HRM AND PERFORMANCE: ETHICAL DILEMMAS 59(including my own) and has widely marketed the existence of a clear link (see,
e.g. the Foreword to Purcell et al. 2003). In the UK, government departments,
notably the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI 2002), have also become
enthusiastic advocates of HRM, allied to an interest in enhancing national
productivity. This is reflected in their policy documents, in their support for
the Kingsmill Task Force discussed at the start of this chapter, and in setting the
promotion of the link between HRM and performance as one of their strategic
priorities. An attraction of HRM as an approach to enhancing productivity
and performance is that it is potentially largely cost free. While there will
always be scope to invest in HR, perhaps through training, the main focus is
on productivity enhancement through greater utilization of the existing HR.
Academics may believe there is a link between HRM and performance but
many will be aware of the limitations of the research and exercise appropri-
ate caution about advocating action on the basis of the research evidence.
Governments, consultancies, and professional bodies have a different agenda
and, in most cases, a different perspective on academic evidence. Allied to
this, HRM may appeal partly because it offers a route to high performance
that may obviate the need for collective representation as a mechanism for
EI. Furthermore, our own research (Guest and King 2004) indicates that most
senior managers, when challenged, believe there probably is a link between
HRM, or at least good ‘people management’, and performance; to them it
appears intuitively plausible.
The ethical issues concern over claiming the case for a link, more partic-
ularly a causal link, between HRM and performance when the evidence base
remains weak. However, for academics, the ethical problems are more com-
plex. If they are reluctant to advocate HRM based on the evidence about its
link to performance, there may be other reasons to advocate it, based on some
of the evidence cited above about its association with workers’ satisfaction
and well-being. Set against this, there is also the difficult question of how to
respond if asked about the alternatives to HRM. One way of resolving this is to
focus on the process and context under which decisions about HRM are made.
HRM may be advocated but there are few guidelines
for its application
The feasibility of application of HRM has rarely been considered as an ethical
issue; indeed, it is possible to question whether it does raise ethical consid-
erations. It is often argued that a distinctive feature of HRM is its focus on
the system of HR practices rather than on a particular practice. It implies
that it is no longer enough to do selection or training or communication very