Studies of Human Resource Mangement (HRM) are both more relevant and more interesting if analysis is emphasised before prescription. This article argues that a more analytical approach to HRM can be constructed from 3 areas of study: the traditional reviews of 20th century management thought; comparative and radical studies of managerial strategy; and new developments in organisation theory. These demonstrate both the com plexity of HRM, (policies vary in different contexts, the same policies can generate different results), and suggest hypotheses to explain the variations found. By pulling this type of analysis into the study of HRM, management education can become more relevant, and managerial prescriptions less prone to error.
Anastasia A. KatouPawan Budhwar