Back to the Future: Implications for the Field of HRM of the Multistakeholder Perspective Proposed 30 Years Ago

Abstract

Thirty years on from the seminal works on human resource management (HRM) by Beer et al., we examine how the subject has developed. We offer a normative review, based on that model and critique the assumption that the business of HRM is solely to improve returns to owners and shareholders. We identify the importance of a wider view of stakeholders to practitioners and how academic studies on the periphery of HRM are beginning to adopt such a view. We argue that the HRM studies so far have given us much valuable learning but that the subject has now reached a point where we need to take a wider, more contextual, more multilayered approach founded on the long‐term needs of all relevant stakeholders. The original Beer et al. model remains a valuable guide to the next 30 years of HRM. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research

“…However, in the literature, rather than in practice, the focus on HRM policy choices and proximal (within firm) outcomes in much of the literature, the 'outer boxes' of the Harvard map of the territory were, with some laudable exceptions, ignored. Thus, the other stakeholders (Beer, Boselie, & Brewster, 2015) and employee well-being hardly featured (though see, for example, Collins & Porras, 1997;Pfeffer, 1994Pfeffer, , 1998. And when they were taken into account, they were seen as means towards other ends (Kaufman, 2010).…”

“…Developments in stakeholder theory (Freeman, Harrison, Wicks, Parmar, & de Colle, 2010) are gradually being reflected in HRM (Beer et al, 2015). The satisfaction of stakeholders is directly connected to their values and assumptions and the values and assumptions that exist in a workplace.…”

Crossing the streams: HRM in multinational enterprises and comparative HRM

“…Significantly, the process approach emphasises the need for HRM research that crosses levels of analysis, and incorporates the perspectives of other stakeholders than owners and shareholders (Beer, Boselie, & Brewster, 2015;Nishii, Lepak, & Schneider, 2008;Sanders & Yang, in press;Sanders, Dorenbosch, & de Reuver, 2008;. There have also been calls for actor-centric research into who the key actors are and what their roles are in HRM development processes (Rupidara & McGraw, 2011;Welch & Welch, 2012).…”

Commitment or Compliance? Institutional Logics of Work Environment Management

“…Human resource theory (or, perhaps more accurately, bundle of theories) rests upon the assumption 'that organizational creativity, flexibility, and prosperity flow naturally from employee growth and development' (Shafritz & Ott, 2001: 145), and, more importantly that the people are the most important asset of any organization (Shafritz & Ott, 2001). From early descriptions (see Beer et al, 2015), HRM was characterized first and foremost by a strategic approach to people-management. That is, employees are resources to be used strategically, as well as resources that should be recruited, evaluated, rewarded, and sanctioned based on their strategic merits (Storey et al, 2009).…”