Due to technological developments, jobs disappear, new jobs arise, and existing jobs change. This leads to opportunities and challenges regarding human resource management (HRM) and the role of the HR function in the future of work. In this article, we explore how technological developments such as the use of smart technologies, artificial intelligence (AI), and robotics influence HRM and the role of the HR function. Through a scoping review, we highlight the influence of technological developments across macro (societal), meso (organization/HRM) and micro (individual workers) level work themes. We specifically focus on the dynamic interplay between technological developments and HRM. At the meso level, the analysis zooms in on how technological developments influence HRM at the strategic, tactical, and operational levels within organizational contexts. Our findings inform a future research agenda comprising avenues aimed at deepening our understanding of the challenges and opportunities associated with technological change in the context of HRM. More specifically, we propose future research to explore how the HR function can prepare the organization, itself, and other stakeholders, including line managers and workers, for the impact of technological developments to enhance HRM for the greater good.
Leadership research has largely been built on the assumption that leadership behaviors exert linear and sign-consistent effects on organizational outcomes. However, converging evidence indicates that these relationships are often nonlinear, such that the same leadership style can produce both beneficial and detrimental outcomes depending on its intensity and contextual conditions. Despite these insights, research on nonlinear leadership effects remains theoretically fragmented and empirically under-integrated, lacking a coherent explanation of when, why, and in what forms such effects emerge. To address this gap, we conducted a systematic analysis of 60 empirical studies on nonlinear leadership effects across task-, relation-, and change-oriented as well as destructive leadership styles. We integrated evidence on functional forms, mediating mechanisms, moderating conditions, and methodological approaches. This analysis identifies consistent empirical patterns while revealing systematic limitations in the explanatory scope of existing theoretical perspectives.Building on this integrated assessment, we developed a leadership intensity threshold framework that conceptualizes leadership intensity as a continuous driver of qualitatively distinct outcome regimes. This framework specifies threshold-based mechanisms through which changes in leadership intensity produce discontinuous shifts in interpersonal dynamics. These shifts, in turn, shape the implementation and effectiveness of HR practices by line managers. By linking fragmented empirical findings with a mechanism-based theoretical account, the framework provides an organizing structure for cumulative theory development in human resource management (HRM). It advances a more precise understanding of how leadership behavior enables or constrains effective HRM implementation across contexts.
Self-managing organisations (SMOs) radically decentralise formal authority, fundamentally challenging traditional models of Human Resource Management (HRM). Drawing on a systematic literature review of 75 articles and adopting a Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) lens, this paper examines how HRM is enacted in the absence of formal managerial hierarchy. We analyse the reconfiguration of HRM actors, roles, and practices, revealing that people management in SMOs emerges through ongoing interactions rather than formal mandates. Specifically, HRM operates as a human-centred, relational, and adaptive ecosystem. As formal managerial hierarchies disappear, employees and teams become the primary HRM actors, replacing hierarchical control with caring practices and peer-based governance. Furthermore, we identify key contingencies and inherent tensions that challenge the long-term sustainability of these HRM ecosystems. By challenging four foundational HRM assumptions, we highlight both the potential and the paradoxical nature of self-managing practices. Ultimately, these insights advance theoretical understanding of the nexus between organisational design and people management, offering critical implications for HRM research and the future of the HR profession.
Organizations impact the common good for all stakeholders through their corporate social responsibility (CSR) actions, with human resource management (HRM) being a driver of employee CSR engagement and support. Employees' reactions to CSR actions are contingent upon their attribution of their organization's motive for engaging in CSR. However, the literature on the impact of employees' CSR attributions shows contradictory effects and terminological inconsistencies. To uncover the reasons for this, we conducted a systematic and cross-disciplinary review of the extant literature on employees' CSR attributions and their impact using keyword searches of eight EBSCOhost online databases. Our review of 61 articles catalogs the attribution construct, its measurement scale, the context of attribution (referent and nationality), accompanying theory, and the impact of the attribution. We find evidence of the jingle-jangle fallacy across studies, as well as the inconsistent impact of self-centered employee CSR attributions (i.e., those perceived as done to benefit the firm). Our review shows that inconsistencies in this literature stem not only from fragmented terminology, but also from deeper construct-level misalignment in how employee CSR attributions are conceptualized and measured. To promote greater precision and refinement, we organize the existing attribution constructs into other-centered, self-centered, and win-win categories and offer six recommendations to improve conceptual precision, measurement alignment, and theorizing. In doing so, this review helps clarify how employees attribute CSR, allowing for stronger theorizing on how HRM can drive CSR engagement.
It is widely accepted that employee wellbeing is a pressing concern for HRM. Poor workplace wellbeing bears substantial societal costs; it is one of the roots of grand challenges of wellbeing and decent work. Enhancing sustainable employee wellbeing is therefore a way for HRM to contribute to the common good (CGHRM). There is a lack of understanding of how to practice CGHRM. Furthermore, existing HRM/wellbeing models lack attention to employee agency and fail to fully reflect the dynamics of the workplace. As such, their explanatory value is limited. To address this gap, drawing on Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) as a middle-range theory and incorporating insights from multi-disciplinary research, we provide a theoretically grounded account of the explanatory mechanism of reciprocal determinism through which a HRM system of practices shapes sustainable employee wellbeing. Our framework highlights the interplay between the theorized causal mechanisms, CGHRM values and principles and an HRM system of practices, offering a dynamic, socially embedded, and agentic explanation. An applied example of a CGHRM system of practices for wellbeing illustrates the theorized mechanism. Our conceptualization and framework underscore the benefit of middle-range theorizing and a focus on explanatory mechanisms, which are largely overlooked in HRM research to date. We further suggest that middle-range theorizing can advance the field and help bridge the “knowing-versus-doing-gap”.
There has been a growing prevalence of AI adoption in the workplace primarily aimed at enhancing performance and productivity. However, knowledge of how such adoption potentially impacts employee well-being is still limited and fragmented. To address this gap, we conduct a systematic review of 74 articles on AI and well-being to take stock of the current literature. Our review synthesizes the types of AI, well-being outcomes, theoretical perspectives, and methodological approaches in the current literature, showing that AI adoption presents both opportunities and challenges for employees' psychological, social, and physical well-being and identifying major theoretical frameworks concerning the influence of AI adoption on well-being. Drawing on the ability-motivation-opportunity (AMO) model, we develop a comprehensive, evidence-based framework for leaders and organizations to integrate AI into HR practices that enhance employees' abilities, motivations, and opportunities to perform, while safeguarding employee well-being. We conclude by discussing the implications for future research and practice.
The rise of generative AI, such as ChatGPT, is transforming workplaces, society, and the environment. While these technologies enhance efficiency and competitiveness, they also threaten fundamental aspects of human dignity, such as privacy, autonomy, and fairness, and they pose risks to employee well-being and societal sustainability. Human resource management (HRM) plays a central role in guiding organizations through AI-driven transformations, balancing digital advancement with the protection of human centric values. However, current Sustainable HRM models are insufficient to address the unique challenges posed by generative AI. This paper introduces the Humanistic HRM model, which comprises three dimensions: dignity-facilitating HRM, well-being-enhancing HRM, and common-good-enabling HRM. This model aims to align technological progress with human-centered values, ensuring AI serves humanity rather than undermines it. Our study extends existing HRM theories by proposing a novel framework that integrates individual and societal concerns, with a particular emphasis on sustainability and ethical governance in AI-driven digital transformation. The Humanistic HRM model provides practical insights for organizations to manage technological disruptions responsibly, fostering ethical and future-ready HRM practices.
Human resource (HR) governance has become an increasingly salient domain of inquiry, yet scholarship on the topic remains fragmented across disciplines and perspectives. To consolidate and advance understanding, this paper presents a systematic review of 43 peer-reviewed studies published between 2003 and 2025. The review shows that HR governance consistently converges on four interdependent governance dimensions—accountability, transparency, compliance, and strategic alignment—but that these have been theorized and operationalized unevenly across contexts, levels, and methods. Tracing the development of the field, we identify five dominant orientations in its intellectual evolution: early normative and compliance debates, institutionalization and legitimacy through governance codes, theoretical consolidation and conceptual clarification, disruption through digitalization, and, most recently, the emergence of an ecosystem perspective.Building on these insights, the paper develops an integrative framework that positions HR governance as a multi-dimensional and interdependent governance system located at the intersection of corporate governance and strategic HRM. The framework clarifies the conceptual backbone of HR governance while underscoring its importance for organizational legitimacy and performance by demonstrating how accountability, transparency, compliance, and strategic alignment operate as jointly necessary but individually insufficient dimensions of a coherent governance architecture. Finally, we outline a forward-looking research agenda that emphasizes cross-national comparison, multi-level and dynamic theorizing, deeper engagement with digitalization and algorithmic accountability, and stronger integration with ESG and HR analytics. In doing so, the paper establishes HR governance as a strategic governance capability and sets a clear agenda for advancing both scholarship and practice in the governance of people.
Organizations continue to face performance pressure while also seeking to develop systems and organizational contexts that are conducive to employee well-being. As a result, the strategic HRM literature has recently grown more interested in understanding how HR systems affect employee outcomes. Yet, evidence in the field suggests that many employees continue to experience mental health challenges, poor engagement, and a crisis of purpose. This paper seeks to address this gap between research and practice by first arguing that most models linking HR systems to well-being are largely predicated on social exchange mechanisms that may not be adequately equipped to properly address well-being. Moreover, many studies in the strategic HRM literature focus on more organization-centric conceptualizations of well-being like affective commitment and job satisfaction. To help address these concerns, this paper offers a conceptual model underpinned by self-determination theory and aimed at enhancing more eudaimonic forms of well-being. Specific practices are proposed and discussed with the aim of mapping a blueprint for a more eudaimonic approach to linking HR systems and employee well-being via the nutriments of autonomy, competence, and relatedness.
A growing number of organizations are created with the explicit purpose of tackling society's grand challenges and contributing to the common good. These ventures are founded and led by “common good entrepreneurs” who design innovative business models focused on addressing societal problems and improving collective flourishing. In pursuing the common good, entrepreneurs prioritize sharing value with society over capturing value for themselves, which creates distinct challenges and requires unique human resources. Common good human resource management (CGHRM) has emphasized mature organizations and, thus, it is unclear how early-stage ventures effectively implement CGHRM. To address this lack of theory, we build on contextual HRM, ecosystems, and business model theories to develop a conceptual CGHRM framework that elucidates how common good entrepreneurs navigate two distinct types of common good-focused ecosystems: HR ecosystems and entrepreneurial ecosystems. We explain that these ecosystems are comprised of unique actors, activities, attributes, and alignment, and thus deliver a different value proposition than conventional ecosystems. Further, we identify the causal mechanisms that support common good entrepreneurs in building CGHRM ecosystems and, ultimately, enable value sharing activities. We also theorize the individual- and ecosystem-level boundary conditions that influence common good entrepreneurs and their ecosystems and explain how their interactions produce distinct configurations that influence the effectiveness of HR ecosystems and their impact on value sharing and the common good. Our interdisciplinary theoretical framework contributes to research at the intersection of HRM, sustainability, and entrepreneurship and generates insights for HR professionals and entrepreneurs seeking to contribute to the greater good.
Existing literature often frames people analytics value creation through an inside-out lens, emphasizing how people analytics can optimize workforce processes and improve organizational performance through data-driven decision-making. However, this perspective overlooks the growing importance of HRM practices adopting an outside-in approach to address common good HRM values and broader societal challenges, as outlined by the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. This paper bridges these two perspectives by mobilizing Chadwick's theoretical depiction of human capital rents to reconceptualize people analytics value creation as a dual orientation that simultaneously addresses value capture, linked to organizational performance outcomes, and human capital value in use, aligned with common good HRM values. To advance this reconceptualization, we introduce a novel people analytics value creation continuum illustrating how people analytics value is maximized when both orientations are addressed simultaneously, while also critically examining the inefficiencies and trade-offs that hinder optimal people analytics value creation. In doing so, this study advances existing theory in people analytics by providing a more comprehensive understanding of value creation and emphasizing the importance of leveraging people analytics to align organizational objectives with common good HRM values. Practical implications and areas for future research are also discussed.
The widespread adoption of distributed work has placed global virtual teams (GVTs) at the center of organizational functioning. Although research on global leadership and virtual leadership has expanded, insights into the competencies at their intersection remain fragmented. This review conceptualizes Global Virtual Leadership (GVL) as a socio-technical phenomenon shaped by the interacting challenges of distance, diversity, and dynamism. We draw on socio-technical systems theory to frame GVTs as work systems in which leadership competencies act as levers that align social and technical sub-systems.Based on a systematic review of 82 studies published between 1998 and 2025, we identify 142 GVL-related competencies and synthesize them into five meta-competency clusters using hierarchical clustering analysis. We develop a typology that positions the five clusters by level of application (from micro to macro) and scope of competency enactment (from socially-oriented to technically-oriented). The typology highlights multiple viable combinations of competencies for effective leadership in GVTs and clarifies how context shapes their salience. This review advances theorizing on leadership in global virtual work by shifting attention from universal competency lists to context-sensitive socio-technical alignment and offers implications for future research and HR practices in global virtual work.
Gig work has emerged as a vibrant and fast-expanding context of work, compelling researchers to revisit foundational assumptions about work, workers and working policies. Once treated as a peripheral employment form, it now sits closer to the centre of academic debate within Human Resource Management and Organizational Psychology. Despite its growing prominence, however, the understanding of HRM in gig work remains theoretically fragmented, partial and underdeveloped, necessitating a unifying framework capable of explaining how HRM in gig work emerges, evolves, and acquires legitimacy. Drawing on an integrative conceptual synthesis of the HRM-in-gig-work corpus, this study (a) maps the field's unfolding trajectory across three discernible phases of evolution; (b) interrogates the contemporary landscape of each HR practice, foregrounding neglected perspectives and articulating the interventions now warranted; and (c) develops an HRMGW conceptual framework that theorizes legitimacy as an emergent outcome of synergistic interplay among institutional pressures and institutional complexities, HR practices, and their symbolic and substantive enactments, ultimately crystallizing in legitimacy outcomes. A set of workable propositions, together with a forward-looking research agenda, is laid out to propel the field toward its next frontier.
Trust development in international business often occurs under conditions of unfamiliarity, uncertainty, vulnerability, anxiety, and time pressure (U2VAT-Conditions), which strain cognitive resources, increase reliance on automatic processing and category-based heuristics, shaping how trustors evaluate the trustworthiness of unfamiliar others. Drawing on economics, psychology, sociology, and identity research, we examine how and why, when multicultural identities are processed under strain, this processing affects trust formation. We integrate these lenses to present a conceptual model of how U2VAT-Conditions distort trustworthiness assessments. We introduce two cognitive paradoxes related to identity cues that can evoke efficiency and deliberation, thereby simultaneously enabling and distorting trustworthiness assessments. These insights are relevant to human resource management (HRM), where trust judgments shape HRM decisions, because they often occur under U2VAT-Conditions, and are vulnerable to cognitive depletion and bias. The paradoxes highlight why well-intentioned managers may misjudge multicultural employees, with implications for reflective, equitable, trust-based HRM practices.
The purpose of this meta-analysis was to provide a comprehensive, quantitative review of antecedents, outcomes, and moderators of organizational diversity climate. Synthesizing Cox's Interactional Model for Cultural Diversity (IMCD) framework (Cox, 1994) and Mor Barak's Model for Organizational Diversity and Inclusion (Mor Barak, 1999), consequences of diversity climate were organized into four broad categories. Data were gleaned from 99 publications to reveal previously untested meta-analytic effects for diversity climate outcomes and antecedents. The effects of diversity climate on some outcomes were stronger when measured by policy-focused rather than attitude-focused measures. Importantly, diversity climate had a stronger relation with several outcomes for organizations that were more diverse, suggesting that diversity climate plays a more important role in enhancing positive outcomes among organizations with greater diversity. This meta-analysis provides insights and guidance for future research and practice on the enhancement of diversity climate and subsequent diversity-related outcomes in organizations.
Although implementing organizational change involves attitudinal support from both individuals and groups, researchers typically examine individual change attitudes as key drivers of change success. In this paper, we focus on collective change attitudes - defined as a group's overall evaluation of a proposed organizational change - to challenge and extend this developing construct. To do so, we adopt a diversity and faultline perspective to identify four distinct patterns of collective change attitudes: convergent, minority belief, fragmented, and bimodal patterns. We offer a theoretical model that explains the influence of group faultlines and change event characteristics on the emergence of the four patterns of collective change attitudes and their temporal trajectories over time. In addition, we theorize the influence of collective change attitudes on change implementation effectiveness. Our work offers implications for research and practice in organizational change and human resource management.
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives aim to enhance organizational legitimacy and build trust, but they can also elicit negative reactions, such as skepticism and distrust. Understanding why people respond negatively and how such reactions can be mitigated is essential for developing more effective and authentic CSR strategies. Although research on micro-CSR has expanded rapidly, most studies focus on positive outcomes with limited insight into potential adverse responses. We systematically reviewed the literature on negative responses to CSR at the individual level of analysis, synthesizing findings across 76 studies comprised of more than 43,000 participants, to develop a cohesive framework that illuminates these reactions, their psychological mechanisms, and contextual factors. Negative responses identified include skepticism, lower purchase intentions, negative perceptions, distrust, and—less frequently studied—behavioural responses like boycotting and cyberloafing. Notably, most studies examine consumer responses, with little research to date on negative reactions among employees, job seekers, or communities. We also synthesized theory across studies, identifying patterns and opportunities to inform further research and theory development. Our review concludes with practical recommendations for advancing research and informing HR and management practice, emphasizing more inclusive, evidence-based approaches to CSR that reflect diverse social values and experiences.
This editorial looks back on the past five years of submissions to Human Resource Management Review to (1) discuss the various forms of review manuscripts that have been submitted, (2) identify factors that led to desk rejection of the different types of review manuscripts, and (3) provide guidance to authors who wish to submit reviews. Review manuscripts are a very large percentage of in-scope submissions and some of the types of review manuscripts (i.e., bibliometric) have a much higher probability of desk rejection compared to other in-scope submissions. We find many of types of review manuscripts are produced according to standardized templates and fall seriously short in making a conceptual or theoretical contribution. The number of these poor submissions appears to be increasing. Given this, we hope this editorial will provide guidance to authors on how to improve their reviews prior to submission.
The workplace is changing in significant ways, driven by the new economy, with changes in technology (e.g., artificial intelligence, algorithmic management), the prevalence of contingent work, demographic changes, and where work is done. At the same time, the workforce is continuing to age and grow more age-diverse. The focus of this article is the implications of this new economy and aging workforce for human resource management practices. In this paper, we begin by reviewing key concepts around lifespan development theories, successful aging at work, and age stereotyping as the bases for analysing these issues. We then describe the implications of the aforementioned workplace changes and the potential for differential outcomes for people of different ages. We conclude with a discussion of the implications for research and human resource management practices.
In responding to global ecological and social challenges, companies have been attempting to report organizational performance on Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) aspects. However, integrating ESG aspects into HRM practices brings tensions and complexities for HR managers who must align HRM with not only organizational goals but broader societal obligations. In the current paper, we adopt a paradox perspective to unravel the complexities of integrating ESG into HRM. We use ESG as an analytical framework to address HRM paradoxical tensions arising from pursuing multiple, often conflicting, agendas. By systematically reviewing the HRM empirical literature, we provide novel insights on paradoxical tensions across the nature, process, and outcomes of HRM with regard to ESG aspects. We argue for a ‘both/and’ approach. The approach helps HR managers balance the needs of diverse stakeholders (including employee, society and the environment), in order to align their HRM practices with values like sustainability, equality, and social inclusion for the common good. By proposing a coherent paradoxical framework, our study contributes to the development of a dynamic view of ‘fit’ and the alignment of fragmented HRM theories, HR practices and outcomes. By doing so, we aim to support organizations in achieving business success and making a positive social and environmental impact, therefore advancing HRM as a viable instrument for the common good.
