Beer et al. ( 1984 ) describe or, alternatively, in oVering their short-term, ‘market’
model with large bonuses for reaching key targets or a severance package for failing
to do so. Within largeWrms, there may also be major variations among non-
managerial workforce groups that reXect diVerent union contracts, diVerent labor
market pressures and diVerences in the degree to which the type of labor is critical
to production (e.g. Godard 1991 ; Osterman 1987 ). When labor markets are tight or
workers control critical know-how, managers tend to respond with more generous
employment oVers and more motivating conditions.
Furthermore, as noted in Table 3. 1 , state regulation has an impact on the process
of adaptation to context that takes place in aWrm’s HRM. Labor laws and labor
market institutions vary from country to country, as do cultural norms. There are
fundamental diVerences, for example, between US employment systems and those
that prevail in the ‘Rhineland countries’ of Germany, France, and the Netherlands
where ‘social partnership’ models accord a strong role to trade unions and works
councils (Paauwe and Boselie 2003 ; this Handbook, Ch. 9 ). This argument can be
linked to the observation that capital markets and the governance systems ofWrms
vary across ‘varieties of capitalism’ (Hall and Soskice 2001 ). Anglo-American stock
markets are seen as according high priority to shareholder returns and encouraging
shorter time horizons in management thinking, implying moreXexible employ-
ment regimes and less investment in human resource development than is typically
found in countries like Germany and Japan with more patient capital providers
(e.g. Gospel and Pendleton 2003 ).
At a minimum, then, we observe employers adapting their goals to a context in
which their own competitive choices, the technologies or service tangibles they
adopt, the characteristics of their employees, the state of labor markets, and the
societal regulations and national cultures they encounter are all playing a signiWcant,
interactive role. On top of this, the personal values, internal politics, and cognitive
limitations of management inevitably exert some inXuence. Adaptation to eco-
nomic realities is clearly a fundamental driver of employer behavior, but so too is
adaptation to the socio-political climate of work, both inside and outside theWrm.
3.4 The Goals of HRM: A Synthesis
.........................................................................................................................................................................................
The purpose of this section is to draw on the frameworks and research insights we
have discussed to present a synthesis of what we presently understand about the
fundamental goals of employers. As suggested immediately above, it helps if
we analyze the goals of HRM in terms of two broad categories: economic and
socio-political objectives.
56 p e t e r b o x a l l