Search results

A glance at any newspaper or management periodical gives the impression that sex discrimination is soon likely to become a thing of the past. Women are being courted as never before by youth‐starved employers trying to cope with the ‘demographic time‐bomb’.

The public sector has been subject to dramatic and determined reform partly fuelled by the explicit objective of breaking union powerbases. Yet public sector unions have been relatively absent from the debates surrounding restructuring and the crisis of organised labour.

The paper examines the operational impact of project management systems on the management of human resources and the practical implications of this for practitioners in two project‐led engineering contractors

The paper achieves these objectives through semi‐structured interviews in two in‐depth case studies.

The paper examines specific human resource practices, for example, staff appraisal and efforts at work re‐structuring. The paper finds that in project‐led organizations, such as those in engineering contracting, embedded sectoral characteristics such as portfolio training limit the capacity of HR practitioners to actively change employee perceptions of their development.

The paper reports on sector‐specific research. However, the paper does illustrate the lack of engagement between project management literatures and personnel/HR literatures on the role of HR practitioners in project‐led organizations

The paper draws out the impact of embedded sector effects on the management of HRs and the effects of this on the role played by practitioners.

The value of this paper for the academic community is that it emphasizes a lack of engagement between project management literatures and HR/personnel literatures when it is likely that “project management” systems are a core managerial mechanism for the deployment of staff.

Looks at the 2000 Employment Research Unit Annual Conference held at the University of Cardiff in Wales on 6/7 September 2000. Spotlights the 76 or so presentations within and shows that these are in many, differing, areas across management research from: retail finance; precarious jobs and decisions; methodological lessons from feminism; call centre experience and disability discrimination. These and all points east and west are covered and laid out in a simple, abstract style, including, where applicable, references, endnotes and bibliography in an easy‐to‐follow manner. Summarizes each paper and also gives conclusions where needed, in a comfortable modern format.

Do multinational companies (MNCs) transfer employment practices across their operations in different countries? In other words, are they innovators in national systems of employment relations or do they adapt to them? This question lies at the heart of much research in the field of international HRM, yet the debate is characterized by two quite different approaches to this question – the “global – local” perspective and the “segmentation” thesis – that have not engaged satisfactorily with one another. Drawing on data from a case study of an American multinational in China, we argue that analysis must be sensitive to the sector-specific conditions that create variation between MNCs in this respect. Specifically, the way that multinationals build international processes of production and service provision is a crucial factor in shaping whether they look to transfer practices and, therefore, whether they are innovators or adapters.

This paper will discuss the issues of internal flexibility in an organisation and will analyse how the Institute of Manpower studies model of the flexible firm has been utilised in the coal mining industry in the UK.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an updated and authoritative measure of individualism vs collectivism (IDV-COLL) as a dimension of national culture.

Rather than focus solely on Hofstede’s classic work, the authors review the main nation-level studies of IDV-COLL and related constructs to identify the salient cultural differences between rich societies and developing nations. The authors conceptualize and operationalize IDV-COLL on the basis of those differences and propose a new national IDV-COLL index, using new data from large probabilistic samples: 52,974 respondents from 56 countries, adequately representing the national cultures of all inhabited continents.

The proposed index is a new, valid measure of IDV-COLL as it is strongly correlated with previous measures of closely associated constructs. As a predictor of important cultural differences that can be expected to be associated with IDV-COLL, it performs better (yields higher correlations) than any known measure of IDV-COLL or a related construct.

An important facet of IDV-COLL – in-group favoritism vs out-group neglect or exclusionism – does not transpire convincingly from the authors’ operationalization of IDV-COLL. The study relies on self-construals. Respondents are unlikely to construe their selves in terms of such concepts.

The new IDV-COLL measure can be used as a reliable, up-to-date national index in studies that compare the cultures of rich and developing nations. The new IDV-COLL scale, consisting of only seven items, can be easily used in future studies.

This is the first IDV-COLL measure based on the communalities of previous studies in this domain and derived from large probabilistic samples that approach national representativeness. The superior predictive properties of the authors’ new measure with respect to extraneous variables are another important strength and contribution.

Hofstede’s model of national culture has enjoyed enormous popularity but rests partly on faith. It has never been fully replicated and its predictive properties have been challenged. The purpose of this paper is to provide a test of the model’s coherence and utility.

Analyses of secondary data, including the World Values Survey, and a new survey across 56 countries represented by nearly 53,000 probabilistically selected respondents.

Improved operationalizations of individualism-collectivism (IDV-COLL) suggest it is a robust dimension of national culture. A modern IDV-COLL index supersedes Hofstede’s 50 year-old original one. Power distance (PD) seems to be a logical facet of IDV-COLL, rather than an independent dimension. Uncertainty avoidance (UA) lacks internal reliability. Approval of restrictive societal rules and laws is a facet of COLL and is not associated with national anxiety or neuroticism. UA is not a predictor of any of its presumed main correlates: importance of job security, preference for a safe job, trust, racism and xenophobia, subjective well-being, innovation, and economic freedom. The dimension of masculinity-femininity (MAS-FEM) lacks coherence. MAS and FEM job goals and broader values are correlated positively, not negatively, and are not related to the MAS-FEM index. MAS-FEM is not a predictor of any of its presumed main correlates: achievement and competition orientation, help and compassion, preference for a workplace with likeable people, work orientation, religiousness, gender egalitarianism, foreign aid. After a radical reconceptualization and a new operationalization, the so-called “fifth dimension” (CWD or long-term orientation) becomes more coherent and useful. The new version, called flexibility-monumentalism (FLX-MON), explains the cultural differences between East Asian Confucian societies at one extreme and Latin America plus Africa at the other, and is the best predictor of national differences in educational achievement.

Differences between subsidiaries of a multinational company, such as IBM around 1970, are not necessarily a good source of knowledge about broad cultural differences. A model of national culture must be validated across a large number of countries from all continents and its predictions should withstand various plausible controls. Much of Hofstede’s model (UA, MAS-FEM) fails this test while the remaining part (IDV-COLL, PD, LTO) needs a serious revision.

Consultancies and business schools still teach Hofstede’s model uncritically. They need to be aware of its deficiencies.

As UA and MAS-FEM are apparently misleading artifacts of Hofstede’s IBM data set, a thorough revision of Hofstede’s model is proposed, reducing it to two dimensions: IDV-COLL and FLX-MON.