An Investigation into How Line Managers Shape and Influence HR Practice During the Implementation Process

Abstract

Human resource research has extended beyond the types of practices implemented to how practices are implemented by line managers who hold people management responsibilities (e.g. performance management) to their direct reports. Scholars agree that implementation of Human Resource Management (HRM) practices is as important for HRM effectiveness as the formulation and design of these practices. Line managers play a central role in HRM practices, and line managers are deeply involved in shaping the outcomes of HRM practices for their team members and in delivering those outcomes to their employees. However, research and theory on how their role is enacted still remains underdeveloped. This thesis is rooted in the line manager HRM implementation and focuses on how and why line managers implement HRM practices. As a contribution to this debate the researcher uses a multi-theoretical lens to understand the phenomenon of line manager implementation of HRM practices. Translation theory an underutilised theoretical lens within HRM studies is used to help further our understanding of how practices are changed or edited by managers. Through a qualitative study the researcher provides new insights into the decisions managers make in choosing how to implement HRM practices. Using the practice of performance management and specifically performance appraisal, the study explores the decisions managers make in implementing (or not), this practice that is devolved by the Human Resources (HR) function. The study explores how and why line managers choose to enact HRM practices and how they shape or influence that process. For the purposes of the study, line managers are defined as people managers who hold responsibility for direct reports. The findings suggest line managers respond in three ways to the implementation of HRM practices. The first category labelled championing reflects how managers choose to actively implement and take ownership for the HRM practices devolved by the HR function. The second category labelled curtailing describes how managers choose to slow down implementation by actively avoiding or passively avoiding implementation. A third categorisation labelled translating illustrates how managers adapt the practice by altering forms and altering content, in order to improve local implementation and also how they behave towards HR when they make those changes.