Dear colleagues
Can you kindly post the below Call for Papers?
Best regards

Akram Al Ariss, PhD

Professor of Human Resource ManagementHabilit¨¦ ¨¤ Diriger des Recherches (HDR)

Toulouse Business School, France


Associate Editor for Career Development International

Resource Management Review

for Papers Special Issue on:


Convergence, or Crossvergence in International Human Resource Management


Resource Management Review (HRMR) announces a call for papers for a special issue on ¡°Divergence,
Convergence, or Crossvergence in International Human Resource Management¡±.


The special issue is edited by Professor Akram Al Ariss (Universit¨¦
de Toulouse, Toulouse Business School) and Professor Yusuf Sidani (American
University of Beirut, Olayan Business School).

[log in to unmask]

[log in to unmask]



Whether organizations and their HR practices are converging¡ªbecoming
more similar¡ª(convergence theory) or diverging in their practices (divergence
theory) is a matter of intense scholarly interest. In their award-winning paper
about values evolution, Ralston et al. (1993; 1997), proposed the crossvergence
theory of values evolution. This perspective marked a departure from the
traditional convergence/divergence theory of values formation. The convergence
theory posited that values develop in sync with the prevailing technology in a
particular society given the impact of technological development on other educational
and institutional structures. As societies become more similar to one another
in terms of industrialization and use of technology, values will eventually
converge to Western capitalism, given that this is where most industrialization
has traditionally occurred (Ralston, 2008). The divergence theory, on the other
hand, argues that the socio-cultural influences are typically the prevailing
forces that lead societal members to adopt specific values irrespective of
other external drivers. The crossvergence theory argues instead that it is in
fact a combination of sociocultural forces as well as ¡°business ideology
influences¡± that is the major force behind the formation of value systems. A
similar term that has been coined in HR research is the ¡°bounded convergence¡± perspective,
which argues that HRM practices sometimes pursue hybrid models of HR (Zhang,


Congruent to the above, this CFP invites scholars to explore these ideas
in the realm of HR practices. To what extent do HR practices converge in line with
what may be considered best practices in that regard, which are mainly
developed in Western societies? Or is it the case that in any given society,
sociocultural practices particular to that society have more impact in
determining that society¡¯s HR practices? Or are we instead witnessing a realization
of the crossvergence theory, wherein a combination of factors molds HR
practices. The crossvergence theory, as far as HR practices are concerned, has
been understudied in HR scholarship. From the papers we are calling for, we
would like to build an understanding of the trends of convergence/divergence/crossvergence
of HRM processes and systems. Earlier HR research seems to be hinting at
crossvergence in certain areas. Sidani and Al Ariss (2013), for example,
suggest that MNCs operate in such a way that certain practices converge (given
their global usage) while other practices diverge (given local contexts) thus leaning
toward a crossvergence perspective. Brewster, Wood, and Brookes (2008) also
find evidence of both similarities and differences in IHRM practices.  Brewster (2004) presents what he terms as ¡°European
perspectives on human resource management¡± suggesting the existence of institutional
and cultural factors that do not conform to a pure convergence theory. Likewise,
Rowley and Benson (2002) explore the difficulties and challenges facing HRM
convergence theory in the Asian context (please refer to the SI in HRMR
about the Chinese context, Zhang, 2012). Other contributions to HRMR
also explore the existence of country/region-specific HR practices (for example
Gooderham & Nordhaug, 2011; Huo, Huang, & Napier, 2002; Mayrhofer,
Brewster, Morley, & Ledolter, 2011; Morley, 2004). The questions that we
ask in this SI cover issues including to what extent we have a global HRM
versus region-specific model of HR (North American model, European model, Asian
model, Middle Eastern model, Nordic model, etc.)? Where do these systems meet
and where do they part both in theory and in practice? In this special issue, we
are interested in discourses that are currently present in the English language
in various parts of the world. We are also interested in under-represented
regions of the world, such as the Asian, African, and Latin American contexts
in addition to other world experiences. We encourage researchers whose work
entails investigating work practices in non-Western contexts to share their
perspectives of HRM within their own contexts. The idea is to attract papers
addressing these issues at the micro (i.e., individual and group) level with
openness to the macro (organizational and societal) levels of analysis.

Some relevant questions (non-exhaustive list) are as follows:

(1)   Are the assumptions of HRM that we understand in the West applicable
in other world regions? What are the major concepts, models, and theories of
HRM in those non-Western contexts and how do these enrich our understanding of
divergence/convergence/convergence perspectives?

(2)    What are some of the comparative features of HRM systems
in different parts of the world, and at different levels of analysis? 
What does this tell us about HRM and allied fields (e.g. organizational
behavior, industrial/organizational psychology, labor relations)?

 (3)    What are the roles of individuals, groups,
organizations, and institutions in creating similar or different approaches to

(4)    How is HRM practiced in countries where most of the major
employers are large government affiliated employers?  What differences do
we see in such contexts in areas such as personnel selection, compensation,
performance appraisal, attraction and retention, training and development,
among others?

 (5)   HRM in Western contexts assumes a certain level of ¡®rule
of law¡¯. How are HRM processes understood at the individual, group, and
organizational levels where the rule of law is deficient or barely existent?

 (6)    What key new trends in HRM can be identified as
international/global (e.g. Global Talent Management)? How do such trends stimulate
empirical research, as well as critical examination of existing concepts,
models, and theories?

 (7)    What is the impact of national cultures in
developing a specific understanding for the role of HRM? Should we expect that
variances along such dimensions (i.e. Hofstede, GLOBE etc.) would be reflected
in different HR systems?



with HRMR¡¯s scope, conceptual and
theoretical papers are welcomed (not empirical). Papers should be submitted
according to the journal¡¯s guidelines:


15th September 2014:            Submit
abstracts (maximum 1000 words) to the guest-editors. 

15th October 2014:     Invitations
to submit full papers will be sent out.

15th April 2015:         Submission
of full papers for refereeing.

15th May 2015:          Authors
will receive feedback.

15th September 2015:            Full
papers with revisions will be due.

2016:                         Journal volume to be published.



Brewster, C. (2004). European
perspectives on human resource management. Human Resource Management Review, 14(4), 365-382.

Brewster, C., Wood, G., &
Brookes, M. (2008). Similarity, isomorphism or duality? Recent survey evidence
on the human resource management policies of multinational corporations. British Journal of Management, 19(4), 320-342.

Gooderham, P., & Nordhaug, O.
(2011). One European model of HRM? Cranet empirical contributions. Human Resource Management Review, 21(1), 27-36.

Huo, Y. P., Huang, H. J., &
Napier, N. K. (2002). Divergence or convergence: a cross©\national comparison of personnel selection practices. Human Resource Management, 41(1), 31-44.

Mayrhofer, W., Brewster, C., Morley,
M. J., & Ledolter, J. (2011). Hearing a different drummer? Convergence of
human resource management in Europe¡ªA longitudinal analysis. Human Resource Management Review, 21(1), 50-67.

Morley, M. J. (2004). Contemporary
debates in European human resource management: Context and content. Human Resource Management Review,14(4),

Rowley, C., & Benson, J. (2002).
Convergence and divergence in Asian human resource management. California Management Review, 44(2).

Ralston, D. A. (2008). The
crossvergence perspective: Reflections and projections. Journal of International Business
Studies, 39(1), 27-40.

Ralston, D. A., Holt, D. H.,
Terpstra, R. H., & Kai-Cheng, Y. (1997). The impact of national culture and
economic ideology on managerial work values: A study of the United States,
Russia, Japan, and China. Journal of International Business Studies, 177-207.

Ralston, D. A., Gustafson, D. J.,
Cheung, F. M., & Terpstra, R. H. (1993). Differences in managerial values:
A study of US, Hong Kong and PRC managers. Journal
of International Business Studies, 249-275.

Sidani, Y., & Al Ariss, A.
(2013) Institutional and corporate drivers of global talent management:
Evidence from the Arab Gulf region. Journal of World Business (2013),

Zhang, M. (2012). The development of
human resource management in China: An overview. Human Resource Management Review, 22(3), 161-164.