2001IJHRM

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/254299534
A Comparative Study of HR Practices in Britain and India
Article in The International Journal of Human Resource Management · August 2001

DOI: 10.1080/713769673
CITATIONS READS
95 5,848
2 authors:
Pawan Budhwar Naresh Khatri

Aston University University of Missouri
229 PUBLICATIONS 7,665 CITATIONS 70 PUBLICATIONS 2,372 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Indian Railways Research Project funded by the Society of HRM (SHRM), US View project
Human & Technological Resource Management (HTRM) New Insights into Revolution 4.0 View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Naresh Khatri on 26 August 2015.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Int. J. of Human Resource Management 12:5 August 2001 800–826
A comparative study of HR practices in

Britain and India
Pawan S. Budhwar and Naresh Khatri
Abstract This paper traces the major developments in the eld of human resource
management brie y and then highlights the need for more cross-national HRM studies.
The results from two parallel surveys of matched Indian and British organizations are
presented. The main aim of the surveys was to examine a wide range of HRM policies
and practices in a cross-national comparative context. The surveys were run in six
industries in the manufacturing sector. The study controlled for a number of variables
such as size of the organization, product, industry sector and personnel participation.
In uence of a number of contingent variables (such as age, size, nature and life-cycle
stage of the organization, presence of unions and human resource strategies) on HRM
policies and practices is analysed. The study nds signi cant differences in recruitment,
compensation, training and development and employee communication practices between
India and Britain.
Keywords Comparative HRM; India; Britain; determinants of HRM; internal labour

markets; cross-national HRM.
Introduction
The developments in the eld of human resource management (HRM) are now well
documented in the literature (see Legge, 1995; Keenoy, 1999; Schuler and Jackson,
1999). Nevertheless, the debate on HRM issues continues even today, although the
focus of the debate has changed over time. It began with the distinction between
personnel management and HRM, and then moved on to incorporating industrial
relations into HRM (Guest, 1991), examining the relationship of HRM strategies and
the integrating of HRM into business strategies (Schuler, 1992), devolving HRM to line
managers (Budhwar and Sparrow, 1997), and nally exploring the extent to which
HRM is the source of competitive advantage for organizations (see, for example,
Barney, 1991; Schuler and MacMillan, 1984; Wright et al., 1994). All these
developments have taken place over the last two decades or so, as a result of which the
nature of the human resource (HR) function has changed from being reactive,
prescriptive and administrative to being proactive, descriptive and executive (Boxall,
1994). At present, the contribution of HRM to rms’ performance is being debated in
Pawan S. Budhwar, Cardiff Business School, Colum Drive, Cardiff CF1 3EU, UK (tel:
1 02920 875214; fax: 1 02920 874419; e-mail: Budhwar@cardiff.ac.uk); Naresh
Khatri, Nanyang Business School, Nanyang Technological University, Mail Box:
S3-B2-C-82, Singapore 639798 (tel: 1 65 790 5679; fax: 1 65 791 3697; e-mail:
Ankhatri@ntu.edu.sg).
The International Journal of Human Resource Management
ISSN 0958-5192 print/ISSN 1466-4399 online © 2001 Taylor & Francis Ltd
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
DOI: 10.1080/09585190110047848
Budhwar and Khatri: HR practices in Britain and India 801
the literature (see, for example, Guest, 1997; Huselid, 1995; MacDuf e, 1995; Schuler
and Jackson, 1999).
Along with these developments, the existing literature also highlights a strong need
for more cross-national HRM studies (Brewster et al., 1996; Cavusgil and Das, 1997).
This is mainly due to ever-increasing internationalization and globalization of business.
As world business develops into a ‘global village’, there is greater need to know how
managers in various parts of the world cope with issues and problems related to the
management of human resources and what major factors impact on HR policies and
practices in different contexts (Hofstede, 1993; Poole, 1990).
Several scholars note that national HR practices are determined by both ‘culture-free’
(such as age, size, nature of organization) and ‘culture-bound’ (such as national culture
and institutions) factors (Budhwar and Sparrow, 1998; Fisher and Shaw, 1992;
Hofstede, 1993; Easterby-Smith et al., 1995). Investigators have identi ed many
important contingency variables in uencing HR practices such as size of the
organization, technology, age of the organization, presence of formal HR department,
type of ownership, the existence of training units in HR department, and the life-cycle
stage of the organization (see, for example, Jackson et al., 1989; Tayeb, 1988). Other
authors (such as Brewster, 1995; Budhwar and Sparrow, 1998; Easterby-Smith et al.,
1995; Hofstede, 1993; Sparrow and Hiltrop, 1997), while acknowledging the role of
contingency factors, have noted that more complex culture-bound arguments must be
applied to the eld of HRM. Management practices, including HRM, are not universal
but ‘socially constructed’ in each society (Boxall, 1995). The investigation into the
in uence of both culture-free and culture-bound variables on HRM in a cross-national
context is therefore crucial for the growth and development of the eld of HRM. This
is particularly so in view of the major development that many countries in the world,
such as China, India, countries in Latin America and those of East and Central Europe,
have liberalized their economic policies and opened gates to foreign investors. These
developments are very signi cant and require more research from an international HRM
perspective to widen the scope of current research literature which is predominantly
based on practices in countries in the European Union and North America.
At present, there is dearth of research on cross-national HRM issues (Brewster et al.,
1996; Clark et al., 1999). This is partly due to the fact that methodological issues
involved in cross-national studies are far more complex than research involving a
sample from a single country or culture, and partly due to the absence of a
comprehensive framework for conducting such studies (Budhwar, 1999; Cavusgil and
Das, 1997).
Research issues
Until the 1970s, the view that management theories are applicable universally was quite
pervasive. However, the in uence of the ‘convergence hypothesis’ has now waned as
suf cient evidence has gradually accumulated against it over time (Hofstede, 1993). To
what extent does the contingency view apply to the relatively new eld of HRM, given
that most HRM models have been developed in the Anglo-Saxon world? McGaughey
and De Cieri (1999) argue that organizations are becoming more similar in terms of
macro-level variables (convergence), but are maintaining their culturally based
dissimilarities in terms of micro-level variables (divergence).
Moreover, the nature of HRM is known to be ‘context speci c’ (Boxall, 1995;
Brewster, 1995). Therefore, the degree and direction of in uence of both culture-bound
and culture-free factors on HRM varies from country to country and is responsible for
802 The International Journal of Human Resource Management
the context-speci c nature of HRM (Locke and Thelen, 1995). For example, the strong
impact of unions and other pressure groups on HRM in India presents the context-
speci c nature of such practices. On the other hand, the in uence of competitive
pressures marked by the downsizing of the workforce in Britain highlights the context-
speci c nature of the British HR function (Budhwar and Sparrow, 1998). Similarly, the
response of unions to competitive pressures such as the introduction of new production
technologies, large-scale restructuring and increasing work exibility varies across
countries. Union membership has declined signi cantly in countries such as Britain,
France and the United States, whereas it has remained quite stable in Canada and
Germany. The above examples show that institutional con gurations mediate between
environmental pressures and their effects on HR practices (Locke and Thelen,
1995).
In order to evaluate and highlight the context-speci c nature of HRM in different
national or regional settings, we need to delineate major factors that could in uence HR
practices in such settings. The dilemma of what factors to include under broad concepts
such as ‘national culture’ or ‘institutions’ needs to be resolved (Sparrow and Hiltrop,
1997). The issue of selection of certain contingent variables such as organizational
strategies and policies from the long list of available factors as possible determinants of
HRM also needs serious attention (Budhwar, 1999). One logical way to tackle this
important task of understanding the complex interactions between HRM practices and
factors in uencing them is by conducting more cross-cultural empirical studies.
In this paper, we examine the in uence of a set of organizational contingencies on
HR policies and practices in a matched sample of Indian and British rms. But why
compare HRM in India and Britain? As noted above, the need for more cross-national
HRM studies, especially between developed and developing nations, is currently strong
(Brewster et al., 1996; Budhwar and Sparrow, 1998; Clark et al., 1999). Moreover,
personnel specialists both in India and Britain are under great pressure, although for
different reasons, to manage their human resources within a dynamic and competitive
environment. In India, after the recent liberalization of economic policies, the increased
level of competition by overseas rms has put a lot of pressure on the personnel
function in domestic companies to prepare and develop their employees so that these
companies are able to compete with overseas rms in skills, ef ciency and effectiveness
(Budhwar and Sparrow, 1997; Krishna and Monappa, 1994; Sparrow and Budhwar,
1997; Venkata Ratnam, 1995). The British personnel function, on the other hand, is
experiencing pressure caused by continuous increase in interest rates and the strong UK
currency (which is forcing rms to downsize or close their operations, as rms are
nding it expensive to export their products), discrimination at the workplace (such as
age, sex and ethnic), an increased level of competition, a move towards harmonization
of conditions across Europe and a need to restructure and train and develop a different
set of competencies in human resources (see, for example, Legge, 1995; Sisson, 1996).
HRM policies and practices are known to change most under such pressures (Benson,
1995), so, in changing, will they converge or diverge?
It would also be of interest to Western rms to know what is happening in India in
the HRM eld as they nd India an attractive place to invest in because of its huge
domestic market (Datt and Sundharam, 1999). Britain is the fth largest investor in
India after the United States, Japan, Germany and Russia (Budhwar, 2001). A
comparative study would provide a useful insight into the Indian HRM scenario. Next
we present a brief overview of HR function in India and Britain followed by two broad
hypotheses.
HRM in Britain and India: review of past research
The roots of the personnel function in Britain can be traced back to the mid-nineteenth
century when social reformers such as Lord Shaftesbury and Robert Owen sought to
legislate provisions for working hours and to ameliorate working conditions for factory
workers such as women and children (Torrington, 1989). These early developments
resulted in the introduction of female welfare of cers and provision of facilities such as
canteens, medical leave and sick pay (Legge, 1995). At the beginning of this century,
big businessmen such as Edward Cadbury began linking welfare of workers with
ef ciency at the workplace (Niven, 1967). In the intervening years, between the two
world wars, this connection between welfare and ef ciency broadened to include
activities aimed at getting a good t between worker and his or her job (Legge, 1995).
This emphasis on welfare and ef ciency gave way to a new and wider role for
personnel management, including activities such as role speci cation, recruitment and
selection, training, records keeping and dismissals.
After the Second World War, the emphasis shifted to full employment and union
power increased (Heery, 1997). The personnel function looked after the legal,
administrative and negotiating aspects and the employment relationships. Torrington
(1989) noted that the personnel function evolved from a ‘labour of cer’s’ role to that of
‘consensus negotiator’ and later to ‘organization man’, with an ever-increasing
emphasis by the personnel function on ef ciency, bargaining and management of
change aspects. In the early 1970s, with the development of employment laws, the
personnel function took on a ‘third-party role’, where the main task of personnel experts
was to interpret the law. As we have seen, it was mainly the growth of competition and
the pressing demand to improve the ef ciency of human resources that led the
personnel function to the role of ‘manpower analyst’ in order to achieve the t between
numbers and skills required and those actually available in the company (Torrington,
1989). Over the last four decades or so the nature of the personnel function in British
industry has undergone a quiet revolution (Legge, 1995).
The personnel function in India originated in the 1920s with the concern for labour
welfare in factories. The Trade Union Act of 1926 gave formal recognition to workers’
unions. The Royal Commission of 1932 recommended the appointment of labour
of cers and the Factories Act of 1948 laid down the duties and quali cations of labour
welfare of cers. All these developments formed the foundation of the personnel
function in India (Balasubramanian, 1994, 1995) and paralleled the initial developments
of the British personnel function. Provisions similar to those of Cadbury in Britain were
provided by the Tata group in India in the early 1920s.
After Independence, in the 1950s, two professional bodies emerged: the Indian
Institute of Personnel Management (IIPM), a counterpart of the Institute of Personnel
Management in the United Kingdom, was formed at Calcutta and the National Institute
of Labour Management (NILM) at Bombay. In the 1960s, the personnel function began
to expand beyond the welfare aspect with three areas of labour welfare, industrial
relations and personnel administration developing as the constituent roles for the
emerging profession (Venkata Ratnam and Shrivastava, 1991). In the 1970s, the thrust
of personnel function shifted towards greater organizational ‘ef ciency’, and by the
1980s it had begun to use and focus on terms and issues such as HRM and human
resource development (HRD). Again, we see many similarities between the role and
competence of HR managers in India and Britain. The two professional bodies of IIPM
and NILM merged in 1980 to form the National Institute of Personnel Management
(NIPM) at Bombay. Such an event took place in Britain in 1994 when the IPM and
Institute of Training and Development merged to form Institute of Personnel and
Development (IPD). Thus, we see that the status of the personnel function in India has
changed over the years. However, the in uence of social contacts, caste, relationships
and politics on Indian HRM policies and practices remains very prominent (Amba-Rao,
1994; Sparrow and Budhwar, 1997).
The present debate in India is quite similar to the one which was dominant in the
United Kingdom in the 1980s when the Thatcher government liberalized the British
economy. The present Indian literature contains arguments about the difference between
personnel management and HRM and HRD and the re-labelling of job titles from
personnel manager to HRD executive (Balasubramanian, 1995; Budhwar, 2000;
Budhwar and Sparrow, 1998). This directly re ects the personnel management versus
human resource management argument in the Western literature (Legge, 1995).
In sum, both Indian and British personnel specialists are under increasing pressure to
change their role; the reasons, however, are different. What is the impact of such
pressures on the personnel function in the two countries? How are personnel specialists
responding to such pressures? We think that, in terms of the perceived role and
competence of HR practitioners, Indian and British personnel specialists see themselves
as being on the same path. But does national culture shape the way they move down this
path?
The existing review of literature shows that, except for Budhwar and Sparrow’s work
(Budhwar, 2000; Budhwar and Sparrow, 1997, 1998; Sparrow and Budhwar, 1997), there
is no comparative HR study on India and Britain. For sure, a few studies do compare
general management practices and policies in India and Britain. For example, Khan and
Atkinson (1987) examined Indian and British managers’ attitudes towards social
responsibility. The authors looked at a number of issues related to the concept of
social responsibility, such as its relevance, potential gains, effects of legislation on
social responsibility and problems involved, and showed signi cant similarities in the
attitudes of Indian and British managers towards them. Tayeb (1987, 1988) examined
the organizational structure and management style prevalent in fourteen matched Indian
and English rms. The author reported many differences between Indian and English
employees in their ways of thinking and linked these differences to the socio-economic
conditions and the cultural values in the two countries.
Broadly speaking, India and Britain have administrative and constitutional similar-
ities, which India inherited from the British, but are the HR practices and policies being
adopted in similar organizations the same in both countries? The literature on Indian
HRM certainly shows a strong in uence of Anglo-Saxon thought (Akhilesh and
Nagaraj, 1990; Venkata Ratnam, 1992). Yet, Tayeb’s (1987) study showed differences
in cultural values and thinking between English and Indian people. Tayeb noted that, in
cultural terms, as compared to an English person, an Indian person is more fearful of
people in power, obedient to superiors, dependent on others, fatalistic, submissive,
collectivist, caste conscious, law-abiding and more clan-orientated. A possible explana-
tion for such behaviour can be traced to the long imperialist history of India. From the
tenth century till 1947 India was ruled by foreigners (Husain, 1992; Thomas and Philip,
1994). Apart from this, the traditional hierarchical social structure of India has always
emphasized respect for superiors, they can be elders, teachers or superiors at work, i.e.
the nature of Hinduism evidenced by the caste and social system (Sahay and Walsham,
1997). Jones (1989), on the basis of interviews with thirty businessmen in Calcutta,
found that the strong in uence of the ‘British Raj’ still existed in Indian organizations.
Crabb (1995) compared diversity management in the United Kingdom and India and
noted the different types of diversity that has to be managed in the two nations. In
Britain, diversity often comes down to race, age or gender, but in India it comes down
to class, background, geographical and linguistic origin, caste and religion. These
diversities are re ected in patterns of life, styles of living, land-tenure systems,
occupational pursuits, inheritance and succession rules. Further, hierarchy and inequal-
ity are deeply rooted in India’s traditions and are often found in practice in the form of
unequally placed caste and class groups (Jain and Venkata Ratnam, 1994). As a result,
there is a continued dependence of one set of people or group on the other (for example,
subordinates on superiors) and a general lack of local initiatives to tackle their own
problems (Sinha, 1990).
There is a strong in uence of social, cultural, economic and political factors on HRM
policies and practices in Indian organizations. At times, selection, promotions and
transfers in Indian organizations are based on ascribed status and social and political
connections. As a result, there is a strong emphasis on collectivism, which means that
family and group attainments take precedence over work outcomes (Kanungo and
Mendonca, 1994). Similarly, Sharma (1984: 80) reported that staf ng in Indian
organizations is primarily governed by familial, communal and political considerations.
Motivational tools in Indian organizations are more likely to be social, interpersonal and
even spiritual. In such conditions, the employees’ orientation is towards personalized
relationships rather than towards performance (Kanungo and Mendonca, 1994: 450). In
contrast, such a situation does not exist overtly in the British organizations.
As noted above, the existing dynamic business environment both in Britain and India
has placed a number of challenges before the personnel specialists. Thus, it is worth
investigating the existing HRM scenarios in the two countries from both personnel
specialists’ and organizations’ viewpoints. The in uence of contingent variables on
HRM policies and practices is analysed from an organizational viewpoint. As there are
less empirical investigations of this type, it was decided to examine such an in uence
from the viewpoint of top personnel specialists. Top personnel specialists are the
‘subject matter experts’ whose role is changing rapidly and they should be able to
provide a comprehensive picture of the evolution of the HR function in their respective
countries.
Due to the lack of comparative studies between developed and developing countries
and because of the absence of an established theoretical framework for such cross-
national evaluation, it is important to clarify the basis for our investigation. Writers such
as Benson (1995), Kochan et al. (1992), Lawler et al. (1995) and Osterman (1992)
suggest the internal labour market (ILM) as a good starting point for analysing HRM in
developing countries (most of the research in the eld of ILMs has been in highly
industrialized nations). Doeringer and Piore (1971) de ne the ILM as ‘an administrative
unit, within which the pricing and allocation of labour is governed by a set of
administrative rules and procedures’. As a result, the internal labour force enjoys certain
rights and privileges which are not available to employees on the external labour
market. One major objective of developing ILMs is to develop long-term employment
relationships to bind employees to the organization so as to reduce turnover. ILMs are
known to be determined by external economic conditions, unions, organizational
characteristics (such, for example, as size, sector, presence of formal HR department)
and transaction costs (Pfeffer and Cohen, 1984; Soeters and Schwan, 1990; Turner,
1994).
The literature on internal labour markets (Benson, 1995; Osterman, 1992, 1994;
Soeters and Schwan, 1990) highlights the need for HRM practices to be consistent with
a systematic and rationalized employment system. For example, the adoption of formal
testing of job applicants, job evaluation, training needs analysis, training evaluation and
performance-related pay are activities associated with highly structured systems
(Lawler et al., 1995). There is plenty of evidence regarding the existence of structured
employment systems in the United Kingdom (see Gospel, 1992). However, there is
much less research evidence for Indian organizations, although, in comparison to Thai
rms, Indian rms are found to have more established ILMs (Lawler et al., 1995).
Nevertheless, we have more evidence regarding the provision of limited bene ts and the
existence of simple rudimentary pay systems in Indian organizations (Bordia and Blau,
1998; Datt and Sundharam, 1999). Moreover, rules regarding practices such as
recruitment, training, promotions and lay-off are ad hoc in nature and subject to easy
manipulations by the employers (Venkata Ratnam, 1995). For example, social and
political pressures signi cantly tamper with and in uence selection and promotion
decisions (Kanungo and Mendonca, 1994; Sparrow and Budhwar, 1997). Lack of
training in Indian organizations is mainly due to nancial constraints, non-availability
of required courses, fear of losing trained managers or poaching and possibility of
external recruitment (Sharma, 1992: 28). The Industrial Disputes Act of 1947 restricts
the ability of employers to re, lay-off or retrench employees. As per this law, lay-offs
are costly (the employer must pay 50 per cent of wages for the rst 90 days and lay-offs
are permitted only for a maximum of 180 days). However, due to the lack of strict
enforcement of the legislation, such provisions are hardly followed seriously (Kuruvilla,
1996: 650). The above discussion suggests that ILMs in Indian organizations would be
less developed than those in Britain.
On the basis of the existing literature (both Indian and British) and the current trends
in HRM in the two countries, we propose the following two hypotheses:
Hypothesis 1: HR practices in Indian organizations are less rationalized and

structured than those in Britain.
Hypothesis 2: There are signi cant differences in the impact of contingent variables
on HR policies and practices of organizations in the two countries.
Methods
Sample
Two parallel questionnaire surveys (one each in Britain and India) of rms having 200
or more employees in six matched industries in the manufacturing sector (food
processing, plastics, steel, textiles, pharmaceuticals and footwear) were carried out
between October 1994 and April 1995. The respondents were the top personnel
specialists, one from each rm. In all, we received ninety-three out of 500
questionnaires (18 per cent) from companies in Britain and 137 out of 450
questionnaires (30 per cent) from companies in India. The items for the questionnaires
were constructed from the existing measures such as those developed by Cran eld
researchers in their study of comparative European HRM (see Brewster and Hegewisch,
1994) and other studies (see, for example, Amba-Rao, 1994; Baird and Meshoulam,
1988; Dimick and Murray, 1978; Jackson et al., 1989).
The sector distributions of the respondents for the two samples showed that 57 per
cent of Indian rms belonged to the public sector and 47 per cent of British
organizations were public limited companies; 39 per cent of the Indian and 52 per cent
of British organizations were from the private sector. The industry-wise distribution of
respondents for the two samples is shown in Table 1.
Table 1 Sample industry distribution
Industry India Britain
Food processing 13.9 % 17.2 %

Plastics 15.3 % 17.2 %
Steel 19 % 16.1 %
Textiles 26.3 % 17.2 %
Pharmaceuticals 14.6 % 21.5 %
Footwear 10.9 % 10.8 %
Analysis of the demographic features of the sample suggests that the sample was
representative of the total population. Forty-six and 62 per cent of Indian and British
organizations, respectively, were medium-sized and employed 200–499 employees, 16
and 14 per cent, respectively, employed 500–999 employees, 31 and 15 per cent,
respectively, 1,000–4,999 employees, and 7 and 8 per cent, respectively, of Indian and
British organizations, employed over 5,000 employees.
Measures
To get a comparative picture of HRM in India and Britain, the in uence of a number
of independent variables on HRM policies and practices was evaluated. We included
the following control variables in our analysis: country, ownership of the rm (private
or public), unionization, size of the organization (number of employees), HR strategy
(cost reduction, talent improvement, talent acquisition, or effective resource allocation),
life-cycle stage of the organization (growth or maturity), and age of the organization.
The control variables were selected based on previous studies (see, for example, Cohen
and Pfeffer, 1986; Fisher and Shaw, 1992; Lawler et al., 1995). Privatization initiated
in Britain in 1980s has now reached its pinnacle. On the other hand, in India, after the
liberalization of economic policies, the privatization of State enterprises is becoming a
hot topic for debate (Venkata Ratnam, 1995). Recently, the privatization of a number of
industries such as the railways, power, ports, roads, bridges and airport projects has
been initiated (Budhwar, 2001; Datt and Sundharam, 1999). Further, rapid growth in
India, propelled by private investment, is likely to alter most HRM patterns (Bordia and
Blau, 1998). The private sector is already attracting a greater proportion of new
employment. However, the adherence to the provision of labour legislation in the Indian
private sector is questionable (Venkata Ratnam, 1995). Our expectation is that HR
practices in the State-owned enterprises (public sector) would be more rationalized and
structured than enterprises in the private sector.
The in uence of trade unions on HRM in the two countries varies. A review of
literature suggests that trade unions are still strong in India as compared to Britain.
Though, in terms of percentage, unions in India are on a decline, in absolute terms there
is an increase in union membership (Das, 1999). Moreover, as in the UK, the Indian
unions are now playing a more co-operative role and are less militant (Venkata Ratnam,
1996). Nevertheless, they still in uence HR policies and practices in Indian companies
greatly. This is due to the strong political support they enjoy and the existence of strong
pro-labour laws in India (Sodhi, 1994; Sparrow and Budhwar, 1997; Venkata Ratnam,
1995). The union in uence on HRM policies and practices of companies in Britain, on
the other hand, has waned signi cantly over the last decade or so. They are playing a
more co-operative role at present (Heery, 1997; Legge, 1995). If the unions are strong
and work effectively, they lead to more systematic and rationalized HRM practices as
Table 2 Trade union membership in India and Britain
India Britain
Number of Number of
Year registered unions Membership* registered unions Membership**
1951–2 4,623 20 – –
1961–2 11,614 40 – –
1971 22,484 55 – –
1981 35,539 54 414 12,106
1987 49,329 79 330 10,475
1990 52,016 70 287 9,947
1992 55,680 57.4 268 9,048
* Membership in hundred thousands Source: Indian Labour Yearbook (1997)
** Membership in thousands Source: Employee Gazette (June 1994)
has happened in developed countries (Soeters and Schwan, 1990). Does this happen in
India? Table 2 highlights the comparative membership details of trade unions in India
and Britain.
While examining the in uence of trade unions on HRM practices in the Indian
context, one must be aware of certain facts. For example, as per the 1991 census, the
total workforce in India was 306.8 million (Budhwar, 2001). Out of this, over 90 per
cent of the workforce is employed in the unorganized sector. Formal policies and
practices relating HRM are generally absent in this sector, which is usually outside the
purview of legislation, the trade union movement and professional management
(Venkata Ratnam, 1996: 28). The Indian union membership details given in Table 2 are
only for the employees in the organized sector. Our sample primarily falls under the
organized sector, in which the unions are known to in uence HRM policies and
practices signi cantly (Das, 1999).
The size of the organization (number of employees) has been shown to affect HRM
practices. For example, large organizations tend to follow more formal and structured
HR practices (Jackson et al., 1989). With the developments in the strategic nature of the
HRM function, some researchers (such as Budhwar and Sparrow, 1997; Hiltrop, 1993)
have examined the in uence of HR strategies on HRM practices. Recent research also
suggests that the life-cycle stage of an organization also affects its HRM policies and
practices (Baird and Meshoulam, 1988; Hendry and Pettigrew, 1992; Milliman and Von
Glinow, 1992). Similarly the in uence of age of the organization on HRM is established
in the literature (see Tayeb, 1987).
The major HRM practices examined in the study fall into general categories of
recruitment (seven items), compensation (four items), training and development (eight
items) and employee communication (seven items). The details of the questionnaire
items are shown in Table 3. The set of recruitment practices was examined separately
for white-collar and blue-collar employees. The remaining three sets of HR practices
were investigated for all employees together.
The terms ‘rationalized’ and ‘structured’ HRM practices in the paper are used in a
broad sense to denote established and formal ILM practices. For example, an
established ILM would adopt performance-related pay, performance-based promotions,
a formal approach to recruitment (for example, conducting formal interviews), formal
career plans and well-structured training programmes.
Table 3 Descriptive statistics
Variables Average value
Pooled India Britain
(n 5 230) (n 5 137) (n 5 93)
Dependent variables
Coding scheme: 1 5 extensive use 0 5 little or no use
Recruitment practices WCS/BCS WCS/BCS WCS/BCS
From among current employees .61/ .39 .68/ .45 .51/ .30
Advertise internally .40/ .38 .49/ .51 .25/ .18
Advertise externally .77/ .34 .83/ .17 .89/ .46
Word of mouth .18/ .42 .19/ .44 .17/ .40
Use of recruitment agencies .53/ .18 .62/ .21 .39/ .33
Use of search/selection consultants .47/ .06 .58/ .05 .42/ .11
Apprentices .05/ .32 .06/ .31 .03/ .34
Compensation practices
On the basis of total work experience .06 .09 .02
On the basis of performance of employees .18 .20 .22
On the basis of skills/ competencies of employees .13 .09 .19
A mixture of above three .57 .59 .55
Means of training and development
Formal career plans .31 .30 .34
Performance appraisal .83 .81 .87
Annual career development interview .30 .24 .40
Assessment centres .13 .09 .17
Succession plans .31 .23 .43
Planned job rotation .30 .37 .21
‘Higher ier’ schemes for managers .23 .22 .24
International/regional experience schemes .17 .16 .18
Employee communication practices
Through immediate superior .90 .86 .95
Through trade unions or work councils .54 .42 .73
Through regular workforce meetings .47 .40 .58
Through quality circles .26 .31 .19
Through suggestion box(es) .39 .40 .35
Through an attitude survey .20 .16 .25
No formal methods .16 .24 .05
Independent variables
Country .60
Age of rm .60 .63 .42
Ownership of rm
Private .43 .37 .50
Public .54 .56 .50
Unionized rm .64 .57 .76
Logarithm of number of employees 6.56 6.70 6.37
Life-cycle stage of rm
Growth .51 .60 .36
Maturity .33 .28 .40
Decline .04 .03 .05
Human resource strategy
Cost reduction .24 .34 .18
Talent improvement .61 .58 .66
Talent acquisition .37 .42 .30
Effective resource allocation .73 .72 .73
WCS 5 white-collar staff; BCS 5 blue-collar staff
Statistical procedures
The data were analysed using binomial logit regression. Given the ordinal and truncated
nature of responses, conventional regression analysis was inappropriate. All the items
constituting the four sets of HR practices were dichotomous in nature, i.e. they had only
two responses – yes or no. Firms indicating yes for items were assigned a value of 1 and
those indicating no were assigned a value of 0. This method was used previously by
Budhwar and Sparrow (1997) and Lawler et al. (1995). Descriptive statistics for the
independent and dependent variables country-wise are presented in Table 3. The pooled
scores for each variable are also provided in the same table.
Each logit regression was run using the following independent variables: 1) a dummy
variable scored 1 if the rm was located in India and 0 if it was located in Britain; 2)
a dummy variable scored 1 if the rm was a private enterprise and 0 if it was a public
enterprise; 3) a dummy variable scored 1 if the rm was unionized and 0 if not; 4) a
dummy variable scored 1 if the rm was in the growth life-cycle stage and 0 if it was
in the maturity life-cycle stage; 5) a dummy variable scored 1 if the rm was adopting
a cost reduction HR strategy and 0 if not; 6) a dummy variable scored 1 if the rm was
adopting a talent improvement HR strategy and 0 if not; 7) a dummy variable scored 1
if the rm was adopting a talent acquisition HR strategy and 0 if not; 8) a dummy
variable scored 1 if the rm was adopting a effective resource allocation HR strategy
and 0 if not; 9) a dummy variable scored 1 if the rm was incorporated after 1965 and
0 if before it; and 10) the logarithm of the number of employees in the rm. The
maximum limit for independent variables is 10 for running logit regressions (Norusis,
1994).
Results and discussion

The parameter estimates for all the individual logit equations, one for each of the listed
dependent variables in Table 3, are provided in Tables 1 to 5 in the appendix. We have
reported only the results that were signi cant at p, .05 and p, .01 (Table 4), although
there were many more relationships that were signi cant at p, .10. Signi cant
relationships are identi ed for both the countries. These parameters are used in testing
the two hypotheses. One should note that Table 4 consists only of signi cant parameters
(p, .05 and p, .01) and that a number of parameters were not always statistically
signi cant nor in the anticipated direction.
Recruitment practices
The differences between British and Indian organizations in their recruitment practices
were analysed separately for white-collar and blue-collar employees. Our study found
signi cant differences in HR practices of companies in the two countries for both sets
of employees. The analysis for white-collar and blue-collar employees is presented
separately beginning with white-collar employees. While Indian organizations in the
private sector are more likely to recruit their management employees from their current
employees, British organizations in their growth life-cycle, but not emphasizing a talent
acquisition strategy, rely more on the stock of current employees for recruiting their
managers. Indian companies in the growth cycle and pursuing talent acquisition and
talent improvement HR strategies make greater use of internal advertisements. On the
other hand, British organizations using cost reduction HR strategy advertise internally
more often. Indian and British companies also differ in their external advertisement.
Indian companies founded after 1965 and pursuing a talent acquisition strategy are
Table 4 Summary of logit results
Variables India Britain
(for white-collar staff)
From current employees 1 [ownership]** 1 [LC Stage]***, 2 [TAHR]**
Advertise internally 1 [TAHR]***, 1 [CRHR]***
1 [TIHR & LC Stage]**
Advertise externally 1 [Age & TAHR]** 2 [TIHR]***, 2 [ownership]**
Word of mouth 1 [ownership]**
Use of recruitment agencies 1 [TAHR]**, 2 [ownership]**
Use of search/consultants
Apprentices 2 [ownership]**
(for blue-collar staff)
From current employees
Advertise internally 1 [TAHR & TIHR]***,
1 [CRHR]**
Advertise externally 2 [CRHR & ERAHR]**
Word of mouth 1 [ownership & Union]** 2 [ERAHR & ownership]**,
2 [TIHR]**
Use of recruitment agencies 2 [Union]***
Use of search/consultants
Apprentices 1 [LC Stage]**,
2 [ERAHR & ownership]**
On the basis of total work 1 [Union]**
experience
On the basis of
performance of employees
On the basis of skills/ 1 [ownership]***, 1 [TAHR]**
competencies of employees
A mixture of above three 1 [Ownership]***
Training & development
Formal career plans 1 [Union]** 1 [Log of Employee]**
Performance appraisal 2 [Log of Employee]**,
1 [TAHR]**
Annual career development 1 [Log of Employee]***
interview
Assessment centres 1 [Union]***, 2 [LC Stage]**
2 [ownership & CRHR]**
Succession plans 1 [ERAHR]** 1[Log of Employee &
LC Stage]***
Planned job rotation 2 [LC Stage]**
‘Higher ier’ schemes for 1 [Log of Employee]*** 2[ERAHR]***, [Log of
managers Employee & Age]**
International/regional
experience schemes
Employee communication
Through immediate superior 2 [LC Stage]** 1 [TIHR]**
Through trade unions or 1 [Log of Employee 1 [Union]***
work councils & Union]***,
2 [LC Stage]**
Table 4 Continued
Variables India Britain
Through regular work 1 [TIHR]***, 2 [CRHR]** 1 [Log of Employee & Age]**

meetings
Through quality circles
Through suggestion box(es) 1 [Log of Employee]**
Through an attitude survey 1 [Union]*** 2[Ownership]***, 1 [LC Stage,
ERAHR & Age]**
No formal methods 2 [TIHR]***
LC stage 5 life cycle stage; CRHR 5 cost reduction HR strategy; ERAHR 5 effective resource
allocation HR strategy; TIHR 5 talent improvement HR strategy; TAHR 5 talent acquisition HR
strategy.
** p, .05; *** p, .01
more likely to advertise externally. In Britain, private-sector organizations using talent

improvement strategy do not advertise externally. It seems that these rms are working
on the development of their existing human resources, instead of spending more to
recruit new employees. The increased emphasis on investors in people (IIP) and
national vocational quali cations (NVQs) then seems to be logical (Keep, 1996;
Sparrow and Marchington, 1998). Indian private-sector organizations use a word-of-
mouth strategy more often and make less use of search rms or consultants. As
mentioned above, there is a strong reliance in the Indian private sector on recruiting top-
level employees based on social contacts and in an informal way, i.e. these positions are
never advertised, but are generally created to accommodate family members, relatives
or friends (Kanungo and Mendonca, 1994; Sparrow and Budhwar, 1996). Our results
also show that Indian rms pursuing a talent acquisition HR strategy are likely to
approach recruitment agencies to recruit their managerial staff. Maybe these rms are in
the public sector where it is a legal requirement to advertise new positions and follow
a formal method of recruitment (Gonsalves et al., 1995). Moreover, Indian private-
sector rms are less likely to recruit their managerial staff as apprentices.
The above ndings highlight the strong in uence of ‘context’ in dictating HRM
practices. For example, though both Indian and British rms recruit their white-collar
staff from among current employees (see Table 4), the logic surrounding such a choice
is country speci c. In the case of India, such a practice is more prevalent in private-
sector rms. The rationale for this is discussed above. On the other hand, in Britain,
recruitment of white-collar staff from current employees is more prevalent in rms
which are in their growth life-cycle stage and are less likely to pursue a talent
acquisition HR strategy. It seems that the pressure to reduce costs is dictating such a
practice. Similarly, other ndings of our study also highlight the context-speci c nature
of HRM in the two countries.
British and Indian organizations also differ in their recruitment practices for blue-
collar workers. Different HR strategies have the most in uence on recruitment practices
for blue-collar workers in both India and Britain. Indian companies pursuing talent
acquisition, talent improvement and cost reduction HR strategies were more likely to
recruit lower-level employees by advertising internally. This not only saves time and
money but also helps in retaining the preferred employees. On the other hand, Indian
rms emphasizing cost reduction and effective resource allocation HR strategies were
less likely to advertise externally to ll their blue-collar jobs. Moreover, unionized
Indian private-sector organizations were more likely to adopt a word-of-mouth method
to recruit their lower-level employees. Previous research (Sharma, 1984; Shenoy, 1981;
Sparrow and Budhwar, 1997) has shown the importance of social relationships, caste
and religion in the management of human resources in India. Further, this is
supplemented by the strong in uence of trade unions and political parties (Sodhi, 1994;
Venkata Ratnam, 1995). British private-sector organizations which pursue an effective
resource allocation and talent improvement HR strategies were less likely to adopt such
a method. The British literature does not report an overt in uence of social relationships
or social contacts in the management of human resources. British unionized rms were
also less likely to engage the help of recruitment agencies to ll their blue-collar
vacancies. Whereas Indian organizations in the growth cycle were more likely to recruit
their lower-level staff as apprentices. The Apprenticeship Act of 1961 states that new
blue-collar employees should be recruited as apprentices (Gonsalves et al., 1995). Our
results also indicate that these organizations were less likely to be in the private sector
and would not emphasize an effective resource allocation HR strategy.
Hypothesis 1 anticipates more reliance on formal and structured recruitment in the
United Kingdom than in India. The above results show mixed support for this. For
example, we have relatively more emphasis in India on recruiting staff by advertising
internally (white-collar) and by adopting a word-of-mouth method. However, this
happens more in the Indian private sector. On the other hand, British organizations rely
less on the word-of-mouth method of recruitment and prefer to advertise externally.
Hypothesis 2 suggests signi cant differences in the nature and level of in uence of
independent variables on recruitment policies and practices in Indian and British
organizations. In comparison to Indian organizations, there are fewer determinants of
the recruitment function in British organizations. Further, there is only one common
independent variable (i.e. ownership) which signi cantly in uences the recruitment
function in the two countries. Interestingly, the nature of in uence of this variable is
different in Indian and British organizations (see Table 4). Thus, our ndings provide
strong support to Hypothesis 2.
Under this key theme, we examined four practices: (1) compensation based on seniority
or work experience, (2) performance-based compensation, (3) compensation based on
skills or competencies of employees, and (4) a mixture of the rst three practices.
Findings of our study suggest that unionized rms in India are likely to pursue a
compensation system based on work experience or seniority. Most public-sector
organizations in India adhere to this mechanism because this is a legal requirement.
Indian private-sector rms pursuing a talent acquisition HR strategy were found to
adopt a skill- or competency-based approach to compensate their employees. Presently,
this trend is emerging in the Indian literature (Balaji et al., 1998; Venkata Ratnam,
1995). On the other hand, British private-sector organizations are more likely to pursue
a mixed approach (comprising of seniority-based, performance-based and skills-based)
to compensate their employees. This is in line with the existing trends in British HRM
(Legge, 1995; Sparrow and Marchington, 1998).
As per Hypothesis 1, we anticipated a more rationalized and structured compensation
system in Britain than in India. Our results show that this is not the case. The emphasis
on performance-related pay and skill or competency-based pay in both countries reveals
the existence of an equally rational pay system. There is subtle transition taking place
away from seniority-based to performance-based pay in India (Bordia and Blau, 1998).
However, this is true only for the Indian private sector. Lifetime employment and
seniority-based pay are still very prevalent in the Indian public sector (Venkata Ratnam,
1995). Unlike Hypothesis 1, the ndings of our study lend strong support to Hypothesis
2, which states that there are signi cant differences in the impact of contingency
variables on HR policies and practices in the two countries.
Training and development

We examined eight training and development practices in our investigation. Indian
unionized rms were found to make greater use of formal career plans for the purpose
of training and development of their employees. Indian rms pursuing a talent
acquisition HR strategy were more likely to adopt performance appraisals to train their
staff. Our survey results show that least 23.3 per cent of 137 Indian rms trained their
staff in performance appraisal. Indian unionized rms are more likely to set up
assessment centres to train their staff. This is more valid in Indian public-sector
organizations, which still seriously follow time-based promotions and increment system
(Bordia and Blau, 1998; Sparrow and Budhwar, 1996). However, Indian private rms
pursuing a cost reduction HR strategy are less likely to use such an approach. On the
other hand, British rms in their growth cycle are less likely to set up assessment
centres to train their employees. Indian rms emphasizing an effective resource
allocation strategy are more likely to have succession plans to train their employees.
British organizations in the growth cycle are also likely to pursue a similar practice. On
the other hand, Indian private-sector rms are less likely to pursue a job rotation
practice to train their staff. British rms pursuing an effective resource allocation HR
strategy are less likely to pursue a high- ier scheme to train their managers. However,
British private-sector rms founded after 1965 and pursuing a talent acquisition HR
strategy are likely to adopt such a scheme for their top managers.
The adoption of formal career plans, annual career development interviews,
assessment centres, succession plans and planned job rotation depict the existence of a
structured training and development system. To a great extent, organizations in both
countries seem to be pursuing this. The ndings thus lead us to the partial rejection of
Hypothesis 1. However, we have to be cautious in generalizing this to Indian private-
sector organizations. Results in Table 4 show clear support for Hypothesis 2.
Employee communication
British rms pursuing a talent improvement HR strategy are more likely to
communicate with their employees through their immediate superiors. This shows an
emphasis on team building in British organizations (see Legge, 1995). On the other
hand, Indian rms in the growth life-cycle stage are less likely to communicate with
their employees through their immediate superiors. They are also not likely to
communicate through trade unions or work councils. The hierarchical system is still
prevalent in Indian organizations, which results mainly in top-down communication.
Nevertheless, Indian unionized rms are likely to communicate with their employees
through unions and work councils. This is mainly due to the presence of strong unions
and provision of the works councils (see Venkata Ratnam, 1995). Similarly, British
unionized rms are likely to adopt the same approach to employee communication.
Moreover, Indian rms pursuing a talent improvement HR strategy are more likely to
communicate with their employees through regular workforce meetings. However,
Indian rms using a cost reduction HR strategy are less likely to participate in regular
workforce meetings with their employees. British private-sector rms formed after 1965
Table 5 Summary of hypotheses testing
HR practices Hypothesis 1 Hypothesis 2
Recruitment Partial rejection Supported

Compensation Rejection Supported
Training and development Partial rejection Supported
Employee communication Partial rejection Supported
are likely to adopt regular workforce meeting as a source of employee communication.

British private rms are also less likely to communicate with their employees via an
attitude survey. But British organizations that are in the growth life-cycle stage, formed
after 1965, and pursuing an effective resource allocation HR strategy are likely to
communicate with their employees through attitude surveys. Similarly, Indian
unionized rms are more likely to adopt the attitude survey method to communicate
with their employees. On the other hand, Indian organizations pursuing a talent
improvement HR strategy are less likely to adopt no formal methods for employee
communication.
Hypothesis 1 anticipates reliance on employee communication through work
councils, suggestion boxes and attitude surveys. Like the training and development
practices, our results show that both Indian and British organizations are adopting the
mechanisms mentioned to communicate with their employees; however, they also seem
to be relying on informal means of communication. Like the above three HRM
functions of recruitment, compensation and training and development, our results for
the employee communication function (see Table 4) strongly support Hypothesis 2. The
results of hypothesis testing are summarized in Table 5.
Conclusions
The results suggest a signi cant relationship between a number of contingent variables
(such as the size, age, nature and life-cycle stage of the organization, HR strategies,
business sector and trade union membership) and HRM policies and practices.
However, the degree and nature of in uence of the independent variables mentioned on
the four HRM functions discussed is signi cantly different in the two countries. We can
therefore conclude that, although we have similar HRM policies and practices prevalent
in the two countries, the logic behind their existence is quite different. This con rms the
context-speci c nature of HRM.
Apart from the traditional contingent variables of age, size and ownership of
organization, our study has revealed that HR strategy has a signi cant in uence on the
nature of HR practices. Further research should be conducted to con rm this. The
generalizability of results should be limited to the sectors under study as there are many
more factors and variables known to in uence HRM practices, such as the business
sector, organizational practices and strategies and a number of national factors such as
national culture and institutions (for details, see Budhwar, 1999).
The results of this study are of relevance to both academicians and practitioners.
From a theoretical point of view, the results test the in uence of a large set of factors
on HRM policies and practices in the two countries. For HR professionals, the study
provides crucial information regarding the context-speci c nature of HRM which can
be used to develop new HR programmes and policies for rms operating in India and
Britain. Moreover, it helped to clarify the general notion of HRM in developing
countries, i.e. HRM policies and practices in such nations are less rationalized and
structured. Our results showed that this is not the case (at least in the Indian context).
We also have an indication of the existence of a unique ILM in Indian organizations,
one based on social relations, political contacts, caste, religion and economic power.
Policy makers need to pay a lot of attention to these unique aspects of HR in Indian
organizations. Based on the ndings of our study, we would suggest strongly that
similar research should be conducted in other developing countries.
Our data do not allow us to evaluate strongly the impact of different HRM practices
on organizational performance. However, considering our results, the existing Indian
HRM literature and the present dynamic business environment, Indian organizations
need to pursue more rationalized HRM practices and build strong ILMs (which should
emphasize solely performance and should be less in uenced by the afore-mentioned
social, economic, religious and political factors). There are some indications suggesting
such developments (in the form of increased emphasis on training and development,
preference for talent in recruitment and performance-based compensation); however,
these tend to be more in the private sector. The time has now come (considering the
increased competitive environment due to the recent economic reforms) to speed up
developments in all sectors.
Acknowledgements
We thank Jay Dahya for his assistance in data analysis. Our thanks are also due to the
anonymous reviewers of IJHRM and the twenty- fth EIBA conference, Chris Brewster,
Michael Poole, Yaw Debrah and Harish Jain for their constructive comments on an
earlier version of the paper. An earlier version of this paper was presented at a
competitive track session of the twenty- fth EIBA conference, 12–14 December
1999.
Appendix
Table 1 Recruitment practices for white-collar staff in India and Britain
Independent Current employees Advert. internally Advert. externally Word of mouth Rect. agencies Consultant Apprentices
variables Pooled India Britain Pooled India Britain Pooled India Britain Pooled India Britain Pooled India Britain Pooled India Britain Pooled India Britain
Age .023 2 .350 .327 2 .086 .093 2 .597 .336 1.13 2 .214 2 .104 2 .712 .517 2 .020 2 .262 .086 .204 .370 2 .502 2 1.11 2 1.73 .919
(.94) (.46) (.56) (.81) (.83) (.32) (.33) (.05)** (.70) (.79) (.20) (.42) (.94) (.56) (.86) (.95) (.40) (.35) (.17) (.09)* (.74)
Country .429 .687 .537 .112 .852 .944 1.69
(.18) (.04)** (.15) (.77) (.00)*** (.00)*** (.05)**
Cost reduction HR 2 .429 .459 2 .046 .934 .711 2.10 2 .619 2 .385 2 1.25 2 .436 .789 .414 .243 .416 2 .148 .090 2 .099 .568 2 8.61 2 9.05 2 8.52
strategy (.28) (.10)* (.95) (.01)*** (.10)* (.01)*** (.15) (.49) (.10)* (.36) (.10)* (.63) (.50) (.36) (.83) (.80) (.81) (.43) (.79) (.81) (.95)
Effective resource 2 1.95 2 .823 .315 .110 .061 .710 2 .574 1.15 2 .043 2 .497 2 .864 2 .264 .034 2 .188 .285 2 .072 .148 2 .011 2 1.10 2 1.08 2 1.14
allocation strategy (.58) (.10)* (.59) (.75) (.89) (.28) (.18) (.10)* (.94) (.23) (.10)* (.69) (.91) (.69) (.61) (.83) (.74) (.98) (.16) (.26) (.59)
Talent improvement 2 .040 2 .238 .271 .862 1.02 .868 2 .738 2 .368 2 1.56 .221 2 .060 .863 .124 .539 2 .480 .015 .225 2 .248 1.47 1.35 9.16
HR strategy (.90) (.57) (.63) (.01)*** (.02)** (.10)* (.05)** (.49) (.01)*** (.57) (.90) (.21) (.68) (.10)* (.34) (.96) (.56) (.64) (.18) (.25) (.93)
Talent acquisition 2 .172 .386 2 1.21 .783 1.07 .542 .544 1.11 .055 .085 2 .022 .079 .399 (.782) 2 .166 .403 .741 .070 .518 .886 2 .593
HR strategy (.59) (.37) (.04)** (.02)** (.01)*** (.38) (.16) (.05)** (.92) (.82) (.96) (.90) (.20) (.05)** (.75) (.20) (.06)* (.90) (.50) (.36) (.83)
Life-cycle stage .930 .537 1.88 .600 .915 .323 .296 .271 .147 2 .054 .249 2 .386 .129 .289 .041 .247 .187 .419 2 .168 .623 2 9.99
(.00)*** (.24) (.00)*** (.07)* (.04)** (.57) (.43) (.62) (.79) (.89) (.65) (.55) (.68) (.51) (.93) (.44) (.66) (.05)** (.82) (.49) (.93)
Log of employees 2 .039 .016 2 .074 .010 .048 2 .090 .162 .517 .191 2 .029 2 .002 2 .075 .086 .129 .150 .028 .043 2 .019 2 .020 .022 .262
(.72) (.91) (.73) (.92) (.74) (.65) (.23) (.81) (.35) (.83) (.99) (.75) (.44) (.41) (.41) (.79) (.76) (.91) (.93) (.94) (.81)
Ownership (private) .310 .944 2 .535 .005 .317 2 .550 .594 .120 1.12 2 .512 .301 .806 .120 2 .570 2 .309 .360 .487 .119 1.20 2 1.87 2 .414
(.31) (.02)** (.31) (.98) (.43) (.32) (.09)* (.81) (.03)** (.16) (.05)** (.19) (.68) (.05)** (.52) (.22) (.21) (.81) (.15) (.05)** (.82)
Unionized rm 2 .059 2 .506 .032 2 .075 .108 2 .659 2 .315 .230 2 .849 2 .068 2 .197 2 .207 .215 2 .045 .366 .586 .523 .815 2 .717 2 .624 2 1.91
(.89) (.28) (.96) (.83) (.80) (.30) (.00)*** (.80) (.23) (.87) (.73) (.77) (.52) (.91) (.54) (.09)* (.23) (.21) (.38) (.52) (.32)
Constant .316 1.12 .218 2 2.33 2 2.59 2 1.23 .325 .447 1.10 2 .670 2 .038 2 1.07 2 1.51 2 1.25 2 1.36 2 1.70 2 1.43 2 1.18 2 3.86 2 3.29 2 11.40
(.73) (.42) (.88) (.02)** (.06)* (.41) (.76) (.80) (.47) (.55) (.98) (.54) (.10)* (.37) (.31) (.06)* (.28) (.39) (.12) (.30) (.92)
2 2 Log likelihood 257.34 142.61 96.15 252.12 153.43 90.72 206.87 101.24 93.82 195.54 113.03 77.68 273.80 154.62 111.34 271.15 160.99 104.39 64.67 46.60 13.80
Goodness of t 16.83 11.04 20.72 26.84 16.87 8.53 20.22 14.29 12.44 5.20 5.49 4.53 13.59 7.98 85.86 16.71 7.16 4.71 21.40 17.79 5.87
Budhwar and Khatri: HR practices in Britain and India
Chi-square (.07)* (.27) (.01)*** (.00)*** (.05)** (.48) (.02)** (.10)* (.18) (.87) (.78) (.87) (.19) (.53) (.96) (.08)* (.62) (.85) (.01)*** (.03)** (.75)
*, ** and *** indicate statistical signi cance at the 90, 95 and 99 per cent con dence intervals respectively.
817
818
Table 2 Recruitment practices for blue-collar staff in India and Britain
Independent Current employees Advert. internally Advert. externally Word of mouth Rect. agencies Consultant Apprentices
Age 2 .017 2 .325 .447 .205 .017 .274 2 .387 .125 2 2.11 2 .370 .673 2 .056 2 .096 .309 2 .305 2 .052 2 1.35 1.14 2 .144 2 .409 2 .263
(.95) (.46) (.45) (.58) (.97) (.68) (.30) (.78) (.05)* (.24) (.10)* (.91) (.81) (.55) (.72) (.93) (.10)* (.28) (.66) (.40) (.62)
Country .793 1.96 1.89 .367 .537 .281 2 .044
(.01)*** (.58) (.00)*** (.24) (.20) (.64) (.89)
Cost reduction HR .045 2 .431 .987 1.96 .670 2 .259 2 .678 2 .607 2 2.47 2 .421 2 .501 2 .347 2 .804 2 .594 2 1.59 2 1.43 2 8.64 .452 2 .474 2 .628 2 .049
strategy (.90) (.32) (.10)* (.15) (.05)** (.80) (.09)* (.05)** (.14) (.24) (.24) (.64) (.10)* (.27) (.27) (.19) (.82) (.74) (.23) (.20) (.94)
Effective resource 2 .104 2 .086 .048 2 .070 2 .112 2 .084 2 .719 2 .758 2 .752 2 .529 2 .223 2 1.10 .114 .416 2 .279 .897 2 .342 8.85 2 .237 2 .959 .902
allocation strategy (.76) (.85) (.93) (.86) (.82) (.91) (.06)* (.05)** (.38) (.10)* (.62) (.05)** (.80) (.46) (.76) (.28) (.75) (.86) (.50) (.04)** (.10)*
Talent improvement .117 .028 .660 .810 1.34 2 .411 .538 .673 2 .444 2 .222 .301 2 .945 2 .489 2 .384 2 .922 .527 .368 .593 2 .287 2 .218 2 .449
HR strategy (.70) (.94) (.29) (.02)** (.00)*** (.54) (.12) (.09)* (.59) (.46) (.44) (.07)* (.20) (.40) (.24) (.45) (.69) (.65) (.37) (.61) (.40)
Talent acquisition .377 .665 2 .015 1.12 1.34 .950 .050 .160 2 .323 2 .527 2 .645 2 .357 .391 .367 .087 .218 .444 2 .352 2 .023 2 .070 .078
HR strategy (.23) (.09)* (.97) (.00)*** (.00)*** (.10)* (.88) (.69) (.70) (.09)* (.10)* (.52) (.31) (.43) (.91) (.73) (.63) (.79) (.94) (.87) (.88)
Life-cycle stage .060 .487 2 .858 2 .038 2 .201 .626 2 .291 2 .560 .090 2 .06 2 .074 .229 .126 .031 .230 2 .505 2 .871 2 .099 .395 .944 2 .219
(.85) (.26) (.10)* (.91) (.67) (.35) (.42) (.20) (.90) (.82) (.86) (.66) (.76) (.95) (.76) (.43) (.36) (.92) (.24) (.05)** (.67)
Log of employees .075 2 .009 .176 .100 .122 .202 .150 .053 .433 2 .04 2 .076 .073 .231 .151 .480 2 .109 .073 2 .283 2 .143 2 .110 2 .180
(.51) (.94) (.41) (.44) (.46) (.46) (.24) (.71) (.10)* (.67) (.60) (.71) (.08)* (.034) (.10)* (.59) (.76) (.37) (.24) (.51) (.34)
Ownership (private) 2 .686 2 .633 2 .806 2 .244 .144 2 1.16 2 .148 2 .280 2 .043 2 .202 .285 2 1.02 .110 2 .211 .419 .971 .566 1.86 2 .285 2 .170 2 .319
(.02)** (.10)* (.10)* (.47) (.73) (.10)* (.65) (.47) (.95) (.48) (.05)** (.04)** (.77) (.10)* (.60) (.12) (.52) (.10)* (.35) (.05)** (.51)
Unionized rm .098 2 .258 1.18 .483 .216 .795 2 1.51 2 .855 2 .412 2 .399 .423 2 .686 2 .412 .371 2 2.01 1.15 .591 .879 .554 .452 .689
(.77) (.56) (.10)* (.10)* (.64) (.37) (.02)** (.06)* (.63) (.23) (.05)** (.25) (.34) (.48) (.01)*** (.16) (.63) (.53) (.12) (.34) (.27)
Constant 2 1.31 .232 2 3.28 2 3.50 2 1.87 2 3.45 2 1.51 .822 2 2.51 1.28 1.32 1.69 2 2.94 2 2.66 2 2.93 2 4.24 2 2.79 2 12.25 .363 .450 2 .059
(.16) (.86) (.06)* (.00)*** (.21) (.08)* (.14) (.54) (.16) (.15) (.31) (.24) (.01)*** (.09)* (.14) (.03)** (.33) (.81) (.70) (.76) (.96)
2 2 Log likelihood 262.55 158.54 89.39 219.72 141.60 67.61 227.90 157.54 59.29 277.48 162.10 102.65 187.47 126.04 53.21 90.54 44.93 31.74 254.15 141.07 104.28
Goodness of t 15.54 11.31 11.78 54.49 28.70 8.43 42.88 12.95 13.42 8.09 7.74 12.52 13.28 5.91 12.27 12.04 14.25 11.62 8.74 11.01 6.08
Chi-square (.11) (.25) (.22) (.00)*** (.00)*** (.49) (.00)*** (.16) (.14) (.62) (.56) (.18) (.20) (.74) (.19) (.28) (.11) (.23) (.55) (.27) (.73)
Table 3 Compensation practices in India and Britain
Independent Total work experience Performance related Skills or competencies Mixed approach
variables Pooled India Britain Pooled India Britain Pooled India Britain Pooled India Britain
Constant 2 4.496 2 2.222 2 87.216 2 1.368 2 1.050 2 1.961 2 1.694 2 2.753 2 2.036 0.746 0.582 1.459
(0.02)** (0.31) (0.97) (0.27) (0.55) (0.33) (0.25) (0.28) (0.30) (0.44) (0.67) (0.34)
Log of employees 2 0.115 2 0.209 6.768 0.001 2 0.181 0.103 2 0.040 0.114 2 0.092 0.031 0.199 2 0.120
(0.03)** (0.10)* (0.96) (0.99) (0.38) (0.65) (0.81) (0.70) (0.67) (0.77) (0.20) (0.50)
Life-cycle stage 0.103 0.140 –0.828 0.167 0.430 2 0.003 0.183 0.125 0.300 2 0.248 2 0.478 2 0.188
(0.56) (0.67) (0.10)* (0.38) (0.10)* (0.98) (0.37) (0.79) (0.10)* (0.11) (0.06)* (0.37)
Unionized rm 0.852 1.389 2 27.613 2 0.377 2 0.249 2 0.571 0.412 0.239 0.556 2 0.107 2 0.298 0.193
(0.73) (0.10)* (0.98) (0.36) (0.65) (0.40) (0.44) (0.78) (0.51) (0.74) (0.50) (0.10)*
Ownership (private) 2 1.376 2 1.121 2 22.716 2 0.406 0.562 0.072 0.564 2.182 0.438 0.187 2 0.223 0.558
(0.08)* (0.10)* (0.98) (0.29) (0.10)* (0.90) (0.05)** (0.00)*** (0.10)* (0.53) (0.58) (0.01)***
Cost reduction HR 0.920 0.6155 30.015 2 0.284 2 0.834 0.563 2 0.405 2 1.046 0.046 0.040 0.243 2 0.004
strategy (0.16) (0.39) (0.98) (0.53) (0.17) (0.49) (0.49) (0.27) (0.95) (0.90) (0.58) (0.99)
Effective resource 0.456 0.183 35.986 0.330 0.353 0.635 2 0.554 1.421 2 0.161 2 0.226 2 0.288 2 0.342
allocation strategy (0.53) (0.80) (0.98) (0.46) (0.54) (0.38) (0.28) (0.10)* (0.82) (0.51) (0.54) (0.54)
Talent improvement 0.844 0.574 21.409 2 0.746 2 0.779 0.775 0.156 2 0.307 0.455 0.299 0.367 0.397
HR strategy (0.22) (0.43) (0.98) (0.04)** (0.12) (0.10)* (0.74) (0.68) (0.52) (0.33) (0.35) (0.44)
Talent acquisition 2 0.281 0.626 2 21.717 0.343 0.167 0.786 1.557 2.134 1.335 0.328 0.575 2 0.112
HR strategy (0.67) (0.39) (0.95) (0.37) (0.74) (0.10)* (0.1)*** (0.02)** (0.10)* (0.29) (0.10)* (0.83)
Age 2 0.562 0.275 2 35.986 0.135 0.503 2 0.431 0.289 0.225 0.503 0.230 2 0.653 0.125
(0.38) (0.69) (0.98) (0.73) (0.38) (0.51) (0.53) (0.78) (0.44) (0.46) (0.15) (0.80)
Country 1.720 2 0.181 2 0.601 0.000
(0.03)** (0.65) (0.19) (1.00)
2 2 Log likelihood 86.38 69.103 2.77 193.50 111.43 76.69 146.69 59.39 77.21 276.25 157.19 111.45
Goodness of t 142.07 99.03 2.00 211.65 121.51 90.43 200.84 82.46 85.38 207.57 121.70 85.24
Chi-square 16.07 9.54 16.13 7.25 7.09 5.52 17.65 14.70 7.85 6.51 9.71 4.38
(0.09)* (0.38) (0.06)* (0.70) (0.62) (0.78) (0.06)* (0.09)* (0.54) (0.77) (0.37) (0.88)
819
820
Table 4a Means of training and development in India and Britain

Independent Formal Career Plans Performance Appraisal Annual Career Interview Assessment Centres
Constant 2 1.0127 2 0.785 2 2.847 2 1.0674 2 2.081 2 3.668 2 3.315 2 4.590 2 4.004 2 3.555 2 7.998 2 1.206
(0.28) (0.64) (0.11) (0.33) (0.35) (0.37) (0.00)*** (0.00)*** (0.02)** (0.01)*** (0.00)*** (0.56)
Log of employees 0.127 2 0.148 0.517 0.773 2 0.698 1.068 0.321 0.447 0.347 0.110 2 0.095 0.400
(0.27) (0.45) (0.02)** (0.0)*** (0.02)** (0.10)* (0.00)*** (0.00)*** (0.10)* (0.47) (0.72) (0.10)*
Life-cycle stage 2 0.113 2 0.161 0.073 2 0.232 2 0.331 2 0.124 0.069 2 0.042 0.117 2 0.224 0.410 2 0.724
(0.50) (0.55) (0.75) (0.27) (0.28) (0.67) (0.67) (0.88) (0.59) (0.32) (0.27) (0.05)**
Unionized rm 0.301 1.215 2 0.642 2 0.433 2 0.520 2 0.066 2 0.142 2 0.815 1.040 0.931 2.381 2 0.142
(0.42) (0.02)** (0.32) (0.35) (0.39) (0.93) (0.70) (0.10)* (0.10)* (0.10)* (0.00)*** (0.86)
Ownership (private) 2 0.295 0.160 2 0.592 2 0.487 2 0.412 2 0.711 2 0.263 2 0.300 2 0.494 0.728 1.635 0.399
(0.38) (0.73) (0.27) (0.24) (0.06)* (0.36) (0.44) (0.06)* (0.35) (0.10)* (0.02)** (0.55)
Cost reduction HR 2 0.389 2 0.711 2 0.560 2 0.677 2 0.925 2 0.244 0.155 0.775 2 1.248 0.715 1.424 2 1.080
strategy (0.34) (0.10)* (0.49) (0.15) (0.10)* (0.81) (0.69) (0.10)* (0.10)* (0.17) (0.05)** (0.39)
Effective resource 0.208 0.959 2 0.503 0.006 2 0.111 0.516 0.615 0.412 0.509 0.624 1.578 2 0.289
allocation strategy (0.59) (0.10)* (0.41) (0.98) (0.86) (0.10)* (0.12) (0.47) (0.10)* (0.24) (0.08)* (0.72)
Talent improvement 2 0.346 2 0.638 2 0.141 0.089 0.292 2 0.265 2 0.032 0.015 2 0.285 0.224 0.280 2 0.411
HR strategy (0.30) (0.16) (0.81) (0.83) (0.60) (0.72) (0.92) (0.97) (0.60) (0.62) (0.68) (0.58)
Talent acquisition HR 2 0.459 2 0.601 2 0.567 0.747 1.305 0.119 0.412 0.321 0.637 0.326 1.206 2 0.583
strategy (0.19) (0.21) (0.37) (0.11) (0.03)** (0.88) (0.23) (0.50) (0.26) (0.47) (0.09)* (0.45)
Age 2 0.020 0.617 0.114 0.148 0.409 2 0.510 0.616 0.533 0.658 2 0.481 0.690 2 1.2953
(0.95) (0.10)* (0.10)* (0.97) (0.48) (0.50) (0.08)* (0.33) (0.23) (0.29) (0.34) (0.10)*
Country 2 0.157 2 0.840 2 1.106 2 0.434

(0.64) (0.07)* (0.00)*** (0.33)
2 2 Log likelihood 238.91 128.71 93.78 160.21 94.90 57.85 232.92 120.86 101.13 148.70 63.80 65.24
Goodness of t 204.56 114.87 81.39 177.01 104.60 67.54 203.58 121.29 83.09 189.69 80.17 72.28
Chi-square 7.83 13.08 10.89 27.55 22.79 11.34 19.09 12.40 12.40 11.32 18.75 10.81
(0.64) (0.15) (0.28) (0.00)*** (0.00)*** (0.25) (0.03)** (0.19) (0.19) (0.33) (0.02)** (0.28)
Table 4b Means of training and development in India and Britain
Independent Succession plans Planned job rotation ‘High ier’ schemes International/regional exp.
Constant 2 3.300 2 4.180 2 6.181 2 1.996 2 0.942 2 2.338 2 3.456 2 4.330 2 3.939 24.637 2 5.199 2 5.732
(0.00)*** (0.00)*** (0.00)*** (0.07)* (0.48) (0.27) (0.00)*** (0.00)*** (0.05)* (0.00)*** (0.01)*** (0.01)***
Log of employees 0.286 0.117 0.824 0.142 0.156 0.278 0.352 0.412 0.604 .0344 0.321 0.503
(0.01)*** (0.48) (0.00)*** (0.24) (0.10)* (0.31) (0.00)*** (0.01)*** (0.02)** (0.02)** (0.10)* (0.08)*
Life-cycle stage 0.091 0.116 0.229 2 0.159 2 0.264 2 0.153 2 0.187 2 0.496 0.061 2 0.280 2 0.307 2 0.204
(0.05)** (0.66) (0.01)*** (0.37) (0.05)** (0.58) (0.33) (0.10)* (0.82) (0.24) (0.44) (0.51)
Unionized rm 2 0.358 2 0.076 0.653 2 0.172 0.178 1.189 0.421 0.878 2 0.179 2 0.591 2 0.526 2 0.593
(0.34) (0.10)* (0.10) (0.63) (0.69) (0.07)* (0.33) (0.12) (0.84) (0.19) (0.37) (0.46)
Ownership (private) 2 0.344 0.003 2 0.592 0.268 2 0.271 0.864 2 0.325 2 0.005 2 0.953 2 0.070 2 0.022 2 0.045
(0.31) (0.99) (0.27) (0.42) (0.10)* (0.10)* (0.25) (0.99) (0.10)* (0.87) (0.96) (0.95)
Cost reduction HR 0.745 0.870 2 0.232 2 0.250 0.056 1.467 0.502 0.990 2 1.251 0.291 0.454 2 0.334
strategy (0.06)* (0.07)* (0.76) (0.52) (0.89) (0.10)* (0.39) (0.06)* (0.24) (0.55) (0.44) (0.75)
Effective resource 1.001 1.341 0.644 0.550 0.471 0.338 2 0.728 2 0.177 2 2.220 1.021 1.441 0.268
allocation strategy (0.01)*** (0.03)** (0.30) (0.10)* (0.33) (0.62) (0.06)* (0.74) (0.00)*** (0.06)* (0.08)* (0.74)
Talent improvement 0.409 0.396 0.265 2 0.220 2 0.081 2 0.569 0.782 0.655 0.869 0.526 0.382 0.828
HR strategy (0.23) (0.38) (0.64) (0.50) (0.83) (0.37) (0.05)* (0.10)* (0.25) (0.23) (0.49) (0.10)*
Talent acquisition HR 0.232 0.461 0.158 0.072 2 0.203 0.438 2 0.141 0.176 1.359 0.788 0.640 0.883
strategy (0.36) (0.32) (0.79) (0.83) (0.62) (0.50) (0.72) (0.72) (0.10)* (0.06)* (0.26) (0.10)*
Age 2 0.009 0.307 0.040 2 0.302 2 0.515 0.120 0.428 0.382 1.522 0.898 0.714 1.374
(0.97) (0.54) (0.94) (0.38) (0.24) (0.85) (0.28) (0.47) (0.04)** (0.05)** (0.27) (0.07)*
Country 2 1.133 0.884 2 0.248 2 0.624
(0.00)*** (0.01)*** (0.51) (0.10)*
2 2 Log likelihood 229.64 124.98 95.53 237.71 154.70 73.38 198.95 113.62 72.92 156.98 92.20 62.44
Goodness of t 204.51 122.11 77.93 205.59 120.86 78.07 206.81 118.85 82.03 184.57 109.13 75.77
Chi-square 24.03 8.28 18.87 15.96 6.01 11.68 22.30 14.84 19.83 20.93 9.57 13.61
(0.00)*** (0.50) (0.02)** (0.10)* (0.73) (0.23) (0.01)*** (0.09)* (0.01)*** (0.02)** (0.38) (0.10)*
821
822
Table 5 Means of employee communication in India and Britain

Independent Through superior Through unions/C. Through meetings Through Q circles Through s. boxes Through survey No formal methods
Constant 2 0.378 2 0.959 2 4.473 2 4.564 2 5.787 2 7.403 2 1.712 2 2.038 2 1.887 0.957 2 0.495 2 0.004 2 0.920 2 2.063 2.146 2 5.494 2 8.472 2 4.976 2 0.510 1.646 2 7.341
(0.07)* (0.63) (0.93) (0.00)*** (0.00)*** (0.00)* (0.10)* (0.01) (0.24) (0.39) (0.72) (0.99) (0.36) (0.16) (0.21) (0.00)*** (0.00)*** (0.02)** (0.72) (0.29) (0.88)
Log of employees 0.254 0.212 0.283 0.517 0.742 0.381 0.287 0.214 0.392 2 0.066 2 0.055 2 0.086 0.172 0.411 2 0.175 0.176 0.292 0.125 2 0.107 2 0.054 2 0.348
(0.22) (0.37) (0.47) (0.00)*** (0.00)*** (0.40) (0.01)*** (0.10)* (0.04)** (0.58) (0.71) (0.69) (0.10)* (0.02)** (0.37) (0.17) (0.10)* (0.54) (0.52) (0.76) (0.41)
Life-cycle stage 2 0.223 2 0.458 0.299 2 0.248 2 0.588 0.265 0.029 0.014 2 0.046 2 0.208 2 0.129 2 0.376 2 0.248 2 0.374 2 0.323 0.265 0.093 0.511 2 0.095 2 0.231 2 0.97
(0.40) (0.05)** (0.64) (0.27) (0.05)** (0.62) (1.00) (0.95) (0.10)* (0.25) (0.10)* (0.10)* (0.13) (0.10)* (0.10)* (0.15) (0.75) (0.05)** (0.69) (0.44) (0.84)
Unionized rm 0.282 0.871 2 8.646 4.491 3.463 6.656 0.120 0.136 2 0.204 0.523 0.783 2 0.497 0.449 0.725 2 0.424 1.160 3.028 2 0.218 2 0.5564 2 0.456 2 2.129
(0.64) (0.10)* (0.87) (0.00)*** (0.00)*** (0.00)*** (0.73) (0.10)* (0.72) (0.17) (0.09)* (0.46) (0.21) (0.10)* (0.48) (0.02)** (0.00)*** (0.77) (0.10)* (0.37) (0.09)*
Ownership (private) 0.725 0.495 1.908 2 0.629 2 0.671 2 1.625 2 0.364 2 0.212 2 0.823 2 0.409 2 0.504 2 0.296 2 0.565 2 0.794 2 0.398 2 0.717 0.472 2 2.033 0.037 0.187 0.626
(0.19) (0.44) (0.10)* (0.10)* (0.10)* (0.35) (0.24) (0.62) (0.10)* (0.23) (0.25) (0.62) (0.07)* (0.07)* (0.44) (0.08)* (0.43) (0.00)*** (0.92) (0.10)* (0.64)
Cost reduction HR 1.051 1.122 2.570 2 0.131 2 0.140 0.371 2 0.679 2 0.913 2 0.544 2 0.352 2 0.275 2 0.241 2 0.435 2 0.547 0.416 2 0.517 2 0.027 2 1.019 2 0.321 2 0.308 0.785
strategy (0.10)* (0.10)* (0.24) (0.81) (0.82) (0.78) (0.07)* (0.05)** (0.47) (0.39) (0.55) (0.80) (0.25) (0.25) (0.56) (0.32) (0.96) (0.29) (0.49) (0.54) (0.58)
Effective resource 0.572 0.547 1.530 0.542 0.331 1.022 0.118 0.081 0.134 0.370 0.093 1.191 2 0.014 0.119 0.121 1.459 1.322 1.950 2 0.222 2 0.625 8.601
allocation strategy (0.34) (0.46) (0.39) (0.26) (0.58) (0.39) (0.73) (0.86) (0.81) (0.35) (0.84) (0.10)* (0.96) (0.81) (0.84) (0.00)*** (0.09)* (0.03)** (0.63) (0.10)* (0.86)
Talent improvement 1.048 0.744 3.017 0.650 0.367 1.834 0.712 1.079 0.169 0.578 0.588 0.409 2 0.048 0.267 2 0.412 0.757 0.783 0.837 2 1.058 2 1.047 2 1.586
HR strategy (0.05)** (0.10)* (0.05)** (0.10)* (0.52) (0.10)* (0.02)** (0.01)*** (0.75) (0.10)* (0.10)* (0.56) (0.88) (0.53) (0.46) (0.08)* (0.21) (0.25) (0.00)*** (0.01)*** (0.10)*
Talent acquisition 0.472 0.549 1.210 2 0.254 2 0.182 2 0.284 2 0.701 2 0.654 2 1.089 2 0.287 2 0.024 2 1.236 2 0.684 2 0.686 2 0.864 0.895 1.134 0.329 2 0.280 2 0.225 2 1.190
HR strategy (0.40) (0.38) (0.56) (0.59) (0.74) (0.79) (0.03)** (0.10)* (0.06)* (0.41) (0.95) (0.10)* (0.04)** (0.10)* (0.10)* (0.03)** (0.07)* (0.64) (0.50) (0.62) (0.41)
Age 1.049 1.191 0.575 2 0.426 0.605 2 0.404 0.442 0.047 1.202 2 0.324 2 0.356 2 0.262 2 0.091 2 0.128 2 0.187 0.301 2 0.206 1.399 2 0.122 2 0.372 1.038
(0.07)* (0.08)* (0.70) (0.35) (0.10)* (0.71) (0.10)* (0.91) (0.03)** (0.36) (0.43) (0.69) (0.78) (0.78) (0.73) (0.46) (0.73) (0.04)** (0.78) (0.46) (0.43)
Country 2 1.590 2 2.025 2 0.790 0.780 0.466 2 0.730 1.724

(0.01)*** (0.00)*** (0.01)*** (0.03)** (0.15) (0.06)* (0.00)***
2 2 Log likelihood 115.83 58.92 22.56 135.08 93.89 30.85 256.88 146.94 102.69 228.51 144.31 77.03 255.67 142.53 99.89 176.75 81.60 73.50 168.18 132.01 25.93
Goodness of t 190.94 113.18 43.78 258.81 125.30 81.50 206.77 124.92 84.74 204.69 120.30 90.05 208.69 122.95 83.94 206.61 86.66 103.94 203.95 123.20 151.91
Chi-square 15.84 9.16 9.69 150.93 73.67 66.35 31.29 19.97 12.48 15.77 9.35 10.73 18.49 23.65 6.37 35.23 27.60 25.74 26.37 8.98 12.09
(0.10)* (0.42) (0.37) (0.00)*** (0.00)*** (0.00)*** (0.00)*** (0.01)*** (0.18) (0.10)* (0.40) (0.29) (0.04)** (0.00)*** (0.70) (0.00)*** (0.00)*** (0.00)*** (0.00)*** (0.43) (0.20)
References
Akhilesh, K.B. and Nagaraj, D.R. (1990) Human Resource Management 2000. New Delhi: Wiley
Eastern.
Amba-Rao. S. (1994) ‘US HRM Principles: Cross-country Comparisons and Two Case
Applications in India’. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 5(3):
755–78.
Baird, L. and Meshoulam, I. (1988) ‘Managing Two Fits of Strategic Human Resource
Management’. Academy of Management Review, 13(1): 116–28.
Balaji, C., Chandrasekhar, S. and Dutta, R. (eds) (1998) Leading Change through Human
Resources: Towards a Globally Competitive India. New Delhi: Tata McGraw Hill.
Balasubramanian, A.G. (1994) ‘Evolution of Personnel Function in India: A Re-examination, Part
I’. Management and Labour Studies, 19(4): 196–210.
Balasubramanian, A.G. (1995) ‘Evolution of Personnel Function in India: A Re-examination, Part
II’. Management and Labour Studies, 20(1): 5–14.
Barney, J.B. (1991) ‘Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage’. Journal of
Management, 17(1): 99–120.
Benson, J. (1995) ‘Future Employment and the Internal Labour Market’. British Journal of
Industrial Relations, 33(4): 603–8.
Bordia, P. and Blau, G. (1998) ‘Pay Referent Comparison and Pay Level Satisfaction in Private
Versus Public Sector Organizations in India’. International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 9(1): 155–67.
Boxall, P.F. (1994) ‘Placing HR Strategy at the Heart of Business Success’. Personnel
Management, July: 32–5.
Boxall, P.F. (1995) ‘Building the Theory of Comparative HRM’. Human Resource Management
Journal, 5(5): 5–17.
Brewster, C. (1995) ‘Towards a European Model of Human Resource Management’. Journal of
International Business, 26(1): 1–22.
Brewster, C. and Hegewisch, A. (eds) (1994) Policy and Practice in European Human Resource
Management. London and New York: Routledge.
Brewster, C., Tregaskis, O., Hegewisch, A. and Mayne, L. (1996) ‘Comparative Research in
Human Resource Management: A Review and an Example’. International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 7(3): 586–604.
Budhwar, P. (1999) ‘Taking Human Resource Management Research to the Next Millennium:
Need for an Integrated Framework’. Paper presented at the Annual Academy of Management
Conference, 9–11 August, Chicago.
Budhwar, P. (2000) ‘Indian and British Personnel Specialists’ Understanding of the Dynamics of
their Function: An Empirical Study’. International Business Review, 9(5).
Budhwar, P. (2001) ‘Doing Business in India’. Thunderbird International Business Review,
forthcoming.
Budhwar, P. and Sparrow, P. (1997) ‘Evaluating Levels of Strategic Integration and Devolvement
of Human Resource Management in India’. International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 8: 476–94.
Budhwar, P. and Sparrow, P. (1998) ‘National Factors Determining Indian and British HRM
Practices: An Empirical Study’. Management International Review, 38(Special Issue 2):
105–21.
Cavusgil, S.T. and Das, A. (1997) ‘Methodological Issues in Empirical Cross-Cultural Research:
A Survey of the Management Literature and a Framework’, Management International Review,
37(1): 71–96.
Clark, T., Gospel, H. and Montgomery, J. (1999) ‘Running on the Spot? A Review of Twenty
Years of Research on the Management of Human Resources in Comparative and Internationa l
Perspective ’. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 10(3): 520–44.
Cohen, Y. and Pfeffer, J. (1986) ‘Organisational Hiring Standards’. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 31: 1–24.
Crabb, S. (1995) ‘Jobs for all in the Global Market’. People Management, 1(2): 22–7.
Das, H. (1999) ‘Trade Union Activism: Avoidable or Inevitable? ’. Indian Journal of Industrial
Relations, 35(2): 224–36.
Datt, R. and Sundharam, K.P.H. (1999) Indian Economy. New Delhi: S. Chand.
Devi, R.D. (1991) ‘Women in Modern Sector Employment in India’. Economic Bulletin for Asia
and the Paci c, June–December: 53–65.
Dimick, D.E. and Murray, V.V. (1978) ‘Correlates of Substantive Policy Decisions in
Organisations: The Case of Human Resource Management’. Academy of Management Journal,
21(4): 611–23.
Doeringer, P. and Piore, M. J. (1971) Internal Labour Market and Manpower Analysis. Lexington,
MA: Lexington Books.
Easterby-Smith, M., Malina, D. and Yuan, L. (1995) ‘How Culture Sensitive is HRM? A
Comparative Analysis of Practice in Chinese and UK Companies’. International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 6(1): 31–59.
Fisher, C.D. and Shaw, J.B. (1992) ‘Establishment Level Correlates of Human Resource
Practices’. Asia Paci c HRM, 30(4): 30–46.
Gonsalves, C., Bhat, R. and Mathew, M. (eds) (1995) Cases on Indian Labour Laws, Vol. 1. New
Delhi: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung .
Gospel, H. (1992) Markets, Firms and the Management of Labour in Modern Britain. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Guest, D.E. (1991) ‘Personnel Management: The End of Orthodoxy? ’. British Journal of
Industrial Relations, 29(2): 147–75.
Guest, D.E. (1997) ‘Human Resource Management and Performance: A Review and Research
Agenda’. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 8(3): 263–76.
Heery, E. (1997) ‘Annual Review Article 1996’. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 35(1):
87–109.
Hendry, C. and Pettigrew, A. (1992) ‘Patterns of Strategic Change in the Development of Human
Resource Management’. British Journal of Management, 3: 137–56.
Hiltrop, J-M. (1993) ‘Strategic Pressures Deriving European HRM’. European Management
Journal, 11(4): 424–34.
Hofstede, G. (1993) ‘Cultural Dimensions in People Management’. In Pucik, V., Tichy, N.M. and
Barnett, C.K. (eds) Globalizing Management. New York: Wiley, pp. 139–58.
Husain, A.S. (1994) The National Culture of India. New Delhi: National Book Trust.
Huselid, M.A. (1995) ‘The Impact of Human Resource Management on Turnover, Productivity,
and Corporate Financial Performance’. Academy of Management Journal, 38(3): 635–72.
Jackson, S., Schuler, R. and Rivero, J.C. (1989) ‘Organisational Characteristics as Predictors of
Personnel Practice’. Personnel Psychology, 42(4): 727–86.
Jain, H.C. and Venkata Ratnam, C.S. (1994) ‘Af rmative Action in Employment for the
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes in India’. International Journal of Manpower,
15(7): 6–25.
Jones, S. (1989) ‘Merchants of the Raj’. Management Accounting, September: 32–5.
Kanungo, R. and Mendonca, M. (1994) ‘Culture and Performance Improvement’. Productivity,
35(4): 447–53.
Keenoy, T. (1999) ‘HRM as Hologram: A Polemic’. Journal of Management Studies, 36:
1–23.
Keep, E. (1996) ‘Vocational Education and Training for Young’. In Sisson, K. (ed.) Personnel
Management: A Comprehensive Guide to Theory and Practice in Britain. London: Blackwell
Business, pp. 299–333.
Khan, F.A. and Atkinson, A. (1987) ‘Managerial Attitudes to Social Responsibility: A
Comparative Study in Indian and Britain’. Journal of Business Ethics, 6: 419–32.
Kochan, T.A., Dyer, L. and Batt, R. (1992) ‘International Human Resource Studies: A Framework
for Future Research’. In Lewin, D., Mitchell, O.S. and Sherer, P.D. (eds) Research Frontiers in
Industrial Relations and Human Resources. Wisconsin: IRRA Series, pp. 309–37.
Krishna, A. and Monappa, A. (1994) ‘Economic Restructuring and Human Resource Manage-
ment’. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 29(4): 490–501.
Kuruvilla, S. (1996) ‘Linkages between Industrialization Strategies and Industrial Relations/
Human Resource Policies: Singapore, Malaysia, The Philippines and India’. Industrial and
Labor Relations Review, 49(4): 635–57.
Lawler, J., Jain, H., Venkata Ratnam, C.S. and Atmiyanandana, V. (1995) ‘Human Resource
Management in Developing Economies: A Comparison of India and Thailand’. International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 6(2): 319–46.
Legge, K. (1995) Human Resource Management: Rhetorics and Realities. Chippenham :
Macmillan Business.
Locke, R. and Thelen, K. (1995) ‘Apples and Oranges Revisited: Contextualized Comparisons
and the Study of Comparative Labor Politics’. Politics and Society, 23(1): 337–67.
MacDuf e, J.P. (1995) ‘Human Resource Bundles and Manufacturing Performance: Organiza-
tional Logic and Flexible Production Systems in the World Auto Industry ’. Industrial and
Labor Relations Reviews, 48(2): 197–221.
McGaughey, S.L. and De Cieri, H. (1999) ‘Reassessment of Convergence and Divergence
Dynamics: Implications for International HRM’. International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 10(2): 235–50.
Milliman, J.F. and Von Glinow, M.A. (1992) ‘A Life Cycle Approach to Strategic Internationa l
Human Resource Management in MNCs’. In Ferris, G.R. and Rowland, K.M. (eds) Research in
Personnel and Human Resource Management, Supplement 2. London: JAI Press, pp. 21–35.
Niven, M.M. (1967) Personnel Management 1913–1963. London: IPM.
Norusis, M.J. (1994) SPSS Professional Statistics 6.1. Illinois: SPSS.
Osterman, P. (1992) ‘Internal Labour Markets in a Changing Environment: Models and
Evidence’. In Lewin, D., Mitchell, O.S. and Sherer, P.D. (eds) Research Frontiers in Industrial
Relations and Human Resources. Wisconsin: IRRA Series, pp. 273–308.
Osterman, P. (1994) ‘Internal Labour Markets: Theory and Change’. In Kerr, C. and Staudohar,
P.D. (eds) Markets and Institutions. Cambridge, MA, and London: Harvard University Press,
pp. 303–39.
Pfeffer, J. and Cohen, Y. (1984) ‘Determinants of Internal Labour Markets in Organizations ’.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 29: 550–72.
Poole, M. (1990) ‘Editorial: Human Resource Management in an International Perspective ’.
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 1(1): 1–15.
Sahay, S. and Walsham, G. (1997) ‘Social Structure and Managerial Agency in India’.
Organisation Studies, 18: 415–44.
Schuler, R.S. (1992) ‘Linking the People with the Strategic Needs of the Business’. Organiza-
tional Dynamics, Summer: 18–32.
Schuler, R. and Jackson, S. (1999) Strategic Human Resource Management. London:
Blackwell.
Schuler, R.S. and MacMillan, I.C. (1984) ‘Gaining Competitive Advantage through HRM
Practices’. Human Resource Management, 23(3): 351–65.
Sharma, I.J. (1984) ‘The Culture Context of Indian Managers’. Management and Labour Studies,
9(2): 72–80.
Sharma, R.D. (1992) ‘Lack of Management Training in India: Causes and Characteristics ’.
International Journal of Manpower, 13(3): 27–34.
Shenoy, S. (1981) ‘Organisation Structure and Context: A Replication of the Aston Study in
India’. In Hickson, D.J. and MacMillan, C.J. (eds) Organisation and Nation: The Aston
Programme IV. Aldershot: Gower.
Sinha, J.B.P. (1990) Work Culture in Indian Context. New Delhi: Sage.
Sisson, K. (ed.) (1996) Personnel Management: A Comprehensive Guide to Theory and Practice
in Britain. Oxford: Blackwell.
Sodhi, J.S. (1994) ‘Emerging Trends in Industrial Relations and Human Resource Management in
Indian Industry ’. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 30(1): 19–37.
Soeters, J.L. and Schwan, R. (1990) ‘Towards an Empirical Assessment of Internal Market
Con gurations ’. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 1(1): 272–87.
Sparrow, P.R. and Budhwar, P. (1996) ‘Human Resource Management in India in the New
Economic Environment’. In Saxena, A. and Devedi, H. (eds) HRM in the New Economic
Environment. Jaipur: National Publishing House, pp. 28–73.
Sparrow, P.R. and Budhwar, P. (1997) ‘Competition and Change: Mapping the Indian HRM
Recipe against World Wide Patterns’. Journal of World Business, 32(3): 224–42.
Sparrow, P.R. and Hiltrop, J-M. (1994) European Human Resource Management in Transition.
London: Prentice Hall.
Sparrow, P.R. and Hiltrop, J-M. (1997) ‘Rede ning the Field of European Human Resource
Management: A Battle between National Mindsets and Forces of Business Transition’. Human
Sparrow, P.R. and Marchington, M. (1998) Human Resource Management: The New Agenda.
London: Pitman.
Srinivasan, A.V. (1990) Japanese Management: The Indian Context. New Delhi: Tata McGraw-
Hill.
Tayeb, M. (1987) ‘Contingency Theory and Culture: A Study of Matched English and the Indian
Manufacturing Firms’. Organisation Studies, 8(3): 241–61.
Tayeb, M. (1988) Organisations and National Culture. London: Sage.
Thomas, A.S. and Philip, A. (1994) ‘India: Management in an Ancient and Modern Civilisation ’.
International Studies of Management and Organisatio n, 24(1–2): 91–115.
Torrington, D. (1989) ‘Human Resource Management and the Personnel Function’. In Storey, J.
(ed.) New Perspectives on Human Resource Management. London: Routledge, pp. 55–66.
Turner, T, (1994) ‘Internal Labour Markets and Employment Systems’. International Journal of
Manpower, 15(1): 15–26.
Venkata Ratnam, C.S. (1992) Managing People: Strategies for Success. New Delhi: Global
Business.
Venkata Ratnam, C.S. (1995) ‘Economic Liberalization and the Transformation of Industria l
Relations Policies in India’. In Verma, A., Kochan, T.A. and Lansbury, R.D. (eds) Employment
Relations in the Growing Asian Economies. London: Routledge.
Venkata Ratnam, C.S. (ed.) (1996) Industrial Relations in Indian States. Delhi: Global Business
Press.
Venkata Ratnam, C.S. and Shrivastava, B.K. (1991) Personnel Management and Human
Resources. New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill.
Wright, P.M., McMahan, G.C. and McWilliams, A. (1994) ‘Human Resources and Sustained
Competitive Advantage: A Resource-Based Perspective ’. International Journal of Human
Copyright of International Journal of Human Resource Management is the property of
Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv
without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.
View publication stats

2001IJHRM

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2001IJHRM

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

A Comparative Study of HR Practices in Britain and India

Article in The International Journal of Human Resource Management · August 2001

Pawan Budhwar Naresh Khatri

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

A comparative study of HR practices in

Pawan S. Budhwar and Naresh Khatri

Keywords Comparative HRM; India; Britain; determinants of HRM; internal labour

Hypothesis 1: HR practices in Indian organizations are less rationalized and

Industry India Britain

Food processing 13.9 % 17.2 %

Results and discussion

Variables India Britain

Variables India Britain

Through regular work 1 [TIHR]***, 2 [CRHR]** 1 [Log of Employee & Age]**

more likely to advertise externally. In Britain, private-sector organizations using talent

Training and development

HR practices Hypothesis 1 Hypothesis 2

Recruitment Partial rejection Supported

are likely to adopt regular workforce meeting as a source of employee communication.

Table 2 Recruitment practices for blue-collar staff in India and Britain

Table 4a Means of training and development in India and Britain

Country 2 0.157 2 0.840 2 1.106 2 0.434

Table 5 Means of employee communication in India and Britain

Country 2 1.590 2 2.025 2 0.790 0.780 0.466 2 0.730 1.724

View publication stats

You might also like

Through regular work 1 [TIHR]*, 2 [CRHR] 1 [Log of Employee & Age]**