Search results

This paper aims to report a study into the role of middle line managers, in public services, in relation to devolved HRM. The paper notes that the intermediacy of middle management leads to a distinct and unique form of role tension. A model is offered to explain that phenomenon, which is exacerbated by HRM responsibilities, and emphasises the importance of middle line managers within organisations.

The paper shows that focused, qualitative discussions complemented earlier research. The NHS, Armed Forces and Fire Service were investigated to inform and test an explanatory framework for the phenomenon that is here denoted as role dissonance.

The paper found that middle line managers want to be proactive in HRM and are taking ownership of HRM and are exceeding their job requirements to do so. However, while it can potentially enhance their role, HRM adds to what is already a substantial workload. Especially, middle managers need to mediate tensions between strategic planners. That unique function, formerly shared with personnel managers, exaggerates the middleness of their roles and is a source of strain for individuals.

The model presented in this paper demonstrates how a range of cultural and structural factors impact on individual and organisational expectations and behaviours. The result is a role‐based phenomenon, which is a distinct feature of middle‐line management, and shows many similarities to cognitive dissonance.

The paper offers new concepts to explain a well‐reported phenomenon that has, so far, not been adequately elucidated.

The central role of line managers in implementing human resource management, is widely acknowledged. There has, however, been scant research into how far that group affect, or are affected by, such practices. Through a case study in two Trust hospitals, this article demonstrates that middle line managers, positioned between the service’s decision‐making bodies and its employees, are bearing many of the consequences of the change process. The effects of growing workloads, combined with altered expectations of their increasingly visible roles, have enhanced the tensions and role conflict inherent to their position. This creates “role dissonance” for managers who must balance the various aspects of their work from a weak power base, and act as a buffer between their staff and their seniors. Their perception is that they are under‐resourced and lack the time needed to manage their staff effectively.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to introduce the special issue, which brings together five papers exploring the changing anatomy of HRM at organisational level. Design/methodology/approach – This overarching paper briefly contextualises the theme and introduces the five selected empirical papers. Findings – The findings in this paper vary according to the core theme of each of the five contributions. The first paper highlights whether the mix of distributed HR activities between the HR department and internal/external agents may be understood to be less a product of contextual influences and more a matter of corporate choice. The second paper establishes that role dissonance is a very real issue for middle managers with HR responsibilities. The third paper unearths the complexities and challenges involved in changing existing HRM procedures and practices in a post‐merger scenario. The fourth paper provides an understanding of the management of human resource supply chains and outlines five, empirically derived, generic models of HR outsourcing. The final paper finds that human resource IT diffusion and take‐up is primarily fuelled by interpersonal communication and network interactions among potential adopters. Originality/value – Combined, the papers offer insights on the changing anatomy of the HRM function against the backdrop of a dynamic contemporary organisational landscape and showcase cross‐national research on the theme.

Without aspiring to emulate Robert Browning's song thrush, we venture to repeat an admonition on smoking in the food trade of almost a decade ago. (The Smoking Habit, 1962, BFJ, 64, 79). The first time it coincided with a little research we had undertaken, which later saw the light of day epitomized in article form and was enthusiastically (sic) commented upon in sections of the press and then died as if it had never been born. (Tobacco and Lung Cancer, 1965, Med. Offr., 2955, 148). Now, it coincides with the most concentrated, officially inspired, campaign, so far, mounted against the evils of smoking. The most striking fact about all these national efforts every few years is the lack of success in real terms. A marketing organization achieving such poor results would count it a costly failure. It would be unfair to say that none have given up, but with a habit so ingrained, determination is required and in many, if not most, of those able to refrain, the craving is so great that they are smoking again within a week or so. Overall, the smoking population is enormous, including, as it does, girls and women‐folk. Once, it was undignified for a woman to be seen smoking. We recall a visit by Queen Mary to the village Manor House, just after the First War; she was an expert in antique furniture and came to see the manor's collection. When Her Majesty asked for a cigarette, the village rang with astonishment for days. Nothing as amazing had happened since Cavaliers and Roundheads tethered their horses beneath the three great poplars which stood on the green. “Queen Mary! 'er smokes!”