Does HRM really matter? Strength of HRM systems from a managerial perspective

Abstract

Mischel in 1973 proposed that the impact of situations on people’s interpretation of events depends on the strength of the situation itself. For example, strong situations lead all persons to construe the particular events the same way and induce uniform expectancies regarding the most appropriate response pattern. Conversely, individual differences can determine behaviour in a weak situation (one which is ambiguously structured), since people have no clear expectations about the behaviours most likely to be appropriate. In sum, situational strength deals with the extent to which a situation induces conformity – a strong situation – or is interpreted as ambiguous – a weak situation. Bowen and Ostroff (2004) brought these ideas to the HRM arena, proposing that in strong psychological situations people share interpretations of particular events, therefore behaving in a uniform and consistent way, and showing a similar orientation towards goals and desired standards of performance. In weak situations people rely on their inner states in order to behave, and therefore it is likely that they exhibit more differences in terms of what is acceptable and efficient organisational behaviour. The authors propose the concept of strong HRM systems, to define how powerful is the HRM System in communicating with employees. Based on interviews to 10 HRM senior managers, we delved into the attributes which make a HRM System (defined as an integrated set of HRM practices) strong (or weak). We compared these qualitative data with the theoretical propositions of Bowen and Ostroff, and offer some insights regarding each of the nine attributes put forward by the authors.