Cited by 453Human Resource and Talent ManagementManagement and Organizational PracticesInnovation and Knowledge Management

Strategic human resource management: where have we come from and where should we be going?

Open access
Boxall, Peter, Purcell, John·2000·International Journal of Management Reviews

Abstract

Strategic human resource management (SHRM) implies a concern with the ways in which HRM is critical to organizational effectiveness. This straightforward assertion is examined in theory and through research evidence to reveal high levels of complexity in relation to how, when and why the interconnection between HRM and organizational outcomes is achieved. The two dominant normative models of ‘best fit’ and ‘best practice’ are considered. The paper concludes that the HR strategies of firms are heavily shaped by contextual contingencies, including national, sectoral and organizational factors. However, such a conclusion does not invalidate all ‘best‐practice’ thinking. Although constrained in certain ways, underpinning principles of labour management still have relevance to practice as essential attributes of a firm's ability to compete in its chosen markets. The paper then considers the resource‐based view (RBV) of the firm and asks whether this provides a better basis for the development of theory in SHRM and in understanding the contribution of HRM to the achievement of sustained competitive advantage. While limits to the utility of RBV in respect of SHRM theory are identified, important implications for research are signalled. Trends in the RBV literature are pushing all those interested in strategy towards studies of intellectual capital, learning processes and organizational adaptability. Researchers in HRM could, if they wished, play a central role in these developments because questions of how to attract, motivate and develop workers with critical and scarce abilities, and develop effective processes of work organization, must be fundamental to any model of knowledge‐based competition. Greater progress will be made when organizations are studied in a much more interdisciplinary or systemic way.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1468-2370.00037

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Boxall, P., & Purcell, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Auckland (NZ)
  • University of Bath (GB)
Venue
International Journal of Management Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2000-06
Volume
2
Issue
2
Pages
183-203
ISSN
  • 1460-8545 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-2370
OpenAlex
W2111642166
Cited by
453
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 29
FWCI
13.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
International Journal of Management Reviews (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Human Resource and Talent Management
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Management and Organizational Practices
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
Keywords
strategic human resource management, best-fit model, best practice model, contextual contingencies, resource-based view, competitive advantage, intellectual capital, organizational learning, organizational adaptability, work organization, labor management, knowledge-based competition

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