본 연구는 ‘한국적 경영학(K-Management)’ 연구 프로젝트의 일환으로 수행된 ‘한국적 인적자원관리(K-HRM)’에 대한 연구이다. 기존의 K-HRM 연구를 계승하면서, 기존연구와는 차별화된 이론기반 연구를 수행하여 향후 K-HRM 연구의 디딤돌이 되도록 돕는데 그 목적이 있다. 보다 구체적으로는 K-HRM 연구를 발전적으로 수행하기 위해 특정 이론을 사용한 기존 연구들을 고찰하여 이론으로 설명되는 것과 되지 못하는 인사관리의 현실이 무엇인지를 살펴보고, 향후 발전적인 연구와 K-HRM 이론개발을 위해 어떤 보완이 필요한지에 대해 논의하고 제안하는데 그 목적이 있다. 본 연구에서는 K-HRM을 “사람을 통해 바람직한 성과를 추구하기 위해 한국의 가치와 상황을 반영하는 지침원리(guiding principles)를 기반으로 각 인사기능의 정책적 선택이 이루어지고 이를 실현하기 위해 도입하고 있는 사람관리 제도와 그 수행과정”으로 정의하고자 한다. 위의 목적을 수행하기 위해 우선 한국 인적자원관리를 1987년 이전 시기, 1987~1997년 시기, 그리고 1997년 이후 시기 등으로 구분하여 세 시기의 인적자원관리의 특징을 정리하였다. 그리고 실증연구의 종합정리를 위해 한국의 인적자원관리분야 연구의 대표적인 학술지인 인사조직연구, 인사관리연구(현, 조직과 인사관리연구), 경영학연구, 산업관계연구에 발표된 실증연구 논문들 54편과 해외저널에 발표된 한국기업들에 대한 인사관리 관련 실증연구 논문들 16편 등 총 70편을 검토하였다. 이 논문들에 대하여 연도별 전체 논문 수 추이, 연도별 분석수준(개인, 조직, 다층), 사용된 인사제도 혹은 시스템(개별제도, 하부시스템, 혹은 전체 시스템), 그리고 인사제도(혹은 시스템)의 변수화(독립, 종속, 조절, 혹은 매개 변수) 등에 따른 추이도 살펴보았다. 나아가 사용된 변수와 주요 이론들을 분석하였다. 10개 이상의 논문들에서 사용된 이론들은 보편적 관점(구성형태적 접근 포함), 상황적 관점, 조직공정성이론, 기대이론, 자원기반이론 등이었다. 인사관리 분야의 연구는 규범과 실제, 가치와 환경, 원리와 제도, 제도와 운영, 그리고 주체와 객체라는 이슈에서 다양한 관점과 격차가 존재하기 때문에 연구에 복잡성을 더해주고 있다. 이에 기존 연구들이 ‘한국적’ 인적자원관리 연구로서 가지는 의미와 한계를 지적하고, 토착적 경영연구, 보편지향 토착연구, 비교연구, 학제적 연구 및 연구기반 및 환경조성 등의 K-HRM 향후 연구를 위한 제안을 제시하였다.

Korea Academy of Management launched the research project “Korea-Type Management (K-Management)” in 2012. As a part of this project, this study focuses on Korea-type human resource management (K-HRM). We define K-HRM as “the process of adopting and implementing practices consistent with policies and guiding principles reflecting Korean values and institutional contexts in order to achieve desirable performance through people.” Hence, the purpose of this study is to lay the groundwork for K-HRM theory. To achieve this, we first described human resource management (HRM) in Korea for three time periods: pre~1987; 1987~1997; and post~1997. We then reviewed 70 papers that have addressed K-HRM or HRM in Korea published in various Korean academic journals and international academic journals listed in Social Science Citation Index (SSCI). Finally, we made recommendations for the further development of K-HRM theory in future research. Human resources were a major factor behind the success of Korea, one of poorest countries in the world in the 1960s which has now become the 10th largest economy globally and a member of the OECD. Korea and Korean firms are good examples of the idea that human resources provide a competitive advantage. To understand K-HRM, we have to look at how HRM operates in Korean firms. Although the roots of HRM in Korean firms are not clear, the formation of HR departments and HRM systems began with industrialization in the 1960s. This study analyzes the historical development of Korean HRM after the 1960s. We classify three periods of Korean HRM based on historical events and points of inflection: the establishment of the Korean internal labor market (1960s~1987), the exploration of new HRM (1987~1997), and the pursuit of performance-based HRM (1997~current). (1) The establishment of the Korean internal labor market. From the 1960s to the 1980s, rapid economic development was the main national priority for Korea. Although various strategies were implemented, Korean firms adopted people-based rather than job-based HRM. Behind this, there was a lack of skilled workers, an underdeveloped external craft labor market, and a strong desire for economic development. Characteristics of the Korean internal labor market (ILM) included large scale public hiring, seniority-based compensation, position-based grade systems, discrimination of blue collar with white collar workers, evaluation systems for control purposes, and development systems for team work. (2) The exploration of new HRM. It was 1987 when democratization in terms of both politics and industry first arrived in Korea. There was an increased focus on the needs of workers (especially blue collar workers), which had been suppressed in the name of economic development. Korean firms explored various ways to balance the needs of workers and competitiveness, adopting and experimenting with various HRM practices. However, these trials were not very successful. (3) The pursuit of performance-based HRM. The 1997 financial crisis was another turning point in modern Korean history. As seen in the cases of POSCO and Samsung Electronics, major changes in Korean HRM, aided by increased labor flexibility, included yeonbongje (merit pay), profit sharing, productivity incentives, and performance management systems. Currently, a new HRM paradigm shift is occurring in Korean firms, though many aspects of the traditional Korean ILM still remain. The coexistence of traditional and modern HRM makes it difficult to understand and interpret the characteristics of Korean HRM. It is also not easy to predict the future of Korean HRM due to the new challenges facing Korean society such as aging and the legislation of a mandatory retirement age. As a result, Korean firms face having to solve old HR problems and while preparing for new challenges. After describing the development of K-HRM, we report and discuss the results of a literature review of HRM in Korea. We reviewed a total of 70 studies that meet both of the following selection criteria; (1) empirical studies published in major Korean journals, or empirical studies published in international journals listed in Social Science Citation Index (SSCI), (2) studies testing theoretical hypotheses using data collected from Korean firms and employees in Korean firms, focusing on individual HR practices (staffing, training and development, compensation, performance appraisal) or human resource management systems such as high-performance, high-commitment and high-involvement systems. Among these previous studies, most research before the beginning of the 1990s was dedicated to reviews of theoretical perspectives or applications of HRM, rather than empirical investigations. This trend started to change in the middle of the 1990s, when more publications included statistical analyses of empirical data. More recently, especially after the Asian financial crisis, there has been an increasing tendency to examine the relationship between HRM and firm performance. There was also found to be a significant lack of publications in SSCI journals compared to publications in Korean journals. Since the mid-2000s, however, there has been a constant increase in number of studies directly related to HRM in Korea published in international journals. The number of empirical studies in Korea dramatically increased in the late 2000s, and a more diverse range of theories have been introduced to explain the relationship between HRM and both organizational- and individual-level outcomes. The difference between the two time periods is especially evident in the following aspects. In terms of the level of analysis, organizational-level studies are more frequent than individual-level studies. The statistical research methods also evolved so that researchers could more accurately test and address how HR practices or systems affected employees and organizations using more sophisticated methods, such as hierarchical linear modeling and panel data analysis. In terms of theoretical application, we found 27 different theories and perspectives used to predict the relationship between HRM and firm performance, employee attitudes and employee behavior. In predicting the relationship between firm performance and individual HR practices or HR systems, a universal approach, which includes the best-configuration approach, was most frequently applied. On the other hand, the contingency approach and resource-based theory (RBT) were frequently the focus of organizational-level studies. For individual-level studies investigating the impact of HR practices, such as compensation, on employee attitudes and behaviors, organizational justice theory and expectancy theory were the most frequently applied theoretical perspectives. We caution that one should not evaluate all of the human resource management research only based on this study’s overall summary of past empirical studies and theoretical applications. However, it is evident that there has been significant improvement in HRM research in terms of the quantity and quality of the publications. In addition, the results of studies that look at the relationship between HRM and both firm performance and individual-level outcomes have contributed to the increasing competitiveness of Korean firms. Despite these improvements in HRM research in Korea, few studies have paid direct attention to exploring ‘Korea-type’ HRM, which is HRM that reflects Korean values and institutional contexts (e.g., politics, culture, society). In other words, although previous empirical studies on HRM in Korea have found that HR clearly affects firm performance, employee attitudes, and employee behavior, it is difficult to find answers to questions like, “What are the results of studies on ‘Korea-type’ or ‘Korea-specific’ HR?”Conducting K-HRM research is a complex task. We discussed five dichotomies that can complicate K-HRM research: (1) norm vs. reality (between philosophical base and management systems); (2) values vs. environments (between principles and environments); (3) principles vs. practices (between principles and management systems); (4) practices vs. operation (between practices and people); and (5) subject vs. object (between people and performance). The papers we reviewed did not fully reflect these issues. Rather than presenting a balanced view, previous studies have tended to focus on one or the other of the divisions. Hence, future research needs to pay more attention to these issues. Finally, we offered recommendations for future research on K-HRM. First, we suggest that researchers conduct more indigenous Korean management research on topics reflecting Korean values and ethos. Second, we also suggest that more focus should be given to universality-oriented Korean indigenous management research. In this case, theoretical frameworks, research models, or concepts developed in Western countries can be utilized but the constructs or models need to be adapted to reflect Korean values and ethos. By doing this, we can add value to established theoretical frameworks by providing a complementary view. Our third suggestion is to design research that reveals the unique features of Korean management through a comparative approach. By doing this, we can delineate the country-specific or culture-specific features of Korean HRM. Fourth, inter-disciplinary or multi-disciplinary research is recommended. In particular, utilizing the academic disciplines of humanities and social sciences is required to enable the accurate interpretation and evaluation of K-HRM phenomena and theories. Finally, academic associations and journals need to provide an institutional setting that encourages the aforementioned research suggestions. For example, academic journals could change the evaluation criteria in their review process to encourage more K-HRM papers that do not employ typical empirical research methods.

, , , , , ,

K-type management (K-management), K-type human resource management (K-HRM), indigenous management research, performance-based HRM, theoretical perspectives, HRM systems, HRM practices