Search

Copyright of Universidad & Empresa is the property of Colegio Mayor de Nuestra Senora del Rosario and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The human resource (HR) architecture model has been influential in the field of strategic human resource management since its inception. This study offers a comprehensive review on this model's contributions to management literature by analyzing 205 journal articles which have substantively cited the three classic articles on HR architecture. Specifically, we develop a framework along two dimensions (that is, the content and the use of the HR architecture model) based on which we systematically discuss the current findings in terms of the theoretical application, empirical validation, and extension and critiques of the HR architecture model. Based on the review, we identify the research gaps in the literature of HR architecture, propose important future research directions and discuss their implications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the maturation of strategic human resource management scholarship, there appears to be a greater call to move from monolithic workforce management to a more strategic and differentiated emphasis on employees with the greatest capacity to enhance competitive advantage. There has been little consideration in the literature as to whether organizations formally identify key groups of employees based on their impact on organizational learning and core competences. Using survey evidence from 260 multinational companies (MNCs), this paper explores the extent to which key groups of employees are formally recognized and whether they are subject to differential compensation practices. The results demonstrate that just in excess of half of these MNCs identify a key group. There was considerable differentiation in the compensation practices between these key groups, managers and the largest occupational group in the workforce. The results give rise to questions worthy of future investigation, namely whether the differentiated approaches used lead to improved performance outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]