Knowledge that Transforms

Most scholarly work on trust recognizes its importance as part of a nonmarket form of governance in exchanges between firms. However, trust is only one such governance device that can be used; other devices such as reputation, bargaining power, and contracts can also be used to govern exchanges. This article empirically examines the relationships between trust, reputation, bargaining power, and contracts as governance devices in agreements between smaller entrepreneurial firms and larger, more established firms. The findings suggest that while the role of trust is an important one, it may be more effective when combined with other governance devices.

In this article, we review how time and space relationships are reframing the training and development agenda. As the speed of business moves faster and boundaries become less relevant, we need ways of expanding and choosing how and when learning and development can take place. We need ways to target development on specific business issues and deliver improved performance in less time with reduced cost. We define a learning options framework to help organize, integrate, synthesize, and better fit training and development methodologies to business realities. Specific knowledge, tools, and examples are provided to show how organizations are identifying and choosing among development options.

This article describes the detailed process of redesigning and implementing the human resources (HR) function at Lafarge. The article argues that a well‐articulated and integrated approach of (1) recruitment, selection, and induction, (2) retraining and redeployment, (3) a performance appraisal system, (4) a compensation and reward mechanism, and (5) rightsizing and (6) integration is required to be aligned with the overall business strategy of the organization. It also reinforces that the foundation of a value‐added HR function is a business strategy that relies on people as a source of competitive advantage. Key challenges for Lafarge in the future include (1) maintaining the change momentum, (2) fast and effective integration of acquired companies and transfer of “best practices,” and (3) attracting and retaining a diverse workforce through their internationalization program.

Executives often spend considerable time and energy trying to influence peers to support new initiatives (e.g., Conger, 1998; Enns, Huff, & Golden, 2001). That said, we know relatively little about how executives actually influence their peers. Using a sample of 132 executives, the present study found that finance executives differed the most from other executives in terms of the influence tactics and contexts used when influencing peers. Human resource executives also differed considerably from their counterparts in operations regarding influence tactics and contexts. Possible explanations, directions for future research, and implications for management are discussed.

As a companion piece to Wiechmann et al. (2003), practical guidance regarding how to implement a global staffing system is provided. Best practices were derived from interviews with key informants in six organizations recognized as leading in the area of global staffing. Best practices related to system acceptability, development, and implementation are presented.

The creation of global HR systems remains a real challenge. This article provides an indepth look at six organizations—Agilent Technologies, Dow Chemical Company, IBM, Motorola, Procter and Gamble, and Shell Oil—that have instituted globally standardized staffing tools and systems. The systems they have created and the challenges they have faced are described.

Plaintiffs' expert witnesses in EEO cases involving performance appraisals often claim that adverse impact is a result of the type of rating format used. Their theory is that more specific rating criteria will lead to lessened adverse impact. We tested that theory by comparing data from a simple category‐based rating system against data from a standards‐based Work Planning and Review appraisal system with over 248,000 performance appraisals of state employees. Using logistic regression and statistical definitions of prima facie discrimination, we found no support for the hypothesis that adverse impact is materially affected by criterion specificity.

Corporate wrongdoing is damaging investor confidence and tarnishing the credibility of the U.S. business community, guilty and innocent alike. Some misdeeds are clearly criminal, others simply unethical or damaging to reputations. They range from “massaging” numbers (“managed earnings”), which tests the limits of financial prudence, to outright fraud. Caught in the limelight are U.S. corporate giants representing some of the world's best‐known brands and most famous CEOs, many only yesterday lionized in the business press. We have explored this issue from the perspective of the HR function through a survey of the senior HR professionals who attended the Human Resources Forum. The survey was augmented with focus groups. Our purpose was to understand current practices, attitudes, and behaviors with respect to legal standards and professional and ethical codes. We also explored the roles of the CEO, HR leadership, and the HR function in minimizing ethical breaches that have diminished investor and public trust. We hope to shed light on the responsibilities, actions, and risks of the HR function and its leadership now and in the future.