Human Resource Management in Practice - Essay Example

Running Head: HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Human Resource Management in Practice s Human Resource Management inPractice "What is the most important contribution that the human resource manager can make to organisational effectiveness?" Introduction Over a span of 20 years or so, the topic of human resource management (HRM) has become one of the most documented in the management literature (a). Moreover, the increased level of globalization and internationalization of business, the growth of new markets (such as in Eastern Europe, China, India, South East Asia, and Latin America), growth of new international business blocs and an increased level of competition among firms at both national and international level has resulted in an increase in comparative HRM studies . Managers and policymakers now need to know how human resources (HR) are managed in different regions of the world and how their counterparts in different parts of the world perceive or react to similar concepts and pressures. It is also important to have an understanding about the main determinants of HRM policies and practices in different regional and national settings. Discussion Academics have responded positively to meet the challenges raised by the globalization of business by investigating a number of issues and problems related to international business . They have attempted to examine management from a cross-national viewpoint. This comparison of HRM policies and practices at a national level helps to test the convergence–divergence thesis. The typical questions pursued by comparative researchers are: (1) how is HRM structured in individual countries. (2) What strategies are discussed? (3) What is put into practice? (4) What are the similarities and differences? (5) What is the influence of national factors such as culture, government policy, and education systems? Scholars have also developed and proposed different models of HRM both between and within nations (Mullins P.97–99, 2002). Interestingly, most models of HRM have an Anglo–Saxon base. As such, from a global perspective, principles of HRM have been developed from a restricted sample of human experience. During the infancy stage of HRM literature, such an ethnocentric approach was understandable and unavoidable. However, with the growth of a “global business village,” firms operating in different countries need appropriate information and guidance to develop their HRM policies and practices. Under such dynamic business conditions, the relevance of lessons learned from the Anglo–Saxon experience is questionable. It is therefore important to scrutinize the extent to which Anglo–Saxon models of HRM are pertinent in other parts of the world. It has now become clear that the study of HRM needs a cross-national comparative dimension and an international perspective. However, the existing literature does not make it clear how HR managers should examine the applicability of HRM models in different settings. For further developments in the field of HRM, it is important to have a framework, which can enable us to conduct such an analysis. The relationship between human resource management (HRM) and business performance has been high on the agenda of many hospitality organisations for nearly two decades. Yet establishing that relationship remains elusive, with organisations seeking to deploy ‘best practice’ methods or more contingent approaches such as ‘best fit’ or ‘bundles’ of HR practices, in pursuit of a positive impact on the bottom line. It is here that academic research has made, and can continue to make, a contribution through systematic and rigorous empirical studies in various organisational settings. Not only is this invaluable evidence that organisations may learn from, but also it forms the basis for more critical scrutiny among the many students across the world studying HRM as a core module on hospitality management courses. While ‘soft’, resource-based and value-added HR policies are deemed essential to achieve the delivery of high service quality and customer care, the reality is somewhat different. Although there are exceptions (for example, Hoque, 1999a and Hoque, 1999b; Haynes and Fryer, 2000), most research concludes that ‘the industry could do better’ (for example, Price, 1994; Worsfold, 1999; McGunnigle and Jameson, 2000; Lucas, 2002 and Lucas, 2004). Perhaps most concern centres on ‘hard’ cost-driven HR policies, where staff is treated as ‘another resource’ to be deployed, and not as humans with feelings, aspirations, the need for self-fulfilment, and the potential for development. Few would disagree that people, like any other resource, have to be utilised as effectively and as efficiently as possible, but this should not be achieved at the expense of personal dignity or wellbeing. Many employees seek a satisfactory experience at work, good relationships with their superiors and peers, and a fair reward for the effort they have contributed. To keep their side of the bargain, organisations have a duty to ensure HR issues are high on the agenda and fit coherently with other strategies, and that the organisations HR will is instilled in its managers through appropriate training and development in all aspects of people management. Some researchers have emphasized a practical ‘best practice’ framework for diagnosing HRM practices. Evenden & Anderson (P. 79-167, 1992) presents 11 dimensions of HRM, which can be used as a checklist for evaluating the effectiveness of HR practices. These dimensions can also be used to benchmark HR activities and the relative influence of the best practices on organizational outcomes. (Evenden & Anderson P. 79-167, 1992) However, in discussing the need to understand HRM in the European context, Mullins (2002) reinforces the need for the adoption of a contingent approach, which can highlight cultural, sectored, and regional differences in European-wide companies. They argue against the ‘one best approach,’ suggesting that it is not practical for the development of global or European HRM strategies. One sensible way of highlighting the suggested differences among firms in different countries is by identifying the main national factors (such as culture, industrial sector, and institutions), which significantly influence their HRM practices. An important agenda before cross-national HRM researchers if they are to avoid misinterpreting the situation is to detail clearly both the specific HR issues within a country as well as the overall HRM recipes pursued by local managers. HRM policies and practices in a cross-national context are influenced by both “culture-bound” variables such as national and organizational culture, institutions, and industrial sector dynamics and “culture-free” variables such as age, size, nature, and life cycle stages of organization (Rollinson p.P.139-144, 2002). The degree and direction of influence of these factors is, however, context-specific, and varies from region to region. For example, the response of human resource managers to common competitive pressures (such as the introduction of new production technologies, large scale restructuring and re-engineering of organizations, and pressure to increase work flexibility) varies across different countries. (Mullins P.97–99, 2002) Human resource manager role in organizational change has increased in countries such as the UK, France, or the British, whereas in UK and Germany, it has remained stable. Similarly, since 2003, human resource manager role in organizational change is on a continuous decline in South Korea due to changes in the Korean political–economic climate. Such a phenomenon shows that different institutional configurations mediate in different ways the effects of common international pressures. Some researchers suggest that informal HRM practices in UK based organizations are more sophisticated than HR managers give them credit for. For example, Pettinger’s (P.210-229, 2007) research in the manufacturing sector shows similarity between many of the HRM practices in small and large firms. They argue that awareness of TQM and JIT philosophies may be why UK based organizations have forced attention on HRM practices. This is not too dissimilar to the conclusion Pettinger (P.210-229, 2007) draw when they argue that coercive networks (supply chain relations for example) have a greater effect on UK based organizations adopting HRM practices than advisory networks. Other studies, such as Ways (p. 767, 2002) analysis of high performance work systems (HPWS) in 446 British firms with less than 100 employees, found higher perceived productivity, and lower workforce and voluntary turnover. The HPWS he studied were made up of HRM practices that had to “be linked to selecting, developing, retaining, and/or motivating (gaining access to) a workforce that produces superior employee output” (Way, 2002, p. 767). Marlows (2006) study of emergent HRM strategy in 64 UK based organizations found “a clear recognition of the need for a strategic awareness to support firm durability and growth” (p. 146), amongst owners but little evidence that this was translated into action. Mullins’s (P.97–99, 2002) comment on Marlows (2006) study, noted that HR managers should examine strategic approaches to HRM in UK based organizations by first examining the types of strategies pursued by UK based organizations. Mullins (2002) goes on to say, “It seems useful to distinguish between those employers whose labour management practices reflect some overall pattern and whose employers who merely respond to contingent events in a reactive and knee-jerk manner” (p. 98). The idea that HR managers might differentiate between informal ad hoc practices found in some firms from various levels of formality and planned action directed towards particular organizational strategies might offer some insight into understanding HRM strategies in UK based organizations. What these studies indicate is that while UK based organization HRM may be characterized by informality, it may be a result of how HR managers are looking for the practices (Marlow, 2006). For example, recently Pettinger (P.210-229, 2007) argued that adopting an open systems approach to analysing HRM in UK based organizations offers fruitful prospects to understanding why practices emerge as they do. They argued, as others have done more broadly about employment relations and industrial relations in UK based organizations , that the embeddedness of UK based organizations in their wider environment needs to be taken into account. Too often, the description of what happens inside the firm in terms of HRM practices ignores what happens outside the firm and how this interplays with internal factors. Therefore, while the formalization of HRM policies becomes desirable as firms grow, the ability for this to occur in UK based organizations depends on the recognition of the owner–manager of the need for delegation and then the possibility of delegating that task. Further the formalization of HRM is also dependent on the awareness of legislation and legal requirements on HRM and employment matters (for example, unfair dismissal, occupational health and safety, equal employment opportunity, etc.) and recognition of the impact on their business should they not be compliant. This is particularly the case in growth oriented or entrepreneurial UK based organizations as these firms most likely reliant on the skills, motivations and energies of their employees to achieve business objectives (Mullins 2000). More importantly, a long term, more strategic approach to HRM in fast growing and entrepreneurial firms is linked to firm growth and survival. So why then do HR managers continue to see informality? Perhaps it is because in some situations informal HRM practices give UK based organizations an advantage. For example, the use of informal recruitment practices relies on the desire for ‘fit’, which in the case of UK based organizations primarily refers to the new recruit fitting into a small work group (Marlow, 2006) rather than fitting the specific job requirements. Similar notions of fit underpin selection procedures such as face-to-face interviews, reference checks and job tryouts. Again, is this strategic or just lucky? Welbourne and her collaborators demonstrate both the strategic importance of valuing employees in the end and also the strategic role of the CEO/owner/entrepreneur in developing these capabilities. The strategic importance of the CEO/owner to firm success and survival is also identified by Evenden & Anderson (P. 79-167, 1992) who argues that the ability of UK based organization owner–manager to develop strategic awareness capabilities contributes to firm survival and success. As Mullins. (2002) argue, in growing UK based organizations there is a pressure on the small business owner–manager to delegate responsibility for HRM although Rollinson (p.P.139-144, 2002) suggests this will depend on the owner–managers management style and personality. Indeed Rees (P. 112–130, 1996) argues that those UK based organization HRM manager’s leadership who are unable to change their style act as a barrier to firm growth (Rees P. 112–130, 1996). However, Pettinger (P.210-229, 2007) note that in the absence of formal planning, that HRM manager’s leadership strategic awareness and personal commitment to certain objectives may contribute to firm success. Given the informal and ad hoc nature of planning in UK based organizations, a focus on the strategic value of the HRM expertise or orientation of the CEO/owner/entrepreneur provides useful point of analysis for identifying strategic approaches to HRM. (Rees P. 112–130, 1996) These findings contribute to our understanding of why UK based organization HRM is informal. Clearly, UK based organizations suffer from what is termed “resource poverty” (Evenden & Anderson P. 79-167, 1992) or the “liability of smallness” (Rollinson p.P.139-144 2002) and this presents unique issues around the practice of HRM. Typically, implementing more formal HRM practices is costly in terms of time, money for UK based organizations, and it may not be seen as an investment in a vital firm resource. Indeed, as Stewart (P.137-141, 1998) demonstrates in their study of IPO firm performance that firms scoring high on HR value, for example through the provision of long-term rewards, had an increased chance of survival. However, they also found that high employee value was negatively associated with short-term performance. Similar conclusions are drawn in the two Dutch studies by Sels et al., 2006a and Sels et al., 2006b where they show that “intensive HRM can influence the financial health of UK based organizations both positively and negatively” (Evenden & Anderson P. 79-167, 1992). Such a view of firm resources is particularly relevant to small and entrepreneurial firms where the unique or idiosyncratic nature of employees skills and knowledge, management structure, and skills and orientations of the owner–manager are likely to be difficult to copy or imitate by competitors. A focus on the contribution and development of such unique resources rather than a short-term concern with the cost of such resources may contribute to the long-term survival of the firm. Similarly, the human capital vested in the owner/entrepreneurs experience, particular orientation (such as valuing employees) or the ability to be outward focused (strategic awareness) may provide the firm with capabilities for survival and success. However, in order to evaluate and highlight the context-specific nature of HRM in different national or regional settings, HR managers need to delineate the main factors and variables that could determine HRM in such settings. The dilemma regarding what factors to include under broad concepts such as ‘national culture’ or ‘institutions’ needs to be resolved. The issue regarding the selection and choice for certain contingent variables and organizational and HR strategies and policies (from the long available list) as possible determinants of HRM also needs serious attention. A sensible way to tackle this mammoth task is to understand the complex interactions between HRM practices and their determining variables based on empirical data. However, there is a scarcity of research in this area. This is partly because the number of methodological issues involved in cross-national research is many and more complex in comparison to national research, and partly due to the absence of a comprehensive framework for conducting such studies. The resource-based view encompasses both firm internal resources emphasizing the capabilities of the intra-organizational network and the relational view (Dvir, Avolio & Shamir. 2002) of the global organization, which is focused on the resources emphasizing the inter-organizational capabilities of the network external to the firm. Just as internal processes, practices, and people are viewed as assets, so too are relational ones that integrate consumers and channels-of-distribution and other external assets. The relational view suggests that these types of assets must be cultivated, encouraged, and protected and are not simply the residual outcome of marketing actions (Harvey & Lusch, 1997; Hunt & Morgan, 1995). Relational perspective is a corollary to resource-based view in that both identify tangible and intangible assets as having value and uniqueness in creating/sustaining competitive advantage (Borman, 1997; Francesco & Gold, 2005). The extent of the firms globalization of business activities reflects the share of its sales, employees and assets outside the borders of its home country (Howell & Avolio, 1993). As this extent increases, the firms need for local social knowledge increases (Kirkman & Den, 2005). In other words, the global organization needs to integrate the local social knowledge across multiple country markets of specific, institutional and social environments. The multiplicity of local environments of varying cultural and economic level distance versus the home country increases the need for the firms inclusion of inpatriation practice in its SGHRM system. Therefore, it is proposed: Successful companies must actively seek "creative destruction" of their existing competencies to retain competitive advantage in the marketplace (Barling, Weber, & Kelloway, 1996). Creative destruction in strategy is particularly important in complex, heterogeneous, rapidly changing (e.g., hyper-competitive) global markets. The process of continuous learning and the modification of resource bundles relative to the efficiency and effectiveness of strategies contribute to development of the firms dynamic capabilities (Teece, 2000; Teece, Pisano, & Shuen, 1997). Applying dynamic capabilities to SGHRM has two core components: (1) dynamic--developing systemic global coherence while recognizing the unique features of each countrys environment to facilitate customization of individual country strategies; (2) capabilities--focuses attention on the key role of managers in the adaptation, integration, and revamping of both internal and relational resources to match the opportunities in the global and local marketplaces (Dierickx & Cool, 2001; Teece et al., 1997). The firms internal and relational resources enable disaggregation and dispersion of its global activities across its global network (Ghorpade, 2000). These activities distributed across country markets are implemented through the mechanisms of hard (bureaucratic) and soft (personnel) control. The degree of global integration of the firms dispersed activities depends upon the firms needs to preserve local responsiveness to individual country markets (Snape, Thompson & Redman, 1998). The variables that capture this degree include: (1) extent of globalization in the firms business activities; (2) heterogeneity of the firms modes of entry across its global network; and (3) the level of horizontal interdependence among subsidiaries influencing the firms strategic trust (Athanassiou & Nigh, 2003). In effect, these variables influence the depth of the internal control mechanisms in the global organization and thus the salience of inpatriation policy and practice in the firms SGHRM. The majority of evidence suggests that the practice of HRM in UK based organizations can be characterised as ad hoc and informal. This can be seen in Rollinson (p.P.139-144, 2002) summary of ‘what HR managers know’ about HRM in general in UK based organizations: all firms have some form of HR, even if informal; most organizations do not have HR professionals in house; firms with more than 100 employees are likely to develop formal HR practices and departments; and early HR choices significantly impact later firm performance (p. 317). Others concur even when the geographic differences in the meaning of small is taken into account. For example, while Evenden & Anderson (P. 79-167, 1992) review relies mainly on studies from the British, where UK based organizations can employ up to 500 employees, a similar conclusion is drawn in European studies where UK based organizations usually employ less than 250 employees. Our own work in UK, which uses the ‘official’, national definition of a UK based organization as one employing less than 20 staff, also shows HRM informality, particularly in firms that are not growing. If HR managers look at the content of UK based organizations HRM systems HR managers can examine more closely what is meant by ‘informality’. Staffing has received much attention by researchers, perhaps because one of the most frequent complaints heard from UK based organization employers is about finding staff. For example our survey for CPA UK of 1753 UK based organizations in Victoria, UK found 69.4% of respondents were ‘very concerned’ about 2006 . Yet in this area researchers find the use of ‘unimaginative’ practices such as newspaper ads and walk-ins, practices that are convenient, inexpensive and directly controllable by the firm, and a reliance on word of mouth, for example. Convenience and ease of use underpins the selection methods that are used, such as face-to-face interviews, reference checks, job tryouts and application blanks. Research shows that leadership is an important HRM issue for many UK based organizations, but formal leadership is less likely to be provided in these firms (Rees P. 112–130, 1996). Storey (2004) provides two explanations for this. First, leadership is less likely to occur in UK based organizations because of ‘ignorance’ of the benefit it can bring and second because the cost is too high for UK based organizations (Rees P. 112–130, 1996). Informal, on-the-job leadership is more likely to occur than formal leadership and therefore it is not correct to assume UK based organizations do not train. For example, Marlow, (2006) point to UK small businesses spending some 5.8 billion pounds sterling on leadership each year. Despite this there is little to show that a strategic approach is being taken as internal and external leadership does not appear to be linked to other HRM practices such as employee performance appraisals (Marlow, 2006). Rollinson (p.P.139-144, 2002) point out that there is very little research, which has dealt with the performance management aspect of HRM in UK, based organizations. What HR managers do know is that performance appraisal practices in UK based organizations tend to be informal and continuous and often used for monitoring and control rather than development purposes. This can occur through the owner–manager working alongside employees or locating him or herself in the same workspace so staff can be directly observed. A UK based organizations ability to attract, motivate and retain employees by offering competitive salaries and appropriate rewards is linked to firm performance and growth. Yet Pettinger (P.210-229, 2007) found that only 29% of his sample used salary surveys to set compensation levels and 33% used job evaluation as a basis of determining compensation. The inability to compete with large firms on pay rates means there can be a greater emphasis on the intrinsic rewards associates with working in a UK based organization. Hornsby, Kuratko, 2004, Hornsby, and Kuratko, 2003 argue that informal approaches to compensation remain the hallmark of UK based organizations. This is reinforced by Mullins (2002) who writes, “Small business compensation practices are often uncoordinated and ad hoc, which may complicate their consistent implementation and impact on worker behaviour” (p. 307). In summary, there is an increasing amount of research that aims to identify the practice of HRM in UK based organizations. Whilst the evidence does show that there is some form of HRM in UK based organizations, it also confirms that the practice is characterized by informality. Is this a problem? HR managers think so because informal HRM practices do not necessarily recognize the value of employees. Despite the view that one of the great strengths of UK based organizations is their informality and the flexibilities that flow from this, there comes a point where informality can lead to diminishing returns. While informality leads to practices that are easy to use and convenient they do not necessarily deliver the best results to the firm over the long term. For example in the case of fast growing and entrepreneurial firms, managers may exhaust their informal staffing contacts (for example, family members, referrals and ‘walk-ins’) and need to develop more strategic methods to recruit employees with the skills and knowledge to sustain business growth. HR managers believe that the existence of formal HRM practices is indicative of some strategic thinking about how employees’ skills, attitudes and behaviour contribute to achieving the firms purpose.(Mullins P.97–99, 2002) In the next section HR managers consider some literature that offers a more strategic understanding of HRM in UK based organizations. Conclusion and Recommendations Despite the recognition of the importance of HRM to small, growing and entrepreneurial firms, there is very little research in the area, there is even less research that explores the strategic nature of HRM in UK based organizations. In light of recent calls for more theory building at the intersection of HRM and small and entrepreneurial firms HR managers argue that SHRM may contribute to a deeper understanding of the role of HRM in UK based organizations. (Stewart P.137-141, 1998) The HRM literature suggests human resources are a source of sustained competitive advantage because value, rareness, exclusivity and non-substitutability are copied from indistinctness, the inherent heterogeneity and complexity of these resources and the conditions under which they are deployed. This view can be applied equally to UK based organizations as large firms, particularly in the understanding of small fast growing and entrepreneurial firm performance were human resources issues are identified as a barrier to growth. Similarly, the notion of synergies gained from inter-linked HRM practices aligned with business strategy has much to add to our understanding of UK based organization performance, particularly given that UK based organization HR practices tend to be idiosyncratic and firm specific. In particular SHRM provides us with an underlying theory that demonstrates the value of a firms human resources and the unique ways in which they are managed in order to achieve organizational goals. References Athanassiou, N., & Nigh, D. (2003). Investigating the use of emergent strategic human resource management activity in the UK based organization. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development. Strategic Management Journal, 20(1), 83-92. Barling, J., Weber, T., & Kelloway, E. K. (1996). Effects of transformational leadership training on attitudinal and financial outcomes: A field experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 827-832. Borman, W. C. (1997). 360-degree ratings: An analysis of assumptions and a research agenda for evaluating their validity. Human Resource Management Review, 7, 299-315. Dierickx, I., & Cool, K. (2001). Human resource management in smaller firms: A contradiction in terms?. Human Resource Management Review, 35(12), 1504-1511. Dvir, T., Eden, D., Avolio, B. J., & Shamir, B. (2002). Impact of transformational leadership on follower development and performance: A field experiment. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 735-756. Evenden, R. & Anderson, G. (1992) "Management Skills: Making the Most of People." Wokingham, England: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co. P. 79-167 Francesco, A. M., & Gold, B. A. (2005). International organizational behavior. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. (International Human Resource Management) Ghorpade, J. (2000). Managing five paradoxes of 360-degree feedback. Academy of Management Executive, 14, 140-150. Harvey, M., & Lusch, R. (1997). High performance work systems and intermediate indicators of firm performance within the British small business sector; European Management Journal, 15(4), 370-380. Haynes and Fryer, P. Haynes and G. Fryer, (2000) Human resources, service quality and performance a case study, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 12 (2000) (4), pp. 240–248. Hoque, K, (1999b) Human resource management and performance in the UK hotel industry, British Journal of Industrial Relations 37 (1999) (3), pp. 419–443. Hoque, K. (1999a) New approaches to HRM in the UK hotel industry, Human Resource Management Journal 9 (1999) (2), pp. 64–76. Howell, J. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1993). Transformational leadership, transactional leadership, locus of control, and support for innovation: Key predictors of consolidated-business-unit performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 891-902. Lucas, R.E, (2002) Fragments of HRM in hospitality? evidence from the Workplace Employee Relations Survey (WERS) 1998, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 14 (2002) (5), pp. 207–212. Lucas, R.E. (2004) Employment Relations in the Hospitality and Tourism Industries, Routledge, London (2004). Marlow, 2006 Marlow, S. (2006). Human resource management in smaller firms: A contradiction in terms? Human Resource Management Review. McGunnigle and Jameson, (2000) P. McGunnigle and S. Jameson, HRM in UK hotels a focus on commitment, Employee Relations 22 (2000) (4), pp. 403–422. Mullins, 2000 Mullins, J. (2000). Commentary on Marlow, S. (2000) Investigating the use of emergent strategic human resource management activity in the UK based organization. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 7, 135–148. International Small Business Journal, 19, 97–99. Mullins, D. (2002) "Organisational Behaviour and Analysis: An Integrated Approach." (2nd ed.) Harlow: Financial Times Prentice Hall. Mullins, L. J. (2002) "Management and Organisational Behaviour." (6th ed.) Harlow: Financial Times Prentice Hall. Pettinger, R. (2007) "Introduction to Management." (Fourth Ed.) New York: Palgrave. P.210-229 Price, L. Price, (1994) Poor personnel practice in the hotel and catering industry does it matter?, Human Resource Management Journal 4 (1994) (4), pp. 44–62. Rees, W. D. (1996) "The Skills of Management." (4th ed.) London: International Thomson Business Press. pp. 112–130. Rollinson, D. (2002) "Organisational Behaviour and Analysis: An Integrated Approach." (2nd ed.) Harlow: Financial Times Prentice Hall. P.139-144 Snape, E., Thompson, D., Yan, F., & Redman, T. (1998). Performance appraisal and culture: Practice and attitudes in Hong Kong and Great Britain. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 9, 841-861. Stewart, D. M. (ed.) (1998) "Gower Handbook of Management Skills." (3rd ed.) Brookfield, VT: Gower.P.137-141 Teece, D. (2000). Technological change and the nature of the firm. In G. Dosi, C. Freeman, R. Nelson, G. Silverberg, & I. Soete (Eds.), Technology change and economic theory (pp. 256-281). New York: Pinter Publications. Teece, D., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533. Way, S. (2002) High performance work systems and intermediate indicators of firm performance within the British small business sector, Journal of Management 28 (2002), p. 767. Worsfold, (1999) P. Worsfold, HRM, performance, commitment and service quality in the hotel industry, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 11 (1999) (7), pp. 340–348. Read More