Due to increased globalization and easy mobility and communications between countries, companies operate at international level. The major task for organizations which operate across international boundaries is to manage. The dissimilar stresses of the drive for integration and differentiation. In the broader sense, International human resource management process has same activities as in Domestic HRM such as planning and staffing. However, domestic HRM is operated in one nation And IHRM activities are involving in different countries. International Human Resource Management is a branch of management studies that examine. The design and effects of organizational human resource practices in cross-cultural contexts.
It occupies an exciting position in the interstices of international business. Human resource management and organizational behavior, scholarships. The theoretical study explains that International HRM is the interplay between three dimensions: HR activities, the types of people being employed in the organization and the different countries that an organization is operating in (Dowling, 1999). Complexities caused by these last two variables are what differentiates international HRM from domestic HRM, as the HR activities themselves are relatively similar.
The meaning and impact of comparative human resource management. Many scholars of HRM have to focus on a narrow definition of the topic that fits the liberal market agenda widespread in some countries but fails to capture the reality of any country – a problem brought into stark relief by comparative studies of HRM. On the basis of that analysis, it will be argued that multiple stakeholder perspectives focused on the long-term benefits to organizations. Employees and the wider community is a more powerful analytic tool. New Roles of Human Resource Management in Business Development
As an increasing number of organizations seek to operate in foreign markets. It is vital that management practitioners develop a better understanding of, and sensitivity to, the impact of different national settings on the management task. In the field of cross-cultural management/organization, scholars have sought to assist practitioners in achieving. This by conducting research that has generally guiding by two key questions: (1) what is general and universal in the management of organizations, and (2) what is peculiar or specific to one nation or culture?
International Human Resource Management has defined as HRM issues, functions. Policies and practices that result from the strategic activities of MNEs. International Human Resource Management deals principally with issues and problems associated with the globalization of capitalism. It involves the same elements as domestic HRM but is more complex to manage. In terms of the diversity of national contexts and types of workers. The emphasis is on the MNCs’ ability to attract, develop and deploy talented employees in a multinational setting and to get them to work effectively despite differences in culture, language, and locations. International HRM tends to mitigate the impact of national culture and national employment practice against corporate culture and practices.
Comparative Human Resource Management, on the other hand, is a systematic method of investigation. That seeks to explain the patterns and variations encountered in cross-national HRM rather than simply describe HRM institutions and practices in different societies. Different national business systems arise from differences in specific historical, cultural and institutional heritage in certain countries. Comparative differences occur due to decisive historical events such as the process of industrialization or due to the legacy of pre-modern forms of social organization. Hofstede adopted the ‘culturalist’ perspective where he argued that national business styles emerge due to ingrained cultural attitudes and mental schemas. He described culture under five dimensions which are power distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance and long-term orientation.
Human Resource Management policies and practices are becoming universal and that country-of-origin effects are no longer relevant. The pressure to build standardize operations internationally is strongest in sectors. Where competition is highly internationalizing, and where firms compete on the basis of a similar product or service across countries. Such as in cars and fast foods. They have put forward several reasons to explain this trend.
Firstly, all MNCs operate in one global market and therefore have to respond to the same environmental pressures such as globalization and technology. The growth in international trade and the move towards an internationally-integrated financial system.
Secondly, the widespread practice of benchmarking ‘best practice’ in terms of cost. Quality and productivity may also have contributed to the convergence of international HRM models for e.g. Japanese style ‘lean-production’ system in the 1980s and 1990s. Moreover, these pressures towards convergence stem in part from the influence of MNCs themselves through. Their ability to transfer practices across borders and erode country-of-origin effects.
Finally, the formation and development of like-minded international cadres mostly from American or European business schools. May have contributed to homogenize international HRM policies and practices.
Since the early 1990s, the international HRM literature has dominated by models and typologies aim at identifying how international HR fits with organizational strategy. The main issue for all multinational companies is the need to trade-off the advantages global efficiency namely. The coordination of its operations to achieve economies of scale and scope as opposing to the need to differentiate its products and services to meet the local demands. They also identify a third pressure, namely worldwide innovation and learning. Whereby firms are encouraging to support innovation and learning across. Their network of subsidiaries rather than simply relying on research and development at the headquarters. MNEs then follow the appropriate HRM policies and practices according to the structure of the organization. The competitive strategy is chosen or stage of corporate evolution reach.
Exporting: This is essentially a model where the HQ management takes home country management approach and try to implement them in their foreign subsidiaries in order to achieve economies of scale. In this model, there is a system of hierarchy and a centralized control. This is especially useful in instances of an uncertain political environment and high risks demanding greater control from corporate parents. Given this pattern of centralization, there is a considerable amount of ‘forward policy transfer’ and less ‘reverse transfer. From subsidiaries to the HQ, i.e. they rely mainly on the technical know-how of the parent company. Strategic Role of e-HR (Electronic Human Resource).
Global firms offer products or services that are standardizing to enable production to carry in a cost-efficient way. Their subsidiaries are not subject to rigid control except over the quality and the presentation of the product or service. This structure is normally associate with the American firms with their formalize. Bureaucratic control and a dominant finance system to internalize risks. What is Need? The Do and Don’t in Diversity Management.
Adaptive: Differences in the host environment demands and conditions mean that overseas subsidiaries have to operate independently. This is common where departing from established practices in host environments is unlawful. For example, in some Germany, there is a legal obligation to negotiate with employee representatives concerning major organizational changes. In other cases, transferring practices may be legal but would go against traditional practices at the risk of losing goodwill from staff. Firms may decide to forgo HQ control if there is the possibility to exploit most efficiently the local labor markets. For example, MNCs which origin from high-cost highly regulates economies such as Germany may well choose not to transfer important elements of their HR systems. Such as collective bargaining or apprenticeship if they move to lower wage, lightly regulated economies such as China.
Integrative: It is also argued that the more management processes and activities can integrate across geographical boundaries. The easier it is to share resources and knowledge. They can identify and best use the skill and management talent. That exists across the MNC network allowing for both global integration and local differentiation.
As mentioned previously, international HRM processes consist of the same activities as domestic HRM but applied in an international context. These include an accurate human resource planning to ensure that the MNCs have the right people at the right place around the world. Good staffing policies that capitalize on the worldwide expertise of expatriates and locals. Performance appraisals that fit with the competitive strategies of the HQ. Adequate training and development to ensure that expatriates. Do not suffer from ‘culture shock‘ and compensation policies that are strategically and culturally relevant. The focus in international HRM strategy is how MNEs coordinate. Their geographically dispersed operations strengthening the organizational culture. Promoting commitment and encouraging willingness in employees to act in the interests of the firm.
1. International Human Resource Management – https://www.civilserviceindia.com/subject/Management/notes/international-human-resource-management.html
2. Comparative HRM – https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110221002250AApRjIq
3. Difference between International and Comparative HRM – https://www.ukessays.com/essays/business/difference-between-international-and-comparative-hrm.php