The DOI matches its Crossref record; 103 of the 111 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 4 of the 49 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research
Open accessAbstract
This paper examines the role of information technology (IT) directly on one central aspect of work in the twenty-first century, its impact on HRM itself. We use the long-established ‘Harvard’ model of HRM, offering a more contextualised view of HRM, a more expansive view of stakeholders, and a wider and more long-term approach to outcomes. Applying those principles to the literature on IT and HRM helps us clarify both the advantages and disadvantages to different stakeholders of the intersection between HRM and technology. We show that rapid technological developments offer a new, smart, digital context for HRM practices with the better quality HRM data and enabling a strong HRM ownership by all stakeholders. At the same time, we see a tension in HRM responsibilities between HRM professionals and organizational members who are not directly assigned HRM tasks but are the subject of them. On the basis of that analysis we offer suggestions for future research.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This conceptual paper applies the Harvard HRM model’s neglected “outer boxes”—context, multiple stakeholders, and long-term outcomes—to the HRM/technology interface. It argues that e-HRM research must move beyond narrow efficiency and shareholder assumptions to study contextual enactment, stakeholder tensions, and long-term consequences.
Key findings
- The paper argues that rapid technological developments offer a “smart, digital context” for HRM with better-quality HRM data and enable strong HRM ownership by all stakeholders, but also create tension in HRM responsibilities between HRM professionals and organizational members who are not directly assigned HRM tasks.
- e-HRM research shows contradictory organizational realities: adoption sometimes creates benefits (cost savings, efficiency, flexible services, employee participation), while other cases show negative results (work stress, more HRM administration, disappointments with technological properties); the paper attributes much variation to insufficient attention to context.
- The paper calls for future e-HRM research to address context, multiple stakeholders, and long-term outcomes, using plural lenses including political, behavioural, institutional, economic, sociological, design, and cultural.
- It cites an expectation that on-call, part-time, self-employed and other contingent employment forms will grow by up to 25% by 2020 (Van der Ploeg & Vermeend, 2014), and discusses risks such as distancing, work intensification, and redundancy.
Methods
- Conceptual paper; no empirical sample or data collection. It draws on the Beer et al. (1984) Harvard model of HRM and existing literature on IT and e-HRM.
- The analysis applies the Harvard model’s context, multiple stakeholder, and long-term outcome dimensions to the HRM/technology interface and derives a future research agenda.
- The paper explicitly excludes discussions of e-work in general, the impact of information technology on jobs, recent developments in smart industries, and work relations.
Limitations
- The paper does not state a formal limitations section. As a conceptual paper, it presents no empirical data, sample, or hypothesis tests; its claims and research agenda are not empirically tested here (evident from the text).
- The paper itself notes limitations in the e-HRM field: e-HRM remains seriously under-theorised; much research is case-study based in firms where e-HRM has been introduced or where it is believed successful; the geographical spread of studies is limited; there is less research on e-HRM’s impact on employees; and the long-term impact of HRM on business has not featured heavily in research.
- It also notes that the effects of advanced e-HRM and increased ownership of HRM data are difficult to foresee.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
43 Own interpretation · 16 No full text of the sources · 15 Sources not found · 15 No basis given · 3 Partly supported · 1 Couldn’t confirm · 1 Not checked yet · accuracy not yet measured
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In their turn, technology-enabled new organisational forms embrace new stakeholders in HRM processes.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For e-HRM to be integrated into daily HRM processes it must be enacted by human actors.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the 'outer boxes' of the Harvard map of the territory were, with some laudable exceptions, ignored.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > The notion of HRM
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All organisational members, with or without assigned HRM and/or managerial responsibilities, are likely to contribute because technology will increasingly offer possibilities to do so.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > e-HRM and stakeholders
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“That perspective saw all HRM activities as having for their purpose the improvement of the efficiency of the firm (other organisations are much less commonly studied) leading to the enrichment of the owners of the business.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Stakeholders
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Line managers play an important strategic role in designing, conveying information about and implementing HRM practices.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Multiple stakeholders
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“There have been arguments that globalisation will apply to HRM too and that universal 'good practice' will inevitably spread around the world (see Cooke, 2003), but there is little evidence that countries are becoming more alike in the way they conceive of and manage HRM (Gooderham & Nordhaug, 2011;Mayrhofer, Brewster, Morley, & Ledolter, 2011).”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Cooke, 2003
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Gooderham & Nordhaug, 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Mayrhofer, Brewster, Morley, & Ledolter, 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is their perceptions of e-HRM applications that determine, to a great extent, how and whether e-HRM will be used.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Multiple stakeholders
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“technologies have changed (through enabling and/or constraining) HRM practices by introducing for example, e-recruitment, e-training, or e-competence management (Stone, Deadrick, Lukaszewski, & Johnson, 2015).”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Stone, Deadrick, Lukaszewski, & Johnson, 2015 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“There is case-study evidence that even in a high-tech operation, employees prefer to get their HRM information from people (their line manager, their HRM specialist or their trade union representative) rather than from the system (Sparrow & Brewster, 2012).”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Multiple stakeholders
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Sparrow & Brewster, 2012
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
- It may state two separate claims as one. 29
- Probably not a substantial claim. 57
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Different sizes of firms and firms in different sectors of the economy have different HRM (Kinnie, Hutchinson, Purcell, Rayton, & Swart, 2005;de Kok, Uhlaner, & Thurik, 2006).”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Kinnie, Hutchinson, Purcell, Rayton, & Swart, 2005 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The opening discussion notes strategic differences between manufacturing and service firms, and Previous Research expects heterogeneity between firms even within a sector. The Methodology identifies small and medium-sized firms in the sample, but does not say that firm size accounts for differences in HRM. The firm-size part of the claim is therefore unsupported by this paper. (LLM, conf=0.84)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites de Kok, Uhlaner, & Thurik, 2006 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Line managers are crucial actors with the responsibility of directly managing employees (Bos-Nehles, 2010;Brewster, Gollan, & Wright, 2014;Wright & Nishii, 2013) and, it is argued, more work being devolved to them over the past few years, although the evidence for that is slim (Brewster et al., 2015).”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Multiple stakeholders
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Bos-Nehles, 2010 source
Bos-Nehles is cited for the first clause, about line managers’ role in directly managing employees. The Abstract discusses their HR role, their implementation of HR practices on the work floor, and evaluations by their subordinates. The later claim about increased devolution and slim evidence is attached to Brewster et al. (2015), not Bos-Nehles. (LLM, conf=0.85)
- Not matchedcites Brewster, Gollan, & Wright, 2014
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Wright & Nishii, 2013
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“'Line managers' themselves can be divided into middle-level and front-line managers (Bos-Nehles, 2010).The latter have direct supervisory responsibility, whereas middle managers are responsible for the coordination of an organisational unit's day-to-day activities.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Multiple stakeholders
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites Bos-Nehles, 2010 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The available Abstract discusses line managers’ role in implementing HR practices, but does not distinguish middle-level from front-line managers or define their responsibilities. Searches for the proposed division and for coordination of an organisational unit’s day-to-day activities found no relevant passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.72)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Could not verify
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The increasing number of studies from emerging countries (Collins, Zhu, & Warner, 2012;Davilla & Elvira, 2012;Horwitz & Budhwar, 2015) may lead to even less consensus on how to conceptualise HRM.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Collins, Zhu, & Warner, 2012 source
- Not matchedcites Davilla & Elvira, 2012
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites Horwitz & Budhwar, 2015 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction reports a significant and growing body of HRM research on emerging markets. It also describes HRM in those markets as context-specific and complex, but it does not say that more studies may reduce consensus on how to conceptualise HRM. The discussion of convergence and divergence in “Emerging Themes, Issues and the Future of HRM in Emerging Markets” concerns HRM practices, not conceptual consensus. (LLM, conf=0.84)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The views of other employees have been rather over-shadowed, as we have noted above.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Multiple stakeholders
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“It led, in a short space of time, to the adoption of a narrow focus on financial performance indicators and to attempts to prove that HRM contributed to that firm performance (Guest, 1997;Paauwe et al., 2013).”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Stakeholders
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Guest, 1997 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Paauwe et al., 2013
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Amongst the more immediate stakeholders are the HRM professionals, line managers and employees.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Multiple stakeholders
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These basic situations will have substantial ramifications that will impact the way their organisations manage people.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The universalist approach with, currently, a heavy emphasis on human capital theory and the resource based view, is very different from the contextual HRM approaches that highlight multiple stakeholders and take into account the institutional environment (Brewster, 1999).”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Brewster, 1999 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The diffusion of e-HRM in various international contexts has been broadly researched (e.g.Florkowski & Olivas-Luján, 2006;Ruël & Bondarouk, 2012).”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It safeguards itself in a continuous inflow-outflow of HRs, a building up of new HRM practices and breaking down of outdated ones, in a state of equilibrium with the internal and external environment.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Even the notion of 'employees' shows a mismatch with organisational conventional reality as technological developments stretched contracts boundaries and impacted on time, so that it might be more appropriate to talk about 'workers', to include those who work for but are not employed by an organisation.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Abstract
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It may explain, for example, why HRM scholars had so little to contribute to explaining the fact that HRM policies such as contingent reward systems for those at the top had played such a part in the global economic crisis that began in 2008, or in suggesting what should replace such systems.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > The notion of HRM
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“An important element of the HRM system (not external to it, but part of the system itself ) is the context within which HRM is carried out.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“altered the HRM organisational communications (Kiesler, Siegel, & McGuire, 1984), introduced social robots to the HRM practices (Breazeal, 2002), and enabled new means of employer branding (Martin & Cerdin, 2014).”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Abstract
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“As Francis et al. (2014Francis et al. ( , p. 1341) ) note 'there is a dearth of critique in [the] literature about the impact on the people involved'.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Long-term outcomes
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Francis et al. (2014, p. 1341) source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not checked yet
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the more advanced, interconnected and smart e-HRM becomes, the more diverse involvement of all stakeholders can be expected.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > e-HRM and stakeholders
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“new non-routine cognitive tasks are expected to comprise three main elements (Levy & Murnane, 2014, p. 16): first, solving unstructured problems, tackling problems that lack rule-based solutions”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > e-HRM and long-term outcomes
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Levy & Murnane, 2014, p. 16
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The diffusion of HRM tasks will occure with the acceptance of monitoring and steering new 'non-observable' data like work-life balance and work stress, selecting data to run and display analysis of the individual job performance, scheduling own work time, or steering training and career development..”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > e-HRM and stakeholders
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Inertia-based e-HRM enactment is characterised by a situation in which users (HRM professionals, line managers and employees) choose to work with e-HRM in the 'old-fashioned' way.This may result in the preservation of the existing technological circumstances with no changes to the HRM processes.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“During the process of e-HRM enactment, human action is both facilitated and constrained through communication on the goals of e-HRM, the extent to which it provides personal outcomes, and whether there are intrinsic benefits to be gained from using the e-HRM.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The strides that have been in this area are summarised in Ruël and Bondarouk (2012), but their analysis emphasises how limited is the geographical spread of studies up to the present.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Ruël and Bondarouk (2012) source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The employee perspective, including social partners such as trade unions and works councils, was often neglected or seen as the exclusive property of psychologists, industrial sociologists and labour relations scholars.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Stakeholders
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Mutual adjustment, as the second e-HRM enactment scenario, may be characterised as a situation in which all groups of users strive to find a consensus that refines their 'old' face-to-face HRM practices and integrates new IT possibilities.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“As Anderson (2012, p. 36) described this development, digital developments move us towards a 'do-it-yourself' economy, where one may expect the future workforce to consist of 'consumer as a producer and costless employees'.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > e-HRM and long-term outcomes
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Anderson (2012, p. 36)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The main indicator of successful e-HRM implementation is, in this view, the skilful and task-consistent operation of the application by the targeted employees.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > e-HRM and long-term outcomes
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The financial measures such as sales, profits and market value (Becker, Huselid, Pickus, & Spratt, 1997;Tichy, Fombrun, & Devanna, 1982) were easier to measure and have more legitimacy in the business community (and in business schools) than social indicators representing, for example, societal well-being.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Stakeholders
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Becker, Huselid, Pickus, & Spratt, 1997
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Tichy, Fombrun, & Devanna, 1982
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We see three scenarios for contextual e-HRM enactment.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. The quote only partly states this claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One implication of e-HRM is the risk of distancing: the potential is for an increasing lack of direct contact between HRM specialists, line managers and workers.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Long-term outcomes
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Improvisation-based enactment of e-HRM calls for the refinement of existing methods of performing HRM tasks.Such enactment results in dramatic alterations of HRM work processes and the use of e-HRM applications.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It forces researchers and practitioners to view e-HRM and HRM as co-evolving, mutually reinforcing and structuring each other.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Long-term outcomes
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“It is by being transferred and filtered through perceptions, understanding and experience that an HRM system gains its quality (Wright & Nishii, 2013) and e-HRM is a part of that wider picture.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Multiple stakeholders
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Wright & Nishii, 2013
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The Harvard 'map' though was concerned with a range of stakeholders, including owners and shareholders, of course, but also including employees and trade unions, management, community and government.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Stakeholders
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Beer et al., 1984
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As IT becomes more accessible, personnel management becomes increasingly dependent on its use and the benefits of using e-HRM cannot be limited to improving job outcomes.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Countries have different HRM systems because they are in different situations, have different cultures and different institutions.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Taken together, changes in HRM and technologies have stretched the geographical boundaries of HRM practices, distances in and between organisations have become shortened.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The context of e-HRM will always include its targeted users; organisational support; and the technology characteristics.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Only ten years after the establishment of HRM as an academic topic, Rosenzweig and Nohria (1994) identified the fact that HRM is the most localised of management practices.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Rosenzweig & Nohria, 1994 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the original Harvard 'map of the territory', which we claim remains a good reflection of the reality of HRM in organisational life.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > The notion of HRM
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The technology does not determine HRM practices.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“With new smart technologies that accelerate networked collaborations within and across organisations, long-term outcomes depend even more on the e-HRM context.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Long-term outcomes
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We believe that to date much of the work on e-HRM has been based on un-declared assumptions about the interests of shareholders being paramount, about context being largely irrelevant, and about the long-term effects on various stakeholders being of less import than short-term efficiency and 'doing more with less'.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Conclusions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Von Bertalanffy (1969) introduced the principle of equifinality, widely used in the configurational tradition in the HRM research, arguing that the same final state may be reached from different initial conditions and HRM antecedents, in different ways, through different mechanisms.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Von Bertalanffy, 1969
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The Harvard model offers a systems perspective on HRM: all the elements interact such that the whole is greater than a sum of its parts.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Beer et al., 1984
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Since it utilises a systems perspective, what matters is the influence and relevance of social interactions between the multiple stakeholders, their idiosyncratic experiences with HRM, and their influence on HRM policy choices.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Stakeholders
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A consequence of the existence of system properties is the appearance of isomorphisms in different fields that govern the behaviour of entities that can be in principle, very different (Von Bertalanffy, 1969).”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Von Bertalanffy, 1969
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Put strongly, HRM is essentially an open system consisting of people, technology, organisations, and management processes.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The main challenges in terms of future-proofing, ensuring the longer-term survival and success of the organisation, will come from companies developing new smart business propositions with the deployment of new technology and knowledge and from learning to collaborate effectively and organise networks that make optimal use of the available data.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > e-HRM and long-term outcomes
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“HRM will be different between small countries and large ones, between rich countries and poor ones, between long-established countries and those just trying to establish themselves, between mono-lingual and multi-lingual countries, and so on.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“HRM specialists have almost universally accepted the perspective of the single stakeholder (owner) for their subject.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Stakeholders
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Unlike many HRM interventions the use of e-HRM is insidious it will have undeclared and perhaps unexpected impacts on how HRM is conducted in the organisation in the futureand it is hard to reverse.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > e-HRM and long-term outcomes
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“National differences are explained by cultural differences (Aycan et al., 2000) and institutional differences.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Aycan et al., 2000 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“But it will also require them to understand what employee competences they need to generate and maintain success and will, simultaneously, make it easier to monitor such competencies.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > e-HRM and long-term outcomes
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Big data offers opportunities to monitor, steer and govern the work processes and job tasks with high levels of precision and will change the way that HRM specialists work.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > e-HRM and long-term outcomes
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Alongside the influence of the organisational context, human actors are also influenced by the e-HRM technology.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Whilst, ironically, that has helped establish HRM as a concept in the business schools and within companies and made the discipline of HRM successful, it also ignored the complexity of the topic.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > The notion of HRM
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Effects of e-HRM on employment relationships are tightly intertwined with the overall role of technology in organisations.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > New technology and HRM: a research agenda
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Social cognitive theorists have shown that incongruent frames lead to different understandings and conflicting interpretations expressed in process loss and misaligned expectations, contradictory actions, resistance and scepticism.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Multiple stakeholders
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“General Systems Theory (GST) helps to establish principles that generalize across phenomena and disciplines, and focuses on the system's structure instead of the system's function.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Von Bertalanffy, 1969
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“So far, the explanations offered for the difficulties that organisations experience in implementing e-HRM have tended to overlook an important aspect of e-HRM adoption: the dynamic nature of the process.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > e-HRM and long-term outcomes
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is mobile technologies that facilitate the expansion of such jobs.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > e-HRM and long-term outcomes
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The enactment approach to e-HRM implementation emphasises the prominent and decisive roles that users play in the recurrent use of an e-HRM technology in the belief that various stakeholders engaging in implementation exert social influence in order to change the pattern of technology use in ways that, over time, remove or ameliorate its potential to constrain human action.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Multiple stakeholders
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the GST tradition, the quality of HRM information is determined by the quality of HRM decisions made, based on this information.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Due to diverse technological advancements, organisations can offer their employees new ways of working by eliminating physical and time barriers and relying on such organisational forms as HRM shared services, telework, and virtual teams.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Unfortunately, the systems perspective did not develop into empirical work and, arguably, its influence has become largely metaphorical (Kozlowski & Klein, 2000).”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Kozlowski & Klein, 2000
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Employees, first line supervisors, middle and top managers get directly involved in co-creation of HRM.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is central to HRM: fundamental to a multi-stakeholder approach is trust between the different stakeholders.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Long-term outcomes
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In some countries, in some industries and in some sizes of business the implications will be minimal.For others, they will be part of the package that contributes to survival and even success in a highly competitive marketplace.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Long-term outcomes
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“These technologies have brought a new vocabulary to the HRM discourse as the conventional terminology is supplemented by new terms like electronic HRM (e-HRM), HRM data mining, HRM cloud computing, appification of HRM (for mobile technologies), SMAC (for Social Media, Analytics, Clouds), and HRM big data (Bondarouk, 2014).”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Bondarouk, 2014
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There may be debate about the balance between these explanations but together or independently culture and institutions will impact the HRM/technology interface too.”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > Context
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The authors state this as an assumption.
The future of HRM is to become 'smart', i.e. to enable and be enabled by digitisation and support and be supported through interconnectedness.
“It is logical to assume that the future of HRM is also to become 'smart', i.e. to enable and be enabled by digitisation and support and be supported through interconnectedness.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Traditionally, e-HRM usage is directly related to job tasks only for HRM professionals; line managers and employees are expected to use e-HRM for reasons other than direct job-related outcomes and not often.
“It is only for HRM professionals that e-HRM usage is traditionally directly related to their job tasks; line managers and employees are expected to use e-HRM for reasons other than direct job-related outcomes: they will not be expected to use e-HRM that often.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Tasks such as recording a new home address, bank account, or family status, terminating a work contract, or changing working hours will be rare for employees.
“Tasks such as recording a new home address, bank account, or family status, terminating a work contract, or changing working hours will be rare for employee.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Multi-national corporations tend to introduce e-HRM in an attempt to standardise HRM practices across borders.
“Multi-national corporations tend to introduce e-HRM in an attempt to standardise HRM practices across borders.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Furthermore, the significant growth of access to HR technology, including human resource information systems (HRISs), cloud platforms and apps, has offered HR departments the ability to collect, manage and analyze large volumes of employee data, compared to earlier legacy IT systems (Bondarouk and Brewster, 2016;Marler and Boudreau, 2017;Kim et al., 2021).”
From Bridging the gap: why, how and when HR analytics can impact organizational performance (2022) · cites this paper as Bondarouk and Brewster, 2016
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“It is argued that 'good digital HRM includes actions and policies that are conducive to the long-term success and survival of a company, not just generating shorter-term returns for shareholders.'”
From Exploring Human Resource Management Digital Transformation in the Digital Age (2024) · cites this paper as Bondarouk and Brewster (2016)
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > e-HRM and long-term outcomes
“execution of non-routine manual tasks”
§ Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research > e-HRM and long-term outcomes
“carrying out routine tasks that cannot be described in rules”
Citations
Cites
Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches
Suchman, M. C. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258788 · Cited by 19,903
Hall, P. A., & Soskice, D. W. (2001) · doi:10.1093/0199247757.001.0001 · Cited by 8,956
The Skill Content of Recent Technological Change: An Empirical Exploration
Autor, D. H., Levy, F., & Murnane, R. J. (2003) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355303322552801 · Cited by 6,205
Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance
Goodhue, D. L., & Thompson, R. L. (1995) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249689 · Cited by 6,006
Klein, K. J., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (2000) · Cited by 4,914
Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hayes, T. L. (2002) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.87.2.268 · Cited by 4,623
The second machine age: work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies
(2015) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.184834 · Cited by 4,409
Differentiation and Integration in Complex Organizations
Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2391211 · Cited by 3,937
Strategic human resource management
Taylor, T., Doherty, A., & McGraw, P. (2015) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315881881-10 · Cited by 3,443
Organizational Legitimacy Under Conditions of Complexity: The Case of the Multinational Enterprise
Kostova, T., & Zaheer, S. (1999) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1999.1580441 · Cited by 3,343
Research works printed but not linked: 18
- 10.1111/apps.2000.49.issue-1 · DOI
- 10.1002/hrm.2015.54.issue-3 · DOI
- Bondarouk, T. (2014). Orchestrating electronic HRM. Enschede: Twente University Press.
- 10.1002/hrm.2015.54.issue-4 · DOI
- Brewster, C., & Mayrhofer, W. (Eds.). (2012). Handbook of research on comparative HRM. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
- 10.1111/jsbm.2006.44.issue-3 · DOI
- 10.1111/joms.1987.24.issue-5 · DOI
- 10.1002/hrm.2015.54.issue-3 · DOI
- 10.1111/ijmr.2010.12.issue-1 · DOI
- Looise J. C. (2015 November) The role of government and regulation in HRM. A historical perspective. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of the Dutch HRM Network Utrecht.
- 10.1111/peps.2008.61.issue-3 · DOI
- 10.1111/hrmj.2003.13.issue-3 · DOI
- 10.1002/hrm.v52.1 · DOI
- Sparrow, P., & Brewster, C. (2012). Reuters: Human resource management in global perspective. Chapter 29. In A. Dundon & A. Wilkinson (Eds.), Case studies in global management (pp. 261–270). Victria: Tilde University Press.
- Stout, L. (2012). The shareholder value myth: How putting shareholders first harms investors, corporations and the general public. San Francisco, CA: Barrett-Koehler.
- 10.1002/hrm.v51.6 · DOI
- 10.1111/ijmr.2012.14.issue-4 · DOI
- Van der Ploeg, R., & Vermeend, W. (2014). Arbeidsmarkt niet voorbereid op de toekomst [Labour market is not ready yet for the future]. De Financiële Telegraaf. Retrieved July 14, 2014.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Vrontis, D., Christofi, M., Pereira, V., Tarba, S., Makrides, A., & Trichina, E. (2022) · The International Journal of Human Resource Management · doi:10.1080/09585192.2020.1871398 · Cited by 1,134
“…scholars emphasize how information technologies are changing HRM-related practices by introducing e-recruitment, e-training or e-competence management, contributing positively to HRM service quality in both local and international organizations (Bondarouk & Brewster, 2016; Bondarouk et al., 2017).”
BackgroundInfluentialSystematic literature review on sustainable human resource management
Macke, J., & Genari, D. (2019) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.091 · Cited by 521
Exploring Human Resource Management Digital Transformation in the Digital Age
Zhang, J., & Chen, Z. (2024) · Journal of the Knowledge Economy · doi:10.1007/s13132-023-01214-y · Cited by 414
“Bondarouk and Brewster (2016) highlight the challenges of conceptualizing digital HRM and the need to adopt a longer-term view when dealing with the outcomes of digital transformation.”
Rebooting employees: Upskilling for artificial intelligence in multinational corporations
Jaiswal, A., Arun, C. J., & Varma, A. (2022) · The International Journal of Human Resource Management · doi:10.1080/09585192.2021.1891114 · Cited by 382
Digital human resource management: A conceptual clarification
Strohmeier, S. (2020) · German Journal of Human Resource Management: Zeitschrift für Personalforschung · doi:10.1177/2397002220921131 · Cited by 358
Metadata
- Authors
- Bondarouk, T., & Brewster, C.
- Affiliations
- University of Twente (NL)
- Iscte – Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (PT)
- Corresponding author
- Bondarouk, Tanya
- Venue
- The International Journal of Human Resource Management
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2016-09-30
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 21
- Pages
- 2652-2671
- ISSN
- 0958-5192 (ISSN-L)
- 1466-4399
- OpenAlex
- W2524229565
- Cited by
- 438
- References
- 111
- Citations by year
- 2026: 115 · 2025: 87 · 2024: 50 · 2023: 53 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 36 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 3
- FWCI
- 24.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- The International Journal of Human Resource Management (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- University of Twente Research Information (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Osuva (University of Vaasa) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Repositório do ISCTE-IUL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- University of Twente Research Information (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › AI and HR Technologies
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Employer Branding and e-HRM
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Human Resource and Talent Management
- Keywords
- information technology, human resource management, stakeholders, digital HRM, HR professionals, organizational members, future research directions
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-03, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-03 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
