Strategic HRM through the cultural looking glass:mapping the cognition of British and Indian managers

This study examines the issues of `integration' of human resource management (HRM) into the corporate strategy, `devolvement' of HRM to line managers and the perceived influence of national culture on HRM in a cross-national comparative context. In order to achieve this, the cognition of personnel specialists from a matched sample of 48 Indian and British firms in the manufacturing sector using the `Visual Cards Sorting' and `CMAP2' methodologies are analyzed. The findings show that even where there is an apparent convergence of strategy — e.g., the desire of both Indian and British personnel managers to increase integration between HRM and business strategy, and to increase the level of devolvement to line managers, the two sets of specialists clearly follow a different logic of action, which is subject to a different set of cross-cultural influences. The implications of pursuing apparently similar HRM solutions in different cross-national contexts are considered. The analysis shows that HRM strategies, when considered in a cross-national context, vary a lot. Different logic leads to the adoption of similar HR strategies, and similar strategies in turn are perceived as producing different outcomes. This variance centres around the existence and perceived influence of several contextual variables such as industrial relations systems, operation of labour markets, and changes in business systems. Specific cross-cultural influences, along with different aspects of competitive business environment associated with the generic HR strategies of integration and devolvement in the two countries are highlighted. This research contributes to the fields of cross-cultural management research, international HRM and managerial and organizational cognition. It also has important messages for policy makers.

Constructing institutional change: emergence, contestation and convergence of business models in the field of Java application servers

How are innovative new business models established if organizations constantly compare themselves against existing criteria and expectations? The objective is to address this question from the perspective of innovators and their ability to redefine established expectations and evaluation criteria. The research questions ask whether there are discernible patterns of discursive action through which innovators theorize institutional change and what role such theorizations play for mobilizing support and realizing change projects. These questions are investigated through a case study on a critical area of enterprise computing software, Java application servers. In the present case, business practices and models were already well established among incumbents with critical market areas allocated to few dominant firms. Fringe players started experimenting with a new business approach of selling services around freely available opensource application servers. While most new players struggled, one new entrant succeeded in leading incumbents to adopt and compete on the new model. The case demonstrates that innovative and substantially new models and practices are established in organizational fields when innovators are able to refine expectations and evaluation criteria within an organisational field. The study addresses the theoretical paradox of embedded agency. Actors who are embedded in prevailing institutional logics and structures find it hard to perceive potentially disruptive opportunities that fall outside existing ways of doing things. Changing prevailing institutional logics and structures requires strategic and institutional work aimed at overcoming barriers to innovation. The study addresses this problem through the lens of (new) institutional theory. This discourse methodology traces the process through which innovators were able to establish a new social and business model in the field.