A model for HRM strategic integration
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/00483480510579420 |
| Date | 01 April 2005 |
| Pages | 192-209 |
| Published date | 01 April 2005 |
| Author | Cathy Sheehan |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour |
A model for HRM strategic
integration
Cathy Sheehan
Department of Management, Faculty of Business and Economics, Monash
University, Caulfield East, Australia
Abstract
Purpose – The broad aims of this research are to analyse the status of, and processes underlying,
strategic human resource management (HRM) integration within organisations and to contribute to
theory development in the area. A great deal of attention is given in the literature to the facilitative role
that HRM can take in organisational change but as yet little attention has been given to modelling the
change processes within HRM itself. This paper addresses that gap by providing a model of the
proposed influences on the move towards strategic HRM integration.
Design/methodology/approach – In-depth interviews with senior HR, finance and line managers
in 13 Australian Best Practice companies are used to explore the supports and barriers underlying
strategic HRM integration.
Findings – The model that is developed uses ideas from the change literature to explain that the
engagement of strategic HRM integration requires a certain set of symbolic and ritualistic gestures.
These symbolic changes, however, do not always result in desired strategic HRM outcomes: symbolic
adjustments must be accompanied by deeper levels of change both from within the HR profession and
from other stakeholders in the organisation.
Practical implications – The research holds a number of practical implications for the career
design of HR professionals: a case is made, for example, for a broader business career background
requirement that may provide the level of business acumen necessary to be a credible participant at
the senior management strategic decision-making level. Intended future research will draw from a
larger sample to test the proposed model.
Originality/value – This research model’s specific responses and outcomes require an ideological
shift both from the HR profession and from stakeholders within the organisation.
Keywords Human resourcestrategies, Integration, Decisionmaking, Human resource management,
Devolution
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
In the 1980s, original writers in the area of human resource management (HRM), Beer
et al. (1984), stressed that in the face of increasing international competition,
organisations had to focus on the value of investments in human resources as a major
source of competitive advantage. More recently the rise in the status of knowledge
workers has highlighted the focus on human resources as the key to organisational
productivity (Fojt, 1995; Tovstiga, 1999). Knowledge workers are considered to be
those workers who are involved in the acquisition, creation, packaging and ap plication
of knowledge (Davenport et al., 1996, p. 54) and they represent the movement that
organisations have made away from knowledge that is located in bodies and routines
to knowledge that is located in brains, dialogue and symbols (Blackler, 1995). Drucker
(1993) posits that in many organisations knowledge workers actually own the
organisation’s means of production and within the resource-based view of the firm,
The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister www.emeraldinsight.com/0048-3486.htm
PR
34,2
192
Received December 2002
Revised July 2003
Accepted November 2003
Personnel Review
Vol. 34 No. 2, 2005
pp. 192-209
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0048-3486
DOI 10.1108/00483480510579420
writers reinforce the idea that human capital is increasingly being seen as the key t o
sustainable competitive advantage (Barney and Wright, 1998; Wright et al., 1994).
The transition from personnel management to HRM reflects this emerging
organisation-wide commitment to human capital development. The change, however,
has activated considerable discussion within the academic literature about the
successful strategic positioning of, and responsibility for, HRM (Beer, 1997; Dyer and
Holder, 1988; Guest 1987; 1989). There is concern, for example, that strategic HRM
integration is still to be realised (Beer, 1997; Johnson, 2000; Kochan and Dyer, 2001;
Storey, 2001) where HRM integration is defined as the full integration of HRM with
organisational strategy; HRM policies that cohere; and the integration of HRM within
line management activities (Schuler, 1992; Beer et al., 1984; Tichy et al., 1982; Devanna
et al., 1984; Dyer and Holder 1988; Guest, 1987, 1989). The integration of HRM
effectively encourages everyone in the organisation to take responsibility for HRM, not
just the HR department. This ensures that HRM is given a much more central position
in any decisions that are made at the strategic or operational level, and reminds
decision makers that an investment in people is a key organisational priority.
The aim of the current research is to clarify the variables that impact on the success
or otherwise of HRM integration and within the review of the relationships that exist
between these variables, model the change process underlying the transition from
personnel management to HRM.
Factors impacting on the transition from personnel to HRM
One of the factors considered to have an impact on successful HRM integration is the
role of the people working within the HR area itself. Beer (1997) has stated that those
people working within the HR function must clearly understand how HRM is different
from the older-style personnel management approach and be prepared to support the
necessary changes. This re-definition of the HR role requires that the HR manager
adopt more of a business partner role. Specifically this role requires that the HR
professional has a clear understanding of how HR fits with, and supports, the
organisation’s mission and strategy as well as an understanding of basic business
processes (Dyer, 1999). Research by Huselid et al. (1997), however, has shown that HR
managers may not be meeting the challenge of this new role. These researchers found
that most HR managers were very proficient in the delivery of professional HRM
capabilities (or competencies) that relate to traditional technical activities. Strategic
HRM capability levels, however, that support the business partner role, were lower.
This latter set of capabilities ensure that human resources staff understand the
connection between business considerations and HRM needs. Sparrow and
Marchington (1998) have similarly observed that many of those involved in the HR
function continue to fail to understand the demands of their new role and lack
confidence in their ability to be strategic business partners.
In Australia, research conducted by Fisher and Dowling (1999) established that
senior HR managers agreed with and supported strategic HRM initiatives. The results
of their study showed that as well as reporting HR title name changes, senior HR
managers also acknowledged the importance of HRM involvement in strategic
decisions, integration of HRM policy areas, the contribution of HRM to the bottom line
and attention to communication between employees and employers. Although this is
encouraging, becoming a credible business partner for HR professionals operating at
HRM strategic
integration
193
To continue reading
Request your trial