Strategic Human Resource Staffing and Organization Research: Are they One-Size-Fits-All Endeavors?

P. Bobko, Denise Potosky
{"title":"Strategic Human Resource Staffing and Organization Research: Are they One-Size-Fits-All Endeavors?","authors":"P. Bobko, Denise Potosky","doi":"10.1108/S1479-8387(2011)0000006011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose – We show that, although most private employer establishments are small, much reported research (and subsequent suggestions for practice) in management comes from large firms. In turn, we wanted to explore if organizational knowledge gained from studying one or more large firms is necessarily applicable to numerous smaller firms. \n \nDesign/methodology/approach – We computed firm size in the United States using existing databases, and we then considered published literature in human resources and strategy to see if the large sample results logically applied to smaller firms. \n \nFindings – At the job-analytic level, it is suggested that jobs might be defined differently and more broadly in smaller establishments than in large organizations. Also, the feasibility of best corporate strategies may be moderated by the size of the firm. In addition, we noted that the underlying model of selection utility in human resource management (HRM), and several factors in its numerical estimation, might need to be modified as a function of firm size. \n \nOriginality/value – We hope that this chapter inspires HRM and strategy researchers by helping to focus future evidence-based efforts, creating new initiatives, and providing results that are useful (or scalable) to the large number of small, private-sector U.S. firms.","PeriodicalId":207420,"journal":{"name":"Research Methodology in Strategy and Management","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Methodology in Strategy and Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-8387(2011)0000006011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Purpose – We show that, although most private employer establishments are small, much reported research (and subsequent suggestions for practice) in management comes from large firms. In turn, we wanted to explore if organizational knowledge gained from studying one or more large firms is necessarily applicable to numerous smaller firms. Design/methodology/approach – We computed firm size in the United States using existing databases, and we then considered published literature in human resources and strategy to see if the large sample results logically applied to smaller firms. Findings – At the job-analytic level, it is suggested that jobs might be defined differently and more broadly in smaller establishments than in large organizations. Also, the feasibility of best corporate strategies may be moderated by the size of the firm. In addition, we noted that the underlying model of selection utility in human resource management (HRM), and several factors in its numerical estimation, might need to be modified as a function of firm size. Originality/value – We hope that this chapter inspires HRM and strategy researchers by helping to focus future evidence-based efforts, creating new initiatives, and providing results that are useful (or scalable) to the large number of small, private-sector U.S. firms.
战略人力资源配置与组织研究:是否一刀切?
目的-我们表明,尽管大多数私人雇主机构都很小,但许多报道的管理研究(以及随后的实践建议)来自大公司。反过来,我们想探索从研究一个或多个大公司中获得的组织知识是否一定适用于许多小公司。设计/方法/方法——我们使用现有的数据库计算了美国的公司规模,然后我们考虑了人力资源和战略方面发表的文献,看看大样本的结果是否在逻辑上适用于较小的公司。调查结果- -在工作分析一级,建议在较小的机构中工作的定义可能与在大组织中不同,而且更广泛。此外,最佳公司战略的可行性可能会受到公司规模的影响。此外,我们注意到人力资源管理(HRM)中选择效用的基本模型,以及其数值估计中的几个因素,可能需要作为企业规模的函数进行修改。原创性/价值——我们希望本章能够启发人力资源管理和战略研究人员,帮助他们关注未来以证据为基础的努力,创造新的倡议,并提供对大量小型美国私营企业有用(或可扩展)的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信