processes, including quantitative and contractual elements; the American
private enterprise culture, reflected in a strong sense of organisational and
managerial freedom and autonomy; the low level of state involvement; and the
American antagonism towards trade unions. The contrasted portrait of HRM in
Europe has shown: the qualitative impact of cultural diversity on HR processes;
the wider sense of organisational and managerial responsibility towards
employees; the greater involvement of the state; and the wider support for and
different role of trade union representation.
A distinct picture of HRM in Europe is therefore emerging. Europeans are
gradually developing a more explicit awareness of what constitutes European
HRM. This has arisen from a critique of the American model. For example,
Guest (1990: 377), observing the UK, saw ‘signs that ... the American model is
losing its appeal as attention focuses to a greater extent on developments in
Europe’. Similarly, Brewster (2000) attacked the ‘universalist’ assumptions of
many HRM texts. Critiques of simplistic attempts to ‘universalise’ the
American models also came from French writers (Communal, 1999; Voynnet
Fourboul and Bournois, 1999). The inapplicability of American models in
Europe was noted in Germany too: ‘An international comparison of HR prac-
tices clearly indicates that the basic functions of HR management are given dif-
ferent weights in different countries and that they are carried out differently’
(Gaugler, 1988: 26). Another German writer, Pieper, surveying European per-
sonnel management similarly concluded that: ‘a single universal model of
HRM does not exist’ (1990: 11).
Indeed, the American concept of HRM contrasts with the view of HRM in
Europe as summarised in Table 7.4. This emerging model of HRM in Europe
calls for flexibility for member states and their agencies to operate within their
respective cultural traditions; an understanding of minimum social standards
in society, protected by a legal framework; a degree of involvement of member
states or supranational institutions in labour market issues; as well as an appre-
ciation of the social dynamics between employers, their associations and
employees and their representative bodies.
Having discussed features of HRM in Europe at a high level of generali-
sation (cross-Atlantic comparison), it is time to take a closer look at HRM
within Europe, particularly at the differences that characterise the European
concept of HRM at regional and national level.
4 DIFFERENCES WITHIN EUROPE
The qualitative impact of cultural and institutional diversity on HRM has been
documented by an array of commentators (e.g. Brewster and Larsen, 2000;
Communal and Senior, 1999; Edwards and Lawrence, 2000). Thus, the
HRM in Europe 179