JanetH.MarlerSandraFisher

AN EVIDENCE-BASED REVIEW OF E-HRM AND STRATEGIC HRM

AGENDA

  Mo#va#onandpurpose

  Researchques#ons

  Evidence‐basedmethodology

  Results

  Synthesizedconclusions

  Futuresteps

2

TOP U.S. PRACTITIONER INITIATIVES IN 2005

11

15

21

23

25

26

23

22

32

42

0 20 40 60 80

ExpandingHRITwithanaly#cs

Sarbanes‐Oxley

Warfortalent

Upgrade

EnterpriseportalforHRtransac#ons

Compensa#onmanagement

ManagerSelf‐Service

Aligningemployeegoals

EmployeeSelf‐Service

Businessprocessimprovements

%ofRespondentsin2005

%Budget

%TimeRespondents

3

Source:CedarCrestone2005‐2006

TOP US PRACTITIONER INITIATIVES IN 2010

4

Source:CedarCrestone2009‐2010

PRACTITIONER STATED INTENDED E-HRM OUTCOMES

CostSavings

•  Headcount/centraliza#on

•  Automa#on

HRServiceDelivery

•  Self‐service•  Bestprac#ces

StrategicBusinessPartner

•  Supportbusiness

•  Talentmanagement

E‐HRM

E-HRM “THEORETICAL” LITERATURE: TALE OF TWO PERSPECTIVES

E‐HRM StrategicHRM“IT’stransforma#onalimpactonHRM”

Snell,Stueber&Lepak(2002)Lengnick‐Hall&Moritz(2003)

“ITasastrategictooltomeetHRstrategicobjec#ves”

Broderick&Boudreau(1992)Reddington&Mar#n(2006)Ruel,BondaroukandVanderVeld(2007)

6

THE DUALITY OF TECHNOLOGY

  Technologicaldeterminism  Independentvariable  Exogenouschange

  Technologyastriggeringforce

  Technologyasanoutcome  Dependentvariable  Consequenceofstrategicchoice

  Technologyasatool

Orlikowski,1992;Strohmeier,2009

7

EVIDENCE-BASED QUESTIONS

e‐HRM

StrategicHRM

Performance

StrategicHRM

e‐HRM

Performance

1)Whate‐HRMandstrategicHRMrela@onshipsarepresentandsupportedacrossstudies?

2)Doestheevidencesupportadeterminis@cviewinwhichtechnologytriggersorganiza@onalchangeordoestheevidencesuggestamoreinfluen@alroleforsocialandorganiza@onalactors?

3)Underwhatcondi@onsdoeseHRMleadto/enhancestrategicHRMandwhatmechanismsoperateinthisrela@onship?

  Systema#cReviewofEvidence(Rousseau,Manning&Denyer,2008;Briner,Denyer&Rousseau,2009)

  Akeymethodologyforloca#ng,appraising,synthesizing,andrepor#ng“bestevidence”frommul#plestudies.

  Morestructured,unbiasedandprac##onerfocusedthantradi#onalliteraturereview.

  Begerthanevidencefromonestudy.

  4Approaches  Aggrega#on  Integra#on  Interpreta#on  Explana#on

  5CategoriesofEvidence

Evidence‐BasedMethodology

4 EVIDENCE-BASED APPROACHES Aggrega@on Integra@on Interpreta@on Explana@on

Goal • Combineeffectstoincreasesamplesizeandreducebias• Predictinterven#onresultsviamoreexactes#matethananysinglestudyachieves

• Synthesisacrossdifferentmethodstoanswerspecificques#ons.• Toexplorewheninterven#onsaremorelikelytobeappropriate.

• Createtenta#vetheoriesofphenomenaincludingpagernsofsocialconstruc#onbasedonqualita#vedata

• Synthesistocreateexplana#ons.• Generatetheory

Method • Quan#ta#vecombina#onofresultsofprimarystudies

• Triangula#onacrossmul#plestudiesandmethods;reviewerjudgment

• Compila#onofdescrip#vedata.• Cross‐studyconceptsareiden#fiedandtranslatedintonewcategories

• Discernpagernsbehindexplanatoryclaims

Data • Favorsrandomizedcontrolledstudies• Publishedandunpublishedstudies;datasets

• Typicallypublishedstudies

• Publishedstudieswithqualita#vedataoncomparablesubjectmager.• Incorporatesprimaryresearcherinterpreta#ons

• Mul#pleformsofevidence.• Typicallypublishedstudies.

10

5 CATEGORIES OF EVIDENCE

  Constructvalidity  Internalvalidity

  covaria#on,  causeprecedeseffect,and  noplausiblealterna#veexplana#ons

(i.e.,notaspuriousrela#onship)  Effectsize  Externalvalidity  Contextualiza#on—iden#fiesthe

limitsofaphenomenonorcauseandeffectrela#onship

11

EVIDENCE-BASED REVIEW METHODOLOGY

  Integra#onSystema#cReview(Rousseau,ManningandDenyer,2008)  Goal

  Synthesisacrossdifferentmethods

  Method  Triangula#onsacrossmul#plestudies

  Data  Typicallypublishedstudies

12

E-HRM CONSTRUCT

  IntendedandactualHRMprac#cesorservices  Awayofimplemen#ngHRMpoliciesandprac#ces

(Ruel,Bondarouk&Looise,2004)

  Represen#ngcollabora#onsbetweenemployeesororganiza#ons  Supportsatleasttwoindividualorcollec#veactors

insharedperformanceofHRac#vi#es(Strohmeier,2007)

  Deliveredorenabledbyinternet/intranet‐basedinforma#ontechnology  Configura#onsofcomputerhardware,somwareand

electronicnetworkingcapability(Marler&Fisher,2010)

13

METHODOLOGY: SAMPLE SELECTION

  Allpublishedar#clesoneHRMinlasttenyears(1999‐2009)

  Searchedprimarybusinessandpsychologydatabases  ABI/Inform/Proquest,BusinessSourcePremierandPsycAr#cles  Mul#plesearchtermsused(B2EandHRM,e‐HRe‐HRM,HRIS,self‐

service,virtualHRM,web‐basedHRM,HRMandInternet)  Scannedreferencelists

  77publishedar#cles  Peerreviewed,includedquan#ta#veorqualita#vedata,addressed

useofeHRMinorganiza#onsnotforpedagogy  Limitedini#allyto2007‐2009

  Finalsampleforthisreview‐20ar#cles

14

CLASSIFICATION OF SAMPLE ARTICLES

  KeyTheore#calPerspec#ves  ConstructandInternalValidity

  Defineconstructs

  Establishbasisofinternalvalidity

  Levelofanalysis

  Empiricalapproach  Covaria#on;cross‐sec#onal

  Causal‐longitudinalorexperimental

  Descrip#ve;casestudy

15

KEY THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES

  StrategicHRMLiterature  Stages(Lengnick‐Hall,etal.2009)

  Con#ngencytheoryofSHRM

  Strategicoutcomes/RBV

  Intendedvs.realized

  Informa#onScienceLiterature  Technologicaldeterminismdebate

  StagesofHRISande‐HRM

  Structura#ontheory

  TechnologyAcceptanceModel(TAM)

  Other

16

THEORETICAL CLASSIFICATION RESULTS

  20percentuseonemaintheory(HRorIS)

  60percentusemul#pletheories  30%partlybasedonTAM

  30%explicitlyorimplicitlyusedeterminism

  15%usecon#ngencytheoryofSHRM

  5%useRBV

  20percentusenotheory–largelydescrip#ve

17

EMPIRICAL CLASSIFICATION RESULTS

 EmpiricalApproach

 45%crosssec#on

 30%casestudy

 20%experimental

 10%longitudinal

 Internalvalidity

 Covaria#on

 70percentofstudies

 Causeprecedingeffect

 30percent

18

STUDY RESULTS QUESTION 1

  Whate‐HRMandstrategicHRMrela@onshipsarepresentandsupportedacrossstudies?

  40percentdealexplicitlywiththee‐HRMStrategicHRMrela#onship

  Macrolevelconstructs

  Evidencenotadequatetoestablishcausality

  Allcrosssec#onalordescrip#ve

19

QUESTION 2

  Determinis@cvieworamoreinfluen@alroleforsocialandorganiza@onalactors?

  Mul#pletheoriesusedsuggestbiastowardstechnologicaldeterminism  5survey‐basedstudiesinUK,Canada,Greece,and

Netherlandssupporte‐HRMtoStrategicHRMrela#onship  Leadstopercep#onsofHRMasastrategicpartner

  1casestudyindicatesnorela#onship

  1casestudyindicatespossiblenega#verela#onship

  1survey‐basedstudysupportsreversedirec#on(StrategicHRMtoe‐HRM)

  However,empiricaldesigncorrela#onalordescrip#ve

20

STUDY CLASSIFICATION RESULTS: QUESTION 3

  Underwhatcondi@onsdoeseHRMleadto/enhancestrategicHRMandwhatmechanismsoperateinthisrela@onship?  Intendedvs.actualoutcomes

  Complexi#esinsystemdevelopment

  Experimentalstudies

  Dataprivacyconcerns

  Supportforcontextualiza#on  60percentatmicrolevel

  10percentatmacrolevel

  Therearemanycontextualcon#ngencies

21

SYNTHESIZED PRACTICAL CONCLUSIONS

  1.Managersexpecte‐HRMtoleadtostrategicHRM

  Althoughevidencelargelysuppor4ve….

  2.Evidenceisalsomixedondirec@onofrela@onship

  3.Noevidenceonactualstrategicoutcomes

  Superiorperformance?

  Compe##veadvantage?

22

SYNTHESIZED PRACTICAL CONCLUSIONS

4.Therearemanycontextual/modera@ngfactorstoconsider  Stageofe‐HRMdiffusion(publish,auto,transform)

  Culture

  Na#onalins#tu#onalinfrastructure

  Compe##veenvironment/pressures

  HRcustomerexpecta#ons,perceivedusefulness,andEOU

  Managerialpressure

  Organiza#onalsupport/training

  Par#cipa#onindevelopmentandimplementa#on

23

NEXT STEPS

  Constructvalidity  Howtomeasuree‐HRMandstrategicHR

  StrategicHRcurrently“perceptual”  Definingstrategicoutcomes

  Needmoreevidenceoninternalvalidity  Partnerwithbusinessonwhetherexpecta#onandrealityare

thesame  Strategicoutcomestudies  Longitudinalresearchdesigns  Moremacrolevelmul#‐organiza#onalormul#‐unit

researchdesigns

  Contextualevidence:moderatorsandmediators  E.g.,underwhatcondi#onsise‐HRMstrategic?  Throughwhatprocessormechanism?

24

25