自由市场经济的分解:制度与人力资源管理

IF 1.7 4区 管理学 Q2 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR
Chris Brewster, Michael Brookes, Geoffrey Wood
{"title":"自由市场经济的分解:制度与人力资源管理","authors":"Chris Brewster, Michael Brookes, Geoffrey Wood","doi":"10.1177/0143831x241235798","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It has been argued that the different ways human resource management is conducted in different countries can be at least partly explained by theories of comparative capitalisms. Earlier work has highlighted much diversity between coordinated market economies, but the liberal markets are commonly assumed to represent a more coherent category. This article scrutinizes the latter assumption more closely by examining differences between the liberal market economies in their approaches to HRM. The authors find that the USA displays greater centralization in human resource management practices, higher turnover rates and less delegation to employees, than in the UK and Australia; this being associated with differences in institutional realities. The study highlights how, under a broad institutional archetype, specific systemic features may exert strong effects on specific HRM practices and challenges assumptions of close institutional coupling in the most advanced economies.","PeriodicalId":47456,"journal":{"name":"Economic and Industrial Democracy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Disaggregating the liberal market economies: Institutions and HRM\",\"authors\":\"Chris Brewster, Michael Brookes, Geoffrey Wood\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0143831x241235798\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It has been argued that the different ways human resource management is conducted in different countries can be at least partly explained by theories of comparative capitalisms. Earlier work has highlighted much diversity between coordinated market economies, but the liberal markets are commonly assumed to represent a more coherent category. This article scrutinizes the latter assumption more closely by examining differences between the liberal market economies in their approaches to HRM. The authors find that the USA displays greater centralization in human resource management practices, higher turnover rates and less delegation to employees, than in the UK and Australia; this being associated with differences in institutional realities. The study highlights how, under a broad institutional archetype, specific systemic features may exert strong effects on specific HRM practices and challenges assumptions of close institutional coupling in the most advanced economies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47456,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Economic and Industrial Democracy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Economic and Industrial Democracy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0143831x241235798\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Economic and Industrial Democracy","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0143831x241235798","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

有人认为,比较资本主义理论至少可以部分解释不同国家人力资源管理的不同方式。早期的研究强调了协调市场经济体之间的多样性,但人们通常认为自由市场代表了一个更为一致的类别。本文通过研究自由市场经济体在人力资源管理方法上的差异,对后一种假设进行了更仔细的审视。作者发现,与英国和澳大利亚相比,美国在人力资源管理实践中表现出更高的集中化程度、更高的人员流动率和更少的员工授权;这与制度现实的差异有关。该研究强调了在广泛的制度原型下,特定的制度特征如何对特定的人力资源管理实践产生强烈影响,并对最发达经济体制度紧密耦合的假设提出了质疑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Disaggregating the liberal market economies: Institutions and HRM
It has been argued that the different ways human resource management is conducted in different countries can be at least partly explained by theories of comparative capitalisms. Earlier work has highlighted much diversity between coordinated market economies, but the liberal markets are commonly assumed to represent a more coherent category. This article scrutinizes the latter assumption more closely by examining differences between the liberal market economies in their approaches to HRM. The authors find that the USA displays greater centralization in human resource management practices, higher turnover rates and less delegation to employees, than in the UK and Australia; this being associated with differences in institutional realities. The study highlights how, under a broad institutional archetype, specific systemic features may exert strong effects on specific HRM practices and challenges assumptions of close institutional coupling in the most advanced economies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Economic and Industrial Democracy
Economic and Industrial Democracy INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
13.30%
发文量
51
期刊介绍: Economic and Industrial Democracy is an international peer reviewed journal that focuses on the study of initiatives designed to enhance the quality of working life through extending the democratic control of workers over the workplace and the economy. How those initiatives are affected by wider political, economic and technological factors are also of interest. Special emphasis is laid on international coverage of empirical material, including discussions of the social and economic conditions in various countries.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信