The role of actors in configuring HR systems within multinational subsidiaries

Crossing the streams: HRM in multinational enterprises and comparative HRM

“…There have also been calls for actor-centric research into who the key actors are and what their roles are in HRM development processes (Rupidara & McGraw, 2011;Welch & Welch, 2012). It is suggested that a focus on how HRM practices, practitioners and praxis interact will advance our understanding of how people-related decisions within organisations are made, implemented and enacted .…”

“…In the HRM in MNEs stream, although 'standardisation' and 'adaptation' imply that certain processes are at play, empirical studies have been slow to analyse the processes involved (Rupidara & McGraw, 2011;Smale, 2008). This is particularly noteworthy in the branch of this stream that looks at the transfer of HRM practices, since the conceptualisation of standardisation as being the result of transfer -typically from headquarters to subsidiary -suggests that our understanding of patterns of HRM practices within MNEs requires an understanding of what happens, or does not happen, during the transfer process (Gamble & Huang, 2009;Chang, Smale, & Tsang, 2013).…”

“…Subsidiary actors, by leveraging their role as 'interpreters' of the local HRM environment, are seen as influential, capable of shaping the patterns of HRM standardisation and adaptation that unfold . In short, it is suggested that the micro-political perspective has arisen out of a need to incorporate explanations based on agentic behavior that have not been adequately accounted for in institutional theorising about HRM configuration processes within MNEs (Rupidara & McGraw, 2011).…”

“…More detailed accounts of the roles and activities of key actors at various levels of the MNE will help to shed light on the dynamic interactions between MNE actors and their context in shaping HRM practices (Rupidara & McGraw, 2011). This will also serve to complement theoretical insights from neoinstitutionalism with those based around agency, power and politics in revealing the complex dynamics of the contested institutional terrain (Ferner, 2009).…”

Implementing HRM Systems: The Role of Employees' Co-Production Behavior and HRM Attributions

“…First, attributional theorist have argued that external situational explanations of behavior are less helpful to explain behavior than internal attributions because they are more subject to change than more dispositional causal explanation (Jones & Davis, 1965). Second, corporate demands can be seen as coercive pressures that force subsidiary managers to adopt global initiatives (Rupidara & McGraw, 2011). As a result, external attributions do provide little information about the underlying values of subsidiary managers and therefore, are unlikely related to employees' desire to engage in HRM co-production.…”