M.P.H.M Gunawardana.

Best Fit vs. Best Practice: Examining the Current Global HRM Debate.

The argument between the "Best Fit" and "Best Practice" approaches to human resource management (HRM) has acquired significant resistances as businesses expand internationally. While each paradigm provides unique approaches to human resource management in a various of industries, selecting one over the other can have a significant impact on employee engagement and organizational effectiveness. This blog examines the current controversy, analyzing the advantages and disadvantages of both strategies as well as their applicability in the current global environment.

The Best Fit Method

Definition and Justification

Best Fit method, where HRM procedures ought to be customized to meet the unique requirements of the company and its surroundings. Best fit method highlights the significance of surrounding elements, including culture, industry dynamics, and organizational strategy (Brewster et al., 2018).

Benefits

1. Relevance: Organizations can enhance their effectiveness and employee engagement by customizing HR practices to local conditions, (Schuler & Jackson, 2018).
2. Strategic Alignment: Adjusted practices ensure that HR initiatives support to expand business goals, fostering improved performance and adaptability.

Difficulties

1. Complexity: Developing customized HR practices needs significant resources and in-depth knowledge of local markets.
2. Inconsistency: Variability in practices across different regions can lead to confusion and perceived inequalities among employees (Collings et al., 2020).

 

The best practice method

Definition and justification.

According to the Best Practices approach, some HR procedures are always successful, no matter the situation. This strategy is based on the idea that better organizational performance can result from putting into practice tried-and-true HR tactics like training programs, performance management systems, and employee engagement initiatives (Becker & Huselid, 2019).

Benefits

1.  Efficiency and Simplicity: Standardizing HR procedures can improve organizational efficiency, lessen administrative workloads, and streamline procedures 

2.  Benchmarking: By comparing their HR procedures to those of industry leaders, businesses can obtain a competitive edge and promote ongoing improvement(Becker & Huselid, 2019).

Difficulties

1. Cultural Misalignment: Employee disengagement may arise from the introduction of conventional procedures without taking local settings into account (Ng & Sears, 2020).

2. Lack of Flexibility: A rigid approach may overlook specific regional needs, limiting the effectiveness of HR strategies (Kirkman et al., 2019).

 

The Ongoing Debate: Best Fit vs. Best Practice

Complementarity and Hybrid Models

A hybrid strategy that combines aspects of both frameworks is adopted by many businesses, therefore the argument between Best Fit and Best Practice is not absolutely binary. This permits local adjustments to satisfy particular cultural and market demands while allowing for the standardization of fundamental HR procedures 

Empirical Evidence

Companies that employ a hybrid strategy generally outperform those that just adhere to Best Fit or Best Practice, according to recent research. Collings et al. (2020) found that companies that successfully integrated the two strategies reported higher levels of employee satisfaction and organizational performance.

Opportunities for the Future

The relevance of Best Fit and Best Practice methods is likely to diminish as the global business environment evolves. Technology advancements, remote work styles, and employee expectations all call for a reevaluation of HRM practices (Tarique & Schuler, 2021). Companies must constantly assess the effectiveness of their HR processes to remain flexible and adaptive to these developments.

Conclusion
The ongoing debate in global human resource management between Best Fit and Best Practice approaches highlights the challenges of managing human resources across several markets. While both approaches offer valuable insights, the optimal approach may be a hybrid model that balances contextual adaptation with standardization. Companies can successfully navigate the

 

References

Becker, B. E., & Huselid, M. A. (2019). High-performance work systems and firm performance: The mediating role of internal social structure. Journal of Management.

Brewster, C., Chung, C., & Sparrow, P. (2018). Globalizing Human Resource Management. Routledge.

Collings, D. G., Mellahi, K., & Cascio, W. F. (2020). Global talent management: A research agenda. Journal of World Business.

Kirkman, B. L., Rosen, B., & Gibson, C. B. (2019). The impact of team empowerment on virtual team performance: The moderating role of face-to-face interaction. Academy of Management Journal.

Ng, E. S. W., & Sears, G. J. (2020). Cultural intelligence and leadership: The case of global leaders. Leadership & Organization Development Journal.

Schuler, R. S., & Jackson, S. E. (2018). Strategic Human Resource Management. In The Oxford Handbook of Human Resource Management. Oxford University Press.