Research Critique
Contents
Review of data collection approaches. 8
Review of data analyses approaches. 9
Formalization of IHRM in the organisational structure. 10
Formalization of IHRM in the organisational structure. 11
IHRM roles for academicians and practitioners. 13
Abstract
This paper will analyse previous research done by De Cieri et al (2002). They attempted to draw comparisons between the views of academicians and those of practitioners in answering a number of research questions on IHRM. This paper will critique the data, analysis and conclusion and will show that although there are reasonable conclusions like showing that practitioners differ from academicians in their views, the research did not distinctively classify the groups that should have been involved.
Introduction
The research article by De Cieri et al set out to establish facts about international human resource management. As the world becomes increasingly integrated, there is need to understand complex issues like managing through cultures and expatriate management (Harvey and Novicevic, 2001). These concepts entail the transfer of professionals from their original residence to other areas to offer much required experience in international business especially among multinationals. Although international human resource management (IHRM) stems from human resource management, the diversity across cultures makes it a particularly interesting topic of discussion as complexities abound.
De Cieri et al analyzed the topics of expatriate management, managing through cultures and managing diversity from the point of academicians and practitioners. Therefore, this article will attempt to critique the extent to which the researchers have covered these topics within the boundaries of pedagogy and practice. There has been a disconnect between academicians’ view of a certain topic as compared to practitioners’. This discussion will attempt to gauge whether De Cieri et al clearly articulate this disconnect and whether they give adequate solutions and sufficient directions for future researchers.
As globalization continues to increase integration between nations, societies should be wary that their cultures are not eroded (Zakaria, 2000). Therefore, expatriates seeking to resettle in other cultures should be aware of the boundaries of that culture so as to maximize the potential of the domestic workforce. The society on the other hand should be interested in this research as it helps in understanding the positives and negatives that are associated with globalization. This research forms a platform from whence future research can be based. As the concept of IHRM is fairly new, there is need for more research to be conducted to better understand it. Therefore, this research functions as an initial knowledge base for future studies. This research is important to academicians and managers as it transmits knowledge that is relevant for industry best practices (Von Glinow et al, 2002). Academicians are charged with imparting this knowledge into managers whereas the managers are charged with the actual realization of the knowledge imparted. Therefore, for academicians to develop better curricula on this topic there must be knowledge sharing between them and practitioners on the ground.
Topic review
The major point of focus has been on the challenges that have faced expatriates and management during practice and for whom academicians have developed literature classifying the subsequent developments in terms of building on, steering and aligning with known HRM best practices (Evans et al., 2002).
There is a rich database of previous literature since the concept of IHRM has been fairly developed from the 1970s. Peer reviewed journals form the best source of critical literature. The International Journal of Human Resource Management is an example of one of the best sources of literature on this topic. Interviews with practitioners and academicians can also form a basis of understanding emergent issues as technology continues to define the way management is done. Rapid evolution of the ICT sector has furthered challenges in IHRM and therefore, current literature might not be of much help. Consulting with experts in this subject might be the most helpful resource in accessing the most current practices.
The foundational study for this research was the work of Oberg (1960), who argued that culture shock, experienced by a person posted to a different international business setting can lead to expatriate failure. The measurement of expatriate failure was done through analysis of financial performance or the lack of a contract extension for a person previously posted in a foreign place of business (Garonzik et al., 2000). Most of the literature is focused on providing adequate pre-departure training for managing abroad in order to avoid cultural frustration that eventually leads to failure (Babcock and Du Babcock, 2001). Therefore, emphasis has been on expatriate management functions which include recruitment and selection, training and development, support, performance assessment, compensation, and repatriation. Another source of literature has been on the impact of managing in a foreign place on the family setup. This entails what it means for couples, children and particularly for women expatriates (Riusala and Suutari, 2000).
Focusing on similar and different cross-cultural behaviour in terms of recruitment and selection, training and development, support, performance assessment, compensation, and repatriation for traditional HRM formed the basis of laying the groundwork for identifying IHRM. Another concept has been developed through analyzing the convergent and divergent systems of HRM practices and corporate social responsibility and also on the political, cultural, developmental and legislative specifics of a nation on the policies adopted by international organisations. Focusing on the impact of internationalization on an international organisation’s policies from a strategic perspective has also been a concept referenced in this research. This mainly considers the impact that outsourcing many HRM functions has on the management of diversity, development of a global consciousness and creation of global teams especially considering that IHRM managers are freed up to steer these policies (Dowling et al., 1999). On the overall, the literature employed, specific to IHRM, focuses on the role of HRM as a global agent to change especially in managing diversity and cultures in making the world a boundaryless one in terms of international business (Sanchez et al, 2000).
The major view is that IHRM should not just be a concept but a partner as expressed by academicians in pedagogy. However, there is a dilemma as to who the brainchild behind this concept is and whether it is shared between academicians and practitioners. Previous research had not empirically expressed this concept in Australia until this research by De Cieri et al. (2002). There has been evidence that senior HR managers are adopting the strategic roles that have been recommended by researchers. Fisher et al (1999) found that the surveyed human resource managers concurred with them regarding the need to adopt strategic HRM policies within their overall business strategies. Considering the functions of senior human resource managers, who look at the bigger picture, and that of junior managers, charged with administrative functions, are the functions of IHRM aligned? This is what De Cieri et al sought to establish from the perspective of both practitioners and academicians. Further, their research considers the perspective of those surveyed on the benchmarks of building HRM (entailing; recruitment and selection, training and development, performance management and reward management), realigning HRM (entailing analysis of comparative HRM systems and cross-cultural management) and steering HRM which entails strategic practices of developing international organizations that are both flexible and adaptable. The research questions in this research seek to: establish the extent of IHRM formalization in Australian universities, extent of formalization in international organizational practice, current IHRM issues, future important issues according to academicians and practitioners, roles played by both academicians and practitioners in the development of IHRM, IHRM areas that need to be improved in organizations, and evidence of best IHRM practices.
Review of data collection approaches
The primary source of data was survey. Two surveys were e-mailed to respondent across all the states and territories of Australia. The first survey was e-mailed to 62 academicians where 29 usable responses were gotten. This was representative of all the Australian states except for one territory.
The second survey was e-mailed to 1,645 members of the Australian Human Resource Institute (AHRI), which is charged with registration of human resource practitioners. In this survey, those who had expressed their interest in IHRM were targeted with expectations that the large number would eventually attract responses from a small number of genuine practitioners. Of these, 87 usable responses were received. The responses were representative of major Australian industries with 43% of the respondent’s organisational headquarters being in the country. The number of the firms outlets in the industries surveyed ranged from 1 to 200. The projected number of expatriates in the industries surveyed was 5000.
Surveys were chosen because of their ease of administration, they could be developed at a lesser cost compared to other methods also required less time to develop (Gray, 2009). In this research, surveys were chosen since they could be remotely administered by use of the internet to send e-mails to specific respondents. It was also easier to use surveys to achieve equal geographical representation of responses. Although the sample size and the number of respondents were small, the researchers chose surveying since a large number of respondents could be simultaneously accessed (Saunders et al, 2009). Additionally, numerous questions could be asked forming a basis for flexibility in data analysis. In the present day, assisted by technology, it is easy to use survey software to formulate and analyse data to ensure reliability, validity and statistical significance in analysing multiple variables. The surveys also allowed for the collection of both qualitative and quantitative data with minimal errors on the part of the surveyor.
The researchers had no way of knowing whether the respondents gave honest or accurate answers. This was minimized by categorizing, especially for academicians, with non-respondents claiming that they were not directly involved in teaching or researching in IHRM. The survey was also likely to contain a bias as only a specific group of academicians were involved. This was minimized by having respondents from all the states and territories to ensure that bias was not limited to a certain region.
Review of data analyses approaches
The respondents were expected to quantify specific research questions from a pre-established rubric. Subsequently, responses that required quantitative values were calculated using descriptive statistics. The researchers found it prudent to use simple quantitative analyses due to the small size of the sample used.
Qualitative responses were content analyzed and subsequently categorized according to emergent themes. These themes were decided by manual pattern-matching as described by Miles and Huberman (1994). Two researchers were employed to check for consistency in the coded data.
The sample size was very small to be used for complex quantitative analysis. Most of the respondents in the surveys did not give any responses or give any usable ones. Use of complex analysis for a small sample size would give inaccurate results that may be overstated or undervalued (Collis and Hussey, 2009).
The data that was analysed by quantitative means was used to establish patterns in responses for the questions asked. The data was then qualitatively analysed using themes. The major strength for this type of analysis is that it allows for multiple theories to be applied in processing a number of different epistemologies. It also allowed the researchers to expand the study past the range set by individual experiences. In this case, thematic analysis worked well because multiple researchers were involved. The themes that were identified were supported by the data sets that were acquired in the course of research. When this type of analysis is used, categories emerge from data collected stemming from a systematic formation of questions requiring specific responses (Bryman and Bell, 2010).
Thematic analysis works well for large data sources. In analysing the results from a small number of sources, broad themes emerge which may not build onto current research. Multiple researchers can present a problem due to a variety of interpretations that may lead to reliability issues. The analysis also makes it difficult to tell codes and themes apart as they are meshed together. When a well researched and articulated theoretical framework is lacking, it may be difficult to expound and compare interpretations inferred from the data acquired. Finally, where individual continuity of data is required, this type of analysis is limited.
Evaluation of results
Formalization of IHRM in the organisational structure
There are seven research questions that the research attempted to answer. In the first part, the researchers wanted to know the structure and extent to which formalization of IHRM has occurred in Australian institutions of higher learning. This part shows 13 out of 22 universities teaching IHRM at the undergraduate level and 17 of the 22 universities offering it at the graduate level. The researchers indicate specific related courses and also that the graduate level has more detailed courses than the former.
Formalization of IHRM in the organisational structure
In the second part, the researchers wanted to know the extent to which formalization of IHRM has occurred in Australian organisational structure. Two structures were the most common with the decentralized model with regional or country headquarters being more popular than the centralized model which has a worldwide headquarters. The least frequent was decentralization to individual business units. These finding were consistent with previous research (De Cieri and Dowling, 1997). The study found that none of the organisations had all their IHRM functions outsourced. This was a contradiction form Evans et al (2000) who advocated that most of IHRM functions should be outsourced to ensure that IHRM managers are part of senior management. This part of the study seemed to create a baseline to develop the subsequent parts of the research as it provided no additional information from what was already common knowledge.
The study sought to quantify the number of paid employees working in IHRM. The results indicated that over 61% of respondents claimed to have between one and nine such employees. This showed that extent of formalization indicated by IHRM policies in the organisations was mixed. Around 50% indicated that there were policies in specific areas like remuneration, performance appraisal, selection and placement, visa arrangements and relocation whereas a staggering 67% indicated no policies in employee training for international assignments, repatriate career management, industrial relations for multiple international locations and evaluation of IHRM activities. The researchers conclude that there has been improvement on the overall organisational formalization of IHRM compared to the levels indicated in previous studies. In this part of the study, there are many conclusions that are inferred from very limited data sets. In determining how many paid employees were in IHRM, the study ignores the possibility that the respondents may have been sourced from the same organisation thus creating duplicity. It does not classify the respondents, first, according to industry then according to organisation but rather makes a blanket conclusion on the whole point. The part on the extent of formalization is well articulated as it shows which areas have made progress and which ones are not.
Current issues in IHRM
Here, there is no match between what academicians and practitioners think as the former consider “strategic focus, research and theoretical issues, employment issues (such as visas), cross-cultural issues and dual-career couples” to be the major issues while the latter consider “remuneration and benefits, cost management, recruitment/selection, formal industrial relations policies and taxation issues”
Future issues in IHRM
Academicians note that the most likely future issues will be “global political risk/security, increased research and theory development, a strategic focus, remuneration and top management support for IHRM”. In contrast practitioners identify the issues as “remuneration, cost management, recruitment and selection, employee retention and formal organizational policies.” From the theories above and the literature discussed in this research, De Cieri et al clearly draw a line between the drivers of academicians and practitioners. While the issues identified by managers seem to be on building HRM, as they are operational and administrative, those of academicians seem to be focused on steering HRM as they are based on strategic functions. The researchers however question that since the practitioner respondents were not profiled according to their seniority, junior managers who are charged with more administrative than strategic functions may have formed the bulk of respondents.
This study did not therefore comprehensively answer this research question based on data gathered from research. In any case, data gathered did neither support earlier assertions by Fisher (1999) that senior managers were gravitating towards more strategic functions nor show any indication that practitioners surveyed had any interest in strategy.
IHRM roles for academicians and practitioners
This part seems to support previous literature where academicians see their role as taking part in more research to build on theory in the industry whereas managers expect academicians to become more relevant and practical to the industry.
In the six research question, there seemed to be similarity between what academicians and practitioners considered as the areas where improvement was needed. They cited repatriation/career development, training, selection and dual-career as the most prominent problem areas.
Finally, when asked for which innovations were drivers to IHRM best practices, there were many responses, but the most alarming was the lack of any ideas in practitioners which indicated a lack of communication or a lack of innovation in their respective organizations.
Conclusion
This research had several implications for academicians and practitioners alike. For academicians, perceptions that they are removed from industry realities should make them offer more interactive career-oriented courses with students who eventually become either academicians or practitioners. For practitioners, Considine et al. (2001) notes that the negative attitude they have towards research has made Australia a low-ranking nation in terms of knowledge creation (Rynes et al, 2001). They must therefore work with academicians in coming up with practices that will further knowledge in this topic.
There are many questions that were covered by De Cieri et al (1997). The data that was collected from this research could not be sufficiently used to give conclusive empirical evidence of majority of these questions (Mohrman et al, 2001). There were two groups of respondents that were considered in this research. The first group was the academicians whose responses were mainly drawn from those currently practicing in the field including those who were self-professed. There are not many levels of academicians one can identify as their jobs are fairly similar. This is not so for practitioners who fall under different levels. This research was based on previous literature where some facts had to be established before proceeding. First, there needed to be a distinction between senior managers and their juniors so that the focus on IHRM could be narrowed to either strategic or administrative. Second, their functions have to be explicitly stated in order to prove the classifications set down for the study including: building, aligning and steering HRM.
Despite the shortcomings of the data, there are important concepts that have been advanced. First is that the divide between academicians and practitioners is still manifest and little has changed in merging the functions and views of these groups. Second is that Australia has made great strides in formalizing IHRM in universities while achieving relative success in formalizing it in organizations and third is that the current and future problem areas are viewed differently by the stakeholders in IHRM with managers and academicians having their own views.
It is evident that the literature required to comprehensively develop curricula in IHRM had not been developed by the time of these research. Subsequent research should focus on having larger sample sizes in order to have more data for analysis. This should be done hand-in-hand with separation of the specific clusters in broad categories like ‘practitioners’. At it current state, this research paper is generalistic and simplistic as it has not even considered other variables like the cultural diversity in Australia alone.
references
Babcock, R.D. and Du-Babcock, B. (2001), Language-based Communication Zones in International Business Communication, The Journal of Business Communication, 38: 372–412.
Bryman, A. and Bell, E. (2010), Business Research Methods. 3rd edition, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Collis, J. and Hussey, R. (2009), Business Research. 3rd edition, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke
Considine, M., Marginson, S. and Sheehan, P. (2001), The Comparative Performance of Australia as a Knowledge Nation, report to the Chifley Research Centre Chifley Research Centre, Melbourne
De Cieri, H.,Dowling, P. and Taylor,K. (1991), The Psychological Impact of Expatriate Relocation on Partners, International Journal of Human Resource Management, 2(3): 377–414.
De Cieri, H. and Dowling, P.J. (1997), Strategic International Human Resource Management: An Asia-Pacific Perspective, Management International Review, 37: 21–42.
De Cieri, H., Fenwick, M. and Hutchings, K., (2002), The challenge of international human resource management: balancing the duality of strategy and practice, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16:4, 584-598
Dowling, P.J., Welch, D.E. and Schuler, R.S. (1999), International Dimensions of Human Resource Management, 3rd edition, South-Western, Cincinnati OH.
Evans, P. and Genadry, N. (1998), ‘A Duality Based Perspective for Strategic Human Resource Management’. In Wright, P., Dwyer, L.D., Boudreau, J.W. and Milkovich, G.T. (eds) Research and Theory in SHRM: An Agenda for the 21st Century, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.
Evans, P., Pucik, V. and Barsoux, J.L. (2002), The Global Challenge: Frameworks for IHRM. McGraw-Hill Irwin, New York.
Fisher, C., Dowling, P. and Garnham, J. (1999), The Impact of Changes to the Human Resource Management Function in Australia, International Journal of Human Resource Management, 10(3): 501–14.
Garonzik, R., Brockner, J. and Siegel, P.A. (2000), Identifying International Assignees at Risk for Premature Departure: The Interactive Effect of Outcome Favourability and Procedural Fairness, Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(1): 13–20.
Gray, D. (2009), Doing Research in the Real World, Sage, London.
Harvey, M. and Novicevic, M.N. (2001), Selecting Expatriates for Increasingly Complex Global Assignments, Career Development International, 6(2/3): 69–86.
Oberg, K. (1960), Culture Shock: Adjustment to New Cultural Environments, Practical Anthropology, 7: 177–82.
Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. (1994), Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, 2nd edn, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Mohrman, S., Gibson, C. and Mohrman, A. (2001), Doing Research that is Useful to Practice: A Model and Empirical Exploration, Academy of Management Journal, 44(2): 357–75.
Riusala, K. and Suutari, V. (2000), Expatriation and Careers: Perspectives of Expatriates and Spouses, Career Development International, 5(2): 81–90.
Rynes, S., Bartunek, J. and Daft, R. (2001), Across the Great Divide: Knowledge Creation and Transfer between Practitioners and Academics, Academy of Management Journal, 44(2): 340–55.
Sanchez, J.I., Spector, P.E. and Cooper, C.L. (2000), Adapting to a Boundaryless World: A Developmental Expatriate Model, Academy of Management Executive, 14(2): 96–106.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P and Thornhill, A. (2009), Research Methods for Business Students 5th Edition, Pitman, London
Von Glinow, M.A et al, (2002), Converging on IHRM Best Practices: Lessons Learned from a Globally Distributed Consortium on Theory and Practice, Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 40(1): 146–66.
Zakaria, N. (2000), The Effects of Cross-cultural Training on the Acculturation Process of the Global Workforce, International Journal of Manpower, 21(6): 492–502.
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|