ABSTRACT

The aim of this paper is to examine the Warwick and Storey Models of Human Resource
Management (HRM). It begins with providing a general introduction underpinning the topic. In
trying to understand and do justice to the topic, the paper examine the concept of HRM from
different scholars. The paper opines that over the years a number of models have been
postulated by various scholars to describe the HRM concept and how it operates. Among which
the Storey model and the Warwick model were discussed. Finally, the paper concludes that since
Human Resource Management (HRM) is critical for business sustainability, success and growth;
thus, in order to gain competitive edge and maintain competitive advantage, organizations
should use HRM models that can help to achieve maximum organizational and employee’s
individual goals.

INTRODUCTION

Human Resource is an important corporate asset and performance of organizations

depends upon the way it is put in use through human resource management, which aims at

ensuring that organizations achieve success through people. This is true, regardless of the type of

organization; government, business, education, health, recreation, or social action. Getting and

keeping good people is critical to the success of every organization. Human Resource

Management (HRM) is an approach consisting of four functions; staffing, training, development

and motivation, and four activities; getting people, preparing them stimulating them, and keeping

them. The overall purpose of human resource management is to ensure that the organization is

able to achieve success through people. In order to achieve this success, various models of HRM

have been developed from time to time by different teams of the researchers that have helped the

HR practitioner to effectively manage the human resources. Of these, the Storey model and the

Warwick model will be examine in this paper.

CONCEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

There is no precise definition of what HRM is. Examination of literature revealed a wide

range of perspectives, theories, and models. According to Armstrong (2014), Human resource

1
management is defined as a strategic, integrated and coherent approach to the employment,

development and well-being of the people working in organizations. Likewise, Minbaeva (2005)

viewed HRM as a set of practices used by organisations to manage human resources through

facilitating the development of competencies that are unique to the organisation, creating

complex social relations and generating organisation knowledge to sustain competitive

advantage.

It was defined by Boxall and Purcell (2003) as ‘all those activities associated with the

management of employment relationships in the firm’. A later comprehensive definition was

offered by Watson (2010), HRM is the managerial utilisation of the efforts, knowledge,

capabilities and committed behaviours which people contribute to an authoritatively coordinated

human enterprise as part of an employment exchange (or more temporary contractual

arrangement) to carry out work tasks in a way which enables the enterprise to continue into the

future. From this framework, it can be established that Human resource management (HRM) is

concerned with all aspects of how people are employed and managed in organizations. It covers

the activities of strategic HRM, human capital management, knowledge management, corporate

social responsibility, organization development, resourcing (workforce planning, recruitment and

selection and talent management), learning and development, performance and reward

management, employee relations, employee well-being and the provision of employee services.

MODELS OF HRM

Over the years a number of models have been postulated by various scholars to describe

the HRM concept and how it operates. Of these, the Storey model and the Warwick model will

be discussed.

2
 Storey Model

Storey (2001), posits that the HRM model emerged in the UK as a 'historically situated

phenomenon' and is 'an amalgam of description, prescription and logical deduction'. He devised

the model by reconstructing the 'implicit models' conveyed by some managers during research

interviews. Storey (1992) identifies the model with 27 points that differentiate HRM from

personnel and industrial relations (IR) practices. Storey’s model is based on an ideal type of

organisation and is a tool used to present what Storey sees as the essential features of personnel

and HRM in an exaggerated way. Storey identifies four categories in which the 27 points fit.

These are: beliefs and assumptions, strategic concepts, line management, and key levers.

Figure 1: Key Elements of Storey's 'ideal' HRM Model

Beliefs and Assumptions

 The human resource gives organization a competitive edge.
 Employee commitment is more important that mere compliance.
 Careful selection and development are central to HRM.

2. Strategic Qualities
 HR decisions are of strategic importance.
 Senior managers must be involved in HRM.
 HR policies should be integrated into the business strategy- stemming from it and
even contributing to it.

3. Critical Role of Managers

 Because HR is critical to the core activities of the business, it is too important to be
left to personnel specialists alone.
 Line managers need to be closely involved both as deliverers and drivers of the HR
policies.
 Much greater attention is paid to the management of managers themselves.

4. Key Levers
 Managing culture is more important than managing procedures and systems.
 Horizontal integrated between different HR practices is essential.
 Restructuring and job design to allow devolved responsibility and empowerment.

Source: Adapted from Storey (2001)

3
 According to the stereotypes depicted in Table 1, the HRM 'recipe' of ideal and practice

prescribes certain priorities. In the framework, the most fundamental belief and assumption is the

notion that, ultimately, among all the factors of production, its labour that really distinguishes

successful firms from mediocre ones. It follows logically from this that employees ought to be

nurtured as a valued asset and not simply regarded as a cost. Moreover, another underlying belief

is that the employer's goal should not merely be to seek employees' compliance with rules, but to

strive for commitment and engagement that goes beyond the contract (Storey, 2001). The

strategic qualities contained in Storey's framework show that HRM is a matter of critical

importance to corporate planning. In Storey's words, decisions about human resources policies

should take their cue from an explicit alignment of the competitive environment, business

strategy and HRM strategy (p. 10). The third component, line management, argues that general

managers and not HRM specialist are vital to the effective delivery of HRM practices (Purcell et

al., 2009). The key levers element in the model focus on the methods used to implement HRM.

This ‘ideal type’ of HRM is not essentially an aim in itself but more of a tool that enables

sets of approaches to be pinpointed in organisations for research and analytical purposes. The

theoretical model is based on conceptions of how organisations have been transformed from

predominantly Personnel/IR practices to HRM practices. There are of course no specific

organisations in reality conforming to this 'ideal type' on which the model is based. It is,

therefore, quintessentially a tool for enabling comparative analysis. Storey’s ‘ideal’ model seeks

to describe the beliefs and assumptions of certain leading edge practitioners, prescribes certain

priorities and presumes certain consequent actions which seem to follow from the series of

proposals.

4
 TABLE 1: Storey Model of HRM

Personnel and Industrial Relations (IR) and Human Resource Management

(HRM): The Differences

Dimensions Personnel and IR HRM

Beliefs and assumptions

1. Contract Careful delineation of Aim to go beyond contract

written contracts

2. Rules Importance of devising 'Can-do' outlook;

clear rules/mutually Impatience with 'rule'

3. Guide to management Procedures Business-need'

action

4. Behaviour referent Norms/custom and Values/mission

practice

5. Managerial task vis-a-vis Monitoring Nurturing

labour

6. Nature of relations Pluralist Unitarist

7. Conflict Institutionalized De-emphasized

Strategic aspects

8. Key relations Labour management Customer

9. Initiatives Piecemeal Integrated

10. Corporate plan Marginal Central

11. Speed of decision Slow Fast

Line management

12. Management role Transactional Transformational leadership

13. Key managers Personnel/ IR specialists General/business/line

managers

14. Communication Indirect Direct

15. Standardization High (e.g. 'parity' an Low (e.g. 'parity' not seen as
issue) relevant)

16. Prized management Negotiation Facilitation

5
 skills

Key levers

17.  Selection Separate, marginal task Integrated, key task

18. Pay Job evaluation (fixed Performance-related

grades)

19. Conditions Separately negotiated Harmonization

20. Labour-management Collective bargaining Towards individual

contracts contracts

21. Thrust of relations with Regularized through Marginalized (with

stewards facilities and training exception of some
bargaining for change
models)

22.  Job categories and Many Few

grades

23.  Communication Restricted flow Increased flow

24.  Job design Division of labour Teamwork

25.  Conflict handling Reach temporary truces Manage climate and culture

26. Training and Controlled access to Learning companies

development courses

27.  Foci of attention for Personnel procedures Wide ranging cultural,

interventions

Source: Storey (1992)

Storey (1992) proposes another model as a means of comparative analysis, for identifying

the shift organisations may take from personnel management to HRM. This is illustrated in

Figure 2. He suggested in the model depicted, that, for an organisation to gain competitive

advantage, a strategic response needs to be given to the beliefs and assumptions of the

organisations and that line managers should take on part of this role. Line managers would have

6
 a responsibility for the change in key levers, which would move the organisation away from

being locked into bureaucratic procedures towards becoming a flexible organisation that would

encourage commitment through performance-related goals.

Figure 2: A Model of the Shift to Human Resource Management

Enhanced Strategic
Competition Response

Believes
and

Assumptions

Attitude and behavior

Line changes:
Manager Commitment Competitive
seize the Customer orientation performance
Initiative Quality
Flexible working

Change in
Key
Levers

IMPLICATIONS FOR INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

Source: Storey (1992)

Storey not only identified the shift towards human resource management, he also

described two approaches to HRM as ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ model. The 'hard' model according to

Storey, (1987) emphasises the 'quantitative, calculative, and business strategic aspects of

7
managing the headcount resource in as "rational" a way as for any other economic factor'. The

hard HRM approach has some kinship with scientific management as people are reduced to

passive objects that are not cherished as a whole people but assessed on whether they possess the

skills/attributes the organisation requires (Legge, 1995; Vaughan, 1994; Storey, 1987; Drucker,

White, Hegewisch, & Mayne, 1996). In contrast, soft HRM places an emphasis on "human" and

is associated with the human relations school of Herzberg and McGregor (Storey, 1987). Legge

refers to this as "Developmental Humanism" (Legge, 1995). Whilst emphasising the importance

of integrating HR policies with Business objectives, the soft model focuses on treating

employees as valued assets and a source of competitive advantage through their commitment,

adaptability and high quality skill and performance. In essence the ‘hard’ approach, rooted in

manpower planning is concerned with aligning human resource strategy with business strategy,

while the ‘soft’ approach is rooted in the human relations school, has concern for workers’

outcomes and encourages commitment to the organisation by focusing on workers’ concerns.

The Storey (1992) model attempted to create “ideal type” human resource approaches

and practices and that the “ideal type” should incorporate the “soft” dimensions of HRM by

focusing on the development of employees (Bratton & Gold, 2003). This would result in high

levels of trust, commitment, and also create an adaptable and motivated workforce. This would

eventually lead to a high performing organisation that could gain a competitive advantage.

8
 The Warwick Model

This model was developed by two researchers, Hendry and Pettigrew (1990) at centre for

strategy and change, University of Warwick (hence the name Warwick model). It emphasises on

analytical approach to Human Resources Management. It also recognizes the impact of the role

of the personnel functions on the human resource strategy content. Like other models, the

Warwick proposition centres on five elements, namely the outer context (macro environmental

forces), inner (firm specific or micro environmental forces) context, organisation or business-

strategy content, HRM context and HRM content.

This model takes cognizance of business strategy and HR practices; it illustrates the

integration of inner context and outer context with organisational strategy. As such, the model

has significance for recruitment and selection, seeing that internal and external contexts should

be integrated with organisational strategy. Organisational strategy, in turn, affects and influences

HRM practices. Such practices entail systems, processes, procedures, techniques, approaches and

methods. The Warwick model’s strength is mainly centred in the fact that it identifies and

classifies important environmental influences on HRM. It also maps the connections between the

environment and organisational strategy. Furthermore, this model explores how HRM should

adapt to changes in the external environment.

9
 The following figure illustrates the contexts and contents of the Warwick model which

consists of external and internal environmental factors, affecting HRM functions.

Figure 2: Warwick model

Sources: Hendry and Pettigrew (1990:6); Legge (2005:158).

10
 The HRM model above illustrates how the outer context of social, economic,

technological, political and legal factors influence and affect the inner context of the

organisation. This context consists of the structure, culture, politics, leadership, task technology

and business output. In turn, the inner context influences and affects the Outer Content (role

definition, organisation and HR output), as well as the content of an organisation’s (business)

strategy. The HRM context and content of organisational strategy influence the HRM content on

issues such as HR work flow, work systems, reward systems or employee relations, objectives,

product/market, and strategy and tactics.

CONCLUSION

Having analyzed the HRM models described above and since Human Resource

Management (HRM) is critical for business sustainability, success and growth; thus, in order to

gain competitive edge and maintain competitive advantage, organizations should use HRM

models that can help to achieve maximum organizational and employee’s individual goals.

11
 REFERENCES

Ali, A. (2013). Significance of Human Resource Management in organizations: Linking Global

Practices with Local Perspective. International Refereed Research Journal, Vol.4, (1), pp
1-2

Armstrong, M, (2014) Armstrong’s’ Hand book of Human Resource Management Practice, 13th
Edition. UK, Ashford Colour Press Ltd.

Boxall, P F and Purcell, J (2003) Strategy and Human Resource Management, Basingstoke,
Palgrave Macmillan.

Bratton, J., and Gold, J. (2003) Human Resource Management: Theory and Practice, 3th edition,
Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

Drucker, J., White, G., Hegewisch, A., Mayne, L. (1996) 'Between hard and soft HRM: human
resource management in the construction industry', Construction Management and
Economics, 14, 405-416.

Hendry, C. and A. Pettigrew, (1990). Human resource management: An agenda for the 1990s.
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 1: 17-43.

Legge, K. (1995) Human Resource Management: Rhetorics and Realities, Basingstoke:

Macmillan.

Legge, K. (2005). Human Resource Management: Management, Work and Organisations:

Rhetorics and Realities. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Minbaeva, D. B. (2005) “HRM practices and MNC knowledge transfer‖.” Personal Review,
Vol.34, No.1, pp. 125-144.

Storey, J. (1987) 'Developments in the management of human resources: an interim report',

Warwick Papers in Industrial Relations, 17, IRRU, School of Industrial and Business
Studies, University of Warwick (November).

Storey, J. (1992) Developments in the Management of Human Resources: An Analytical Review.

Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.

Storey, J. (2001) Human Resource Management: A Critical Text (2nd edn). London: Thomson
Learning.

Vaughan, E. (1994) 'The trial between sense and sentiment: a reflection on the language of
HRM', Journal of General Management, 19, 3, 20-32.

Watson, T J (2010) Critical social science, pragmatism and the realities of HRM, The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 21 (6), pp 915–31.

12