Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-02T17:01:37.548Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reactions to HRM: An Employee Perspective from South Africa and New Zealand

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2015

Vicky Browning  and
Fiona Edgar
Vicky Browning
Affiliation:
Department of Management, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Duneclin, New Zealand Telephone: -64 3 479 8121, Fax:, +64 3 479 8173, Email: [email protected]
Fiona Edgar
Affiliation:
Department of Management, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin, New Zealand Telephone: +64 3 479 8091, Fax:, +64 3 479 8173, Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to provide a representation of the employee viewpoint on emerging issues related to HRM practices associated with the ‘new employment relationship’. Data obtained from employees across two studies in two very different countries – South Africa and New Zealand has been used to represent the employee perspective. Interestingly, a number of shared perceptions about these HRM practices are found to exist between employees from South Africa and New Zealand, suggesting the problems employees currently experience with the HR practices in the workplace that aim to promote this new relationship could be more widely shared.

The areas of shared concern highlighted by employees were mainly related to the implementation of HRM practices. For example, insufficient line management commitment, unfairness and inconsistency in the application of HR policies were all issues that were commonly raised, as was poor communication. Employees attributed these problems to the inadequate skills of those responsible for the implementation of HRM, and tended to be of the view that they could effectively be resolved through the HR department playing a more central role in the implementation of HRM in an organisation, training of line managers to carry out their HR responsibilities more effectively and increased consultation with employees.

Employees participating in these studies appeared to demonstrate a surprisingly high level of awareness and cognisance in identifying problems with HR practice and more significantly how these problems might be rectified. This would support the importance of accessing the employee perspective in both the implementation and research into HRM in practice. Based on the issues highlighted by the employees, increased co operation between line management, the HR department and employees is suggested to facilitate the effective design and implementation of HRM practice in this era of new employment relations.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Management & Organization , Volume 10 , Issue 2 , January 2004 , pp. 1 - 13
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Funding for the South African study provided by the Graduate School of Business, University of Cape Town and for the New Zealand study from the Foundation for Science Research and Technology.

References

Beer, M.Spector, B.Lawrence, PR. Mills, D & Walton, RE 1984. Managing human assets. 4th edn. Dryden Press, New York.Google Scholar
Bettenecourt, L & Brown, SW 1997. ‘Contact employees’ relationships among workplace fairness, job satisfaction and prosocial service-orientated behaviours, Journal of Retailing, vol. 73, no. 1, pp. 39–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boswell, WR. Moynihan, LM. Roehling, MV & Cavanaugh, MA 2001. ‘Responsibilities in the “new employment relationship”: An empirical test of an assumed phenomenon”, Journal of Managerial Issues, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 307–328.Google Scholar
Bowen, DE. Gilliland, SW & Folger, R 1999. ‘HRM and service fairness: How being fair with employees spills over to customers’, Organisational Dynamics, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 7–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitz-enz, J 2000. The ROI of human capital measuring the economic value of employee performance. Amacom, New York.Google Scholar
Fombrun, CJ. Tichy, NM & Devanna, MA 1984. Strategic human resource management. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
Franklin, A 1996. “Optimizing employee performance’, CMA. vol. 70, no. 6, p. 6.Google Scholar
Gibb, S 2000. “Evaluating HRM effectiveness: The stereotype connection’, Employee Relations, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 58–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guest, DE 2001. ‘Human resource management: When research confronts theory’, International Journal of Human Resource Management, vol. 12, no. 7, pp. 1092–1106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guest, DE 1999. “Human resource management – The worker's verdict’, Human Resource Management Journal, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 5–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guest, DE & Conway, N 1999. ‘Peering into the black hole: The downside of the new employment relations in the IK’, British Journal of Industrial Relations, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 367–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grundy, T 1998. ‘How are corporate strategy and human resources strategy linked?’, Journal of General Management, vol. 23, no. 3, Spring, pp. 49–72.Google Scholar
Hendry, C & Pettigrew, A 1986. ‘The practice of strategie human resource management’, Personnel Review, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendry, N & Morley, M 1995. ‘Line managers and human resource development’, Journal of European Industrial Training, vol. 19, no. 10, pp. 31–37.Google Scholar
Herriot, P & Pemberton, C 1995. ‘Facilitating new deals’, Human Resource Management Journal. vol. 7, pp. 45–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huselid, MA 1994. ‘Documenting HR's effect on company performance”, HR Magazine. 01, pp. 79–85.Google Scholar
Kane, B.Crawford, J & Grant, D 1999. ‘Barriers to effective HRM’, International Journal of Manpower, vol. 20, no. 8, pp. 494–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keenoy, T 1990. ‘HRM: A case of the wolf in sheep's clothing?’, Personnel Review, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larsen, HH & Brewster, C 2003. ‘Fine management responsibility for HRM: What is happening in Europe?’, Employee Relations, vol. 25, no. 3. pp. 228–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGovern, P.Hope-Hailey, Y & Stiles, P 1997. ‘Human resource management on the line?’, Human Resource Management Journal, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 12–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, JP & Smith, CA 2000. ‘HRM practices and organisational commitment: Test of a mediation model’, Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 319–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Napier, NK & Peterson, RB 1984, ‘Putting human resource management at the line manager level’, Business Horizons, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 72–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pfeffer, J & Veiga, JF 1999. ‘Putting people first for organizational success’, Academy of Management Executive, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 37–48.Google Scholar
Poole, M & Jenkins, G 1997. ‘Responsibilities for human resource management practices in the modern enterprise. Evidence from Britain’, Personnel Review, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 333–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poole, M & Mansfield, R 1992. ‘Manager's attitudes to human resource management: Rhetoric and reality’, in Blyton, P & Turnbull, P (eds). Reassessing human resource management. Sage, London.Google Scholar
Rainbird, H 2000. ‘Training in the workplace and workplace learning: Introduction’, in Rainbird, H (ed.). Training in the workplace. Critical perspectives on learning at work, Macmillian Press Ltd, Great Britain, pp. 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Renwick, D 2003. ‘Line manager involved in HRM: An inside view’, Employee Relations, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 262–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, SL. Kraatz, MS & Rousseau, DM 1994. ‘Changing obligations and the psychological contract: A longitudinal study’, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 137–152.Google Scholar
Rochling, MV. Cavanaugh, MA. Moynihan, LM & Boswell, WR 2000. ‘The nature of the new employment relationship: A content analysis of the practitioner and academic literatures’, Human Resource Management, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 305–320.3.0.CO;2-V>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schalk, R & Freese, C 1997. ‘New facets of commitment in response to organizational change: Research trends and the Dutch experience’, Journal of Otganizational Behavior, vol. 4, pp. 107–123.Google Scholar
Shimko, BW 1990. ‘All managers are HRM managers’, HR Magazine. 01, pp. 67–70.Google Scholar
Storey, J 1995. Human resource management: A critical text. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
Truss, C.Gratton, L.Hope-Hailey, V.McGovern, P & Stiles, P 1997. ‘Soft and hard models of human resource management: A reappraisal’, Journal of Management Studies. vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 53–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulrich, D 1997. Human resource Chammpions: The next agenda for adding value and deliver results. Harvard Business School Press, Boston.Google Scholar
Wimalasiri, JS 1995. ‘An examination of the influence of human resource practices, organizational commitment and job satisfaction on work performance’, International Journal of Management. vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 352–363.Google Scholar
Wood, S 1995. ‘The four pillars of HRM: Arc they connected?’, Human Resource Management Journal, vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 49–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yadong, L & Seung, H 2004. ‘Multiparty cooperation and performance in international equity joint ventures’, Journal of International Business Studies, vol. 35, no. 2, p. 142.Google Scholar