038-0385()8L.59[aid=341016]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0038-0385()8L.59[aid=341016]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0047-2506()14:2L.115[aid=6277855]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0047-2506()14:2L.115[aid=6277855]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.671[aid=341126]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.671[aid=341126]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()9:4L.671[aid=341126]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0018-7267()55:1L.89[aid=4133037]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0018-7267()55:1L.89[aid=4133037]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()10:2L.235[aid=1293544]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()10:2L.235[aid=1293544]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()10:2L.235[aid=1293544]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=1090-9516()36:4L.429[aid=6277856]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=1090-9516()36:4L.429[aid=6277856]


17/18

Pieper, R. (1990), Introduction: human resource management: an international comparison, inPieper, R. (Ed.), Human Resource Management: An International Comparison , de Gruyter,Berlin, pp. 1-26.

Poole, M. (1990), Editorial: human resource management in an international perspective, International Journal of Human Resource Management , Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 1-15.

Porter, M. (1990), The Competitive Advantage of Nations , Macmillan, Basingstoke.

Prahalad, C. and Doz, Y. (1987), The Multinational Mission: Balancing Local Demands and Global Vision , Free Press, New York, NY.

Pucik, V. (1992), Globalization and human resource management, in Barnett, C.K. (Ed.),Globalizing Management: Creating and Leading the Competitive Organization , Wiley, NewYork, NY, pp. 61-81.

Redding, G. (1994), Comparative management theory: jungle, zoo or fossil bed?, OrganizationStudies , Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 323-59.

Rosenzweig, P. and Nohria, N. (1994), Inuences on human resource management practices inmultinational corporations, Journal of International Business Studies , Vol. 25 No. 2,pp. 229-51.

Schneider, S. and Barsoux, J. (1997), Managing across Cultures , Prentice-Hall, Hemel Hempstead.

Schollhammer, H. (1975), Current research on international and comparative managementissues, Management International Review , Vol. 15, pp. 29-45.

Schuler, R. (2000), The internationalization of human resource management, Journal of International Management , Vol. 6, pp. 239-60.

Schuler, R. and Jackson, S. (1987), Linking competitive strategy with human resourcemanagement practices, Academy of Management Executive , Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 207-19.

Schuler, R., Dowling, P. and De Cieri, H. (1993), An integrative framework of strategicinternational human resource management, International Journal of Human Resource Management , Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 717-64.

Scullion, H. (1995), International human resource management, in Storey, J. (Ed.), Human Resource Management: A Critical Text , Routledge, London, pp. 352-82.

Scullion, H. (1999), International HRM in medium-sized MNEs: evidence from Ireland, inBrewster, C. and Harris, H. (Eds), International HRM: Contemporary Issues in Europe ,Routledge, London, pp. 48-63.

Scullion, H. and Starkey, K. (2000), In search of the changing role of the corporate humanresource function in the international rm, International Journal of Human Resource Management , Vol. 11 No. 6, pp. 1061-81.

Smith, P., Dugan, S. and Trompenaars, F. (1996), National culture and the values of organizational employees: a dimensional analysis across 43 nations, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology , Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 231-64.

Sndergaard, M. (1994), Research note: Hofstedes consequences: a study of reviews, citationsand replications, Organization Studies , Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 447-56.

Sparrow, P. and Hiltrop, J. (1997), Redening the eld of European human resourcemanagement: a battle between national mindsets and forces of business transition, Human Resource Management , Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 201-19.

Sparrow, P., Schuler, R. and Jackson, S. (1994), Convergence or divergence? Human resourcepractices and policies for competitive advantage world-wide, International Journal of Human Resource Management , Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 267-99.


management

611
http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0047-2506()25:2L.229[aid=145391]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0047-2506()25:2L.229[aid=145391]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0047-2506()25:2L.229[aid=145391]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0047-2506()25:2L.229[aid=145391]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0047-2506()25:2L.229[aid=145391]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=1075-4253()6L.239[aid=6277851]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=1075-4253()6L.239[aid=6277851]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=1075-4253()6L.239[aid=6277851]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=1075-4253()6L.239[aid=6277851]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()11:6L.1061[aid=1794836]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()11:6L.1061[aid=1794836]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()11:6L.1061[aid=1794836]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()11:6L.1061[aid=1794836]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0958-5192()11:6L.1061[aid=1794836]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0022-0221()27:2L.231[aid=343242]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0022-0221()27:2L.231[aid=343242]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0022-0221()27:2L.231[aid=343242]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0022-0221()27:2L.231[aid=343242]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0022-0221()27:2L.231[aid=343242]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0090-4848()36:2L.201[aid=315224]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0090-4848()36:2L.201[aid=315224]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0090-4848()36:2L.201[aid=315224]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0090-4848()36:2L.201[aid=315224]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=1075-4253()6L.239[aid=6277851]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=1075-4253()6L.239[aid=6277851]http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/linker?ext=a&reqidx=0090-4848()36:2L.201[aid=315224]http://www.ingentaselect.c

International Hr m

Documents

Transcript of International Hr m