Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Handbook of Strategic e-Business Management pp 605–632Cite as

Research Approaches in e-HRM: Categorisation and Analysis

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Progress in IS ((PROIS))

Abstract

Electronic Human Resource Management (e-HRM) is a new interdisciplinary field of research at the intersection of Human Resources (HR) and Information Systems (IS). Research in e-HRM is currently based on diverse research approaches from HR and IS, its “parent disciplines”, as well as other disciplines. The frequent implicitness and thus uncertainty of the used research approaches, however, is disadvantageous for future e-HRM research because it obstructs a conscious and instructed selection and adoption of research approaches as well as mutual understanding and cooperation between different research approaches. The current chapter thus aims to categorise (which approaches are available?) and analyse (which characteristics and potential do these approaches demonstrate?) e-HRM research approaches. To this end, a brief framework of conceptual criteria is derived that allows research approaches in e-HRM to be categorised and analysed. Based on this, a categorisation and analysis of four major approaches, i.e., critical research, interpretive research, post-positive research and design research, is offered, and the possibilities for adopting these approaches in e-HRM research are described.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    “Post-positivism”, however, constitutes a rather unfortunate designation, given that it does not refer to a major characteristic of the approach but instead to its succession of another approach.

References

  • Anderson, V. (2004). Research approaches in human resource management. London: CIPD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aier, S., & Fischer, C. (2011). Criteria of progress in information systems design theories. Information Systems and e-Business Management, 9, 133–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson, M. (2009). Critical perspectives on strategic HRM. In J. Storey, P. M. Wright, & D. Ulrich (Eds.), The routledge companion to strategic human resource management (pp. 52–62). Oxon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson, M., & Deetz, S. (2000). Doing critical management research. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Applegate, L. M. (1999). Rigor and relevance in MIS research—Introduction. MIS Quarterly, 23(1), 1–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, K. D. (1994). Typologies and taxonomies: An introduction to classification techniques. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bondarouk, T, V. & Furtmueller, E., (2012) E-HRM research: Promises, hopes, facts and path forward, reviewing four decades of empirical evidence. In C. Tansley & H. Williams (eds.), Proceedings of the 4 th International e-HRM Conference: Innovation, Creativity and e-HRM (pp. 25–60), Nottingham Trent University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunge, M. (1959). Causality: The place of the causal principle in modern science. Cambridge Mass.: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunge, M. (1967a). Scientific research I: The search for system. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunge, M. (1967b). Scientific research II: The search for truth. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological paradigms and organizational analysis. London: Heinemann Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson, S. A. (2010). Design science research in information systems: A critical realist approach. In A. R. Hevner & S. Chatterjee (Eds.), Design science research in information systems (pp. 209–233). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cecez-Kecmanovic, D. (2005). Basic assumptions of the critical research perspective in information systems. In D. Howcroft & E. M. Trauth (Eds.), Handbook of critical information systems research—Theory and application (pp. 19–46). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cecez-Kecmanovic, D. (2011). Doing critical information systems research—Arguments for a critical research methodology. European Journal of Information Systems, 20, 440–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, W., & Hirschheim, R. (2004). A paradigmatic and methodological examination of information systems research from 1991 to 2001. Information Systems Journal, 14(3), 197–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cua, F. C., & Garret, T. C. (2009). Understanding epistemology and ontology in information systems research. In A. Cater-Steel & L. Al-Hakim (Eds.), Information systems research methods, epistemology and applications (pp. 35–57). Hershey: IGI Global.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dachler, H.-P., & Enderle, G. (1989). Epistemological and ethical considerations in implementing human resource management. Journal of Business Ethics, 8, 597–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deetz, S. (1996). Describing differences in approaches to organization science: Rethinking Burrell and Morgan and their legacy. Organization Science, 7(2), 191–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2003). The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: A ten-year update. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(4), 9–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, C., Winter, R., & Wortmann, F. (2010). Design theory. Business and Information Systems Engineering, 6, 387–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goles, T., & Hirshheim, R. (2000). The paradigm is dead, the paradigm is dead…long live the paradigm: The legacy of Burrell and Morgan. International Journal of Management Science, 28(3), 249–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregor, S., & Jones, D. (2007). The anatomy of a design theory. Journal of the Association of Information Systems, 5(8), 312–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayek, F. A. (1955). Degrees of explanation. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 6(23), 209–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hevner, A. R., & Chatterjee, S. (2010). Design science research frameworks. In A. R. Hevner & S. Chatterjee (Eds.), Design science research in information systems (pp. 23–31). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iivari, J. (2007). A paradigmatic analysis of information systems as design science. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 19(2), 39–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khazanchi, D. & Munkvold, B. E. (2002). On the rhetoric and relevance of IS research paradigms (pp. 1–10), Proceedings of the 36th Hawai Conference on Systems Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, H. K., & Myers, M. D. (1999). A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 23(1), 67–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuechler, B., & Vaishnavi, J. (2008). On theory development in design science research: Anatomy of a research project. European Journal of Information Systems, 17, 489–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1976). The structure of scientific revolutions (3rd ed.). Chicago: Chicago University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, A. (1991). Integrating positivist and interpretivist approaches to organizational research. Organization Science, 2, 342–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, S. T., & Smith, G. (1995). Design and natural science research on information technology. Decision Support Systems, 15(4), 251–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayrhofer, W. (2009). Groping in the dark? Recent contributions to progress in interpretative research—A review. German Journal of Human Resource Research, 23(2), 166–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKenna, S., Singh, P., & Richardson, J. (2008). A drunkards’ search: looking for ‘HRM’ in the wrong places. Management International Review, 48(1), 115–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKenna, S., Richardson, J., & Manroop, L. (2011). Alternative paradigms to the study and practice of performance management and evaluation. Human Resource Management Review, 21(2), 148–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers, M. D., & Klein, H. K. (2011). A set of principles for conducting critical research in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 35(1), 17–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niehaves, B. (2007). On epistemological diversity in design science: New vistas for design-oriented IS research? (pp. 1–13) Proceedings of the 28 th International Conference on Information Systems, Montreal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nienhüser, W. (2011). Empirical research on human resource management as production of ideology. Management Revue, 22(4), 367–393.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olivas-Luján, M. & Rosseau, D. M. (2010). Can the evidence-based movement help e-HRM to bridge the research-practice-gap? In S. Strohmeier & A. Diederichsen (eds.), Evidence-based e-HRM? On the Way to Rigorous and Relevant Research, Proceedings of the 3 rd European Academic Workshop on Electronic Human Resource Management (pp. 3–13), Bamberg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orlikowski, W. J., & Baroudi, J. J. (1991). Studying information technology in organizations: research approaches and assumptions. Information Systems Research, 2(1), 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orwell, G. (1949). 1984, London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panayotopoulou, L., Galanaki, E., & Papalexandris, N. (2010). Adoption of electronic systems in hrm: Is national background of the firm relevant? New Technology, Work and Employment, 25(3), 253–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parry, E. (2011). An examination of e-HRM as means to increase the value of the HR function. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(5), 1146–1162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paucar-Caceres, A., & Wright, G. (2011). Contemporary discourses in information systems research: Methodological inclusiveness in a sample of information systems journals. International Journal of Information Management, 31(6), 593–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M., Chaterjee, S. (2007/2008). A design science research methodology for information systems research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(3), 45–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K. R. (1963). Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robey, D. (1996). Diversity in information systems research: Threat, promise, and responsibility. Information Systems Research, 7(4), 400–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robey, D., & Markus, L. M. (1998). Rigor and relevance: Producing consumable research about information systems. Information Resources Management Journal, 11(1), 7–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruël, H. J. M., & Bondarouk, T. V. (2012). A cross-national perspective on the intersection between information technology and HRM. In C. Brewster & W. Mayrhofer (Eds.), Handbook on research on comparative human resource management (pp. 416–448). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Searle, R. H. (2006). New technology: The potential impact of surveillance techniques in recruitment practices. Personnel Review, 35(3), 336–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, D. & Dulebohn, R. (2013). Emerging issues in theory and research of e-HRM. Human Resource Management Review 23(1), 1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strohmeier, S. (2007). Research in e-HRM: Review and implications. Human Resource Management Review, 17(3), 19–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strohmeier, S. (2009). Concepts of e-HRM consequences: A categorization, review, and suggestion. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20(3), 528–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strohmeier, S. (2012). Design research in e-HRM—An outline, example, and discussion. In C. Tansley & H. Williams (eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth International e-HRM Conference: Innovation, Creativity and e-HRM (pp. 374–400), Nottingham Trent University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strohmeier, S., & Kabst, R. (2009). Organizational adoption of e-HRM. An empirical exploration of major adoption factors. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 24(6), 482–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tansley, C., & Newell, S. (2007). A Knowledge-based view of agenda-formation in the development of human resource information systems. Management Learning, 38(1), 95–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Aken, J. E. (2004). Management research based on the paradigm of design science: The quest for tested and grounded technological rules. Journal of Management Studies, 41(2), 219–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Aken, J. E. (2005). Management research as a design science: Articulating the research products of mode 2 knowledge production in management. British Journal of Management, 16(1), 19–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venable, J. (2006). The role of theory and theorising in design science research. First International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology (pp. 1–18), Claremont, California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walls, J. G., Widmeyer, G. R., & El Sawy, O. A. (1992). Building an information systems design theory for vigilant EIS. Information Systems Research, 3(1), 36–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsham, G. (1995). Interpretive case studies in IS research: nature and method. European Journal of Information Systems, 4(2), 74–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, T. J. (2004). HRM and critical social science analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 41(3), 447–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, M. (2000). Interpretivism and generalization. Sociology, 34(2), 209–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winter, R. (2008). Design science research in Europe. European Journal of Information Systems, 17, 470–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Chair of Management Information Systems, Saarland University, Saarbruecken, Germany

    Stefan Strohmeier

Authors
  1. Stefan Strohmeier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefan Strohmeier .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Business Administration, University of Granada, Granada, Spain

    Francisco J. Martínez-López

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Strohmeier, S. (2014). Research Approaches in e-HRM: Categorisation and Analysis. In: Martínez-López, F. (eds) Handbook of Strategic e-Business Management. Progress in IS. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39747-9_25

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation