In a major study of HRM in multidivisional companies, Purcell and Ahlstrand
(1994) argue that what actually determines HR strategy will be determined by
decisions at all three levels and by the ability and leadership style of local
managers to follow through goals in the context of specific environmental
conditions. Case study analysis has, however, highlighted the problematic
nature of strategic choice model building. The conception of strategic choice
might exaggerate the ability of managers to make decisions and take action
independent of the environmental contexts in which they do business (Colling,
1995)^32.
Another part of the strategic HRM debate has focused on the integration or 'fit'
of business strategy with HR strategy. This shift in managerial thought, calling
for the HR function to be 'strategically integrated', is depicted in Beer et al.'s
(1984) model of HRM. The authors espoused the need to establish a close
two-way relationship or 'fit' between the external business strategy and the
elements of the internal HR strategy:
'An organization's HRM policies and practices must fit with its strategy in its
competitive environment and with the immediate business conditions that it
faces' (Beer et al., 1984, p. 25). The concept of integration has three aspects:
the linking of HR policies and practices with the strategic management
process of the organization
the internalization of the importance of HR on the part of line managers
the integration of the workforce into the organization to foster
commitment or an 'identity of interest' with the strategic goals.
Not surprisingly, this approach to SHRM has been referred to as the
'matching' model.