Abstract
Purpose
By undertaking a detailed review of the Strategic Human Resource Management (SHRM) discourse, the purpose of this paper is to uncover and explicate the power differentials embedded in the social structure of organizations and suggests ways to reconcile them.
Design/methodology/approach
Methods used are thematic review, content analysis, and inductive theorizing, with Foucault’s archaeological and genealogical analysis style as the overarching framework.
Findings
At the methodological level, the authors demonstrate the application of Foucault’s twin methods: archaeological and genealogical analysis. At the substantive level, the authors have two contributions. First, the authors critique and analyze the various themes of power that emerge from the SHRM discourse as well as the hybridized overlaps of SHRM with other organization studies topics of interest such as organizational learning, network studies, control and postmodernism. Second, the authors propose a “Power” theory based nomothetic, typological synthesis for crafting the business-facing human resource (HR) function. The power lens manifests as the meta-theory to guide a much required streamlining of constructs and “value laden” synthesis of the literature.
Research limitations/implications
The potential of critical theory in crafting situated and context-sensitive research propositions is demonstrated.
Practical implications
Organizational strategists and HR managers can utilize the proposed typology to better understand their current ideological positions and decide future aspired images.
Originality/value
This is a conversation between two paradigms, SHRM and power theory, that are epistemologically at two opposite poles.
Subject
Business and International Management,Strategy and Management
Reference107 articles.
1. Human resource development (HRD) for performance management: the case of Nepalese organizations;International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management,2010
2. The future of human resource management;Work Study,2003
3. Major trends in knowledge management research: a bibliometric study;Scientometrics,2016
4. Determinants of organizational performance: a proposed framework;International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management,2016
5. Alvesson, M. and Deetz, S. (1999), “Critical theory and postmodernism: approaches to organizational studies”, in Clegg and Hardy (Eds), Studying Organization: Theory & Method, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 185-211.
Cited by
12 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献