The Adkar Change Management Model Business Essay

The Adkar Change Management Model Business Essay Industrial Laboratory Problems with Production, Efficiency, and Flow. Continuous quality improvement is the focus of a quality based leader in an industrial QC laboratory, but laboratory leaders that are deficient in quality assurance knowledge can struggle with analyzing production, efficiency, or workflow problems. Major issues industrial QC laboratory leaders encounter are uneven workloads, poor work scheduling, lack of cross training, overstrained work activities, and inefficient wasteful processes (Reynolds, 2009). To combat these issues of poor laboratory efficiency and quality, assertive laboratory leaders may try to improve conditions by implementing an efficiency system, such as lean 5S. Problem recognition, by industrial QC laboratory leaders, is a valuable first step to continuous quality improvement. Insufficient understanding of the complexity involved in inefficient culture, the lean 5S system purpose, and change management leads to failure for most industrial laborator y leaders in sustaining a meaningful and successful lean 5S culture change. 5S Description as a Foundation to Lean, and 5S Failure 5S is a five step system for altering the environment of an industrial lab that is inefficient, wasteful, and displaying poor quality into a lab that is organized, experiences smooth work flow of product and personnel, and is visually enhanced; as a result, bringing wasteful issues to the forefront for continuous improvement. The 5S system is a quality improvement development originating in Japan; unequivocally, the five Ss are seiri, seiton, seiso, seiketsu, and shitsuke (Hirano,1992); however, in the English version the five Ss have been given the names sort, set in order, shine, standardize, and sustain (5S Supply, 2011). Each step of the 5S system works together. 5S starts with sort, where an industrial laboratory visually organizes and labels its entire inventory in groups of importance and categorical description; for instance, marking all laboratory equipment as essential, possible essential, and non-essential (Nilipour Jamshidian, 2005). All non-essential items are marked with a red tag and then taken to a holding area for non-value added item disposal. Sort is the step of removing waste that reduces clutter and improves organization for moving on to the next step in the 5S system, set in order. Set in order is the orderliness step where all value-added inventory items are organized and properly labeled for easy use and access. Access to items is determined by how often they are needed or used; for example, frequently used laboratory equipment and tools should be kept close to the area of need, and less frequently used items can be stored away in a properly labeled area for easy discovery (Froeh ling, 2009). Organizational tools are implemented such as labeling cabinets and shelves, color coding equipment and tools, and outlining and labeling work areas. Organizing, labeling, and placing laboratory tools and equipment in their designated locations allow for ease of the next 5S step of shine. Shine involves cleaning the laboratory, removing dirt and grime, and making the lab shine. Cleanliness and orderliness provides an industrial lab environment for easily identifying and eliminating waste and non-value added items. To make the 5S system part of everyday lab activities, the first three steps of 5S must become part of laboratory standard operating procedure; for this reason, the work needs to be standardized through work tasks (Froehling, 2009). Each employee of the lab must do his or her part in continually organizing, eliminating waste, and cleaning; subsequently, these tasks are done by implementing the fourth step of standardize. Once the 5S system is standardized, it must be reinforced through the sustain step which involves such activities as auditing, appraisal, and positive feedback; consequently, sustain is the step most practitioners neglect and do not fully implement, therefore leading to failure of this step. According to Hogg (2005), the sustain step, of the 5S system, is where the majority of 5S failure occurs. There are those that consider the 5S system as basic housekeeping, and if a practitioner were to look at the first three steps of 5S, it would be (Eaton, 2000). What the laboratory leaders fail to recognize is the true application of all five steps of 5S as the foundation to a lean laboratory and as a permanent culture change to a lab that has operated in the past as inefficient and wasteful. For example, if an industrial laboratory has been working for 10 years as inefficient, then inefficiency would be customary and the standard engrained in that laboratory culture. Because of this history, it would take more than housekeeping to break down the cultural barriers existing in this laboratory work environment to improve efficiency and quality long term. If 5S is labeled as housekeeping by laboratory leadership or upper management, then the 5S quality initiative most certainly falters (Hogg, 2005). 5S as a Culture Change, and Change Management Failure It is important for industrial laboratory leaders to realize that 5S implementation is more than housekeeping. 5S is a change in the following three areas; work flow of product and personnel, functioning of the lab in terms of inventory and equipment, and standard operating procedures and daily activities. Understanding the changes that take place through the implementation of the laboratory 5S system is crucial knowledge for laboratory leadership. 5S is not a quality tool, but a lean quality system that requires change from all industrial laboratory personnel. According to Shil (2009), it is crucial for laboratory leadership and upper management to acknowledge lean 5S as a culture change to the organization, and not a simple task performed periodically. Now that the 5S system has been established successfully as a change in culture it is important for the 5S facilitator to understand the intricacies of implementing change, and sustaining the intended change as needed with lean 5S. The important issues needing to be addressed when implementing change are leadership support, employee resistance, and change reinforcement. Leadership support is very important to start the 5S implementation, so laboratory personnel must recognize that company management is serious about the changes being put forth, and feel confident in management to provide the resources and support that is needed to make the changes materialize and endure. Employee resistance can be a huge obstacle to the implementation of change; therefore, leadership cannot ignore resistance and must do all it can to change resistance to acceptance (Obrien, 2008). Engaging the employee is the first step to breaking down this barrier, and engagement is accomplished by effective commun ication and employee involvement. Communication is important for educating laboratory personnel on the reasons for the proposed change, and for their understanding of the root causes of laboratory inefficiencies that brought on the need for change. Effective communication brings a positive light to the employees perception of the change, gives them an understanding of the needed change, and starts the breakdown of resistance (Society for Human Resource Management, 2007). The next important aspect for leadership in employee engagement is to involve the laboratory personnel in the decision making and implementation planning of the 5S system. Involvement in the change gives the laboratory personnel a sense of ownership in the system, and continues to deplete the remaining resistance to change. According to Gallup Business Journal (2012), engaging employees builds passion within the workforce and that passion can turn employee resistance to employee innovation and promotion of change. Once a change has been implemented it is not necessarily secure; consequently, this uncertainty is a third reason 5S practitioners fail to sustain the intended quality improvements that lean 5S is meant for. 5S is a dynamic system that needs to be managed and measured. Most failure of 5S occurs in the fifth step of sustain because laboratory leaders lose focus on the 5S system. Because standards are in place and the laboratory is clean and organized, leaders think the laboratory will continue to operate this way. This thought process is a big mistake and causes the 5S system to deteriorate and result in laboratory personnel losing initial enthusiasm for the lean quality initiative. According to Bevan (2011), the major factor in successful change is not putting together a plan or understanding the change, but implementing and sustaining the change, yet many change leaders assume initial change will stick, therefore neglecting to preserve the change. Failure of the 5S system is not onl y a waste of resources, money and time, but also a loss of opportunity. The 5S system is the foundation of a lean laboratory, and if 5S fails it can result in an increase in laboratory personnel change resistance for any future lean initiatives. Understanding the intent of 5S as a culture change and demonstrating a clear understanding of the complexities of change management practice is extremely beneficial for any 5S practitioner. Change Management Success, and the ADKAR Change Management Model 5S is not a laboratory housekeeping task or quality tool; on the contrary, 5S is a lean system that requires culture change in the industrial laboratory. In order for a successful implementation and sustainable 5S culture change in an industrial laboratory, a change management model can be extremely important and vital for planning, educating, implementing, and sustaining the quality initiative. A change management model provides the structure that is missing from the 5S steps for successful and sustainable change. Research shows that change, such as 5S, breaks down due to poor planning and leadership, employee resistance and human resource neglect, and insufficient reinforcement of the change in culture (Song, 2009). One such change management model that has proven success is the ADKAR change management model developed by Jeffrey Hiatt from the Prosci Learning Center. The ADKAR change management model consists of five elements that build off of each other, and focus on important areas of change; such as, evaluation, management leadership, employee engagement, training, and reinforcement (Hiatt, 2006). Although some industry professionals may prefer an alternative change management model, the ADKAR model was chosen for its simplicity, structure, and ability to implement change ranging from change in individuals to more complex company-wide change. ADKAR Elements The ADKAR change management model has five elements in its structure, and the five elements are: Awareness, Desire, Knowledge, Ability, Reinforcement. Awareness Element of the ADKAR Model The element of awareness consists of some very important aspects in providing a solid foundation to a change initiative like lean 5S. One aspect is the ability to evaluate the organizations openness to change, and provide information for evaluating each element of the ADKAR model. For instance, determining how aware the organization is on its need to change, if management supports the proposed changes, and if the change has been communicated to the employees. Evaluation is a good starting point in determining which element of the ADKAR model is the weakest in respect to the organization making the changes. Evaluation could answer important questions like: What is the desire level of the employees to making this change happen? How knowledgeable are employees on the new processes and systems intended from the change? Are resources and workforce available to enable the laboratory to implement the changes? Is there a process for reinforcing the changes, and is the laboratory able to sustain the new systems and processes long term? Evaluation using the ADKAR change management model provides 5S leadership with a planning resource for making a strong plan prior to beginning the 5S system implementation. Awareness also promotes the importance of having strong management support for the planned 5S changes; subsequently, sponsorship is important for giving laboratory employees the feeling of being supported by upper management, and confidence knowing that resources are being provided for the full 5S implementation. Awareness likewise covers the very important process of communicating to employees the reasoning for the 5S system, and engaging employees on their concerns and ideas, and using their experience to build strong support for the 5S system. According to the survey by the Society of Human Resource Management (2007), the two highest reported barriers to successful change are employee resistance to change, and insufficient communication of the planned change. Hiatt (2006) lists the four strategies of developing awareness of change as: Operative Communication, Top Management Support, Leadership Instruction, Appropriate Information Access. Desire Element of the ADKAR Model People are naturally hesitant to change, and strategically communicating the need for 5S and showing strong management support is designed to create the next element of the ADKAR model; specifically, desire for the 5S system in the laboratory. Desire is the breaking down of change resistance and the barriers to change inherent in the laboratory employees, and engaging them to the point of turning resistance to enthusiasm. According to Zigarmi and Hoekstra (2011), resistance to change is created when change is forced on employees instead of performed with employees; furthermore, not involving the employees being affected by the change taking place is the largest obstruction to successful change. Jeffrey Hiatt (2006) lists the maneuvers for creating desire in the ADKAR model as: Sponsor the change successfully in collaboration with employees, Provide managers the ability to perform as change leaders, Appraise risk and expect resistance, Involve employees in the process, Align enticement programs to the goals. After the first two elements of ADKAR are implemented, the laboratory personnel are aware of the efficiency problems in the laboratory department, and the need for continuous quality improvement. Through effective communication and employee involvement the desire to change is strong, and employees are on board with the next step of learning about the five steps and structure of the 5S system. Not addressing the first two steps of awareness and desire is the first problem 5S practitioners make; as a result, they do not set a strong foundation for implementing a system as culturally complicated as 5S. Laboratory leaders can misinterpret the 5S system as a simple housekeeping activity or quality tool and then struggle mightily, because laboratory employees cannot understand the need for the system, and do not feel the presence of management support; accordingly, employees then naturally build a resistance to the implementation of 5S into the laboratory. Knowledge Element of the ADKAR Model Knowledge is the third element of the ADKAR change management model. Knowledge is the training element of the change management structure and consists of training all laboratory employees on the history, structure, and processes used in the 5S system. The knowledge element of the ADKAR model stresses the importance of robust instruction of how to implement and use each 5S step, and making sure laboratory employees are unified in implementing and following the procedures to be developed. Jeffrey Hiatt (2006) describes the exercises for building knowledge in the ADKAR model as: Train and educate with effectiveness, Provide work tools, Coach employees individually, Develop training groups and settings. According to the research paper by Korkut, Cakicier, Erdinler, Ulay, and Dogan (2009), 5S training by organizational leadership to the personnel executing the 5S implementation is a decisive factor in the successful 5S operation. Eaton and Caprenter (2000), reiterate the importance of training and emphasize that all affected employees need to understand how 5S works, how it is implemented, and what the results should be. Ability Element of the ADKAR Model Ability is the fourth element of the ADKAR model, and emphasizes the importance of providing resources in time, manpower, and equipment for a full implementation of all 5S steps. If time, manpower, and equipment are not adequate for implementing changes, then the whole 5S system can be compromised and each step may not be completed as the system is designed. Jeffrey Hiatt (2006) lists the exercises for crafting ability in the ADKAR model as: Support the change through daily supervisor involvement, Provide expert advice in subject material, Appraise performance, Involve employees in training exercises. According to Bevan (2011), monetary, workforce, and technological resources must be available and applied to empower the change to be executed, or the change will be impaired. Minimalizing resources on change implementation such as 5S into an industrial laboratory can weaken the sustainability of the intended changes; in summary, laboratory personnel need the tools and time to get the job done. Reinforcement Element of the ADKAR Model Reinforcement is the last element of the ADKAR change management model. This element is extremely important if the 5S system is to be sustainable for the long term in an industrial laboratory. Knowing that 5S failures happen most often when 5S practitioners neglect the last step of the 5S system, sustain, then the ADKAR model can provide the proper planning and focus needed on building a sustainable 5S system in the industrial laboratory. Reinforcement accentuates the importance of measuring the affects of 5S changes through auditing the 5S system. According to Bevan (2011), tracking the changes by comparing results with the planned vision of the 5S system and reassessing goals to promote continual improvement are critical factors in successful and sustainable change. Hiatt (2006) also underscores the importance of employee recognition for following new 5S standard operating procedures, being a team player, and enthusiastically promoting the 5S culture changes. Another point of reinf orcement is the continuation of management support, and keeping management involved with auditing and providing the needed positive feedback for employee recognition. Leaders of change must be aware of their role in successful change, and their responsibility in fostering the new system for continued growth and change in culture (Higgs Rowland, 2010). If the reinforcement of the industrial laboratory 5S system is planned for and followed, as the ADKAR model can provide, then the probability of 5S sustainability failure will extremely diminish, and the 5S culture change can become the norm. Reinforcement, Continuous Improvement, and PDSA Cycle The ADKAR model stresses the importance of a strong reinforcement process for sustainability and continuous improvement of implemented changes. An important quality and continuous improvement tool that provides a strong reinforcement process for 5S sustainability is the use of the continuous improvement cycle of PDSA (plan, do, study, act). With the inclusion of the PDSA cycle in the reinforcement element of the ADKAR model, 5S system audits, metrics, appraisals, and laboratory personnel feedback and recognition would be planned, implemented, studied for effectiveness, and continually improved by enacting changes to improve culture change reinforcement and 5S sustainably. According to the PDSA workbook from the State of Victoria Department of Health (2010), the PDSA cycle is an excellent model for continuous system improvement; furthermore, the workbook breaks down each phase of the PDSA cycle as follows: Plan Phase: The planning of the 5S improvement that answers, the who, what, when, why, and how of the initiative. Do Phase: The execution of the scheduled deliverables from the planning phase. Study Phase: The review phase of comparing where the 5S system was and where it is now since the planned improvement initiatives have been executed. Measurables are taken to determine if changes were beneficial, or if more changes are needed to meet intended plans. Act Phase: The moving forward phase to realize the gains from the cycle, determine opportunities that have risen from this initiative, and decide if the improvement cycle needs to be repeated or are new strategies apparent for improvement. The ADKAR reinforcement element employs five campaigns for reinforcing change: Celebration and Recognition, Rewards, Feedback from Employees, Audits and Performance Measurement Systems, Accountability Systems (Hiatt, 2006). To employ these reinforcement campaigns and continually improve these tactics, PDSA can provide the continuous improvement model for devising, implementing, measuring, and improving the five tactics of reinforcement that the 5S system needs for long term sustainability. Continuous quality improvement is a voyage, and the PDSA cycle provides the structure needed to verify the sustainability of 5S through recurring assessment, and prevention of disparities within the 5S system from its intentions (Quality Insights of Pennsylvania, 2011). Each PDSA cycle performed in the reinforcement element of ADKAR provides a learning experience that can be used for continually strengthening the 5S system, and sufficiently reacting to laboratory environment changes and new quality issues (Srivannaboon, 2009).

The White Hip Hop Fan :: Music Racial Race Papers

The White Hip Hop Fan Methodology In case you are not accustomed with the group Public Enemy, the subtitles names is a play of their album "It'll Take a Nation of Millions to Hold Us Back." Being not only a white hip hop fan, but a white kid trying to become a rapper, I have obviously been faced with the problem of society's non-acceptance of my type. I interviewed a friend of mine who I rap with quite often about his feelings on the subject of the white hip hop fan, and have long pondered it on my own. I read books and web sites recommended by friends and continue to search out more information on the subject. In this paper I look at the state of the white hip hop fan and of the white rapper, focusing mainly on the social and cultural impact, the way the white fan feels and is looked at by society. Description ON HIP HOP IN GENERAL: The term hip hop relates to four areas of urban culture: mcing, djing, break dancing, and graffiti art. Hip hop basically started in New York city. Who knows which of the four areas really came first, but the important thing is that they evolved together. Many of the graffiti artists were rappers who would tag their name or crew to get publicity. However, if one had to pick who really came first, I would say it was the DJs. The most important early DJs were Grandmaster Flash and Africa Bambaataa, who were hip hop kings of their respective parts of New York City. MCs began to show up in this context as people began to talk over the DJs scratching and they mostly talked about the DJ's skills and pumped up the crowd. Finally, break dancing was obviously started when people began dancing to the music. All four areas have grown up together and taken their own outside influences as well. Now that hip hop has been around for a few decades (it started back in the early 80s), it has gone thro ugh many phases, and is constantly evolving. Some of the earliest hip hoppers say that hip hop died in the 90s, but there are those purists in every musical genres who dislike its evolution for whatever reason, and they are not the majority. Today, hip hop comes in a wide variety from gangsta rap, to underground rap, to jazzrap fusion, to what I like to call pophop, and much more.

Salem Possessed: The Social Origins of Witchcraft Essay -- essays rese

Salem Possessed: The Social Origins of Witchcraft, Paul Boyer and Stephen Nissenbaum, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press copyright 1974. The purpose of this book was to examine the history and social life of Salem Village to try to figure out what was the cause of the events that occurred there. I believe that the authors achieved their objective at least they did to me. Boyer and Nissenbaum's explanation for the outbreak of witchcraft accusations in Salem hinges on an understanding of the economic, political and personal issues which divided village long before 1692. At bottom, geography and history divided Salem Village and Salem Town. Situated in the interior from the bustling mercantile town of Salem, Salem Village remained primarily an agricultural community. Boyer and Nissenba...

Why Western History Matters :: essays research papers

Critical Analysis for â€Å"Why Western History Matters† by Donald Kagan   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   â€Å"Why Western History Matters† is an essay adapted from a speech Donald Kagan delivered to the National Association of Scholars, and was reprinted in the December 28, 1994, issue of the Wall Street Journal. Throughout Kagan’s essay, he describes the essential need for the college course, Western History. He does so by examining older cultures and explaining why they were quintessential to the past and to our future development as a society. I strongly concur with Kagan’s standpoint of the necessity of history, and the realization of how exactly our flourishing society came about. History is a key constituent in determining who we are; for to determine who we are one must first know from whence they came. In the words of George Santayana, â€Å"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it†. Donald Kagan argues for the requisiteness of Western History by describing older cultures, and then explaining how these older cultures became a key influence in what our society has become today. He examines the ancient Greek, Christian, and English culture influences that helped form our country. Throughout his essay, his depth of historical research is quite evident. He uses historical research of past cultures to imply the necessity of knowing where we, as Americans, came from. This approach helps establish the author’s credibility, and makes his presentation more plausible. The first ancient civilization that Kagan highlights is the Greek. He writes of their republic city-states, and pioneering of a â€Å"political life come to be shared by a relatively large portion of people†. He uses the Greek culture as an influence of science and reason. â€Å"The Greeks exposed everything they perceived—natural, human and divine—to the searching examination of reason.† Finally he describes the Greek quest for virtue and morality. He uses these examples to show how similar our culture is to the Greek. Second, Kagan explains of the Christian influence on our society. With the controversial idea of Christianity, â€Å"Philosophy led to the powerful divisive quarrels about the nature of God and other theological questions†. The influence of Christianity established itself within great writers of American history, who helped shape our country. Such as John Locke, who influenced our country’s foundation with the idea of God given â€Å"natural rights†, life, liberty and property. All of which define our personal freedom today. Finally, he discusses the influence of the English Revolution.

Plunkitt of Tammany Hall

Summer School I can blame no one but myself for my need to attend summer school for this year. However: I would like to blame it on my Spanish teacher, my mother, my siblings, my dog ate the homework, anyone but Christopher L. Martin. Summer school was not in my game plan the first day of school last year. I entered my school, Lake Catholic HAS, with the calm surety and purpose of a bona-fide tenth grader, Vie been here before.My anxiety level was low but my expectations for the future year were high. There are times when I think that I remain overwhelmed in some way by the enormity of the campus; the numerous classrooms, by the tough rules that are actually enforced. Transitioning from a small Catholic parish school boasting an 8th grade graduating class of 34 students to a large campus of hundreds of students present a challenge to â€Å"fit-in† that I had never experienced. I began the August, 2011 school year anticipating the spectacular athletic and academically successfu l year ahead of me.I ever thought that such a hopeful day would end in humiliation a years end. You might ask what caused this major shift in my universe. I failed both semesters of Spanish II and had to retake the entire year during summer school at SST. Robert Williams in Euclid, OH. I will be honest and admit that prior to formulating thoughts to Jot down in preparation of writing this personal essay; I thought the most devastating result of having to attend summer school was that I was automatically ineligible to participate in football.I was not allowed to attend practice or to Join the am for the annual trip to the Edinburgh campus where players honed their skills and bonded as men. I now realize and accept the fact that my behavior placed a heavy financial burden on my families finances. Summer school is not cheap! . The cost of attending summer school hit our budget so hard that my 2011-2012 grades were not paid for until it was too late to pick up the summer reading assignm ents. I am therefore very grateful to have the option of writing this personal essay. Paying for summer school had our family without food and water.Not only did my having to attend summer school overwhelm our family budget, the time factor ruined any chances I might have had for summer employment. I had to wake up every morning to go to school and remain in that hot stuffy building for four hours a day, 5 days a week for 4 weeks. It may be difficult to believe, but there were times when our instructor would keep us in class for an extra hour or two. The requirements were so intense that I spent most of the long hot summer nights and week-ends stuck in the house completing homework assignments.Unfortunate as it was, I feel this experience has opened my eyes to my need to take personal responsibility for myself in all areas of my live including school. Writing this essay also makes me realize the unconditional love and faith my mother has in me in spite of what I did or didn't do. Ha rdship it placed on her as a divorced single parent and her ability to provide for me and my siblings. My athletic scholarship has been revoked because of this and still she works hard to keep me here so that I can get the best education available.She didn't even include caring for herself into the equation because she was focused on supporting me and my siblings. Yea, she stayed on me to the point of angry outbursts; however, I realize the reason for her persistence at keeping me focused is based on her love for me and her hopes for me to enjoy a bright future. It is also noted in my mind, that accurate, timely completion of class assignments is a precursor to life as a college student and as a functioning, contributing member of society. I am considering this summer school experience from beginning to end as a â€Å"lesson learned. â€Å"

Effects of Fast Food Essay

INTRODUCTION Junk food is typically defined as foods with little nutritional value that are high in calories, fat, sugar, salt, or caffeine. It is widely believed that the term was coined by Michael Jacobson, director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, in 1972. Common junk foods include salted snack foods, gum, candy, sweet desserts, fried fast food, and carbonated beverages. The convenience, price and predictability of fast food makes it a frequent meal choice for many people. However, as consumption of fast food has risen over the last three decades, so too have occurrences of several health issues and diseases related to fast food and unhealthy eating habits. Eaten regularly, fast food can put you at an increased risk for developing diabetes, heart disease or obesity. The fast food industry in India has evolved with the changing lifestyles of young Indian population. The sheer variety of gastronomic preferences across the regions has brought about different modules across the country. Many of the traditional dishes have adapted to suit the emerging fast food outlets. The basic adaption is to decrease the processing and serving time. HEALTH EFFECTS A study by Paul Johnson and Paul Kenny at the Scripps Research Institute (2008) suggested that junk food consumption alters brains activity in a manner similar to addictive drugs like cocaine or heroin. The increase of junk food is directly associated with the increase in obesity, heart disease, high blood pressure, certain cancers, tooth decay, and other diseases. Fast Food Contributes to Obesity Fast food is a major contributor to rising occurrences of obesity. Calorie-laden fast food meals can contain nearly a full day’s worth of calories and fat and, eaten regularly, can increase your chances of obesity. According to CBS News Health Watch, almost one-third of U.S children between the ages of 4 and 19 consume fast food which, depending on the regularity which with fast food is eaten, can cause a 6-pound weight increase per year. Fast Food increases Diabetes Along with obesity, consumption of fast food has been linked to an increased chance of developing Type 2 Diabetes. In Type 2 Diabetes, either your body is unable to regulate blood sugar with insulin, or is unable to produce insulin. Increased body fat, along with a high-sugar and high-carbohydrate diet, can increase your body’s resistance to insulin, which monitors your blood sugar levels. An article published by the US Department of Health and Human Services states that people who ate fast food two or more times per week were twice as likely to experience insulin resistance. Fast Food is High in Sodium Fast food is typically very high in sodium. A large order of fast food french fries can contain as much as 30% of your daily value of sodium. While important to consume in small amounts, a diet high in sodium can lead to high blood pressure, a potential precursor to heart disease. As excess sodium builds up in your bloodstream, your heart must work harder to pump blood successfully, which can cause hypertension and high blood pressure. Regularly consuming foods high in sodium can greatly increase your chances of developing high blood pressure. Fast Food is Low in Nutrients Many fast food are low in nutrients. Hamburgers served on white bread, french fries and other high-carbohydrate sides and fried or high-fat meats are common fast food menu items, and all lack important nutrients such as vitamins found in fresh produce, fiber found in whole grains and protein served without added fat. Foods which are high in sugar and carbohydrates but low in nutrients are also often less filling than healthier options, and can lead to overeating. Furthermore, non-nutritious fast food several times per week can impact your energy levels and mood, and may put you at risk for vitamin deficiency. Harmful Effects of Junk Food * The regular consumption of junk food is the leading factor in obesity and excess weight. * Obesity is second only to smoking as a cause of death in America. * 46% of Canadian adults are either overweight or obese, with obesity in children increasing three-fold over the past 2 decades. * Consumption of Aerated drinks containing sugar has been linked to weight gain and an increased risk for development of type 2 diabetes. * Studies have revealed that obese people have twice the rate of chronic health problems as people of normal weight. * Junk food diet is a major cause of heart diseases. * High cholesterol resulting from junk food puts undue strain on the liver, causing long-term damage to this essential organ. * Research has suggested that diets high in fat may also impair essential brain functions, like concentration and memory. The junk food facts about Aerated drinks alone are alarming. There is compelling evidence that regular consumption of Aerated drinks leads to Increased rates of: – * Bone fracture * Osteoporosis * Weight gain and obesity * Type II Diabetes * Kidney stones * Tooth decay and other dental problems ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I am deeply indebted to my Economics teacher, Mrs. Payal Mathur, without whose help this project would not have been possible. The success of this project depends largely on the encouragement and guidance provided by Mrs. Payal Mathur. I take this opportunity to express my gratitude to the people who have been instrumental in the successful completion of this project. I can’t thank them enough for their tremendous support and sparing their valuable time. I would like to thank the people of my colony, my friends and relatives who were my respondents and painstakingly filled the questionnaires. The guidance and support received from all my family members who contributed to this project, was vital for the success of the project. I am grateful for their constant support and help. Last but not the least, I also acknowledge the effort put in by my elder sister Miss Upasna Handa in compiling the project. BIBLIOGRAPHY INFORMATION: * www.google.com * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junk_food * http://facts.randomhistory.com/interesting-facts-about-junk-food.html * http://www.livestrong.com/article/497521-facts-about-the-dangers-of-eating-fast-food/ PICTURES: * www.google.com JUNK FOOD FACTS – CHILDREN * The junk food industry deliberately targets children as young as 2 in a bid to create brand preference and lifelong loyalty. * Advertisers question kids and tap into their play to create ads and products with guaranteed child-appeal. Fast food chains use the lure of free toys to get kids to persuade their parents to spend. A desirable toy can double or triple weekly sales of kids’ meals. And every child brings along at least one adult too. * Flavorings and colorings can cause asthma, rashes and hyperactivity. Many countries – but not the UK – ban them from children’s food. JUNK FOOD FACTS – AERATEDDRINKS * The metal can costs more than the ingredients, which are primarily water mixed with additives, sugar or sweetener, and caffeine. A can of cola contains 10 teaspoons of sugar. * Aerated drinks are aggressively marketed by fast food chains, because they are so profitable, at around 97% profit on the price per cup. The bigger the cup, the greater the profit. * In the US, average adult consumption of Aerated drinks is around 500 cans a year. * Twenty per cent of American under-2s are given Aerated drinks – laden with sugar and additives – every day. DISGUSTING JUNK FOOD FACTS ABOUT THE FOOD ON YOUR PLATE * Canned spaghetti A helping of carbohydrate, salt and sugar, with virtually no fibre, anyone? * Chicken nuggets Low cost nuggets are cheap because they contain as little as 16% pulped chicken, bulked out with water, chicken skin, proteins removed from bone, hide, or poultry feathers, mechanically retrieved meat; plus the ubiquitous sugar, additives and salt. They also contain bulking agents used to soak up the water that’s injected into chicken to increase the weight – and the profit. Minced meat can hid a multitude of revolting ‘extras’ : carcinogenic antibiotics, recycled cat food, and poultry mixed with beef proteins have all been found in chicken destined for the production line. * Chocolate muffin Ruinously high in sugar, and made with the big baddie of the junk food industry, partially hydrogenated vegetable oil which has zero nutritional value, and damages heart and arteries. * Fries Fat-packed and low in nutrients. May be coated with additives and salt. * Fruit yoghurts, ready-made sauces, fruit drinks, baby foods – and more†¦ Modified starches, along with colorings and flavorings, mimic the texture of fresh fruit and veg, so that manufacturers’ can use less of the real thing. They also mask rancid flavors’ and smells. * Milkshakes A simple-sounding ingredient, like ‘artificial strawberry flavor’ can in itself contain around 50 chemicals. And not one single strawberry. What’s in some of that Junk Food? * One teaspoon of sugar is extracted from a stalk of sugarcane one metre in length! * A super-sized order of McDonald’s fries contains 610 calories and 29 grams of fat. * A king-sized order of Burger King’s fries packs 590 calories and 30 grams of fat. * A king-sized Burger King meal, (Double Whopper with cheese, large fries and large drink) contains 1,800 calories (mostly derived from fat and refined sugar). To ‘burn’ these calories would take nearly 6 hours of cycling (at 20 miles per hour). Junk Food Advertising * The food industry spends over $33 billion per year in the US alone to advertise food products that could be classified as junk food. * The majority of food advertising during children’s television programming is for sweetened cereals, Aerated drinks, candy, processed snacks and fast foods. * The average American child sees around 20,000 ads a year for junk food. * Over 90% of American children eat at McDonald’s at least once per month. * American teenagers drink an average of 760 can of soda pop per year (with boys drinking about 25% more than girls). * The average American of any age drinks over 500 cans of Aerated drinks per year. * Nearly 20% of children under 2 years of age are given Aerated drinks every day in America! * The average person today consumes more sugar in two weeks than a person a century ago would have eaten in a whole year. That’s a junk food fact!

Strategic Hrm

Cornell University ILR School [email  protected] CAHRS Working Paper Series Center for Advanced Human Resource Studies (CAHRS) 4-1-2006 Strategic Management and HRM Mathew R. Allen Patrick M. Wright Cornell University Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons. ilr. cornell. edu/cahrswp This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Center for Advanced Human Resource Studies (CAHRS) at [email  protected] It has been accepted for inclusion in CAHRS Working Paper Series by an authorized administrator of [email  protected]For more information, please contact [email  protected] edu. Strategic Management and HRM Abstract [Excerpt] The purpose of this chapter is to discuss this intersection between Strategic Management and HRM, what we know, and future directions for SHRM research. We will begin by briefly discussing the concept of strategy and the popularization of the resource-based view (RBV) of the firm. Next we will address its role in creating the link between HRM and Strategic Management including key questions that the RBV has raised in relation to SHRM.We will then examine the current state of affairs in SHRM; the progress made, and key questions and concerns occupying the attention of SHRM researchers. Finally, we will conclude with our views on future directions for SHRM research. Keywords CAHRS, ILR, center, human resource, studies, advanced, link, information technology, business partner, strategic role, competencies, HR, HRM, HR professionals, management Comments Suggested Citation Allen, M. R. & Wright, P. M. (2006). Strategic management and HRM (CAHRS Working Paper #06-04).Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Center for Advanced Human Resource Studies. http://digitalcommons. ilr. cornell. edu/cahrswp/404/ This article is available at [email  protected]: http://digitalcommons. ilr. cornell. edu/cahrswp/404 CAHRS at Cornell University 187 Ives Hall Ithaca, NY 14853-3901 USA T el. 607 255-9358 www. ilr. cornell. edu/CAHRS WORKING PAPER SERIES Strategic Management and HRM Mathew R. Allen Patrick M. Wright Working Paper 06 – 04 Strategic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04Strategic Management and HRM Mathew R. Allen Patrick M. Wright Department of Human Resource Studies School of Industrial and Labor Relations Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853-3901 April 2006 http://www. ilr. cornell. edu/cahrs This paper has not undergone formal review or approval of the faculty of the ILR School. It is intended to make results of Center research available to others interested in preliminary form to encourage discussion and suggestions. Most (if not all) of the CAHRS Working Papers are available for reading at the Catherwood Library.For information on what’s available link to the Cornell Library Catalog: http://catalog. library. cornell. edu if you wish. Page 2 of 26 Strategic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04 Abstract Page 3 of 26 Strategic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04 Strategic Management and HRM Introduction It has been said that the most important assets of any business walk out the door at the end of each day. Indeed, people and the management of people are increasingly seen as key elements of competitive advantage (Boxall & Purcell, 2003; Pfeffer, 1998; Gratton, Hailey & Truss, 2000).Spurred on by increasing competition, fast paced technological change, globalization and other factors, businesses are seeking to understand how one of the last truly competitive resources, their human resources, can be managed for competitive advantage. This idea that the human resources of a firm can play a strategic role in the success of an organization has led to the formation of a field of research often referred to as strategic human resource management (SHRM).This relatively young field represents an intersection of the strategic management and human resource management (HRM) literatures (Boxall, 1998; Boxall and Purcell, 2000). Wright and M cMahan (1992) defined strategic human resource management as â€Å"the pattern of planned human resource deployments and activities intended to enable the firm to achieve its goals† (1992, p. 298). The purpose of this chapter is to discuss this intersection between Strategic Management and HRM, what we know, and future directions for SHRM research.We will begin by briefly discussing the concept of strategy and the popularization of the resource-based view (RBV) of the firm. Next we will address its role in creating the link between HRM and Strategic Management including key questions that the RBV has raised in relation to SHRM. We will then examine the current state of affairs in SHRM; the progress made, and key questions and concerns occupying the attention of SHRM researchers. Finally, we will conclude with our views on future directions for SHRM research. Strategy And The Resource-Based View Of The FirmThe field of strategy focuses on how firms can position themselves to c ompete, and its popularity began increasing exponentially in the mid 1980s with two books. First, Peters & Page 4 of 26 Strategic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04 Waterman’s (1982) In Search of Excellence provided a practitioner-oriented analysis of excellent companies and the common threads that united them. However, Porter’s (1980) Competitive Strategy presented a more academically based analysis of strategy, but in a way that practitioners/executives quickly gravitated toward.This Industrial/Organization Economicsbased analysis primarily focused on industry characteristics, in particular the five forces of barriers to entry, power of buyers, power of suppliers, substitutes, and competitive rivalry as the determinants of industry profitability. While this analysis did propose four generic strategies (cost, differentiation, focus, and ‘stuck in the middle’), the bulk of the analysis focused on external factors that determined company profitability. This f ramework seemed to dominate strategic management thinking of the early 1980s.However, with the advent of the resource-based view of the firm (Barney, 1991; Wernerfelt, 1980), strategic management research moved to a more internal focus. Rather than simply developing competitive strategies to address the environment, the resource-based view suggested that firms should look inward to their resources, both physical and intellectual, for sources of competitive advantage. Though others had addressed the concept of the RBV previously, Barney (1991) specifically explicated how firm resources contribute to the sustained competitive advantage of the firm.He suggested that resources that are valuable, rare, inimitable and non-substitutable will lead to competitive advantage. Value in this context is defined as resources either exploiting opportunities or neutralizing threats to the organization and rarity is defined as being a resource that is not currently available to a large number of the organization’s current or future competitors (Barney, 1991). Inimitability refers to the fact it is difficult for other firms to copy or otherwise reproduce the resources for their own use.Finally, non-substitutability means that other resources cannot be used by competitors in order to replicate the benefit (Barney 1991). When all four of these conditions are met, it is said that the firm or organization possess resources which can potentially lead to a sustained competitive advantage over time. Page 5 of 26 Strategic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04 The resource-based view has become almost the assumed paradigm within strategic management research (Barney and Wright, 2001).It has been the basic theoretical foundation from which much of the current strategic management research regarding knowledge-based views of the firm (Grant, 1996), human capital (Hitt et al. , 2001), and dynamic capabilities (Teece, Pisano, & Schuen, 1997) are derived. In fact, Priem and Butler (2001) ma pped RBV studies against eighteen strategy research topics, demonstrating the breadth of its diffusion within the strategic management domain.More importantly from the standpoint of this chapter, the resource-based view has become the guiding paradigm on which virtually all strategic HRM research is based (Wright, Dunford, & Snell, 2001). In spite of the wide acceptance of the RBV, it is not without criticism. Priem and Butler, (2001a, b) have leveled the most cogent critique to date suggesting that the RBV does not truly constitute a theory. Their argument focuses primarily on two basic issues. First, they suggest that the RBV is basically tautological in its definition of key constructs.They note that Barney’s statement that â€Å"if a firm’s valuable resources are absolutely unique among a set of competing and potentially competing firms, those resources will generate at least a competitive advantage (Barney, 2001: 102)† essentially requires definitional depe ndence. In other words, without definitional dependence (i. e. â€Å"valuable resources†) the diametrical statement – that unique firms possess competitive advantages – does not logically follow. Their second major criticism of the RBV as a â€Å"theory† focuses on the inability to test it (Priem & Butler, 2001b). They note he necessity condition of â€Å"falsifiability† for a theory. In other words, in order for a set of stated relationships to constitute a theory, the relationships must be able to be measured and tested in a way that allows for the theory to be found to be false. This relates directly to the tautology criticism, but brings the debate into the empirical realm. In spite of these criticisms, even the critics agree that the impact of the RBV on strategic management research has been significant and that the effort to focus on the internal aspects of the organization in explaining competitive advantage has been a useful one (Preim & B utler,Page 6 of 26 Strategic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04 2001b). While the debate might continue as to the theoretical implications of the RBV for strategic management research, it is clear that it has made a significant contribution to Strategic Management and, more specifically, SHRM research (Wright, Dunford & Snell, 2001). A Brief History Of Strategic HRM Wright and McMahan’s (1992) definition of strategic human resource management illustrates that the major focus of the field should be on aligning HR with firm strategies.Jim Walker’s (1980) classic book, Human Resource Planning, was one of the first to directly suggest considering a firm’s business strategy when developing a human resource plan. Devanna, Fombrum, and Tichy’s (1981) article, â€Å"Human Resources Management: a Strategic Perspective†, added to the foundation. These attempts tended to take an existing strategy typology (e. g. Miles and Snow’s (1978) prospectors, analy zers and defenders) and delineate the kinds of HRM practices that should be associated with each strategy. These attempts to tie HRM to strategy have been referred to as â€Å"vertical alignment† (Wright & McMahan, 1992).Beer, Spector, Lawrence, Mills and Walton (1984) introduced an alternative to the individual HR sub-function framework for HR strategy. They argued that viewing HRM as separate HR sub-functions was a product of the historical development of HRM and current views of HR departments. They proposed a more generalist approach to viewing HRM with the focus on the entire HR system rather than single HR practices. This led to a focus on how the different HR sub-functions could be aligned and work together to accomplish the goals of HRM and a more macro view of HRM as whole rather than individual functions.This alignment of HR functions with each other is often referred to as â€Å"horizontal alignment† (see this Handbook, chapter 19. ) The combination of both vertical and horizontal alignment was a significant step in explaining how HRM could contribute to the accomplishment of strategic goals. However, given the external focus of the strategic management literature at that time, HR was seen to play only a secondary role in the accomplishment of strategy with an emphasis on the role that HRM Page 7 of 26 Strategic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04 layed in strategy implementation, but not strategy formulation. Lengnick-Hall and LengnickHall (1988) stated â€Å"strategic human resource management models emphasize implementation over strategy formulation. Human resources are considered means, not part of generating or selecting strategic objectives. Rarely are human resources seen as a strategic capacity from which competitive choices should be derived† (1988, p. 456). A shift in strategic management thinking would be required to change that perception and open the door for further development of the SHRM literature.The diffusion of the resource-based view into the Strategic HRM literature spurred this paradigmatic shift in the view of the link between strategy and HRM. Because the resourcebased view proposes that firm competitive advantage comes from the internal resources that it possesses (Wernerfelt, 1984; Barney, 1991), the RBV provided a legitimate foundation upon which HRM researchers could argue that people and the human resources of a firm could in fact contribute to firm-level performance and influence strategy formulation.This resulted in a number of efforts to conceptually or theoretically tie strategic HRM to the resource-based view. For instance, Wright, McMahan, and McWilliams (1994) suggested that while HR practices might be easily imitated, the human capital pool of an organization might constitute a source of sustainable competitive advantage. Lado and Wilson (1994) argued that HR practices combined into an overall HR system can be valuable, unique, and difficult to imitate, thus constituting a resource meeting the conditions necessary for sustained competitive advantage.Boxall (1996, 1998) proposed a distinction between human resource advantage (advantage stemming from a superior human capital pool) and organizational process advantage (advantage stemming from superior processes for managing human capital). The resource-based view also provided the theoretical rationale for empirical studies of how HR practices might impact firm success. One of the early empirical studies of this relationship was carried out by Arthur (1994). Using a sample of steel mini-mills, he found that a specific set of HR practices was significantly related to firm performance in the form of lower Page 8 of 26Strategic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04 scrap rates and lower turnover. Huselid (1995), in his landmark study, demonstrated that the use of a set of 13 HRM practices representing a ‘high-performance work system’ was significantly and positively related to lower turnover, and higher profits, sales, and market value for the firms studied. In a similar study, MacDuffie (1995), using data from automobile manufacturing plants, demonstrated that different bundles of HR practices led to higher performance, furthering the argument that the integrated HR system, rather than individual HR practices, leads to higher performance.Delery and Doty (1996) similarly demonstrated the impact of HR practices on firm performance among a sample of banks. This vein of research quickly expanded in the U. S. (e. g. , Batt, 1999; Huselid, Jackson, & Schuler, 1996; Youndt, Snell, Dean, & Lepak,, 1996), the U. K. (e. g. , Brewster, 1999; Guest, 1997; Guest, Michie, Conway, & Sheehan, 2003; Tyson, 1997), elsewhere in Europe (e. g. , d’Arcimoles, 1997; Lahteenmaki, Story, & Vanhala, 1998; Rodriguez & Ventura, 2003) and Asia (e. g. Bae & Lawler, 2000; Lee & Chee, 1996; Lee & Miller, 1999), as well as in multinational corporations operating in multiple international environment s (Brewster, Sparrow, and Harris, 2000). In sum, the RBV, with its focus on the internal resources possessed by a firm, has given the field a theoretical understanding of why human resources systems might lead to sustainable competitive advantage and provided the spark to generate empirical research in this vein (Guest, 2001; Paauwe & Boselie, 2005; , Wright et al, 2005). Key Questions Raised By The Application Of RBV To SHRMIn spite of the significant amount of research demonstrating a link between HRM practices and firm performance, there are several key questions regarding the RBV and its implications for SHRM research that remain unanswered. First, there is some question as to whether current research on HRM and performance is truly testing the RBV. Second, there is still a general lack of understanding around the concept of fit, and its role in the link between strategy and HRM. Third, there are still unanswered questions regarding HRM and whether orPage 9 of 26 Strategic Manag ement and HRM CAHRS WP06-04 not HRM defined as systems of HR practices truly constitutes a resource under the conditions outlined by Barney (1991) and, specifically, whether those resources are truly sustainable over time. Finally, there are several measurement and methodological issues that, while not within the direct scope of this chapter, are worth mentioning as they are pertinent to our discussion of this intersection between Strategic Management and HRM research. Testing of the RBV within SHRMWhile the SHRM research just discussed has used the RBV as a basis for the assertion that HRM contributes to performance, it has not actually tested the theory that was presented in Barney’s (1991) article (Wright, Dunford & Snell, 2001). Most of this research has taken a similar view on how HR practices can lead to firm performance. The model generally argues that HRM in the form of HR practices directly impacts the employees either by increasing human capital or motivation or bot h. This in turn will have an impact on operational outcomes such as quality, customer service, turnover or other operational level outcomes.These operational outcomes will in turn impact firm-level outcomes such as financial performance in the form of revenues, profits or other firm-level measures of performance (Dyer, 1984). In a similar vein, Wright Dunford and Snell, (2001) point out that there are three important components of HRM that constitute a resource for the firm that are influenced by the HR practices or HR system. First, there is the human capital pool comprised of the stock of employee knowledge, skills, motivation and behaviors.HR practices can help build the knowledge and skill base as well as elicit relevant behavior. Second, there is the flow of human capital through the firm. This reflects the movement of people (with their individual knowledge, skills and abilities) as well as knowledge itself. HR practices can certainly influence the movement of people. However, more importantly, the types of reward systems, culture, and other aspects of HRM influence the extent to which employees are willing to create, share, and apply knowledge internally. Page 10 of 26 Strategic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04Third, the dynamic processes through which organizations change and/or renew themselves constitute the third area illustrating the link between HRM and the resource-based view of the firm. HR practices are the primary levers through which the firm can change the pool of human capital as well as attempt to change the employee behaviors that lead to organizational success. There appears to be a general consensus among SHRM researchers around the general model of the HR to performance relationship and the role of HR practices, the human capital pool, and employee motivation and behaviors as discussed by Dyer (1984) and others.The implications of this for RBV and SHRM research is that while separate components of the full HRM to performance model have been tested such as HR practices (Huselid, 1995; McDuffie, 1995) and human capital (Richard, 2001; Wright, McMahan & Smart, 1995), a full test of the causal model through which HRM impacts performance has not (Wright, Gardner, Moynihan, & Allen, 2005; Wright, Dunford & Snell, 2001; Boxall, 1998). Current research has established an empirical relationship between HR practices and firm performance, but more remains to be done.By testing the full model, including the additional components of the human capital pool and employee relationships and behaviors, a more complete test of the underlying assumptions of the RBV could be established, thus adding credibility to the theoretical model of the relationship between HRM and performance. Fit and the Resource-based View of the Firm In the Priem and Butler (2001) critique of the RBV, one of the points brought up as a theoretical weakness of the RBV is lack of definition around the boundaries or contexts in which it will hold.They point out that â€Å"relative to other strategy theories †¦ little effort to establish the appropriate contexts for the RBV has been apparent† (2001 p. 32). The notion of context has been an important issue in the study of SHRM (Delery & Doty, 1996, Boxall & Purcell, 2000). Most often referred to as contingencies (or the idea of fit), contextual arguments center on the Page 11 of 26 Strategic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04 idea that the role that HRM plays in firm performance is contingent on some other variable.We break our discussion of fit into the role of human capital and HR practices. Human Capital and Fit. The most often cited perspective for explaining contingency relationships in SHRM is the behavioral perspective (Jackson, Schuler & Rivero, 1989) which posits that different firm strategies (other contingencies could be inserted as well) require different kinds of behaviors from employees. Consequently, the success of these strategies is dependent at least in part on th e ability of the firm to elicit these behaviors from its employees (Cappelli & Singh, 1992; Wright & Snell, 1998).Going back to the distinction between human capital skills and employee behavior, Wright and Snell (1999) noted that skills and abilities tend to be necessary, but not sufficient conditions for employee behavior. Consequently, any fit to firm strategy must first consider the kinds of employee behavior (e. g. , experimentation and discovery) required to successfully execute the strategy (e. g. , focused on offering innovative products), and the kinds of skills necessary to exhibit those behaviors (e. g. , scientific knowledge).Obviously, the workforce at Nordstrom’s (an upscale retailer) is quite different from the workforce at Wal-Mart (a discount retailer). Thus, the resource-based application to SHRM requires focusing on a fit between the skills and behaviors of employees that are best suited to the firm’s strategy (Wright et al. 1995). While this idea of fit focuses on across-firm variance in the workforce, Lepak and Snell (1999) developed a framework that simultaneously addresses variation across firms and variations in HR systems within firms (see this Handbook, chapter 11).Their model of ‘human resource architecture’ posits that the skills of individuals or jobs within a firm can be placed along two dimensions: value (to the firm’s strategy) and uniqueness. Their framework demonstrates how different jobs within firms may need to be managed differently, but it also helps to explain differences across firms. For instance, within Wal-Mart, those in charge of logistics have extremely valuable and unique skills, much more so than the average sales Page 12 of 26 Strategic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04 associate.On the other hand, at Nordstrom’s, because customer service is important, sales associate skills are more critical to the strategy than those of the logistics employees. HR Practices and Fit. The t heoretical assumption that the skills and behaviors of employees must fit the strategic needs of the firm in order for the workforce to be a source of competitive advantage leads to the exploration of how HR practices might also need to achieve some form of fit. With regard to vertical fit, as noted previously, business strategies require different skills and behaviors from employees.Because HR practices are generally the levers through which the firm manages these different skills and behaviors, one would expect to see different practices associated with different strategies. For instance, one would expect that firms focused on low cost might not pay the same level of wages and benefits as firms focused on innovation or customer service. Horizontal fit refers to a fit between HR practices to ensure that the individual HR practices are set up in such a way that they support each other (Boxall & Purcell, 2003; Baird & Meshoulam, 1988, Delery, 1998).An example of this would be a selec tion process that focuses on finding team players and a compensation system that focuses on team-based rewards. Theoretically, the rationale for horizontal fit suggests that (a) complementary bundles of HR practices can be redundantly reinforcing the development of certain skills and behaviors resulting in a higher likelihood that they will occur and (b) conflicting practices can send mixed signals to employees regarding necessary skills and behaviors that reduce the probability that they will be exhibited (Becker & Huselid, 1998).There appears to be some agreement in the literature that both types of fit are necessary for optimal impact of HRM on performance (Baird & Meshoulam, 1988; Delery, 1998; Delery & Doty, 1996; Boxall & Purcell, 2003), but not necessarily empirical support for these types of fit (see this Handbook, chapter 27; Wright & Sherman, 1999). Potential Pitfalls of Fit. The idea of fit, whether it be vertical or horizontal, raises two important questions for SHRM res earchers. The first question focuses on empirical support forPage 13 of 26 Strategic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04 the idea of fit. Second, even if fit has positive consequences in the short term, does fitting HRM practices with strategy or other contingent variables universally lead to positive results? That is, are there negative implications of fit? As previously discussed, numerous researchers have argued for fitting HRM to contingent variables. However, the efficacy of fit has not received much empirical support (Paauwe, 2004; Wright & Sherman, 1999).Huselid’s (1995) landmark study sought to test the fit hypothesis using a variety of conceptualizations of fit, yet found little support. Similarly, Delery and Doty (1996) only found limited support across a number of fit tests. The lack of empirical support may largely be due to focusing only on a fit between generic HRM practices and strategy, rather than the outcomes, or products (Wright, 1998) of the HRM practices (sk ills, behaviors, etc. ). Thus, it seems that it may be too early to draw any definite conclusions about the validity of the fit hypothesis.However, while fit between HRM practices and various contingency variables might enhance the ability of HRM to contribute to firm performance, there is also the possibility that a tight fit between HRM and strategy may inhibit the ability of the firm to remain flexible enough to adapt to changing circumstances. Firms are increasingly required to adapt to environments that are constantly changing, both within and outside the firm. A tight fit may appear to be desirable but during times of transition and/or change a lack of fit might make adaptation and change more efficient (Lengnick-Hall, Lengnick-Hall, 1988).Wright and Snell (1998) developed a framework in which HRM contributes to fit and flexibility simultaneously without conflict between the two, but this framework has yet to be tested and the question remains as to when and where fit might be more or less appropriate. The second question raised by contextual issues surrounding SHRM and the idea of fit is related to the efficacy of fit. Regardless of whether or not fit can have a positive effect on organizational outcomes, there is still some question as to whether or not true fit with key contingencies is feasible.Large organizations operate in complex environments, often across Page 14 of 26 Strategic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04 multiple products, industries and geographies. This complexity leads to questions regarding the ability of the firm to fit HRM practices to all of these diverse and complex circumstances (Boxall & Purcell, 2003). In addition, Boxall and Purcell, (2003) argue that there are competing ideals within a business that require trade-offs in fit.They describe fit as â€Å"a process that involves some tension among competing objectives in management and inevitably implies tensions among competing interests† (2003, p. 188). A simple example o f these tensions can be seen in attempting to fit a strategy of commitment to employees with a hostile or extremely competitive operating environment. A firm with a strategic commitment to the well-being of employees operating in an economic downturn or time of increased competition may be forced to make choices between commitment to employees and a need for estructuring, layoffs or other non-friendly actions toward employees in order to stay solvent. In these situations, compromises will have to be made on either the fit with the strategy or the fit with the environment or both, raising the question again as to whether or not a true fit with contingencies is feasible. These questions regarding the ability to achieve fit and the desirability of achieving fit do not diminish the importance of understanding contextual issues in SHRM research.Understanding the contextual issues surrounding HRM and its impact on performance remains critical. In spite of the interest in the role of conte xtual issues and fit in SHRM, findings in support of contingency relationships have been mixed (Wright & Sherman, 1999). Much of this criticism could be due to ineffective methods used in the measurement of HRM or the contingency and performance variables studied or that the correct contingencies have not yet been studied (Becker & Gerhart, 1996, Rogers & Wright, 1998; Wright & Sherman, 1999).In addition, Boxall and Purcell (2000) have argued that more complex and comprehensive models of contingency relationships are needed in order to understand the impact of context on the HRM to performance relationship. Regardless of the reasoning, it is clear that the impact of context on this important relationship is not yet completely understood and more research is Page 15 of 26 Strategic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04 needed to understand the role of context, as well as questions surrounding models of fit in SHRM research.HRM Practices and Sustainable Competitive Advantage Another issue that has been raised by the RBV and its application to SHRM research is the sustainability of HRM as a competitive advantage. Whether one focuses on bundles of HR practices as an HR system, the human capital pool or employee relationships and behaviors, there remains the question as to whether HRM as a resource meets the inimitability and nonsubstitutability conditions that are required in the RBV for sustained competitive advantage (Barney, 1991).According to Barney (1991), there are three general reasons why firm resources would be difficult to imitate: the resources are created and formed under unique historical conditions, the resources are causally ambiguous, or the resources are socially complex. Labeled as path dependency by Becker and Gerhart (1996), the unique historical conditions under which HRM is formed in individual firms may make its understanding and replication extremely difficult, if not impossible.HR systems are developed over time and the complex history involved in their development makes them difficult to replicate. The development and implementation of a single HR practice such as a variable pay system takes place over time including time to solicit management input and buy-in, work out discrepancies, and align the practice with current strategies as well as firm culture and needs. The end result is a practice that reflects the philosophies and culture of the firm and its management, created to solve the specific needs of the company.Compound that single HR practice with a whole system of practices each with its own history and evolution specific to a particular firm, its philosophies and current situation and you have an HR system that cannot be bought or easily replicated without a significant investment both of time and financial resources. Causal ambiguity implies that the exact manner in which human resource management contributes to the competitive advantage of the firm is either unknown or sufficiently ambiguous Page 16 of 26 Stra tegic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04 so as to be difficult or impossible to imitate.According to Becker and Gerhart (1996), the ability to replicate a successful HR system would require an understanding of how all of the elements of this complex system interact and in turn impact the performance of an organization. Given the previous discussion of the basic HRM to performance model and the manner in which it is expected that HRM contributes to firm performance, it is difficult to imagine how the intricate interplay among various HR practices, human capital and employee behaviors, employee outcomes, operational outcomes and firm-level outcomes could be understood by a competitor in a meaningful way.Finally, Barney (1991) points out that competitors will find it difficult to replicate a competitive advantage based on complex social phenomena. Given the nature of HRM and its direct relation to employees, almost every aspect of the HR system, the human capital and especially the emplo yee behavior and relationships has a social component.The way in which HR practices are communicated and implemented among different departments and parts of the organization is influenced by the various social relationships involved; top management to general managers, general managers to department heads or managers and those managers to employees as well as interactions between departments and employees. The complexity of the social relationships in the case of HRM makes it difficult for competitors to imitate it. Finally, for a resource to constitute a source of sustainable competitive advantage it must be non-substitutable.This implies that competitors should not be able to use a different set of resources in order to achieve similar results (Barney, 1991). This concept has not yet been tested, but could provide for interesting research in the area of contextual factors and SHRM. If, in fact, it is found that a particular set of HR practices is positively related to performance in a given context, then, a follow-on question to that which would get at the substitutability question might be whether or not there is another set of HR practices for which the results are similar.This could lead to discussions about strategic configurations of HR Page 17 of 26 Strategic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04 practices rather than universal high-performance work systems that have dominated past research (Delery & Doty, 1996). Regardless of whether there is one or many ways to achieve similar results in different contextual situations, the testing of these possibilities would lead to an increased understanding of the relationship between the RBV and SHRM research and the sustainability of HRM as a strategic resource.Measurement and Methodological Issues In addition to key questions surrounding the RBV and SHRM research, there are also several measurement and methodological issues which have hindered our ability to better understand the relationship between strategy and HRM. Measurement issues relating to the HRM, competitive advantage and key control variables have made the comparison of results across studies and interpretation of findings difficult (Rogers & Wright, 1998; Dyer & Reeves, 1995).In addition, there are questions around the appropriate level of analysis within the firm at which to test these relationships as well as issues related to the mixing of variables measured at different levels of analysis (Rogers & Wright 1998, Becker & Gerhart, 1996). Finally, as was pointed out, the majority of research to date has focused on the relationship between HR systems and firm-level performance and, while the findings indicate a positive relationship, there is insufficient evidence at this point to be able to infer that the relationship is causal (Wright et al. , 2005).A full discussion of these issues is beyond the scope of this chapter and a more thorough discussion may be found in other chapters in this text (see particularly chapters 26 and 2 7), but it is important to note in discussing key questions in SHRM that they exist and need to be addressed or at least considered in future research. Future Directions Research on SHRM management over the past decade has made significant progress in developing our understanding of the role that HRM plays in firm performance. The field now has a significant foundation upon which to build future research.In our opinion, future research should focus on both answering key questions that remain in understanding the relationship Page 18 of 26 Strategic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04 between HRM and performance and by expanding or broadening what is considered SHRM. Such extension would encompass both other resources and other theories currently studied in strategic management research. Key Unanswered Questions The previous portion of the chapter pointed out several key questions that have been raised as a result of the application of the RBV to SHRM research that are not yet answered. First, research that directly tests the concepts outlined in the RBV has not been done (Priem & Butler, 2001). Thus future research should focus on testing the concepts of the RBV by testing the full model through which HRM leads to competitive advantage or firm performance. Do HR practices impact the human capital pool and the relationships and behaviors of the employees and do those outcomes in turn impact both operational and firm-level performance? Answering these questions by testing the full causal model would be a significant contribution to our understanding of the strategic nature of HRM.In essence, this reflects the â€Å"black box process† that Priem and Butler (2001) argued must be addressed by RBV theorists and researchers. Second, future research should focus on understanding the contextual questions surrounding the HRM to performance relationship. Mixed results in past contextual research is not reason enough to abandon the question all together. It is highly l ikely that HRM matters more or less in certain situations or under certain conditions. Efforts should be made to continue to test established models of HRM in new and unique situations.In addition, more thorough tests of moderating variables in the HRM to performance relationship should be tested. Given the complexity involved in the measurement and testing of these relationships and the mixed results of past research in this area it is likely that researchers will need to seek out contexts with reduced complexity such as departments within large organizations or small businesses where reduced complexity will provide more meaningful measures of potential moderating variables and more meaningful tests of the moderating relationships can be performed. Page 19 of 26 Strategic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04Another step that needs to be taken in understanding the role of context in the HRM to performance relationship is to move away from universal-type models of HRM such as highperform ance work systems and high-involvement work systems and develop and test different configurations of HR practices that might apply to specific situations. In doing this, researchers will be able to better understand the specific bundles or HR practices that are applicable or fit with different types of organizations or situations, thus making a significant contribution to our understanding of the types of HRM that will matter in a given situation.Expanding the Role of SHRM Future research in SHRM should focus on conceptually expanding what is considered to be the role of SHRM. Historically, SHRM has been viewed as the interface between HRM and strategic management (Boxall, 1996) with the focus of much research being on understanding how the HRM function (namely HRM practices) can be strategically aligned so as to contribute directly to competitive advantage.This implies a concern with how HR practices can contribute to strategy implementation without addressing the larger question o f how HRM can contribute or play a role in strategy formulation (Lengnick-Hall & Lengnick-Hall, 1988). Wright et. al. (2001) argued that it is the human capital (the knowledge skills and abilities of the human resources) as well as the relationships and motivation of the employees that leads to competitive advantage. The purpose of HR practices is to develop or acquire this human capital and influence the relationships and behaviors of the employees so that they can contribute to the strategic goals of the irm. Future research should examine human capital and the social interactions and motivations of the human element within a firm (Snell, Shadur, & Wright, 2002), not only as independent variables but also as mediating and dependent variables. A focus in this area will bring the field more in line with contemporary views in strategic management. Research in this area will also help us to get beyond questions regarding how HR practices can facilitate the strategic goals of a firm an d begin to understand how organizations can understand the resources found in their human element and use that Page 20 of 26Strategic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04 understanding to influence or even drive their decisions about their strategic direction. For instance, IBM’s strong HR processes/competencies led it into the business of offering outsourced HR services. This was an internal resource that was extended into a new product line, and illustrates how an understanding of such resources can influence strategic direction. Along these same lines, another way to break away from this notion of HRM as a facilitator of the strategic direction of the firm is by focusing on some of the resources currently salient to strategic management researchers.In their review of the RBV and SHRM relationship, Wright, Dunford and Snell, (2001) argue that the RBV created a link between HRM and strategic management research and that as a result of this link the two fields were converging. Be cause of this convergence, the potential impact of SHRM research on mainstream strategy issues is tremendous. Increasingly, strategy researchers are focusing on knowledge and knowledge-based resources (Argote, & Ingram, 2000; Grant, 1996;), human capital (Hitt et al. 001), social capital (Inkpen & Tsang, 2005; McFadyen, Ann, & Albert, 2004), capabilities (Dutta, Narasimhan, & Rajiv, 2005), and dynamic capabilities (Teece, Pisano, & Schuen, 1997), as critical resources that lead to organizational success. While HRM practices strongly influence these resources, the SHRM literature seems almost devoid of empirical attention to them. Only recently have researchers began to explore these issues (Kinnie, Swart, & Purcell, 2005; Thompson & Heron, 2005). Additional research in these areas would provide tremendous synergy between HRM and strategy.In addition, alternative theories such as ‘learning organizations’ (Fiol & Lyles, 1985; Fisher & White, 2000), real options theory (Mc Grath, 1997; Trigeorgis, 1996) and institutional theory (Meyer & Rowan, 1977) can be combined with SHRM research to enhance our understanding of the strategic nature of HRM. For instance, Bhattacharya and Wright (2005) showed how real options theory can be applied to understanding flexibility in SHRM. In addition, Paauwe and Boselie (Chapter 9) provide a detailed analysis of how institutional theory can better inform SHRM research. The use of these in addressing questions in SHRM research willPage 21 of 26 Strategic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04 provide new lenses through which researchers are able to view the HRM to performance relationship, potentially providing new insights and ideas that will further our understanding of SHRM. Conclusion While the field of strategic HRM is relatively young, significant progress has been made at a rapid pace. Researchers have provided great theoretical and empirical advancements in a period of just over 25 years. Much of this progress is the r esult of the RBV and its emphasis on the internal resources of the firm as a source of sustainable competitive advantage.The RBV and its application to SHRM research created an important link between strategic management and HRM research. Its application has been followed by a significant amount of research using the RBV as a basis for assertions about the strategic nature of HRM. However, the link between HRM and strategic management can be strengthened by breaking away from the focus on HR practices. Other key resources currently being researched in strategic management have the potential to be directly influenced by HRM, but their coverage by SHRM researchers has been minimal, leaving a tremendous opportunity for future research in this area.In addition to this, new theories relevant to strategic management have yet to be combined with SHRM research, leaving potential for additional contributions to our understanding of the intersection between strategic management and HRM. Page 22 of 26 Strategic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04 References Argote, L. , Ingram, P. , Levine, J. M. , & Moreland, R. L. (2000). Knowledge transfer in organizations: Learning from the experience of others. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 1-8. Arthur, J. B. (1994). Effects of human resource systems on manufacturing performance and turnover.Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 670. Bae, J. , & Lawler, J. J. (2000). Organizational and HRM strategies in Krea: Impact on firm performance in an emerging economy. Academy of Management Journal, 43(3), 502. Baird, L. , & Meshoulam, I. (1988). Managing two fits of strategic human resource management. Academy of Management Review, 13(1), 116. Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99. Batt, R. (1999). Work organization, technology, and performance in customer service and sales. Industrial & Labor Relations Review, 52(4), 539. Becker, B. E. & Huselid, M. A. (1998). High performance work systems and firm performance: A synthesis of research and managerial applications. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 16, 53-101. Becker, B. , & Gerhart, B. (1996). The impact of human resource management on organizational performance: Progress and prospects. Academy of Management Journal, 39(4), 779. Beer, M. , Spector, M. , Lawrence, P. R. , Mills, D. Q. , & Walton, R. E. (1984). Managing human assets. New York: Free Press. Battacharya, M. & Wright, P. (2005). Managing human assets in an uncertain world: Applying real options theory to HRM.International Journal of Human Resource Management 16, 929-948. Boxall, P. , & Purcell, J. (2003). Strategy and human resource management. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Boxall, P. (1996) The strategic HRM debate and the resource-based view of the firm. Human Resource Management Journal, 6: 59-75. Boxall, P. (1998). Achieving competitive advantage through human resource strategy: Towards a theor y of industry dynamics. Human Resource Management Review, 8(3), 265. Boxall, P. , & Purcell, J. (2000). Strategic human resource management: Where have we come from and where should we be going?International Journal of Management Reviews, 2(2), 183. Brewster, C. (1999). Different paradigms in strategic HRM: Questions raised by comparative research. In P. Wright, L. Dyer, J. Boudreau & G. Milkovich (Eds. ), Research in personnel and human resource management: Strategic HRM in the 21st century (Supplement 4 ed. ). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Brewster, C. , Sparrow, P. , & Harris, H. (2005). Towards a new model of globalizing HRM. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16 Capelli, P. & Singh, H. (1992). Integrating strategic human resources and strategic management. In D. Lewin, O. S.Mitchell, & P. D. Sherer (Eds. ) Research frontiers in industrial relations and human resources pp 165-192. Madison, WI: IRRA. Collins, C. J. , & Clark, K. D. (2003). Strategic human resource pr actices, top management team social networks, and firm performance: The role of human resource practices in creating organizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Journal, 46(6), 740-751. d'Arcimoles, C. (1997). Human resource policies and company performance: A quantitative approach using longitudinal data. Organization Studies (Walter De Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG. ), 18(5), 857. Delery, J. E. (1998).Issues of fit in strategic human resource management: Implications for research. Human Resource Management Review, 8(3), 289. Page 23 of 26 Strategic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04 Delery, J. E. , & Doty, D. H. (1996). Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource management: Tests of universalistic, contingency.. Academy of Management Journal, 39(4), 802. Devanna, M. A. , Fombrun, C. , & Tichy, N. (1981). Human resources management: A strategic perspective. Organizational Dynamics, 9(3), 51. Dutta, S. , Narasimhan, O. , & Rajiv, S. (2005). Conceptualizing and measuring c apabilities: Methodology and empirical application.Strategic Management Journal, 26(3), 277-285. Dyer, L. (1984). Studying human resource strategy. Industrial Relations, 23(2) Dyer, L. , & Reeves, T. (1995). Human resource strategies and firm performance: What do we know and where do we need to go? International Journal of Human Resource Management, 6(3), 656. Fiol, C. M. , & Lyles, M. A. (1985). Organizational learning. Academy of Management Review, 10(4), 803. Fisher, S. R. , & White, M. A. (2000). Downsizing in a learning organization: Are there hidden costs? Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 244-251. Grant, R. M. 1. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm.Strategic Management Journal, 17, 109. Gratton, L. , Hailey, V. H. , & Truss, C. (2000). Strategic human resource management. New York: Oxford University. Guest, D. E. (2001). Human resource management: When research confronts theory. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 12(7), 1092-1106. Guest, D. E. , Michie, J. , Conway, N. , & Sheehan, M. (2003). Human resource management and corporate performance in the UK. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 41(2), 291-314. Hitt, M. A. , Ireland, R. D. , & Hoskisson, R. E. (2005). Strategic management competitiveness and globalization (6th ed. . Mason, Ohio: Thompson South-Western. Hitt, M. Bierman, L. , Shimizu, K. & Kochar, R. (2001). Direct and moderating effects of human capital on the strategy and performance in professional service firms: A resource-based perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 13-28. Huselid, M. A. (1995). The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity, and corporate.. Academy of Management Journal, 38(3), 635. Huselid, M. A. , Jackson, S. E. , & Schuler, R. S. (1997). Technical and strategic human resources management effectiveness as determinants of firm performance.Academy of Management Journal, 40(1), 171. Inkpen, A. C. , & Tsang, E. W. K. (2005). Social capital, netw orks, and knowledge transfer. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 146-165. Jackson, S. E. , Schuler, R. S. , & Carlos Rivero, J. (1989). Organizational characteristics as predictors of personnel practices. Personnel Psychology, 42(4), 727-786. Lee, J. & Miller, D. (1999). People matter: Commitment to employees, strategy and performance in Korean firms. Strategic Management Journal, 20(6), 579. Kinnie, N. , Swart, J. , & Purcell, J. (2005). Influences on the choice of HR systems: The network organization perspective.International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16 Kogut, B. , & Zander, U. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science: A Journal of the Institute of Management Sciences, 3(3), 383-397. Lado, A. A. , & Wilson, M. C. (1994). Human resource systems and sustained competitive advantage: A competency-based perspective. Academy of Management Review, 19(4), 699-727. Lahteenmaki, S. , Storey, J. , & Vanhal a, S. (1998). HRM and company performance: The use of measurement and the influence of economic cycles. Human Resource Management Journal, 8(2), 51-65.Page 24 of 26 Strategic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04 Lee, M. B. , & Chee, Y. (1996). Business strategy, participative human resource management and organizational performance: The case of south Korea. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 34, 77-94. Lengnick-hall, C. A. , & Lengnick-hall, M. L. (1988). Strategic human resources management: A review of the literature and a proposed typology. Academy of Management Review, 13(3), 454. Lepak, D. P. , & Snell, S. A. (1999). The human resource architecture: Toward a theory of human capital allocation and development. Academy of Management Review, 24: 31-48 Macduffie, J.P. (1995). Human resource bundles and manufacturing performance: Organizational logic and flexible.. Industrial & Labor Relations Review, 48(2), 197. Mahoney, J. , & Pandian, J. (1992). Resource-based view within the c onversation of strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 13: 363-380 McFadyen, M. A. , & Cannella Jr. , A. A. (2004). Social capital and knowledge creation: Diminishing returns of the number and strength of exchange relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 47(5), 735-746. McGrath, R. G. (1997). A real options logic for initiating technology positioning investments.Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 974-996. Meyer, J. Rowan, E. (1977). Institutionalize organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83:340-363. Miles, R. E. , Snow, C. C. , & Meyer, A. D. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure, and process. Academy of Management Review, 3(3), 546. Paauwe, J. (2004) HRM and Performance: Achieving Long Term Viability. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Paauwe, J. , & Boselie, P. (2005). Best practices†¦ in spite of performance: Just a matter of imitation? International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(6): 987-1003. Pa auwe, J. & Boselie, P. (2003). Challenging ‘strategic HRM' and the relevance of the institutional setting. Human Resource Management Journal, 13(3), 56. Peters, T. J. , & Waterman, R. (1982). In search of excellence. New York: Harper and Row. Pfeffer, J. (1998). The human equation: Building profits by putting people first. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Porter, M. , E. (1985). Competitive advantage. New York: New York Free Press. Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive strategy. New York: New York Free Press. Priem, R. & Butler, J. (2001a) Is the resource-based â€Å"view† a useful perspective for strategic management research?Academy of Management Review, 26: 22-41. Priem & Butler, J. (2001b). Tautology in the resource-based view and the implications of externally determined resource value: Further comments. Academy of Management Review, 26: 57-67. Richard, O. (2001). Racial diversity, business strategy, and firm performance: A resource-based view. Academy of Man agement Journal, 43: 164-177. Rodriguez, J. M. , & Ventura, J. (2003). Human resource management systems and organizational performance: An analysis of the Spanish manufacturing industry. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14(7), 1206-1226. Rogers, E. W. , & Wright, P. M. (1998).Measuring organizational performance in strategic human resource management: Problems, prospects, and performance information markets. Human Resource Management Review, 8(3), 311. Schuler, R. S. , & Jackson, S. E. (1987). Linking competitive strategies with human resource management practices. Academy of Management Executive, 1(3), 207. Snell, S. A. , Shadur, M. A. , & Wright, P. M. (2001). Human resources strategy: The era of our ways. Blackwell Handbook of Strategic Management, , 627-649. Teece, D. J. , Pisano, G. , & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533.Page 25 of 26 Strategic Management and HRM CAHRS WP06-04 Thompso n, M. , & Heron, P. (2005). Management capability and high performance work organization. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16 Trigeorgis, L. (1996). Real options: Managerial flexibility and strategy in resource allocation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Truss, C. , & Gratton, L. (1994). Strategic human resource management: A conceptual approach. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 5(3), 663. Tyson, S. (1997). Human resource strategy: A process for managing the contribution of HRM to organizational performance.International Journal of Human Resource Management, 8(3), 277-290. Walker, J. (1980). Human resource planning. New York: McGraw-Hill. Wan, D. , Ong, C. H. , & Kok, V. (2002). Strategic human resource management and organizational performance in Singapore. Compensation & Benefits Review, 34(4), 33. Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171-180. Wright, P. (1998). Strategy-HR Fit: Does it really matter? Human Resource Planning, 21(4), 56-57. Wright, P. M. , & Gardner, T. M. (2003). Theoretical and empirical challenges in studying the HR practice – firm performance relationship.In D. Holman, T. D. Wall, C. Clegg, P. Sparrow & A. Howard (Eds. ), The new workplace: People technology, and organisation. Sussex, UK: Wiley. Wright, P. & Sherman, S. (1999). Failing to find fit in strategic human resource management: Theoretical and empirical problems. In Wright, P. , Dyer, L. , Boudreau, J. , & Milkovich, G. (Eds. ). Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management (Supplement 4). pp. 5374. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Wright, P. M. , Dunford, B. B. , & Snell, S. A. (2001). Human resources and the resource-based view of the firm. Journal of Management, 27(6), 701.Wright, P. M. , Gardner, T. M. , Moynihan, L. M. , & Allen, M. R. (2005). The relationship between hr practices and firm performance: Examining causal order. Personnel Psychology, 58(2), 409-446. Wright, P. M. , & McMahan, G. C. (1992). Theoretical perspectives for strategic human resource management. Journal of Management, 18(2), 295. Wright, P. M. , McMahan, G. C. , & McWilliams, A. (1994). Human resources and sustained competitive advantage: A resource-based perspective. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 5(2), 301. Wright, P. M. , McMahan, G. C. , & Smart, D. L. (1995).Matches between human resources and strategy among NCAA basketball teams. Academy of Management Journal, 38(4), 1052. Wright, P. M. , & Snell, S. A. (1998). Toward a unifying framework for exploring fit and flexibility in strategic human resource.. Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 756. Wright, P. M. , & Snell, S. A. (1991). Toward an integrative view of strategic human resource management. Human Resource Management Review, 1(3), 203. Youndt, M. A. , Snell, S. A. , Dean, J. W. , Jr, & Lepak, D. P. (1996). Human resource management, manufacturing strategy, and firm performance. Academy of Management Journ al, 39(4), 836. Page 26 of 26