Public sector HRM: the case of no central human resource strategy

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of the paper is to outline and analyse the limitations and opportunities of decentralised human resource management (HRM) in the public sector.Design/methodology/approachThe paper is based on a case study of the Estonian Central Government.FindingsIt is demonstrated that the absence of a central human resource strategy, combined with fragmentation, insufficient coordination and a lack of common values throughout the public service as well as with other limitations related to the country's post‐communist legacy has hindered a systematic approach to public service HRM. However, the paper also reveals that a decentralised setup of HRM has enabled Estonia to flexibly conduct major reforms on the organisational level during the transition of the 1990s and in the following Europeanisation period.Research limitations/implicationsAlthough the case study method limits the extent to which findings of the study may be generalised to other countries and settings, there are still several lessons to be learned from the Estonian case of no central HR strategy.Practical implicationsThe practical recommendations are related to the applicability of the strategic HRM model, path dependency of the development of HRM and the strategic fit between a country's HRM model and the wider context in which it is applied.Originality/valueThe paper provides a new look to the macro‐level HR policies and to the institutional setup of central HR coordination in the context of fast reforms.

Are Managers in Slovakia Ethical Leaders? Key Findings on the Level of Ethical Leadership in the Slovak Business Environment

“…In this process of morality transition a special attention should be paid to the role of business organizations in improving ethical behaviour. However, still, there is a growing number of scandals witnessed in the business arena, most of all due to continuous ethical failures of managers like the corruption in private and public sectors (Beddow, 2016;Batory, 2012;De Ridder, 2009), or ineffective HRM practices (Järvalt and Randma-Liiv, 2010) and related mistreatment of employees . As Kuralt (2008) has noted, societal transition represents a radical social change, and as such it embodies a special challenge to managers.…”

Gestão estratégica de pessoas no Legislativo Federal brasileiro: condições para a implementação

“…The 3 types of context and the 4 types of interferants apparently would affect each other, in a complex system of interactions (Fonseca et al, 2013;Hendry & Pettigrew, 1990;Paauwe, 2004), that also involves organizational actors, as the high administration (Bergue, 2014), groups of interest in general (Järvalt & Randma-Liiv, 2010;Truss, 2008;Tsui, 1987), line managers (Guest, 1987;Mesch et al, 1995;Teo, 2002) and servers (Camões & Meneses, 2016;Vo & Bartram, 2012).…”

The pursuit of HR outsourcing in an emerging economy: The effects of HRM strategy on HR labour costs

“…Under this strategy, HR focus is very narrow and primarily includes issues related to payroll, hiring, and firing (McEvoy & Buller, 2013). In this sense, organizations do not yet understand the real value of human resources and need to move further on their ad hoc HR practices, and may require the desire and competence from outside (Chow et al, 2013;Jarvalt & Randma-Liiv, 2010). The strategy is characterized by: (i) unclear or very narrow job definitions; (ii) the use of written documents to communicate work-related skills and knowledge; (iii) comparatively fewer opportunities for employees to receive extensive training; (iv) nonparticipation of employees in management decision-making; (v) the utilization of result-oriented performance evaluation as a control mechanism; (vi) relatively unstructured career planning; and (vii) low employment security (Delery & Doty, 1996).…”

“…Innovation by the work force is not highly prized, and pay is based on quantity rather than quality of output. Because organizations embracing this strategy do not necessarily regard employees as a valuable resource (Delery & Doty, 1996;Jarvalt & Randma-Liiv, 2010), limited formal training is provided. Most of these firms are conservative organizations that are inherently skeptical of the uncertain consequences of engaging a third party to undertake its own HR functions (Chow et al, 2013;Stroh & Treehuboff, 2003).…”