Important issues in human resource management: introduction to the 2020 review issue

In this fourth annual review issue published by The International Journal of Human Resource Management (IJHRM), we are delighted to present five articles that cover some of the important areas in people management in contemporary work settings. Our review articles cover topics that are less well-researched, compared with some popular themes, as the trend of the ‘psychologisation’ of human resource management (HRM) continues in momentum (Godard, 2014; Kaufman, 2015). At IJHRM we can see that there is continued strong interest in HRM and international HRM (IHRM), although the HR topics and geographical origins of submitted manuscripts become more diverse. With this review issue, we would like to reflect on three aspects related to current research trends that impinge on the field of international HRM.

First, the growing interest in the micro-foundations of HRM and organisational behaviour, as we have seen in the large number of submissions to IJHRM in recent years. Many of these replicate western theories in a developing country research settings. At times, these offer limited theoretical or practical insights. Unfortunately, we notice a tendency to de-contextualise the research setting even when it may offer crucial insights to interpret what is going on.

Second, the quantification of HRM research has a tendency to undervalue potential variations in HRM practices, processes, and outcomes across different sectors (e.g. public sector) and ownership forms (e.g. state-owned enterprises (SOEs)). Often, these variations are treated as variables to be controlled out in research designs. For example, SOEs continue to make up a significant proportion of some national economies not only in less developed countries, but also developed countries. Many SOEs are in monopoly positions and/or receive strong, sometimes hidden, support from the government. These enterprises are economic as well as social entities, assuming important political functions (e.g. Gu, Zhang, Vaz, & Mukwereza, 2016). Yet SOEs, many of which have been undergoing reform and restructuring as part of the national politico-economic transition/transformation, have received limited research attention.

Third, despite calls for employee-oriented HRM research, including perceptions of employees of HRM practices (e.g. Bowen & Ostroff, 2004) and employee well-being oriented HRM practices (e.g. Guest, 2017), research in this area in the international HRM context remains insufficient. Given the enduring influence of distinctive historical, cultural and institutional factors in HRM in different societal contexts, further research that is sensitive to contextual settings would help us understand what types of (indigenous) HRM practices are implemented, how they are perceived by employees, and what effects they may have on employee well-being.

These research avenues call for a bottom-up and practice-oriented approach to examining HRM in the international context in order to reveal local drivers, policies, practices and outcomes of HRM practices. The collection of review papers in this issue takes stock of research highlighted in the above topical areas and offers researchers some research directions for future efforts.

In the first review paper, Fletcher, Bailey, Alfes and Madden critically review 188 empirical studies of engagement in the public sector context in light of the serious HR challenges a number of public sector organisations and public services have encountered in recent years. The authors found that the majority of the studies focus their attention on individual and job level factors, while neglecting contextual contingencies specific to the public sector. Through identifying significant ‘context gaps’, the authors present a future research agenda which addresses a number of key areas. These include: clarifying the relationship between engagement and public service motivation; further contextualizing general engagement models; exploring cultural, socio-political, and institutional factors in more depth; encouraging a more critical perspective on engagement; understanding the variation in the experience of engagement across different public services/delivery models; and connecting more strongly with practical concerns and initiatives within public organisations. In doing so, the authors accentuate the importance for HRM scholars to embed their research more strongly within a sectoral context.

The second paper, by Xiao and Cooke, provides a systematic review of HRM in Chinese SOEs, which documents the wide reaching state-sector reform since the late 1980s. The paper draws on 178 studies from 43 English academic journals over a period of 25 years (1993–2017). In analysing this body of literature and by taking stock of theoretical frameworks, research methods, themes, and analysis of academic articles in this area, the authors share a number of insights. Specifically, they found that the research methods used have shifted from qualitative and interpretive approaches towards quantitative and sophisticated modelling. Another finding is that there has been a relatively heavy reliance on institutional theory in the earlier studies reviewed but that more recent studies have moved towards organisational behaviour perspectives. Relatedly, the level of analysis has shifted from the macro to micro level and thematic foci have become more diverse and complex.

A third paper, by Fan, Zhu, Timming, Su, Huang and Lu, provides a comprehensive review of research on occupational health and safety (OHS) from 1956 to 2019. A total of 564 articles from 17 leading journals were included in the review, uncovering five distinct, yet inter-related, themes: (1) antecedents and work-related factors influencing OHS; (2) industrial policy and regulations surrounding OHS; (3) OHS management practices; (4) approaches to, and models of, managing OHS; and (5) outcomes of OHS management. Overall, the authors found that OHS research is poorly integrated into the field of HRM. The authors identified several important opportunities for HR researchers to add value to this field of research.

Wang, Kim, Rafferty and Sander’s study, the fourth paper, captures a relatively young field of research on employee perceptions of HRM practices through a critical review of 105 articles from leading HRM journals. The authors examine how researchers conceptualise and operationalise employee perceptions of HRM practices, and whether and how employees’ idiosyncratic or collective perceptions of HRM practices may shape employee outcomes. Wang et al. found that employee perceptions of HRM practices is not a monolithic concept. Rather, three distinct components of employee perceptions of HRM practices emerged: ‘what’, ‘how’, and ‘why’. This finding, according to the authors, helps enriching the theoretical foundations of HR communication, embracing cross-national contexts, and enhancing practical relevance.

The fifth paper by Andresen, Pattie and Hippler investigates what it means to be a ‘self-initiated’ expatriate (SIEs) in different contexts, a fast growing field of research. The authors found that personal initiative is an important behaviour relevant to future workplaces that will require significant self-reliance. They highlight the degree to which personal initiative shown by SIEs is context-dependent and conclude that it is untenable to attribute to all SIEs homogeneous work behaviour in terms of personal initiative. To facilitate future research, the authors incorporate a theory of personal initiative and offer suggestions on how to measure initiative, as well as an initial model of how personal initiative will improve SIE outcomes. This review contributes to advancing the conceptualisation of SIE research, which is an important endeavour in light of the informalisation of employment in many parts of the world with significant implications for individual workers’ career opportunities and outcomes.

In summary, as a leading journal in the international HRM field, IJHRM continues to publish articles that take into account contextual factors at various levels that may influence people management, covering not only the psychological aspects of human needs and interactions at the workplace level, but also, importantly, the institutional rights and physical wellbeing of workers in less developed economies. In addition, we observe further trends with respect to recent submissions and we encourage more research in these important areas. First, there is increased attention to issues of sustainability and responsibility within HRM in different research settings. Second, the interest in diversity issues continues to be strong, but the field would benefit from more knowledge in less well-researched societal contexts and new conceptualisation. Third, the understanding of IHRM strategies, structures, policies and practices within not-for-profit organisation is still underexplored. Further research, perhaps through revisiting earlier models and frameworks of HRM, may be gainful. This applies not just to not-for-profit organisations but also to for-profit organisations (e.g. Xie & Cooke, 2019). Fourth, the exploration of avenues that may shape the future of work continues to be highly interesting. Fifth, and related, the use of HR analytics and technology in the workplace, its effects on employees, leadership and organisational outcomes is yielding valuable insights.

Overall, investigating work phenomena using broad and contextually sensitive approaches – for instance through integrating macro, meso and micro perspectives – are highly welcome in IJHRM. We maintain that context remains critical in understanding how people perceive the nature of their work, the quality of workplace relationship, and the effect of HRM practices. We strongly encourage researchers to develop their research with these objectives in mind in their endeavour to extend the knowledge frontier of IHRM.