Evidence based HRM
Part I
Chapter 1 – Evidence based HRM
Employment relationship is an exchange relationship between employee and organization, in which
employee provides labor and employer rewards employee. Nature of the exchange influenced by
context of employment relations.
Human resource management is sum of all strategy, policy, procedures, day-to-day acts that aim to
guide employment relations towards goals of organizations. HRM is made up of HR practices: all the
policies and procedures used for managing employment relations.
3 stages of employment relationship: entry -> work -> transition.
Rational decision-making considers all information and weighs it according to some criteria before
making a decision. Choice for HR practices is bounded rationality: effort to the best decision given an
imperfect understanding of reality. But all actors must be taken into account and no quick-fix.
Theory
Evidence-based management takes into account the nature of the problem, information from
different sources within company and experts before suggesting an intervention.
Research-practice gap. Nowadays research is more accessible for practitioners and researchers write
practical implications. Co-creation is a study in which practitioners are closely involved, which leads to
learning on both sides.
Evidence-based management originated in development of evidence-based medicine. Evidence-
based HRM (EBHRM) is a conscientious, explicit, judicious decision-making process to address
people-related issues in organizations by combing best available research evidence with measurable
data and professional knowledge available in organizations. Core elements:
Is about decision-making by practitioners who consciously apply expertise and judgement
Uses evidence from local context
Critically evaluates best available external research evidence
Take perspectives of people who might be affected
EBHRM isn’t about applying best practice, which assumes that there’s one best way of doing HR in all
situations. Also not about benchmarking, comparing practices between organizations.
Decision-making
Concerns strategic decision-making, involves using resources and is supposed to lead to substantial
outcome that matters for organization. Different views on decision-making process.
Rational decision-making theory, decision maker has first idea about what to achieve with decision
and then use methodology to gather appropriate information and weigh various alternatives before
decision. But people aren’t machines.
Bounded rationality, individuals are able to take rational decisions within the limits of preferences,
social position and understanding of problem and alternative solutions.
EBM can be too time-consuming, e.g. during crises and non-strategic daily issues.
,Process of decision-making:
Asking a focused question
To explore the problem and determinate the problem statement. Also exploring the context.
All helps to decide if the problem deserves EBM process intervention. After positive decision,
first defining the outcome as specific as possible, focused problem statement: describes
observable and measurable outcome, indicates specific HRM domain, specifies targeted
group of employees.
Collecting evidence
To explore the cause of the problem from multiple angles. Evidence concerns proof of the
existence of causality. 4 sources of evidence: organizational, stakeholder, experiential and
scientific evidence. Organizational, stakeholder and experiential evidence are local evidence.
Scientific evidence is external evidence.
- Local evidence
Systematically gathered data in particular organizational setting, aiming to inform
local decisions.
- External evidence
Evidence generated by systematic research of similar cases of cause-effect
relationships. Must rely on a larger body of research to form complete picture,
systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Systematic reviews have methodical approach
to comparing research finding across different studies. Meta-analysis is statistical
procedure for examining overall strength of findings across number of studies, often
part of systematic review. Practitioners must be aware of publication bias. If there’s
not a systematic review, practitioners do their own:
1. Define research question in terms of causal relationship
2. Determine which type of research is included
3. Determine where research is likely to be found
4. Select only research articles that fulfil search criteria
5. Evaluate quality of research selected
6. Synthesize findings from studies
7. Evaluate findings in light of limitations
Evaluating the evidence
Quality of evidence must be considered, core indicators:
- Validity
Is the evidence actually telling us something about causal relationship between cause
and effect. Evidence should indicate that there’s a relationship between cause and
effect. Validity means that there aren’t alternative explanations for causal
relationship, to rule out alternative explanations:
o Check quality of measures
Ask whether evidence is based on measures that captures the meaning of
constructs in problem statement; construct validity.
o Check quality of research designs
Strongest evidence comes from longitudinal and quasi-experimental research
designs, is complex.
o Good theory
Provide good theoretical arguments that explain why cause would lead to
effect (not vice versa). Is valid when it’s based on insights derived from many
studies.
, - Reliability
Reliable if there’s certainty that if research is repeated, outcome would be the same.
Check if it’s possible to verify research method. Evaluation of reliability involves:
o Replicability of evidence
Ask whether evidence provides clear description of measures, research
procedure and sampling of organizations and respondents.
o Quality of sample
Sample size (precision) and sampling procedures influence reliability.
- Generalizability
Can local/external evidence be used to draw conclusions about people/organizations
that weren’t included in research that led to evidence. If evidence is repeated, more
likely to generalize to new samples. Questions that should be taken into account:
o Does evidence have boundary conditions?
Boundary conditions are local conditions that change causal relationship.
Meta-analyses mention a number of moderators (boundary conditions):
institutional, organization, demographic and research design conditions.
o What if generalization of evidence is unclear?
Examine if it’s possible to replicate evidence locally.
- Ethicality
Academic and professional ethical guidelines should guide behavior of people using
EBHRM to protect participants. Include: informed consent, honest information
sharing, data protection and privacy regulations.
Generating alternatives
People involved in EBHRM can generate ideas for HR practices by brainstorming sessions.
Decide, prepare and implement
Decision about preferred HR practice. Next prepare for implementation with potential
obstacles and implementation plan. Important:
- Must be easy to understand
- Should align with other regulations and laws
- Managers should be trained and prepared to use practice
- Top management should communicate importance of practice
- Stakeholders need support during implementation while learning how to use practice
Strategies to advocate advantages of EBHRM:
- Raise awareness
- Showcase data
- Facilitate access to external evidence
- Collaborate in research
- Training
- Curiosity
Evaluate and adjust HR practice
Evaluation will show if practice leads to expected effects in outcome by tracking, can be
quantitative. Structured approach, e.g. after action review. If the effect is other than
expected, decision-makers need to go back in process and adjust.
Part II
Chapter 2 – Investing in People and Business Performance
By investing in people as resource for organizational success, people become asset for organizations.
