Critical Examination of Current Academic Theory and Debates on HRM in Global Contexts

Global Human Resource Management (HRM) is shaped by changing theories, cultural diversity, technology, and workforce trends. While traditional ideas provide a base, modern HRM focuses on globalization, diversity, digital tools, and ethical challenges.

Figure: Human Resources in a Global Context (Brooks, 2021)

1. Theoretical Perspectives on HRM in Global Contexts

a) Universalist vs. Contingency Approach

• The Universalist perspective says that the best HRM practices, such as performance-based pay, employee engagement, and leadership development, are applicable to any cultures and industries (Pfeffer, 1994).
• The Contingency perspective (Schuler & Jackson, 1987) says that the HRM strategies must align with external factors such as national culture, industry norms, and labor regulations.

Debate:

Some scholars say that multinational corporations (MNCs) should build standardized HRM strategies for consistency (Brewster, 1999), while others focus on the need for localization to accommodate cultural and institutional differences (Hofstede, 1980).

b) Convergence vs. Divergence in Global HRM

• The Convergence theory says that globalization leads to similar HRM practices across countries due to economic integration and technology adoption (Rowley & Benson, 2002).
• The Divergence theory says that the national and cultural differences prevent full standardization of HRM practices (Sparrow et al., 1994).

Debate:

While global firms attempt to apply uniform HR policies, studies say that local labor laws, cultural attitudes, and economic conditions influence HRM strategies in different regions (Farndale et al., 2017).

c) Institutional Theory & National Business Systems Approach

• Institutional theory (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983) says that the HRM is shaped by legal, social, and political institutions in each country.
• The National Business Systems approach (Whitley, 1999) says that HRM is deeply embedded in national economic structures, governance models, and labor markets.

Debate:

Global HRM strategies must balance global corporate policies with local institutional pressures, creating a “glocal” approach where firms integrate global efficiency with local responsiveness (Edwards & Kuruvilla, 2005).

2. Key Contemporary Debates in Global HRM

a) The Impact of AI and Digital HRM

• The rise of AI, automation, and digital HR tools is quickly changing recruitment, performance management, and workforce analytics.
• Some scholars say that AI increases the efficiency and reduces bias (Bhardwaj et al., 2020), while critics highlight algorithmic discrimination, job displacement, and ethical concerns (Raisch & Krakowski, 2021).

Debate:

The major question is whether AI-driven HRM will empower or replace human HR teams and how ethical AI governance can be assured in cross-cultural HRM environments (Leicht-Deobald et al., 2019).

b) Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) in a Global Workforce

• Global HRM must navigate cultural diversity, gender equity, and social inclusion.
• The business case for DEI says that diverse teams improve innovation and financial performance (Cox & Blake, 1991).
• However, critics say that tokenistic DEI efforts without structural changes lead to “diversity washing” rather than meaningful inclusion (Tatli & Özbilgin, 2012).

Debate:

Should multinational corporations apply Western-focused DEI policies worldwide, or should diversity management be tailored to fit local cultural contexts?

c) The Gig Economy and Remote Work Challenges

• The rise of gig work and remote jobs has challenged traditional HRM models.
• Some scholars argue that flexible work improves productivity and work-life balance (Bailey & Kurland, 2002), while others focus on issues like job insecurity, lack of benefits, and mental health concerns (Kalleberg, 2011).

Debate:

How can global HRM ensure fair labor practices for gig and remote workers in various places and legal systems?

d) Ethical HRM and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)

• HRM is increasingly linked to corporate ethics, sustainability, and human rights in global supply chains.
• Ethical HRM promotes fair wages, employee well-being, and policies against exploitation (Greenwood, 2013).
• However, critics say that profit-driven firms often focus on cost-cutting rather than ethical considerations, leading to HRM violations in developing economies (Banerjee, 2008).

Debate:

Should HRM ethics be standardized globally (e.g., through the UN Global Compact) or adapted to local business needs?

3. Future Directions in Global HRM

a) The Rise of Strategic HRM (SHRM)

• HR is evolving from an administrative function to a strategic partner (Wright & McMahan, 1992).
• Future HR leaders will need skills in people analytics, business strategy, and global labor laws.

b) HRM in Emerging Markets

• Western HRM models often dominate academic research, but HRM in Asia, Africa, and Latin America requires more focus.
• Indigenous HRM approaches, like Confucian HRM (China) or Ubuntu HRM (Africa), challenge Western-centered HR theories (Horwitz, 2017).

c) Sustainable HRM

• The concept of Green HRM highlights integrating sustainability and environmental responsibility into HRM policies (Jabbour, 2013).
• Organizations are under pressure to adopt eco-friendly HR practices that promote ethical labor standards, carbon reduction, and employee well-being.

Global HRM balances standardization and localization, efficiency and ethics, and technology and human connection. While theories provide a foundation, real-world challenges make workforce management complex. Future strategies must blend AI, diversity, ethical labor practices, and sustainability to succeed in a connected world.

References

• Brooks, R. (2021) Human resources in a global context. Available at: https://online.lincoln.ac.uk/human-resources-in-a-global-context/ (Accessed: 16 March 2025).
• Barney, J. (1991) ‘Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage’, Journal of Management, 17(1), pp. 99–120.
• Bondarouk, T. and Brewster, C. (2016) ‘Conceptualising the Future of HRM and Technology Research’, International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(21), pp. 2652–2671.
• Brewster, C. (1999) ‘Strategic Human Resource Management: The Value of Different Paradigms’, Management International Review, 39(3), pp. 45–60.
• Cooke, F. L., Wood, G., Wang, M. and Veen, A. (2020) ‘International HRM in the Context of the Global South’, Human Resource Management Journal, 30(4), pp. 588–606.
• DiMaggio, P. J. and Powell, W. W. (1983) ‘The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields’, American Sociological Review, 48(2), pp. 147–160.
• Farndale, E., Brewster, C. and Mayrhofer, W. (2021) ‘The Role of Context in Comparative and International HRM’, European Journal of International Management, 15(5), pp. 637–654.
• Horwitz, F. (2017) ‘International HRM in Developing Economies: Barriers, Challenges and Opportunities’, Journal of World Business, 52(1), pp. 23–34.
• Huselid, M. A. (1995) ‘The Impact of Human Resource Management Practices on Turnover, Productivity, and Corporate Financial Performance’, Academy of Management Journal, 38(3), pp. 635–672.
• Parry, E. and Battista, V. (2019) ‘The Impact of Digitalization on the HRM Profession’, Employee Relations, 41(5), pp. 1117–1137.
• Bailey, D. E. and Kurland, N. B. (2002) ‘A review of telework research: Findings, new directions, and lessons for the study of modern work’, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(4), pp. 383-400.
• Banerjee, S. B. (2008) ‘Corporate social responsibility: The good, the bad and the ugly’, Critical Sociology, 34(1), pp. 51-79.
• Bhardwaj, A., Singh, A. K. and Singh, S. (2020) ‘Artificial intelligence in human resource management: A literature review’, International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science, 9(2), pp. 1-12.
• Brewster, C. (1999) ‘Strategic human resource management: The value of different paradigms’, Management International Review, 39(3), pp. 45-64.
• Greenwood, M. (2013) ‘Ethical analyses of HRM: A review and research agenda’, Journal of Business Ethics, 114(2), pp. 355-366.
• Hofstede, G. (1980) Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
• Kalleberg, A. L. (2011) Good jobs, bad jobs: The rise of polarized and precarious employment systems in the United States, 1970s–2000s. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
• Raisch, S. and Krakowski, S. (2021) ‘Artificial intelligence and management: The automation–augmentation paradox’, Academy of Management Review, 46(1), pp. 192-210.