Managing HRM related tensions is a matter of practical and theoretical significance.
Despite increasing interest among HRM scholars in understanding the nature of tensions in
managing the employment relationship, attempts to explore these tensions that go beyond
the mapping of dualities or naming of the negative aspects of tensions are somewhat rare.
Furthermore, discussions on managing HRM tensions tend to be of limited value for
practitioners due to their overly abstract nature contributing to what several
commentators lament is a growing theory-practice gap in HRM research. This Special Issue
aims to advance the discussion on tensions in HRM by drawing on a recent paradox
perspective from organization theory. Along with the contributors to the Special Issue, we
explore how a paradox perspective can support HRM researchers in a more systematic
analysis of types of HRM paradoxes and tensions and in deepening awareness of practical
strategies for coping actively and constructively with tensions. In this introduction to
the Special Issue, we first provide a synthesis of the features of a paradox perspective
and contrast it with previous research on tensions in organization theory and HRM. Next,
we illustrate how a paradox perspective can be applied to analyzing HRM tensions
presenting key examples of such analysis. We then introduce the contributions to this
Special Issue all of which draw, albeit in different ways, on a paradox perspective on
HRM. Finally, we explore opportunities for future research. In particular, we focus on the
need to move from a duality perspective to a paradox perspective on HRM, on opportunities
to explore the links between HRM, paradox and organizational sustainability and on the
skills and capabilities needed for coping with HRM paradoxes both at individual and
organizational/HRM levels.
AndriopoulosC.LewisM.W.
(2009). Exploitation-exploration tensions and organizational
ambidexterity: Managing paradoxes of innovation. Organization
Science, 20(4),
696–717.
2.
BoselieP.BrewsterC.PaauweJ.
(2009). In search of balance - Managing the dualities of
HRM: An overview of the issues. Personnel Review,
38(5),
461–471.
3.
BoxallP.PurcellJ.
(2011). Strategy and Human Resource Management
(3rd ed.). Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillan.
4.
BrandlJ.KozicaA.
(2015). Coping with institutional complexity through
conventions: An empirical case study., Proceedings des 37.
Kongress der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Soziologie “Routinen der Krise – Krise der
Routinen”. Trier.
5.
BrandlJ.EhnertI.Bos-NehlesA.
(2012). Organising HRM: The HRM department and line
management roles in a comparative perspective. In BrewsterC.MayrhoferW.
(Eds.), Handbook of Research on Comparative Human Resource Management
(pp. 239–267). Cheltenham:
Edward Elgar Publishing.
6.
BurnsT.StalkerG. M.
(1961). Management and technology.
London: Tavistock
Publications.
7.
CaldwellR.
(2003). The changing roles of personnel managers: Old
ambiguities, new uncertainties. Journal of Management
Studies, 40(4),
983–1004.
8.
CameronK.S.QuinnR.E.
(1988) Organizational paradox and
transformation. In QuinnR.E.CameronK.S.
(Eds.), Paradox and transformation: Toward a theory of change in organization and
management (pp. 1–18). New York,
NY: Ballinger Publishing Co/Harper & Row
Publishers.
9.
CrozierM.
(1964). The bureaucratic phenomenon.
Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
10.
De WootP.
(2005). Should Prometheus be bound? Corporate global
responsibility. Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillan and EFMD.
11.
DelbridgeR.KeenoyT.
(2010). Beyond managerialism?International Journal of Human Resource Management,
21(6),
799–817.
12.
Den HartogD. N.De HooghA. H.KeeganA. E.
(2007). The interactive effects of belongingness and
charisma on helping and compliance. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 92(4),
1131–1139.
13.
DenisonD.R.HooijbergR.QuinnR.E.
(1995). Paradox and performance: Toward a theory of
behavioral complexity in managerial leadership. Organization
Science, 6,
524–540.
14.
EhnertI.
(2009). Sustainable Human Resource Management: A conceptual and
exploratory analysis from a paradox perspective.
Heidelberg: Springer Science &
Business Media.
15.
EhnertI.ParsaS.RoperI.WagnerM.Muller-CamenM.
(2015). Reporting on sustainability and HRM: A comparative
study of sustainability reporting practices by the world's largest
companies. The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 1–21, https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1080/09585192.2015.1024157.
16.
EhnertI.HarryW.ZinkK.J.
(Eds.) (2014). Sustainability and Human Resource Management:
Developing sustainable business organizations.
Heidelberg:
Physica/Springer.
17.
EvansP.A.L.
(1999). HRM on the edge: A duality
perspective. Organization,
6(2),
325–338.
18.
EvansP.A.L.PucikV.BjörkmanI.
(2011). The global challenge: International Human Resource
Management. New York:
McGraw-Hill Irwin.
19.
FrancisH.M.RamdhonyA.ReddingtonM.StainesH.
(2013). Opening spaces for conversational practice: A
conduit for effective engagement strategies and productive working
arrangements. The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 24(14),
2713–2740.
20.
GalbraithJ.R.
(1973). Designing complex organizations:
Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co.,
Inc.
21.
GodardJ.
(2014). The psychologisation of employment
relations?Human Resource Management Journal, 24(1),
1–18.
22.
GouldnerA.W.
(1954). Patterns of industrial bureaucracy.
Glencoe, IL: Free
Press.
23.
GrantA.M.ChristiansonM.K.PriceR.H.
(2007). Happiness, health, or relationships? Managerial
practices and employee well-being tradeoffs. The Academy of
Management Perspectives, 21(3),
51–63.
24.
GreenwoodM.R.
(2013). Ethical analyses of HRM: A review and research
agenda. Journal of Business Ethics,
114(2),
355–366.
25.
GreenwoodM.R.
(2002). Ethics and HRM: A review and conceptual
analysis. Journal of Business Ethics,
36(3),
261–278.
26.
GuerciM.RahimianM.CarolloL.
(2014). Paradoxes in green Human Resource Management:
Evidences from the Italian context. Academy of Management
Proceedings, 2014.
27.
GuilmotN.EhnertI.
(2014). 26 years of paradox research: A literature
review. Paper presented at the 30th EGOS Colloquium
Rotterdam, July 2014.
28.
HahnT.PreussL.PinkseJ.FiggeF.
(2014). Cognitive frames in corporate sustainability:
Managerial sensemaking with paradoxical and business case frames.
Academy of Management Review, 39(4),
463–487.
29.
HuyQ. N.
(2002). Emotional balancing of organizational continuity and
radical change: The contribution of middle managers.
Administrative Science Quarterly,
47(1),
31–69.
30.
JacksonS.E.SchulerR.S.JiangK.
(2014). An aspirational framework for strategic Human
Resource Management. The Academy of Management Annals,
8(1),
1–56.
31.
JarzabkowskiP.LêJ.Van de VenA.H.
(2013). Responding to competing strategic demands: How
organizing, belonging, and performing paradoxes coevolve.
Strategic Organization, 11(3),
245–280.
32.
JayJ.
(2013). Navigating paradox as a mechanism of change and
innovation in hybrid organizations. Academy of Management
Journal, 56,
137–159.
33.
KangS. C.SnellS. A.
(2009). Intellectual capital architectures and ambidextrous
learning: A framework for Human Resource Management. Journal of
Management Studies, 46(1),
65–92.
34.
KeeganA.BoselieP.
(2006). The lack of impact of sissensus inspired analysis on
developments in the field of Human Resource Management. Journal
of Management Studies, 43(7),
1491–1511.
35.
KeeganA.FrancisH.
(2010). Practitioner talk: The changing textscape of HRM and
emergence of HR business partnership. International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 21(6),
873–898.
36.
KeeganA.HuemannM.TurnerJ.R.
(2012). Beyond the line: Exploring the HRM responsibilities
of line managers, project managers and the HRM department in four project-oriented
companies in the Netherlands, Austria, the UK and the USA. The
International Journal of Human Resource Management,
23(15),
3085–3104.
37.
KorczynskiM.
(2002). Human Resource Management in service work.
Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan.
38.
KozicaA.BrandlJ.
(2015). Handling paradoxical tensions through conventions:
The case of performance appraisal. Zeitschrift fuer Personalforschung.
German Journal of Research in Human Resource Management,
29(1), 49–68, doi:
10.1688/ZfP-2015-01-Kozica.
39.
KozicaA.EhnertI.
(2015). Lernen von Nachhaltigkeit: Exploration und
Exploitation als Lernmodi einer vollständig ambidextren Organisation.
zfbf Sonderheft, 68(14),
124–144.
40.
LangR.RegoK.
(2015). German Human Resource Management professionals under
tensions: A Bourdieusian approach. Zeitschrift für
Personalforschung. German Journal of Research in Human Resource Management,
29(3–4), 259–279, doi:
10.1688/ZfP-2015-03-Lang.
41.
LawrenceP. R.LorschJ. W.
(1967). Organization and environment. Managing differentiation and
integration. Boston, Mass.:
Harvard Univ.
42.
LeggeK.
(1995). Human Resource Management. Rhetoric and realities.
London:
MacMillan.
43.
LeggeK.
(1978). Power, innovation and problem-solving in personnel
management. London:
McGraw-Hill.
44.
LepakD.P.SnellS.A.
(1999). The human resource architecture: Toward a theory of
human capital allocation and development. Academy of Management
Review, 24(1),
31–48.
45.
LewisM.W.
(2000). Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive
guide. The Academy of Management Review,
25(4),
760–776.
46.
LewisM.W.SmithW.K.
(2014). Paradox as a metatheoretical perspective: Sharpening
the focus and widening the scope. The Journal of Applied
Behavioral Science, 50(2),
127–149.
47.
LüscherL.S.LewisM.W.
(2008). Organizational change and managerial sensemaking:
Working through paradox. Academy of Management Journal,
51(2),
221–240.
48.
MarchingtonM.CookeF.L.HebsonG.
(2009). Human Resource Management across organisational
boundaries. In WilkinsonA.BaconN.RedmanT.SnellS.
(Eds.), Sage handbook of Human Resource Management (pp.
460–477). London:
Sage.
MeijerinkJ.BondaroukT.Kees LooiseJ.
(2013). Value creation through HR shared services: Towards a
conceptual framework. Personnel Review,
42(2),
154–175.
51.
PetersP.LamW.
(2015). Can employability do the trick? Revealing
paradoxical tensions and responses in the process of adopting innovative employability
enhancing policies and practices in organizations. Zeitschrift
für Personalforschung. German Journal of Research in Human Resource Management,
29(3–4), 235–258, doi:
10.1688/ZfP-2015-03-Peters.
52.
PooleM.S.v. d. VenA.H.
(1989). Using paradox to build management and organization
theories. The Academy of Management Review,
14(4),
562–578.
53.
PrietoI.M.Pilar Pérez
SantanaM.
(2012). Building ambidexterity: The role of human resource
practices in the performance of firms from Spain. Human Resource
Management, 51(2),
189–211.
54.
QuinnR.
E. (1988). Beyond rational
management. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
55.
RamsayH.ScholariosD.HarleyB.
(2000). Employees and high-performance work Systems: Testing
inside the black box. British Journal of Industrial
Relations, 38(4),
501–531.
SandoffM.WidellG.
(2015). Translating as response to paradoxes – when
implementing HRM strategies in service organisations.
Zeitschrift für Personalforschung. German Journal of Research in Human Resource
Management, 29(3–4),
303–323, doi:
10.1688/ZfP-2015-03-Sandoff.
58.
SchulerR.S.JacksonS.E.
(1987). Linking competitive strategies with Human Resource
Management practices. The Academy of Management
Executive, 1(3),
207–219.
59.
SennaJ.ShaniA.B.
(2009). Utilizing technology to support
sustainability. In DochertyP.KiraM.ShaniA.B.
(Eds.), Creating sustainable work systems: Developing social
sustainability (pp. 84–100).
London:
Routledge.
60.
SheehanC.De CieriH.GreenwoodM.Van BurenH.J.
(2014). HR professional role tensions: Perceptions and
responses of the top management team. Human Resource
Management, 53(1),
115–130.
61.
SmithW.K.LewisM.W.TushmanM.
(2011). Organizational sustainability: Organization design
and senior leadership to enable strategic paradox. In CameronK.SpreitzerG.
(Eds.), The Oxford handbook of positive organizational scholarship (pp.
798–810). New York:
Oxford University Press.
62.
SmithK.K.BergD.N.
(1987). Paradoxes of group life: Understanding conflict, paralysis,
and movement in group dynamics:
Jossey-Bass.
63.
SmithW.K.LewisM.
(2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium
model of organizing. Academy of Management Review,
36(2),
381–403.
64.
StilesP.TrevorJ.FarndaleE.MorrisS.S.PaauweJ.StahlG.K.
(2015). Changing routine: Reframing performance management
within a multinational. Journal of Management Studies,
52(1),
63–88.
65.
SwartJ.KinnieN.
(2014). Reconsidering boundaries: Human Resource Management
in a networked world. Human Resource Management,
53(2),
291–310.
66.
van de
VoordeF.C.
(2010). HRM, employee well-being and organizational performance: A
balanced perspective. Ridderkerk:
Ridderprint.
67.
WatsonT.J.
(2010). Critical social science, pragmatism and the
realities of HRM. International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 21(6),
915–931.
68.
WatsonT.J.
(2004). HRM and critical social science
analysis. Journal of Management Studies,
41(3),
447–467.
69.
WatsonT.J.
(1986). Management, organisation and employment strategy: New
directions in theory and practice. London:
Routledge.
70.
WatsonT.J.
(1977). The personnel managers.
London:
Routledge.
71.
WeickK.E.
(1979). The social psychology of organizing (2nd
ed.). New York: McGraw
Hill.
72.
WhittakerS.MarchingtonM.
(2003). Devolving HR responsibility to the line – Threat,
Oopportunity or partnership?Employee Relations, 25(3),
245–261.
