Strategic Human Resource Management Research in the United States: A Failing Grade After 30 Years?

Abstract

Executive Overview In this paper I look at the last three decades of predominantly American research literature on strategic human resource management from three dimensions: (1) development of theory with predictive accuracy and robust conclusions, (2) production of actionable and value-added managerial principles, and (3) accurate portrayal of the historical origins and development of this area of management scholarship and practice. After an extensive reading of the literature, I conclude that strategic human resource management researchers as a group deserve a D to F grade on all three dimensions. Among the problems are an overreliance on knowledge areas and perspectives pertaining to the internal dimension of organizations and management (e.g., strategy, psychology, and organizational behavior) and too little attention paid to those areas and perspectives dealing with the external dimension (e.g., economics, industrial/employment relations, and the macro side of sociology). I suggest an economics-based framework as a possible way forward; a less normative-driven research program would also be helpful.