The (potential) demise of HRM?

Abstract

This article seeks to provoke that human resource management (HRM), both as an academic field of study and as a form of professional practice, is at risk of impoverishment. The main reasoning for this is because of ideological individualism and marketisation with an attendant neglect on wider organisational, employee, and societal concerns. Following a review of the context of financialised capitalism, three contemporary developments in HRM are used to illustrate the argument: reward strategies, talent management, and high performance work systems. Implications for the practice of HRM and the way the subject area is taught in mainstream business schools are considered.

Towards better work in China: mapping the relationships between high‐performance work systems, trade unions, and employee well‐being

“…Discussions on the nature of work and decent working conditions are increasingly common (Dundon and Rafferty ; Osterman ). The concept of ‘decent work’ refers to ‘requiring basic security for all – in society, in the workplace and for individual workers’, with the primary focus on ‘basic income security and basic ‘voice’ or representation security’ (Bonnet, Figueiredo and Standing , 213–214).…”

Leading and education of talented employees as one of the major impacts of globalization on human resources management

“…Global integration trend show the standardization in talent recruitment, management and development to make sure their competitive advantage in the market [10]. Authors Dundon and Rafferty [11] point out the importance of reward strategies, talent management, and high performance work systems in human resources management in a global work environment. Talent management describes an organization's identification of key positions and, subsequently, the development and retention of a talent pool to fill those positions [12].…”

‘Grand challenge’ or ‘not an issue’? The discourses on income inequality of compensation managers and consultants

“…between workers employed at the same level) and vertical (i.e. between workers employed at different levels) pay dispersion (Dundon and Rafferty, 2018). Indeed, organizational-oriented compensation practices set compensation levels through administrative rules (internal hiring, promotion by seniority) with the goal of ensuring internal pay equity, thereby reducing horizontal pay dispersion (Dulebohn and Werling, 2007).…”

“…However, unlike the general management literature (see the recent special issues of Human Relations, Business & Society, and Journal of Management Studies), HRM research has still to make an original contribution to the debate on income inequality (Batt and Banerjee, 2012;Dundon and Rafferty, 2018). Hence, in this article we contribute to the HRM literature by adopting a discursive perspective on the views and talk of a specific sub-family of HRM practitionerscompensation managers and consultants -who are key actors in the definition of companies' compensation practices.…”