Harm of efficiency oriented HRM practices on stakeholders: an ethical issue for sustainability

Abstract

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to explore psychological, social and work related health aspects of harm imposed on stakeholders, such as employees, their families and communities, by organizations while using efficiency based human resource management (HRM) practices. Design/methodology/approach -The ethical issues of negative externality (NE) or harm of HRM practices are scrutinized using ethics of care for a stakeholders' perspective. Further, the conceptual framework of NE of HRM is used to analyse the psychological, social and work related health harm of one of the strategic HRM practices, work intensification, a widely used practice to improve the efficiency of employees. Findings -It is evident from this article that NE of work intensification has become the major contributor to the psychological, social, and work related health aspects of harm on the stakeholders, and they as third parties render the costs for managing this harm.Research limitations/implications -The harm indicators and the associated costs are drawn from published research that was not conducted for the purpose of identifying the harm of the NE of HRM practices. Hence, it is suggested that it would be useful to develop a tool to measure the harmful effects of HRM practices on the stakeholders. Practical implications -The analysis of NE of work intensification can help managers to be proactive in introducing sustainable HRM strategies so as to minimize the harms of NE of HRM practices. Originality/value -The framework of NE of HRM provides a new insight that overutilization of human resources for maximizing an organisation's profit has an unsustainable impact on society.

Organizational Justice as Mediator of the Discretionary Human Resource Practice-Organizational Citizenship Behavior Relationship: Evidence from Enterprises in China

“…According to Hayton (2004) [8] and Gavino (2012) [9], this essay divides the discretionary HRP as four dimensions including selective staffing, promotional opportunities, performance management and participation in decision making. It is different from efficiency based HRM practice including high performance human resource practice, which would bring negative externality to employees on psychological, social and work related health aspects [10].…”

Reporting on sustainability and HRM: a comparative study of sustainability reporting practices by the world's largest companies

“…While the academic debate on measuring Sustainable HRM has started only recently (e.g. Guerci & Pedrini, 2014;Mariappanadar, 2012Mariappanadar, , 2013Osranek & Zink, 2014) and while a consensus for what practices may constitute a definitive checklist of Sustainable HRM practices is currently not available, there are a number of core 14 101 The International Journal of Human Resource Management attributes and concepts that overlap significantly with those associated with sustainability reporting. Hence, our use of the GRI reporting guidelines which allowed us to shed light on the attention companies pay to Sustainable HRM is an additional contribution to this debate.…”

“…This definition highlights two components of Sustainable HRM: (1) the recognition of multiple, potentially contradictory, economic, ecological and social goals such as human sustainability (Docherty, Kira, & Shani, 2009;Wilkinson et al, 2001) or ecological sustainability (Jackson, Renwick, Jabbour, & Muller-Camen, 2011) and (2) complex interrelations between HRM systems and their internal and external environments with particular emphasis on relationships which allow the long-term reproduction of resources (Ehnert, 2009b) and which control externalities (Mariappanadar, 2003). As a theoretical background for operationalising Sustainable HRM, three approaches have been suggested in the literature, namely paradox theory (Ehnert, 2009b), a theory of negative externalities and stakeholder harm (Mariappanadar, 2012(Mariappanadar, , 2013 and stakeholder theory (Guerci, 2011;Guerci & Pedrini, 2014). For two reasons our paper contributes to the latter stream of research.…”

“…First, in Sustainable HRM, there is the commitment to refraining from pursuing short-term cost-driven HRM practices that harm workers, their families and their communities (Mariappanadar, 2003(Mariappanadar, , 2012. Second, however, Sustainable HRM involves taking proactive steps to developing mutually beneficial and regenerative relationships between internal and external resource providers (e.g.…”

The HR role in corporate social responsibility and sustainability: A boundary‐shifting literature review

“…The database also includes: Aguinis and Glavas (); Barrena‐Martínez, López‐Fernández, and Romero‐Fernández (); Cordeiro and Sarkis (); Cornelius, Todres, Janjuha‐Jivraj, Woods, and Wallace (); Demuijnck (); Denyer and Tranfield (); Eccles and Serafeim (); Fuentes‐García, Núñez‐Tabales, and Veroz‐Herradón (2008); Fukukawa and Teramoto (); Glavas (); Gold, Seuring, and Beske (); Hoeven and Verhoeven (); Mariappanadar (); Orlitzky and Frenkel (); Rimanoczy and Pearson (); Wettstein (); Wirtenberg, Harmon, Russell, and Fairfield ().…”