The transfer of training and development practices in Japanese subsidiaries in Vietnam

Abstract

This paper examines the interaction between ‘home‐country’ and ‘host‐country’ effects in determining human resource management (HRM) policies and practices in multinational companies (MNCs) in the context of a developing country. The paper is based on an investigation of the training and development strategies for local managers of a sample of Japanese companies operating in Vietnam, and presents clear evidence of the transfer of home‐country practices. The sector emerges as a key variable in explaining variations in HRM patterns with a greater number of comprehensive training and development programs recorded in automotive than in fast‐moving consumer goods (FMCG) industries. We also argue that developing host countries pose little in the way of formal constraint mechanisms to the transfer of HRM practices, but the instability of the institutional environment and the weakness of its subsystems suggest a complex and challenging situation for MNC operations, and inhibit their ability to maintain their home‐country HRM practices.

Does the historical and institutional re-construction of Ghana support the transfer of HRM practices?

“…Foreign MNEs in China are usually given more managerial autonomy and employment flexibility in the adoption of market-oriented HRM strategies than their local Chinese counterparts (Warner, Goodall and Ding (1999). Vo and Hannif (2012) argued that developing host-countries pose little or minimal constraints in the transfer of training and development practices from MNE homecountry to their subsidiaries. This strand of the literature points to the fact that less developed host-countries pose limited constraints in relation to HRM practice transfers or managerial and technology transfers owing to: the setting of flexible regulations in the quest to maintaining a favourable investment climate to attract foreign direct investment (FDI) (Collings et al, 2008;Gunnigle et al, 2003); availability of HRM regulatory gaps or weaknesses in legislations governing IRs and HRM practices (Muller, 1998;Morgan and Kristensen, 2006;Aguzzoli and Geary, 2014); and the host-countries may lack the capability to enforce existing laws and regulations because of institutional weaknesses (Kostova et al, 2008) and wide-spread corruption (Chowdhury and Mahmood, 2012), creating leeway for MNE subsidiaries to choose their own HRM practices regardless of local isomorphism.…”

International human resource management of Japanese multinational corporations: Challenges and future directions

“…For instance, while Japanese manufacturing factories in Tennessee were largely able to transfer Japanese HRM practices, service firms in New York had to adapt to local standards. Other studies suggest that Japanese MNCs selectively transfer HRM practices according to the local context (Vo and Hannif, 2012;Grill et al, forthcoming;Maharjan and Sekiguchi, forthcoming).…”

Impact evaluation of T&D at the societal level

“…T&D in itself has no intrinsic value, because it is not an inherently good or bad thing (Griffin, 2012). Organizational features and social support at work are key conditions for its positive impact (Blume et al, 2010;Burke and Hutchins, 2007;Burke and Saks, 2009;Cheng and Hampson, 2008;Chiaburu et al, 2010;Grossman and Salas, 2011;Salas and Cannon-Bowers, 2001;Vo and Hannif, 2012). Predictors of this impact on the job include self-efficacy, retention, support and feedback from the supervisor, participant and instructor characteristics, aspects of the work environment, motivation to learn and to transfer, conscientiousness, learning goal and performance orientation, instrumentality of T&D, organizational climate and work environment (Blume et al, 2010;Burke and Hutchins, 2007;Chiaburu et al, 2010;Martin, 2010;Tziner et al, 2007;Velada et al, 2007).…”