Table of Contents
The theoretical framework used.
The key aim of this article is to analyze the impact of three organizational-level HRM practices on individual organizational commitment. The examination of this article is done by three writers. The writer’s names are Joseph C. Rode, Xiaowen Hung, and Barbara Flynn. These three experts have found from previous researches that human resource management (HRM) practice varies from culture to culture. Then, these three researchers have found that little empirical research has done on the impact of HRM practices on firm-level or individual-level outcome variables across different cultures. Therefore, these three writers feel the necessity of conducting a study on this issue.
I believe the finding of this study is valid and reliable. This is because the background histories of these three writers show that they have skills and knowledge of research. Joseph C. Rode and Xiaowen Hung worked for Miami (OH) University in the Department of Management and Barbara Flynn worked for Indiana University in the Department of Operations and Decision Technologies. In addition, this study was conducted by these three researchers recently that was published in the Human Resource Management Journal in 2016. Thus, this is considered that the researchers focused on contemporary issues and the latest data related to the research topic and subject matters. However, the researchers highly depended on a survey dataset collected in 2005/2006; it may raise questions against the research validity and reliability in the perspective of current and latest research outcomes.
The research outcome can initially be considered as valid and reliable because the study did an empirical analysis based on an effective survey dataset, where survey data came from 2424 participants in 120 businesses from four different nations and 3 industries. This study classified four countries into low institutional collectivism and high intuitional collectivism. The study found a significant impact of organizational-level HRM on individual organizational commitment in training and teamwork through different cultures. However, this study found partial support in the impact of cultural differences on employee involvement. In this case, there is a bit of confusion that may lead further researchers to study more theoretical and empirical models for a better understanding of HRM performance across different cultures.
Theoretical framework used
The literature review in this article mainly focused on the difference in human resource management practices across different nations and cultures. The writers of these articles have huge data on the relationship between HRM practices and national cultural values. However, the researchers have found limited data on the relationship between HRM practices in different cultures and the firm-level or individual-level couture variables. Although some studies were done on these factors, they were not considered very effective because the sample sizes were small in a few organizations and limited geographical areas that have limited the finding. Therefore, the poor is known about the impact of HRM practices on individual and firm-level HRM practices across cultural differences. However, there is a matter of justification for this finding. This is because there may be a limitation in data collection from several secondary data sources. If the researchers fail to access a wide variety of data sources, the researcher will fail to ensure research reliability.
The study of this article found that the article only applied a psychological contract theory and organizational behavior theory review the macro-level strategic HRM literature. Along with these two theoretical frameworks, the authors in this article used only a survey dataset that developed a number of researchers in 2005/2006. Although the use of these limited theoretical frameworks has promoted the researchers to control the effects of organizational positions, it could not possible to measure aggregated results. In this case, other frameworks like socio-cognitive theory developed by Sparrow (1998) could be used to analyze different environmental factors and their impact on the psychological contract process. In addition, Hofstede’s cultural model is widely used to analyze cultural differences in global HRM practices.
Our Recommended Resources:
This model defines six dimensions in cultural differences are individualism vs. collectivism, masculinity vs. femininity, uncertainty avoidance, power distance, long-term vs. short-time orientation, and indulgence vs. restraint. My experiences and study show that staff motivation and hygiene factors in workplaces also differ from culture to culture. For example, the employee expectations and needs in developed countries’ cultures can vary from developing countries’ cultures. Therefore, the researchers in this article could also apply different motivational and hygiene factors related to theoretical frameworks to understand the cultural differences in HRM practices. In this case, as Mullins (2015) suggested, the researchers in this article could apply different content theories (such as Maslow’s hierarchy of needs model, Alderfer’s modified need hierarchy model, Herzberg’s two-factor theory, and McClelland’s achievement motivation theory) and processes theories (such as expectancy theories, equity theory, goal theory, and attribution theory).
The authors of this article formulated different methodologies and strategies to conduct the research. My study shows that the methodologies defined in this article have both positive and negative sides. My study believes for conducting valid and reliable research, a researcher should follow the “Research Onion” model developed in Saunders et al. (2015). However, the researchers in this article did not follow or applied this “Research Onion” theory appropriately. There are several research philosophical views including pragmatism, positivism, interpretivism, and realism, but it is not clear which particular philosophical view was applied in the research on this article. Then, my study found that deductive or inductive research approaches are widely used in research work………………..