In international comparative studies of personnel management/HRM, one of the central issues is to identify similarities and differences in approaches to this specific function in organisations. The driving forces in a market economy lead HRM practices in different countries down more or less a similar path. In this case it is assumed that the best methods and practices that have proven themselves indeed exist, and these have therefore been found in use whereever a market economy works. The same trend is noticeable when talking about the influence of institutional forces in European Union that result in HRM practices becoming increasingly similar in different countries. At the same time, developments in HRM in different countries are influenced by deeply rooted value systems and cultural traditions that act as forces creating and maintaining divergence. The comparison of Slovenia and Estonia offers specific insights into how and why the HRM function has changed in organisations in two new European Union member countries.
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to participate in the convergence‐divergence debate related to the trends in European human resource management (HRM). The paper evaluates the converging vs diverging implications in Estonia and Finland by comparing HR strategies, policies and practices between the two countries in the context of HRM in the Nordic and EU‐15 countries.Design/methodology/approachThe research is part of a large international comparative HRM project (CRANET), which covers over 30 countries. Empirical data were collected by a survey questionnaire mailed to large private and public organisations employing over 200 employees. The Estonian survey data involve 69 organisations and the Finnish data 269. The data cover private companies and public sector organisations.FindingsThe comparison of HRM in Estonia and Finland revealed a few interesting empirical observations: First, in spite of Estonia's short history as an independent Baltic state, HRM has stabilised its position at both strategic and policy level's as well as in HR practices. Second, there is a converging (directional) trend between Estonian and Finnish HRM. Third, the Estonian HRM matches with the EU‐15 HRM; Estonia does not increase diversity in the European HRM.Research limitations/implicationsThe main limitation of the study is related to survey methodology. In further research longitudinal data as well as case studies and triangulation are needed to open country‐level trends in the convergence‐divergence debate.Practical implicationsEstonian companies and public organisations might need to pay more attention to equality/diversity policy. Special attention should be paid to HRM in public organisations.Originality/valueThe main value of the paper is related to the contribution to the convergence debate in HRM.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.