Human-Resource-Management-Sample-Essay
Sample Critical Review (from a School of Management Tutor)
IMPORTANT!
This review is for guidance only. I have produced it in response to student questions about what a critical review looks like. Please do not include headings in your assignments – I have included them here to aid navigation of the article.
On re-reading my review I wondered whether I had written too much on the methodological discussion at the expense of discussing the results. Having said this, perhaps my focus is justified given that the problematic research strategy has implications for the results.
You will see that I have cited around 15 papers in my review – you do not need this many references in your assignment to get a good mark. I have simply tried to demonstrate a few ways in which references might be incorporated into your work.
[Harvard Reference]Behrends, T. (2007) ‘Recruitment practices in small and medium enterprises. An empirical study among knowledge-intensive professional service firms’. Management Revue, 18(1):55-74.
1. [Introduction]In this paper it will be argued that Behrends? (2007) study of recruitment practices in small and medium sized professional service firms is an interesting but problematic piece of research. The argument will be developed through a criti cal review of Behrends? paper, discussing in turn its conceptual bases, research methods, main findings, and practical implications.
2. [Brief Summary / Synopsis]Behrends? paper reports a study of 342 companies? recruitment practices. In particular the research is concerned with small and medium-sized knowledge-intensive professional service firms (SMKIPSFs) in Germany. Behrends justifies the paper?s focus, o f how SMKIPSFs manage recruitment, on the grounds that professional service firms are highly dependent on their employees for the quality of services sold by the company.
3. The study utilised a survey research strategy (3)to understand the recruitment practices use in the focal firms (Methods). Behrends? research findings suggest recruitment and selection practices in SMKIPSFs, while distinct from the practices of larger firms, are mostly suitable for the smaller firms in question (4). This finding resonates with a core theme running through Behrends? conceptualization of recruitment in SMKIPSFs, and indeed smaller firms more generally, that these firms are distinct from larger organizations (1).
4. [Literature and Concepts] Behrends is critical of the established literature on how smaller businesses conduct recruitment and selection. A particular problem in the literature, identified by Behrends, is a tendency to view smaller firms as lacking the various trappings of HRM. This “management deficit” (2007: 57) perspective is based on an implicit comparison with a model of people management derived from research into large organizations (2).
5. In criticising the “management deficit” (2007: 57) perspective, Behrends does not offer many examples of studies taking such a position (5). Behrends does cite Holliday (1995) along with Curran and Blackburn (2001) but it is unclear whether he considers these authors to hold such a perspective or to share his criticisms of it. Certainly from reading Holliday?s (1995) study of working-life in smaller firms, and Curran?s (2006) recent discussion of smaller firms? di stinctiveness (also see Torres and Julien, 2005), it seems unlikely that the “management deficit” perspective is reflected in their work (External views on the core theme).
6. The lack of supporting evidence (5)offered for his assertion that “Many publications tend to construe the observable absence of (formal) HRM in small and medium-size enterprises as a severe “management deficit”.” (2007:57) might raise questions as to how Behrends? view is reflected in the literature. Nevertheless, the deficit perspe ctive serves to throw the alternative “equivalence model” (2007: 57) into sharper relief (2).
7. Behrends? alternative to the deficit view of management of smaller firms is that their approaches to people management should be viewed on their own terms. In other words, the context of the organization should be taken into account when considering whether practices are appropriate (2).
8. Under the equivalence perspective organizations are accepted to require certain basic functions, like recruitment, but they are expected to differ in how they fulfil such functional requirements (2). Although some have criticised this functional view of HRM in smaller firms (for example see Taylor, 2005) an awareness that smaller firms should be judged on their own terms informs much of the recent literature on HRM in small and medium organizations (Rainnie, 1989; Abbot, 1993; Marchington et al, 2003). External counter-argument and support (3)
9. Broadening his discussion beyond the primary concepts of deficit and equivalence Behrends highlights the heterogeneity of organizations within an “SME” definition(2), for example in terms of employee numbers. While specifically on the topic of recruitment, Behrends determines that in smaller firms recruitment must be a “...social process...” (2007:62) dependent on social networks and interpersonal relations.
10. Behrends? discussion of the literature and identification of a need to better understand recruitment in SMKIPSFs leads him to formulate six hypotheses ?. The hypotheses concern the nature of recruitment in SMKIPSFs and the role played by the social structure of the organization.
11. [Research Methods]To investigate these hypotheses Behrends conducted a survey via telephone and online of “...German SMEs in selected knowl edge-intensive sectors.” (2007: 62). The questions were mainly …closed? in nature and built around organizations? HRM activities, the social nature of the business, and considerations of the practices? effectiveness. The questionnaires were answered by “...a competent contact person...” (2007: 62).
12. The 342 usable responses, a response rate of around 19%, represent an impressive achievement for a survey approach involving SMEs (compare with Duberley and Walley, 1995; Dennis, 2003).1However a number of concerns with Behrends? research approach should be addressed. Methods (3)
13. The first issue with the research strategy concerns the study?s focus. Although Behrends? explicitly identifies the concern of the study as relating to SME recruitment practices (see for example the article title and the discussion on page 56), elsewhere he describes the study?s focus as being on policies (see for example page 62). The distinction between policies and practices is important in itself because policies are not always reflected by practices (Wright and Boswell, 2002). It matters from a methodological perspective because strategies capable of accounting for policies may not be effective at capturing practices. Potential weakness (5)
14. Bacon et al (1996) demonstrate through their multi-method study of HRM in SMEs that survey responses are not necessarily matched by the practices in use. This means that if Behrends is serious about wishing to investigate recruitment practices in SMEs, his research approach may be inappropriate. External source criticism(5)
1Eight businesses over the 250 employee ‘SME’ threshold were included in the 342 usable responses but these were discounted by Behrends, leaving 334 organizations remaining for analysis.
15. Secondly, the study?s reliance on single respondents provides no means of verifying the information provided by the respondent. This debate has already been played out in the HRM literature (Paauwe and Boselie, 2005) and while single respondent surveys are still present in research of HRM in SMEs (see for example Sels et al, 2006) it remains problematic.2External source criticism(5)
16. A third, and for current purposes final, challenge to Behrends? res earch approach concerns his use of closed questions. In setting out his initial position in relation to the literature, Behrends is at pains to stress how research must be sensitive to the distinctive nature of SMEs when compared to larger organizations. It is this belief in the distinctiveness of smaller firms that informs Behrends? critique of the deficit model and promotion of an equivalence perspective (1). There is a tension, however, in arguing for research that takes the context of smaller firms seriously but studying these businesses via closed questions. Potential weakness (5) ... continuing below ...
17. Closed questions gather …yes / no? answers against a pre-defined set of policies, practices, or other characteristics. Such questions appear well-suited to exploring how far a respondent firm?s policies or practices conform to Behrends? understanding of HRM in SMEs, however less good at detecting emergent practices not yet covered in the literature. Since HRM in SMKIPSFs is generally under-researched (Scase, 1995) approaches to HRM might exist in these firms and yet not be represented in extant research. If practices exist have but have yet to be reported in the literature they are unlikely to be covered on Behrends? list of closed questions.
2Behrends partially acknowledges this limitation on page 73 but fails to explain why the research design incorporated a significant weakness he was aware of
Behrend s? research strategy therefore appears ill-equipped to meet his own standard regarding the importance of context sensitivity when exploring HRM activities in SMEs. If fact Behrends? list is designed to confirm the existence of practices found elsewhere rat her than explore how SMKIPSFs? context might inform the practices they adopt.
18. [Discussion of Results]The problematic nature of Behrends? methodological approach makes it hard to discuss his reported findings with confidence (6). Nevertheless, Behrend s? initial findings suggest that consistent with Kotey and Slade (2005) larger firms have greater degrees of HRM formalization and infrastructure than smaller firms. This means that firms of different sizes may vary in their recruitment and selection procedures? formality. Behrends also emphasises that in smaller firms, the recruitment activities should be seen as a “...social process...”(2007: 72) involving existing employees, which recalls the earlier findings of Marchington et al (2003). External refs support (6)
19. Behrends? findings in relation to recruitment in SMKIPSFs seem to confirm the results reported in SMEs operating in different contexts. To this extent, and remaining cautious of the methodological limitations already discussed, Behrends? study suggests that SMKIPSFs may operate in ways similar to other SMEs (6). This finding may be a product of the research design, however if this idea can be generalised there may be scope for further research to test for whether general research into HRM in SMEs can account for the activities of SMKIPSFs. [Practical Implication] Researchers engaging in such studies would be well-advised, however,
to address the limitations of Behrends? study and this seems to be the main practical implication stemming from his reported study.
20. [Overall Conclusion]In conclusion, Behrends has attempted to explore recruitment activities in a sub-set of German SMEs. The importance of employees, and recruitment in particular, to these firms along with the general absence of knowledge-intensive firms from discussion of HRM in SMEs (Scase, 1995) suggest that this was a worthy endeavour (6). Unfortunately fundamental difficulties with Behrends?conceptualisation and execution of his research mean that the reported results must be treated with extreme caution (6).
Word count: 1492
References:
Abbott, B. (1993). "Training strategies in small service sector firms: employer and employee perspectives." Human Resource Management Journal4(2): 70-87.
Bacon, N., P. Ackers, J. Storey and D. Coates (1996). "It's a small world: managing human resources in small businesses." International Journal of Human Resource Management7(1): 83-100.
Curran, J. (2006). ""Specificity" and "denaturing" the small business." International Small Business Journal24(2): 205-210.
Curran, J. and R. Blackburn (2001). Researching the small enterprise. London, Sage. Dennis, W. J. (2003). "Raising response rates in mail surveys of small business owners: Results of an experiment." Journal of Small Business Management41(3): 278.
Duberley, J. P. and P. Walley (1995). "Assessing the adoption of HRM by small and medium-sized manufacturing organizations." The International Journal of Human Resource Management6(4): 891-909.
Holliday, R. (1995). Investigating small firms: nice work? London, Routledge.
Kotey, B. and P. Slade (2005). "Formal human resource management practices in small growing firms." Journal of Small Business Management43(1): 16-40.
Marchington, M., M. Carroll and P. Boxall (2003). "Labour scarcity and the survival of small firms: a resource-based view of the road haulage industry." Human Resource Management Journal13(4): 5-22.
Paauwe, J. and P. Boselie (2005). "HRM and performance: what next?" Human Resource Management Journal15(4): 68-83.
Rainnie, A. (1991). Small firms: between the enterprise culture and new times. Deciphering the enterprise culture: entrepreneurship, petty capitalism and the restructuring of Britain. R. Burrows. London, Routledge: 176-199.
Taylor, S. (2005). The hunting of the snark: A critical analysis of human resource management discourses in relation to managing labour in smaller organisations. Managing labour in small firms. S. Marlow, D. Patton and M. Ram. Abingdon: Oxfordshire, Routledge: 18-42.
Torrès, O. and P.-A. Julien (2005). "Specificity and denaturing of small business." International Small Business Journal23(4): 355-377.
Wright, P. M. and W. R. Boswell (2002). "Desegregating HRM: a review and synthesis of micro and macro human resource management research." Journal of Management 28(3): 247-276.