This article addresses the question of what might constitute Critical Human Resource Management (CHRM). Consideration is given to ideas from critics of HRM, both from within the field and those external to it, in particular Critical Management Studies, and to mainstream scholars who have voiced concerns regarding the moribund and limited nature of mainstream HRM. CHRM is advanced in order that HRM might be better contextualized within the prevailing socio-economic order of capitalism; managerialist assumptions and language may be denaturalized and challenged; and that voices excluded in mainstream HRM, such as workers (especially minorities and those in non-standard employment), trade unions and those involved outside large Western corporations, may be heard. The analytical coherence of CHRM builds from a theorization of the employment relationship and requires acknowledgement of the sociological, psychological, economic, political and ethical aspects of working, managing and organizing. In our view, HRM research will be enriched by the variety of methodological and theoretical approaches of CHRM and by the inclusion of a wider range of different research settings and research questions. However, a fruitful and reflexive engagement between CHRM and mainstream HRM seems unlikely until the latter critically assesses rather than assumes the managerial perspective.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 173 citations exist upstream.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.