some of the best evidence available at this point. It shows thatWrms that match
high-quality human capital to a strategy of high-service customization outperform
those that do not. This implies that for the time being, at least, theseWrms are
enjoying competitive advantage through HRM.
- 2 The Socio-Political Objectives of HRM
As intimated earlier in the discussion of the process of adaptation in HRM, the
goals of HRM are best understood as plural (Evans 1986 ). There is no such thing as
a single ‘bottom line’ in HRM: viability has more than an economic meaning.
Employers are concerned with some degree of social legitimacywhile simultan-
eouslypursuing labor productivity (Boxall and Purcell 2003 ). IfWrms want to be
seen as legitimate and have ready access to society’s resources, then their employ-
ment practices must be seen to comply with labor laws and strongly held social
norms (Lees 1997 ). The need for social legitimacy means that variation in HRM
based on responses to diVerent national institutional environments is strong
(Gooderham et al. 1999 ). This is emphasized in all the broad analytical frameworks
in HRM. Without denying that some multinationals wield considerable power
(Rubery and Grimshaw 2003 ), individualWrms rarely have opportunities to inXu-
ence social standards and generally take the established ethical framework in
relation to labor management as a given. Doing so helps to secure good order
within the workplace and institutional support outside it.
In this connection, it is useful to make a comment about the oft-advocated
objective of ‘internalWt.’ Because social legitimacy is a necessary goal (for allWrms
that wish to avoid social sanctions, legal, moral, and economic), the notion of
‘internalWt’ must be treated with some caution (Boxall and Purcell 2003 : 56 – 8 ,
243 – 5 ). It is clearly impossible to makeall HR policies reXective of a chosen com-
petitive or economic mission. Some of aWrm’s employment policies are there simply
to ensure compliance with labor laws and social conventions and have no necessary
connection to its competitive strategies. Here, then, is another strategic tension
associated with the goals of HRM: ifWrms cannot aVord to meet baseline regulatory
requirements in a particular country, they cannot do legitimate business there.
As with economic motives, it is useful to subject socio-political motives to
dynamic analysis. This suggests a fourth fundamental motive concerned with
enhancing, if not maximizing, managerial autonomy. In a classic study of man-
agement ideology, Reinhard Bendix ( 1956 : p. xxiii) argued that ‘ideologies of
management are attempts by leaders of enterprises to justify the privilege of
voluntary action and association for themselves, while imposing upon all subor-
dinates the duty of obedience and of service to the best of their ability.’ Gospel
( 1973 ) refers to management as having a less openly acknowledged ‘security
objective’ alongside its proWt (cost eVectiveness) motive, a goal to maximize its
the goals of hrm 61