Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
This paper uses data from interviews with HRM managers of the Australian operations of overseas multinational companies to critically question the analytical utility of a number of standard factors that have traditionally been claimed, in the international HRM literature, to influence decisions concerning the appropriate balance between centralization and localization in HRM. The variables reviewed are primarily structural: industry sector, strategic role of the subsidiary, administrative heritage and formal organizational structure. The data suggest that the firms modify their formal structures frequently in response to environmental turbulence and have evolved towards structural forms that are radically asymmetrical. Two variables that have received limited academic attention to date but which critically mediate the pattern of intended changes are identified. First, the perception by key actors in subsidiaries of HR competence elsewhere in the MNC network, particularly head office. Second, the propensity of the staff in the subsidiary to lobby politically against changes they did not perceive to be rational.
International Journal of Manpower – Emerald Publishing
Published: Sep 1, 2004
Keywords: Multinational companies; Human resource management; Centralized control; Australia
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.