Search results

The purpose of this paper is to focus on the different rationales for devolving people management responsibilities to the line and examine their consequences for the HR function and HR’s interactions with line managers and employees.

A model was developed and tested that describes how the rationale for devolving people management to the line influences the HR function, HR’s interactions with line managers and the quality of people management. Survey data were collected from 446 managers who reported that their organisations had devolved people management to the line.

Results indicate that devolution rationales are associated with distinct changes to the HR function’s strategic integration and size. These changes in the HR function are in turn associated with utilisation of line manager focused HR practices, HR’s business partner orientation and people management effectiveness.

The HR function should consider changes that refine job descriptions to include a clear statement of people management responsibilities, ensure performance appraisals incorporate an assessment of people management effectiveness and prioritise line manager training and rewards in an environment where line managers may be less than enthusiastic about their newly acquired people management responsibilities.

The study contributes to the devolution literature by outlining how the effects of devolution are tied to the rationale underlying devolution efforts. It suggests that the tendency to conceptualise devolution without reference to the reason why it is pursued may be contributing to the controversy over its consequences.

Despite much rhetoric about the need to be strategic, HR professionals have often had difficulty in establishing themselves as credible contributors to organizational performances, facing a legitimacy issue in their relationship with line managers. Adopting a social cognitive theory framework, the present study explores the HR professionals’ perceptions and expectations of the changing roles that HR professionals and line managers could play in a near future scenario where a set of smart technologies will be applied to HRM.

The research design is based on a two-wave survey: it involves 53 HR professionals belonging to the HR department of the Italian branch of one of the biggest international consulting companies which is about to implement a wide digital transformation.

Preliminary findings prompt reflections into the role of digital practices in reshaping the relationship between the HR department and line managers, especially in consideration of the role of HR professionals’ technology readiness and tenure. They suggest that HR devolution is not a matter of “all or nothing,” but it requires different solutions, which also depend on the nature of the specific HR practice. From a managerial perspective, the chapter suggests the paramount importance of sustaining the digital mindset of the HR professionals and their professional image.

This article examines the reallocation of human resource management responsibilities from HR specialists to line managers in UK public sector organisations in an increasingly regulated working environment. It uses evidence about the extent and scope of HR devolution in a large unitary city council, the British Library and a county probationary service. Based on the perceptions of senior managers, middle managers, HR specialists and the trade union representatives, it specifically explores: the issues devolution raises about the HR responsibilities of line managers; the experience of HR devolution in the public sector; and the impact of a more externally regulated and litigious workplace on continuing devolution.

Few definitions in the HRM literature have reached as much consensus as the term “devolution”. However, devolution is a phenomenon that has been defined from the perspective of HRM specialists, with little or no contribution from middle managers. This paper seeks to explore what is behind the commonly shared definition of devolution, by examining not only the actual tasks that are being devolved, but also by trying to establish different degrees of devolution according to a number of dimensions.

An approach that facilitated the exploration of the extent of devolution and impact on middle managers' perceptions was required. A qualitative approach was adopted. Specifically, a case study of a hospital in Spain was undertaken. The research methods included in‐depth interviews, participant observation and internal documentation.

The findings emphasize the importance of reflecting on the reality and the rhetoric of devolution. The results indicate that it is worthwhile to break down the concept of devolution into dimensions (tasks and responsibilities, decision‐making power, financial power and expertise power) and to specify what dimensions are devolved.

There is a clear difference between the rhetoric of devolution and what actually happens in practice. In order to distinguish between those organisations that go beyond the rhetoric of devolution, it is important to differentiate between the devolution of tasks and the devolution of decision‐making power and autonomy in order to undertake these tasks. This differentiation facilitates the identification of those companies which display superficial levels of devolution and take steps to advance the process.

This paper questions the traditional definition of devolution. It proposes a new definition of devolution based on the identification of various dimensions and incorporates the perspectives of all the actors involved in the process.

Based on role theory, this paper seeks to investigate the impact of HR devolution characteristics (number of devolved HR tasks), characteristics of the HR devolution context (level of support from the HR department, and presence of institutionalised incentives to perform the allotted HR tasks well), and personal characteristics of the front‐line managers (HR competency) on front‐line managers' perceptions of two HR role stressors, i.e. HR role ambiguity and HR role overload.

The paper uses a sample of 169 front‐line managers from 47 organisations. The results are based on two moderation regression analyses, taking into account the nested nature of the observations.

The results suggest that the execution of a high number of HR tasks does not lead to the occurrence of HR role stressors among front‐line managers. However, for the HR department it is important to create an appropriate environment in terms of giving HR support and advice to line managers, and training line managers regarding their HR competencies.

This research opens up interesting lines of inquiry regarding the conditions under which the partnership between the HR department and line management can be successful.

The paper provides HR practitioners with insights into the conditions needed to avoid perceptions of HR role stressors among front‐line managers.

The paper applies role theory in a new context, i.e. the HR role of front‐line managers.

The aim of the article is to analyse HR devolution from HR departments to the line. Two important problems are addressed. The first problem concerns the disregard for the changes in line management that comes with HR devolution. The second problem addressed deals with the lack of studies of organisational contingencies.

The paper presents and analyses an in‐depth case study of a radically projected firm within the Tetra Park group where a new HR‐oriented management role has been created to replace the traditional line management role. Based on the case study findings, the paper elaborates on the new approach to line management and how a new management role is moulded in the context of project‐based organisations.

Based on literature studies, the paper identifies four key challenges for HRM in project‐based organisations that are critical for the development of the new approach to line management in such settings. Based on case study observations, it analyses the creation of a new management role – the so called “competence coach” – in project‐based organisation within the Tetra Park group. It argues that the new approach adopted points to the need of breaking out of traditional conceptions of line management, and of developing the concept of an HR‐oriented management role that is a legitimate player in the HR organisation of a firm.

The paper provides a rich case description of a project‐based firm in a HRM perspective. The descriptions and the analysis give practical as well as theoretical implications of HRM issues that arise in project‐based firms, and of changes in line management as a way of developing the capabilities to handle these issues.

Two research questions are asked in this paper: RQ1. How does line management involvement in PA work unfold in practice? RQ2. How does line management involvement contribute toward any divergence arising between intended and implemented PA work?

An in-depth case study from a multi-actor perspective based on interviews with HR managers, line managers and employees, and organizational documents.

The findings illustrate how line managers faced three types of complexities during implementation, i.e. dilemmas, understandings, and local adaptations. These jointly contributed to a divergence arising between the PA as intended and the PA as implemented. This divergence became associated with how line management involvement was restricted to the local context and the initial stages of the PA process, highlighting how HR practices can contain both devolved and non-devolved elements.

We respond to calls for more in-depth qualitative studies of how line managers are involved in HR work; this is done specifically by conceptualizing the complexities line managers face in practice when implementing HR practices. As such, we add to the understanding of HR practices as relational and social in nature. We also contribute to the processual understanding of HRM by highlighting how HR practices can contain both devolved and non-devolved elements. By stressing the limitations of binary conceptualizations of HR devolution, we add to the understanding of HR devolution as more complex and multifaceted than traditionally assumed.

This paper assesses the role of human resource (HR) managers adopting a strategic role and devolution of HR work to the line in work organisations, and details interviews with 46 line managers drawn from an exploratory study in three work organisations in the UK over a two‐year period. The study finds that HR managers can be seen to be both engaging in the process of enhancing employee wellbeing at work, and also acting against it. The conclusions drawn are that, while the advantages to employee wellbeing through adopting a strategic HR approach led by HR managers and devolution of HR work to the line are numerous, the potential costs to employee wellbeing are also significant. The latter must be addressed by organisations if future employee commitment to these organisations is to be secured.

The purpose of this paper is to highlight the importance of a multi-level approach consisting of individual, human resource management (HRM) team, and organizational contingency factors when considering the efficacy of HR devolvement efforts. The authors accomplish this through a review of the relevant devolvement literature to show how outcomes are impacted by contingency factors, which highlights a gap in extant scholarship, and the authors organize the literature in a way that is meaningful to future researchers interested in the topic as well as practitioners involved with its implementation.

The authors use a narrative review approach to describe previous devolvement research (e.g. Hammersley, 2001; Harvey and Moeller, 2009). In contrast to a systematic review more commonly seen in quantitative meta-analyses, a narrative review allows for a more descriptive and detailed analysis and critique of quantitative, qualitative, and theoretical research (Bezrukova et al., 2012; Posthuma et al., 2002). This methodology produced over 300 books, journal articles, magazine articles, and discussion papers. In this review, the authors chose to focus only on those peer-reviewed papers reporting empirical findings or developing theoretical arguments surrounding devolvement.

While the studies reviewed herein are admirable and help call attention to an important topic in HRM, they nonetheless fail to provide a comprehensive understanding of contingencies affecting devolvement as they do not consider the multi-level nature of the phenomenon. Therefore, the authors’ contribution lies in the identification and categorization of contingency factors affecting the occurrence of devolvement operating at the individual, HRM team, and organizational levels.

As devolvement continues to be a viable means for assigning HR responsibilities from the human resources department to managers, its effects can have an impact on organizational performance, the strategic positioning of HR, and various job attitudes of line managers. Therefore, a clearer picture of devolvement in order to understand its continued significance is an important contribution.