Discrepancy between human resource research and practice: Comparison of industrial/organisational psychologists and human resource practitioners' beliefs

Abstract

There is a large and growing body of research to show that human resource (HR) practices affect individual performance, organisational productivity and organisational performance. Academic findings about effective HR practices, however, have not readily been adopted by practitioners. A variety of theoretical and practical explanations have been advanced about the research-practice gap. Research by Rynes, Colbert, and Brown (2002) suggested that the research-practice gap is due to a lack of knowledge, but the extent to which these findings apply to the Australian context is unknown. The sample consisted of 102 industrial/organisational (I/O) psychologists and 89 HR practitioners. The main aim of the present study was to replicate and extend the work of Rynes et al. by examining and comparing the knowledge of I/O psychologists and HR practitioners. It was found that overall I/O psychologists were better informed about HR research than HR practitioners; in particular, they were more knowledgeable about management practices and recruitment and selection. In both groups, of the five content areas examined (Management Practices; General Employment Practices; Training and Development; Recruitment and Selection; and Compensation and Benefits), the greatest gaps were in Recruitment and Selection.

The Research-Practice Gap in Human Resource Management: A Cross-Cultural Study

“…Two replications of this effort among Dutch (Sanders, van Riemsdijk, & Groen, ) and Australian HR practitioners (Carless, Rasiah, & Irmer, ) yielded very similar results. In both studies, respondents answered around 60 percent of the items correctly and fared the worst on selection‐related items.…”

“…Taken together, we examine beliefs about the effectiveness of HR practices by surveying HR professionals in Finland, Spain, and South Korea, and compare the gaps between practitioner beliefs and research knowledge to earlier studies (Carless et al, ; Rynes et al, ; Sanders et al, ). We contribute to this discourse by assessing cross‐cultural differences in HR practitioner beliefs.…”

“…In both studies, respondents answered around 60 percent of the items correctly and fared the worst on selection‐related items. On a micro level, the characteristics of the respondents have been discussed to be relevant factors (e.g., job level, tenure, education, information‐seeking strategies, attitudes toward academics and research; Carless et al, ; Rynes et al, ; Sanders et al, ). Other research points to the fact that organizational context and corporate cultures may account for some of the differences in human resource practices and strategies (Gerhart & Fang, ).…”

“…In the present study, accordingly, we replicate and expand the efforts of Rynes et al () in three countries: Finland, Spain, and South Korea. By doing so, we contribute to the literature by exploring the potential role of national culture on HR professionals’ beliefs, an examination that is not possible within a single‐country study (Carless et al, ; Sanders et al, ; Rynes et al, ). Specifically, we examine the possibility that beliefs about some HR practices, those that are more interpersonal‐oriented, are culture specific, while others, those that are more technical‐oriented, are not (see, e.g., Reiche, Lee, & Quintanilla, ).…”

Psychological testing for selection purposes: a guide to evidence-based practice for human resource professionals

“…Some argue that the research -practice gap can be explained by a lack of knowledge about selection practices (Terpstra and Rozell 1997;Ryan and Tippins 2004;Anderson 2005). Evidence supports the knowledge hypothesis; a large discrepancy exists between research findings and practitioners' beliefs about selection practices (Rynes et al 2002;Carless, Rasiah and Irmer 2009).…”