Impact of Culture on Human Resource Management Practices: A 10‐Country Comparison
Abstract
Le Mode`le de Culture Fit explique la manie`re dont l’environnement socio‐culturel influence la culture interne au travail et les pratiques de la direction des ressources humaines. Ce mode`le a e´te´ teste´ sur 2003 salarie´s d’entreprises prive´es dans 10 pays. Les participants ont rempli un questionnaire de 57 items, destine´ a` mesurer les perceptions de la direction sur 4 dimensions socio‐culturelles, 6 dimensions de culture interne au travail, et les pratiques HRM (Management des Ressources Humaines) dans 3 zones territoiriales. Une analyse ponde´re´e par re´gressions multiples, au niveau individuel, a montre´ que les directeurs qui caracte´risaient leurs environnement socio‐culturel de fac¸on fataliste, supposaient aussi que les employe´s n’e´taient pas malle´ables par nature. Ces directeurs ne pratiquaient pas l’enrichissement des postes et donnaient tout pouvoir au contrôle et a` la re´mune´ration en fonction des performances. Les directeurs qui appre´ciaient une grande loyaute´ des employe´s supposaient qu’ils remplissent entre eux des obligations re´ciproques et s’engagaient dans la voie donnant pouvoir aux pratiques HRM. Les directeurs qui percevaient le paternalisme et une forte distance de l’autorite´ dans leur environnement socio‐culturel, supposaient une re´activite´ des employe´s, et en outre ne pourvoyaient pas a` l’enrichissement des postes et a` la de´le´gation. Des mode`les spe´cifiques a` la culture qui mettent en relation ces 3 groupes de variables ainsi que les applications de ces recherches pour la psychologie industrielles trans‐culturellesont e´te´ de´battus.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
National differences in HRM are explained by cultural differences and institutional differences.
“National differences are explained by cultural differences (Aycan et al., 2000) and institutional differences.”
From Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research (2016) · cites this paper as Aycan et al., 2000
Cites
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173 · Cited by 91,542 · see citing works
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 · Cited by 91,532 · see citing works
Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement.
Rotter, J. B. (1966) · Psychological Monographs: General and Applied · doi:10.1037/h0092976 · Cited by 21,937 · see citing works
Smith, P. B., Dugan, S., & Trompenaars, F. (1996) · Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology · doi:10.1177/0022022196272006 · Cited by 807 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Beugelsdijk, S., Maseland, R., & van Hoorn, A. (2015) · Global Strategy Journal · doi:10.1002/gsj.1098 · Cited by 455 · see citing works
Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research
Bondarouk, T., & Brewster, C. (2016) · The International Journal of Human Resource Management · doi:10.1080/09585192.2016.1232296 · Cited by 438 · see citing works
Linking justice, trust and innovative work behaviour to work engagement
A. Agarwal, U. (2014) · Personnel Review · doi:10.1108/pr-02-2012-0019 · Cited by 389 · see citing works
A question of balance: Time perspective and well-being in British and Russian samples
Boniwell, I., Osin, E., Alex Linley, P., & Ivanchenko, G. V. (2010) · The Journal of Positive Psychology · doi:10.1080/17439760903271181 · Cited by 376 · see citing works
Zakaria, N., Stanton, J. M., & Sarkar‐Barney, S. T. M. (2003) · Information Technology & People · doi:10.1108/09593840310463023 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
Malik, A., Pereira, V., & Budhwar, P. (2021) · Human Resource Management Review · doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2020.100743 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Predictors and Outcomes of Relational and Transactional Psychological Contract
Aggarwal, U., & Bhargava, S. (2010) · Psychological Studies · doi:10.1007/s12646-010-0033-2 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Gibson, C. B., & McDaniel, D. M. (2010) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691610375560 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Culture and Conflict Management Style of International Project Managers
Mohammed, U. K., White, G. R., & Prabhakar, G. P. (2009) · International Journal of Business and Management · doi:10.5539/ijbm.v3n5p3 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Ahmad, A., Fareed, M., Isa, M. F. M., & Salleh, S. S. M. M. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.756255 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
- Authors
- Aycan, Z., Kanungo, R., Mendonca, M., Yu, K., Deller, J., Stahl, G., & Kurshid, A.
- Affiliations
- Koç University (TR)
- McGill University (CA)
- Dalian University of Technology (CN)
- Daimler (Germany) (DE)
- University of Bayreuth (DE)
- Lahore University of Management Sciences (PK)
- Venue
- Applied Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2000-01
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 192-221
- ISSN
- 0269-994X (ISSN-L)
- 1464-0597
- OpenAlex
- W2158044215
- Cited by
- 786
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 48 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 43 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 37 · 2015: 49 · 2014: 50 · 2013: 52 · 2012: 42
- FWCI
- 43.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Applied Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Anthropology › Global and Cross-Cultural Management
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Employee Performance and Management
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Human Resource and Talent Management
- Keywords
- human resource management practices, organizational culture, socio-cultural environment, HR managers' perceptions, job enrichment, performance-based pay, employee loyalty, paternalism, employee responsiveness, delegation, fatalism, cross-cultural comparison
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.
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