Resource Management in Project Management Peer Reviewed Articles

Introduction

With the aim of portraying the hereafter of HRM research, scholars have proposed new domains and perspectives (Bondarouk & Brewster, 2016; Deadrick & Stone, 2014; Huselid, 2011; Kramar, 2014; Marchington, 2015; Ulrich & Dulebohn, 2015). For case, ideas around sustainability have set HRM contributions into a wider social context every bit being one of its time to come focuses (Boudreau & Ramstad, 2005; DuBois & Dubois, 2012; Ehnert et al., 2016; Kramar, 2014). And "HRM and context", which manifestly includes cultural and institutional contexts across different countries (Cooke, 2018; Farndale et al., 2017; Schuler & Tarique, 2007), has been proposed as the next "HRM evolution moving ridge" (Ulrich & Dulebohn, 2015; Ulrich, 2011). Despite these endeavors to broaden HRM perspectives and investigate future HRM roles and responsibilities, an overview of the popular research topics and domains reveals that HRM scholars tend either to overlook unusual organizational forms or non turn to them until afterward (Hayton et al., 2011; Markoulli et al., 2017).

Shared service centers apart (Farndale et al., 2009; Rothwell et al., 2011), HRM enquiry has not been particularly concerned either with network forms of organization (Castrogiovanni & Kidwell, 2010; Rubery et al., 2002; Swart & Kinnie, 2014; for exceptions), regional clusters, or, more recently, platform organizations. Rather, the HRM field has left this to adjacent sub-disciplines of direction (such as studies of organizations or work, strategic and innovation direction). This is quite surprising, as early appraisals of the HRM field (not least in the inaugural result of this journal; cf. Hendry & Pettigrew, 1990) already pointed to a respective need to be contextually and processually sensitive and consider employment practices in interaction with the strategy and structure of an organization. The same development seems to repeat itself with regard to forms of temporary organizing such every bit events or projects. Instead, in the soapbox about the time to come of HRM, as in overall past periods of the discipline's development, the field continues to assume the existence of organizations as long-lasting if non permanent entities (e.g. Björkmann et al., 2014; Bowen & Ostroff, 2004; Kramar, 2014; Sanders et al., 2014; Ulrich & Dulebohn, 2015).

Over the past decades, nevertheless, temporary forms of organization, including projection-based organizations or PBOs for brusque, which utilize projects to reach most of the work and to achieve their goals (Hobday, 2000), take become so important in exercise that some speak of a projectification of lodge and nowadays empirical show that underlines this trend (Lundin et al., 2015; Schoper et al., 2018). This is also notable in the international domain, where projects have spread significantly in and beyond unlike industries (Cova et al., 2002; Welch et al., 2008). As nosotros volition testify, this development has been neglected by and big by researchers in the field of HRM, including international HRM.

Despite widespread fail, some scholars have noted the important implications of temporary organizations for HRM (Keegan et al., 2012; Keegan & Den Hartog, 2019; Raja et al., 2013; Söderlund & Bredin, 2006; Welch et al., 2008). For example, Nuhn et al. (2018) find that the turnover intentions of employees in temporary organizations are different from those in permanent ones. Moreover, research also articulates the changes and challenges of traditional HRM in the projectification procedure in general and PBOs in item (due east.k. Raja et al., 2013; Söderlund & Bredin, 2006; Huemann, 2015). For case, Raja et al. (2013) claim that "elevating the HR function role to reconcile with project-based piece of work" is challenging and requires HRM models that account for the specific features of such work.

On this premise, the time may be ripe not only to point out the demand for more than HRM research on projects as possibly the most mutual grade of temporary organisation (Bakker, 2010) but also to consolidate what nosotros already know and point out what we should know. Towards these ends, we will focus in the following on research of PBOs, since they, due to their "semi-temporary" (Bakker et al., 2016) nature and in sharp contrast to isolated projects or networks of interorganizational projects, take a fair chance of developing a specialized HRM function and respective policies and practices. Other forms of temporary organizing will be mentioned only in passing.

Interestingly, nearly of the enquiry that takes the temporariness of organizations into business relationship has been done exterior the HRM field, virtually notably in the field of project management (Bredin, 2008, 2010; Bredin & Söderlund, 2013; Fabi & Pettersen, 1992; Huemann, 2010, 2015; Huemann, Keegan, et al., 2007; Huemann, Turner, et al., 2007; Keegan et al., 2018; Turner et al., 2008; Turner & Simister, 2000). However, these studies explicate only a few aspects of the HRM-PBO human relationship by focusing mostly on how HRM is configured and functions in the context of this type of temporary organization. This is, while more cardinal research questions could have been raised, enquiring, for case, into why HRM should be different in this organizational form – or in other words, why traditional HRM roles and responsibilities are likely to be undermined in the temporary context.

This will be the divergence point of this newspaper, which aims to investigate the status of the HRM inquiry on temporary organizations, particularly PBOs, in conjunction with the evolution of the HRM field. Specifically, we will respond the following two questions:

1. To what extent and with what focus have temporary forms of organizing in general and PBOs in item been reflected in the HRM field?

2. What are the implications of this particular form of temporary system for the future evolution of HRM as a scholarly field?

Towards this aim, we will review the literature in the last 2 decades of HRM development and reveal the extent to which the preconception of organizations as being long-lived rather than temporary systems has dominated the field. Furthermore, nosotros will show how temporary organizational forms take been reflected on with regard to HRM. More precisely, nosotros volition systematically review the state of the art of HRM research on PBOs from the outset of the twenty showtime century to 2019. Towards this stop, we focus on research to be found in the first-tier HRM journals with the highest impact factors, namely the Journal of Man Resources (JHR), Man Resources Direction (HRM), Human Resource Management Journal (HRMJ), Human Resource Management Review (HRMR) and the International Journal of Human Resource Management (IJHRM). These five journals are constitutive for the field of HRM and reverberate the status of the field as a distinctive discipline. Since nosotros searched systematically on the Web of Scientific discipline commendation database, we also captured HRM research on projects and/or PBOs published in general management and project management journals.

Starting with a short overview of the field of HRM's evolution, our intention is thus to draw attending to the pivotal function of organizational forms in general and of the rapidly spreading forms of temporary organization in particular, in building and securing the time to come of HRM. With this review we thus contribute to the conversation about future directions of the field by questioning the predominant conceptualization of organizations in HRM research as being relatively enduring entities. We believe that our approach, utilizing an organizational lens in conjunction with the development of the HRM field, differentiates this review from previous ones published in other direction journals (cf. Bakker, 2010; Burke & Morley, 2016; Keegan et al., 2018). Nosotros point to the ignorance of the field regarding the spread of temporary forms of organizing, as well in the international context – with the notable exception of temporary employment. From our perspective, temporary forms of organization such as PBOs, as being perhaps the most popular, create an splendid opportunity to become beyond the permanency supposition of organizations that has been taken for granted past HRM scholars.

HRM research and the permanency supposition

Different historical periodizations have been presented by scholars to elucidate the evolution of HRM (e.thou. Deadrick & Stone, 2014; Kaufman, 1993, 2008, 2014; Ulrich & Dulebohn, 2015; Dulebohn et al., 1995; Ling, 1965). What is mutual among them is the say-so of the preconception of organizations as rather enduring entities, which seems to have been taken for granted throughout the field'south evolution. Regardless of causes and drivers that accept formed and promoted this somewhat not-temporal conception of the organization throughout the evolution of the field; this dominance has led, with one exception, to more temporary forms of organizing being ignored. This is even true for Strategic HRM (hereafter SHRM), which was introduced and has been diffused enormously since the 1980s (Beer, 1985; Beer et al., 2015; Deadrick & Stone, 2014; Fombrun et al., 1984; Kaufman, 1993, 2014; Kramar, 2014; Ulrich & Dulebohn, 2015). While in theory, SHRM promoted the adoption of an organizational lens and, in practice, the enduring employer-employee relationship was questioned past the speedily spreading phenomenon of temporary employment (Koene et al., 2004), HRM research, including international HRM enquiry (Farndale et al., 2017; Schuler & Tarique, 2007), connected to concord on to the permanency assumption with regard to organizations.

This continues to be the customary opinion, where more recently notions such as "sustainable HRM" (Boudreau & Ramstad, 2005; DuBois & Dubois, 2012; Kramar, 2014), "HRM and engineering" (Bondarouk & Brewster, 2016), "respect for humanity" (Cleveland et al., 2015), "multi-stakeholder HRM" (Beer et al., 2015) besides equally "HRM and context" (Ulrich & Dulebohn, 2015) take been proposed equally more or less complementary approaches that help HRM get more influential in the organisation.

This is quite surprising. While, equally we volition testify, HRM inquiry on temporary work has for many years gone well beyond the assumption of long-lasting employment, HRM research almost never considers the structural dimension of temporary organizing as being relevant. This is while, in the low-cal of the spreading "project society" (Lundin et al., 2015), not simply the employer-employee nexus has become temporary, just likewise the organization of piece of work. We debate that, without considering this of import contextual change and going well beyond the permanency assumption, HRM inquiry cannot fully capture the reality and complication of contemporary organizations and employment (cf. Watson, 2004).

HRM and temporariness: review arroyo and findings

As stated before, we consider the HRM journals selected to exist constitutive for the field. Human Resource Direction and the Periodical of Human Resources were founded in the 1960s. The constitutive effect is reflected, for instance, by the title change of the first journal, originally founded as the Management of Personnel Quarterly in 1972 (Kaufman, 2014). The other journals were founded in the 1990s, in line with the enquiry and do that emerged in that decade.

Despite our focus on these journals, nosotros conducted a comprehensive search on the Web of Scientific discipline citation database, cartoon on a precise list of search terms to ensure we had captured published HRM research on projects and/or PBOs not just in these specialized HRM journals, merely also in general management and project management journals. Following the systematic literature review approach (Tranfield et al., 2003; Denyer & Tranfield, 2009), we investigated the database drawing upon the following search terms and formula: ("Homo Resource Manag*" OR "personnel Manag*") AND ("Temporar*" OR "projection*") AND ("work*" OR "employment*" OR "temporary organ*" OR "project-based organi*"). The search was done on Feb 12, 2020, in the topic field that includes titles, abstracts and the authors' keywords of research works besides every bit Keywords Plus, which is unique to Web of Scientific discipline.

The search was restricted to the time menstruation under scrutiny (2000–2019) and publications in the English linguistic communication using relevant Web of Science categories, i.e. management, industrial and labor relations, practical psychology, public administration, business organisation, economics, operations enquiry and management science. Conceptual and review manufactures, editorials, volume capacity, early access and proceedings papers (333 in all) were excluded. Then we reviewed the content of all 211 manufactures by skimming their abstracts. This process ensures embrace of the use of different vocabulary for the same concepts. Thereby, we included those manufactures that dealt with HRM topics in different forms of temporary organizing, including PBOs (Bakker et al., 2016), and excluded those that dealt with either HRM or such more permanent forms.

This procedure allowed us to place 73 articles for in-depth review (encounter Table 1). Articles published in the five HRM journals focus overwhelmingly on temporary employment (39 articles) rather than on HRM issues related to working in projects or PBOs; only 11 articles in these journals are on the latter topic. Some more papers on this topic have been published during the menstruation under scrutiny in general management as well as in project management journals (i.e. ten and 13, respectively).

Human resource management in projection-based organizations: revisiting the permanency supposition

Published online:

02 July 2020

Table 1. Articles on temporary forms of organizing (2000–2019).

Temporary employment in permanent contexts

Given the vast increase in temporary employment over the past decades, it comes every bit no surprise that research on this form of employment has intensified (Ward et al., 2001; Peck & Theodore, 1998; Koene et al., 2004; Finegold et al., 2005, p. 66). By now, this topic has even go one of the classic issues for HRM inquiry. Despite the utilise of a dissimilar vocabulary such as 'flexible piece of work', 'not-standard employment', 'contract work', 'contingent workforce', 'temporary bureau workers' or, more than recently, 'gig workers', these studies focus on the non-permanent type of employment and hence on but one important dimension of temporary organizing: the actors (Bakker et al., 2016). A review of temporary employment research reveals that the employment relationship and the morale of temporary employees are the dominant enquiry themes (run across Figure 1).

Man resource direction in project-based organizations: revisiting the permanency assumption

Published online:

02 July 2020

Effigy 1. HRM and temporariness: enquiry categories and themes.

Traditional themes

Studies about temporary employment relations cover investigations of macro-institutional factors and forces driving HR strategies and HR practices for managing temporary workers and temporary piece of work agencies. While research focusing on the origins and the context of temporary employment relations uses an institutional approach (e.1000. Allen et al., 2017; Anagnostopoulos & Siebert, 2015; Koene et al., 2004; Pulignano & Doerflinger, 2013), research with a strategy lens elucidates what blazon of temporary work is employed and when, and how it should be utilized, by explicating the strategic benefits of temporary work and the reciprocal effects of 60 minutes strategies and temporary employment (see, Cardon, 2003; Foote & Folta, 2002; Ghosh et al., 2009; Nesheim et al., 2007; Storey et al., 2002; Ward et al., 2001; Wong, 2001). Furthermore, differences in managing temporary and permanent employees, likewise every bit the impact of temporary employment on Hour configurations and practices, are addressed by inquiry on Hour practices (eastward.g. Bahn, 2015; Emmerik & Sanders, 2004; Finegold et al., 2005; Hopkins, 2014; Hopp et al., 2016; Knox & Walsh, 2005; Koene & Riemsdijk, 2005; Mallon & Duberley, 2000; Mitlacher, 2008; Tempest, 2009).

Meanwhile, other research examines temporary work agencies and addresses HRM as their cadre business concern process for value cosmos (Liu et al., 2010; Mitlacher, 2006; Kirkpatrick et al., 2019). Recently, Kirkpatrick et al. (2019), for case, investigated the office of client organizations in managing agency workers. Their study of nursing and social piece of work shows "how client organizations can go more than involved in the direction of agency workers than has previously been acknowledged" (71). The study illustrates how "the nature of agency worker contracts, the role of temporary work agencies, competing organizational cost-control priorities, and perceptions of the regulatory context" (71) drive the client interest.

Furthermore, temporary workers' morale issues are addressed by adopting an organizational behavior lens. Towards this terminate, attitudinal (Banerjee et al., 2012; Cuyper et al., 2014; Invitee et al., 2006; Scheel et al., 2013; Slattery et al., 2008; Mode et al., 2010; Jung et al., 2018), perceptional (Flickinger et al., 2016; Ruyter, 2007; Ruyter et al., 2008) and behavioral (Kuvaas et al., 2013; Torka, 2011; George et al., 2010; Svensson et al., 2015; Imhof & Andresen, 2018) differences between temporary and permanent workers, besides as the effects of the apply of temporary workers on the behavior of permanent employees are investigated. Although for the virtually part HRM enquiry reflects temporariness past concentrating on temporary employment, i.e. on the agency dimension of temporary organizing (Bakker et al., 2016), the enquiry hardly goes beyond the permanent context of organizations. Almost all of this research (38 out of 39) was conducted in permanent organizations.

Temporary organizations and PBOs

A temporary organisation tin can exist defined "as a temporally divisional group [or system; the authors] of interdependent organizational actors, formed to complete a complex chore" (Burke & Morley, 2016, p. 1237). Notwithstanding the different definitions and the ambiguities that come with it (Lundin & Söderholm, 1995; come across also Bakker, 2010; Lundin et al., 2015), in that location is wide-spread consensus that temporariness is the decisive feature of temporary organizations; temporariness either determined by a particular date or fourth dimension menstruation, or the accomplishment of "predetermined goals or conditions" (Bakker et al., 2016, p. 1704). This distinguishing feature is also called the "institutionalized termination" (Lundin & Söderholm, 1995, p. 445; Bakker et al., 2016; Burke & Morley, 2016, p. 1237). Other characteristics of this organizational form have also been articulated. While they are not constitutive for this form, they may nevertheless have important implications for HRM. The 4t framework, presented by Ludin and Söderholm (1995) in their seminal piece of work highlights not only time just too chore, squad and transition every bit being of import characteristics of temporary organizations. Other features often mentioned are: the novelty, multidisciplinarity and interdependence (Bakker, 2010; Burke & Morley, 2016) every bit well as the complexity and knowledge-intensity of tasks (Henning & Wald, 2019; Hodgson, 2004; Whitley, 2006; Lundin et al., 2015), the utilization of highly skilled individuals with diverse competencies (Lindkvist, 2005; Meyerson et al., 1996), besides as the respective use of heterogeneous, diverse teams (Henning & Wald, 2019). Research also underscores how temporary organizations can be more flexible and innovative by being less hierarchical in comparison with permanent organizations (Henning & Wald, 2019; Hodgson, 2004; Whitley, 2006; Lundin et al., 2015).

Apart from these characteristics, many authors accept articulated the challenges and difficulties these forms face due to their temporary nature. In this respect, for instance, challenges in managing noesis are salient (Bresnen et al., 2003; DeFillippi & Arthur, 1998, Sydow et al., 2004) because of the temporariness not only of structures, but often as well of actors (Bakker et al., 2016). This challenge is aggravated by the "autonomy and centralization-decentralization dilemma" due to different requirements of temporary and permanent parts (O'Dell & Grayson, 1998) and, specifically in the project-based form, by the "performance-learning dilemma" and the associated missing learning opportunities because of the necessity to focus on the "immediate task and performance demands" of the project (Sydow et al., 2004).

To some extent, the controversy virtually these characteristics results from the fact that temporary organizations comprise a wide range of forms such equally "R&D projects (Katz, 1982), theatre productions (Goodman & Goodman, 1972), film sets (DeFillippi & Arthur, 1998), emergency response teams (Weick, 1993), chore forces (Saunders & Ahuja, 2006), construction projects (Scarbrough et al., 2004) and sports event organizing committees (Løwendahl, 1995), and are diffused amid different industries, e.yard. consulting and professional services, cultural industries, high technology and complex products and systems" (Sydow et al., 2004, p. 1475).

With respect to temporariness, such organizations can be extreme, equally in the instance of "ephemeral" and "disposable" organizations (Bakker et al., 2016) or "projection-based enterprises/firms" (DeFillippi & Arthur, 1998; Burke & Morley, 2016). In these cases, the organization is disposed of after the completion of a task or the achievement of the desired goals (eastward.g. crisis management, marketing campaign or event organizing). Hence, non only the construction but also the employment of actors is of a temporary nature. At the other end of the spectrum, permanent and temporary elements are combined into semi-temporal or hybrid forms. These include not just PBOs but as well the "Project-Supported Organisation" (PSO) and the "Project Network" (PNW); all characterized not simply by temporary, but as well by more permanent structures. These latter structures may, for case, comprise a "projection management office" (PMO) that supports the organisation- or network-broad utilize of project tools and practices (Bakker et al., 2016; Burke & Morley, 2016; Braun, 2018; Lundin et al., 2015).

Past intersecting these dissimilar temporary organizational forms on the one manus and temporary and permanent types of employment on the other, five unlike categories of "employees" emerge that could be a target of HRM research. While temporary organizational forms are defined in terms of the Organizational Termination (OT), temporal employment forms refer to the Employment Termination (ET). Nosotros distinguish betwixt temporal employment and organizational forms by focusing on organizational structures and actors respectively, both in conjunction with the termination point (run into, Bakker et al., 2016). On this premise, the life of an organisation and the duration of employment are not necessarily identical and can come to an cease at different points in fourth dimension. Table 2, which is based on Bakker et al. (2016) typology of temporary forms of organizing, depicts the types of employment relevant in such forms.

Homo resource management in project-based organizations: revisiting the permanency assumption

Published online:

02 July 2020

Table 2. Temporal organizational and employment forms (based on Bakker et al., 2016, p. 1706).

The category (ane) of ephemeral employees refers to individuals who piece of work in a single-project squad or a single-project house, in other words, a disposable arrangement (Bakker et al., 2016). In this instance, organizational and employment termination points are identical (OT = ET). This means that every bit the organization is dissolved later on the completion of the chore or at a certain point in time, the employment opportunity ceases to exist at the same time. Examples are individuals working for an electoral campaign or members of a rescue team. In these cases, necessary recruitment, training, administration, etc. cannot exist provided by HRM because ephemeral organizations lack whatsoever permanent structures needed for such services.

Categories (2) and (3) refer to employees that work in what we telephone call temporal hybrids or in, using Bakker et al. (2016) term, "semi-temporary organizations". Organizations that embrace both temporary and permanent organizing and, as such, utilize both temporary and permanent employees simultaneously. Here "project-based employees" (type 2) refers to the group that is normally released or moved on to other projects after the termination of the job, while the whole organization continues to exist; engineers or technicians in a construction house are a case in point. "Core-project employees" (type 3), by contrast, are those whose employment is independent of temporary projects. Examples of this category are members of the HR section of a PBO or members of a PMO. While in example (2) the employment relationship is less durable than the existence of the organization (ET < OT), information technology is permanent for core-projection employees (3), irrespective of the dissolution of projects (ET > OT). In both cases, HRM can obviously provide the recruitment, training, administration and other services needed.

Categories (iv) and (5) highlight the more classical employee segments in permanent contexts that have been at the center of HRM research: Contract employees (type four) refers to what is usually defined as temporary workers who work in a permanent organisation (OT > ET). The relationship between tenured employees (5) and the organization is divisional just by the retirement historic period and man or organizational life elapsing (OT = ET). This latter group, traditionally targeted by the Hr department, has been at the center of HRM inquiry one time the standard employment relationship had emerged. Simply, as shown past our review, the former grouping has in the meantime also received much scholarly attending.

These v categories institute a comprehensive framework for analyzing the HRM enquiry in temporary forms of organizing. On the ground of this categorization, PBOs, the focal point of this review and probably the most mutual example of temporal hybrids, are defined as beingness the type of organization in which projects contain the principal part of the organizational value cosmos, and permanent structures just support this value cosmos procedure (Bakker, 2010; Bredin, 2008; Cacciatori, 2008; Davies & Hobday, 2005; Lindkvist, 2004; Sydow et al., 2004, p. 1475); or as Hobday (2000) asserts in his seminal article, these are organizations in which "the project is the principal business mechanism for coordinating and integrating all the master business functions of the house" (874).

The projection introduces specific characteristics into an organization of a PBO type, differentiating it from purely permanent or long-lasting organizations. These features emanate from being project-intensive and are the salient feature of its processes, policies and procedures, whereas tensions ascend due to the dichotomy of the temporary and the permanent (Winch, 2014). Importantly, there is a resource dependence betwixt the project, as the temporary office, and the more permanent context (Sydow et al., 2004). The latter part of the organization, or inter-organizational network in the case of PNWs, is commonly responsible for supporting the projects by providing resource and reconciling conflicts with other entities. Because of the importance of value cosmos in the class of projects, PBOs are expected not only to utilize project management every bit the prevalent epitome and well-known project management tool (cf. Turner, 2007, 2009), but also to benefit from HRM institutions.

Thus, temporary organizations in full general and PBOs in particular have structural properties that differ significantly from purely permanent organizations. The implications for HRM are not ever obvious, just definitively deserve to exist studied by HRM scholars. However, HRM in a project context has been investigated more ofttimes by project direction scholars and published mainly in project management journals (see, Bredin, 2008, 2010; Bredin & Söderlund, 2011, 2013; Huemann, 2010; Huemann et al., 2007; Keegan et al., 2018; Turner et al., 2008), only occasionally in HRM journals (eastward.g. Söderlund & Bredin, 2006).

How HRM works in PBOs

In comparison to studies of temporary workers or contract workers (type 4 in Table ii), significantly less inquiry has been conducted on all other forms of temporary organizing, including PBOs. Co-ordinate to the framework presented in Tabular array 2, research on projection managers as core-projection employees (blazon 3) is however fairly primal to HRM research on projects in general and PBOs in item. Ephemeral (type 1) and projection-based employees (type ii), by dissimilarity, take received nearly no attending from HRM scholars (see Figure ane). Nevertheless, research, particularly in the field of project management, heeds how HRM works and is configured in the project-based setting. This approach raised initial interests in the topic among projection direction scholars and made it pop in this field (meet, Bredin, 2008, 2010; Huemann et al., 2007; Turner et al., 2008). The focal indicate of this research theme is the particular specifics of PBOs and the mode HRM deals with them. Furthermore, inquiry besides addresses the role of HRM in conjunction with project success and investigates its impact on project functioning.

HRM peculiarities in PBOs

While staff membership in permanent organizations is typically established by an employment contract, employment in projects in general and PBOs in particular is often just or additionally based on consignment to a temporary task (Turner, 2009). Research shows that project members tin can have different roles in several projects simultaneously (Tyssen et al., 2013) and oft participate in team decisions such as staffing or work organisation (Hanisch & Wald, 2014; Nuhn et al., 2018). Withal, projects and projection managers are non mentioned in a recent review of the role of managers across all hierarchical levels in HRM, from board to bottom; nor are they even included among the 28 search terms that span five categories of managers (Steffensen et al., 2019). In the case of PBOs as temporal hybrids, support functions such as HRM normally remain in the permanent part because of the express duration of projects and are hence not dissolved after the completion of projects (Nuhn et al., 2018). Information technology is therefore argued that key HRM activities such equally payment, promotion and career evolution are implemented in the permanent and not the temporary part of PBOs (Bredin & Söderlund, 2011).

Some HRM research on projects points to these and other important specifics of HRM in PBOs. For example, Keegan et al. (2012) indicate that, despite the emphasis on the important role of line managers in executing HRM practices, these practices were, with regard to the temporary part of the system, not only executed by line managers or the HRM department, but as well by project managers in PBOs. Other research contends, unlike what is promised by the notion of SHRM, that information technology is challenging for HRM departments in PBOs to contribute to organizational strategy. Information technology seems that these departments generally play a coordinative role between the temporary and permanent parts of the organisation (Keegan et al., 2012). In a similar vein, Keegan and Den Hartog (2019) explore performance appraisal in PBOs. They not only signal out the of import role of actors across the "HRM triad" (Jackson et al., 2017), only likewise explicate the "central part of employees" vis-à-vis the "weak coordinating role of human being resource specialists" in the appraisal process.

In this respect the bulk of HRM inquiry on PBOs, as put forwards mainly by project management scholars, explores how HRM is reconciled with the characteristics of PBOs. Clark and Colling (2005), for instance, investigate how projection direction systems affect HRM practices. Drawing upon two in-depth case studies of engineering contractors, they illustrate that in PBOs "embedded sectoral characteristics such as portfolio training limit the capacity of 60 minutes practitioners to actively change employee perceptions of their evolution" (178). Their study highlights "the lack of engagement between projection direction literature and Hour/personnel literature when information technology is probable that projection management systems are a core managerial machinery for the deployment of staff" (178). In a similar vein, Bredin and Söderlund (2007) scrutinize the devolution of HR roles and responsibilities to line managers in PBOs. Post-obit an in-depth case study of a project-based firm, the authors demonstrate the transition from a traditional line management part to the new Hr-oriented management role, the so-chosen "competence motorcoach" in PBOs. The report too illustrates HRM challenges in this transition and highlights "the need of breaking out of traditional conceptions of line direction" in PBOs (178).

With the same approach, Bredin and Söderlund (2011) innovate the "HR quadriad" equally a framework for analyzing HRM roles and practices in PBOs. They highlight the interaction between "HR specialists, line managers, project managers and project workers". Based on case studies in six PBOs, the authors show that HRM is carried out in collaboration between these four roles. In a similar vein, Keegan et al. (2012) delineate HRM configurations and the 60 minutes roles and responsibilities of project managers "beyond the line managers" in PBOs. They investigate the "devolution of HR responsibilities" in projection-oriented companies and enumerate the unlike roles and configurations of the HRM department. The inquiry is based on the studies of iv companies, in the Netherlands, Austria, the Britain and the USA, all of them active in dissimilar sectors, i.e. business process outsourcing, telecommunication, engineering, and aerospace. The inquiry reveals that "some HRM activities are the responsibleness of the project manager rather than either the line director or the HRM section and sophisticated interaction of the roles of the HRM section, line direction and projection management caused challenges and traps where people are managed across the boundaries of the permanent and temporary system" (3085).

Likewise, the strategic role of Hour practitioners in a projection-based context has been investigated by Raja et al. (2013), who study different contract arrangements in the structure sector and their furnishings on HRM configurations and, in particular, on the "business partnering model". The authors articulate the Hr managers' challenges when forming their professional identity equally concern partners in structure PBOs. To elucidate the difficulties of HRM practices in international projects, Welch et al. (2008) address HRM challenges in international development projects. The authors explain the HRM challenges of consulting providers in different sectors, i.eastward. engineering, health, education and public sector reform, in "staff deployment, HR planning, career trajectory and chore security" due to the "discontinuous, complex and unique" characteristics of international projects.

HRM and projection success

While the above-mentioned studies mostly focus on the adaptation of HRM inside the project-based context and articulate its challenges in this regard, other studies address the part of HRM in project performance and/or success. For case, recently Mohamed Imhmed Abuazoom et al. (2019) show how HRM practices improve projection quality performance in the construction industry of Libya. Utilizing a quantitative arroyo, the result reveals that "data sharing and self-management as cardinal HRM practices significantly influence project quality functioning" (81). Furthermore, Furukawa (2016) investigates the dynamics of critical problem-solving project teams and creativity in a project-based environment. The study was conducted in an international software support organization in Germany and Japan on the basis of analyzing 104 semi-structured interviews. The outcome highlights that "managerial functions are crucial to determining projection composition, and advisable project environments are created by facilitating multiple squad memberships at multi-level organisational units" (92). In addition, the effect has been investigated of "people risks" (Becker & Smidt, 2015), "Islamic Work Ideals" (Khan & Rashead, 2015), "team development" (Zwikael & Unger-Aviram, 2010) and "training, motivation and [employee] performance" (Tabassi & Abu Bakar, 2009) on the project success and performance.

Project managers in PBOs

A significant role of the overall sparse HRM research on projects uses an organizational behavior lens on project managers as a distinct group, i.eastward. core-project employees in temporal hybrid forms such equally PBOs. Research on this theme addresses project managers' competencies, beliefs and their role in project functioning. Among other things, this research makes employ of concepts such as competency, memory and satisfaction, socialization as well as work stress and power.

Project managers' competence and beliefs

The "competency profile of superior project managers" in the construction industry has been studied by Cheng et al. (2005). The authors identify and enumerate both behavioral and job-job competencies and discover that, while "job-task competencies are highly specific to the industry, the behavioral competencies of superior project managers are more often than not generic in nature and apply to a range of other management positions" (25). Puck et al. (2008) deport research on the adjustment power of managers working in multinational project teams in the pipeline and plant construction sector. Due to the great cultural heterogeneity of multinational projection teams, the authors propose "aligning measures", similar to the socialization process, for "new organizational members and expatriate managers that are sent to piece of work in a different cultural context".

With a behavioral lens and from the perspective of projection direction rather than HRM scholarship, Ekrot et al. (2018) elucidate the furnishings of "perceived organizational supports" on the job satisfaction of projection managers, relating to the risk of them planning to quit the position. The authors accost career and project portfolio management as existence the predictors of perceived organizational support for project managers and investigate the human relationship betwixt such support, job satisfaction and turnover intentions. The research findings illustrate a positive relationship between perceived organizational back up and job satisfaction and its negative effect on the turnover intention. Also, the authors prove that the career path for project managers is associated positively with perceived organizational support, especially when information technology is accompanied by adequate qualification opportunities. Results farther stress "the significance of top management interest and the support of PMOs for project managers' perceived organizational support" (1950).

Following a different psychological arroyo, Coetzer and Gibbison (2016) also as Coetzer (2016) study the relationship between "adult attention deficit" (AAD) and the "operational effectiveness of project managers" (OEPM) and the function of time management in this nexus. Utilizing an experiment with the participation of employed graduate business organization students in the project manager function and psychometric tools, the authors test the hypothesis that time direction mediates the relationship between AAD and OEPM. The result shows that "AAD is negatively associated with time management and OEPM, and time direction is positively associated with OEPM. Time direction partially mediates the human relationship between AAD and OEPM" (970). Furthermore, An et al. (2019) investigate how project managers deal with "stressful conditions" in the ending phase of projects. Their research elucidates "the impact of project managers' participation in project ending, and their capability's contribution to projection ending operation under pressure" (198). Using structural equation modelling to analyze the data collected from experienced projection managers in unlike industries, the study identifies six stressors, namely "skill discretion, decision authority, job demands, job insecurity, job readjustment, and family support" and unveils that "project managers nether pressure tend to starting time lose control of the task with less strategic importance" (198).

Project managers and project performance

Project managers have a pivotal role in managing the project and, subsequently, on the project effect. Thus, selecting and assigning them to the project as an HRM chore is crucial for projects, while the role of 60 minutes managers in this process is unclear. To investigate how decisions on allocating project managers to projects are made and affect project operation, Seboni and Tutesigensi (2015) address the decision-making process of allocating project managers to projects in a project-based setting. The authors examine Seboni and Tutesigensi (2014) conceptual framework of allocating projection managers to projects in Botswana. By analyzing both quantitative and qualitative information, the written report identifies "strengths in projection manager-to-projection practices, demonstrated by informants' recognition of some important criteria to exist considered. The key weaknesses were exemplified by a lack of effective management tools and techniques to match project managers to projects" (428).

Relatedly, the power and influence of projection managers in comparison to functional managers under the challenge of dual control in matrix organizations has been investigated past Moodley et al. (2016). Cartoon upon a ii-phase qualitative and quantitive design, the written report shows "functional and project managers are associated with very different attitudinal outcomes among projection team members" (103).

HRM concepts and practices for temporary organizations

In contrast to previous research themes, more recently, a grouping of studies has approached the phenomenon of temporary organization by reexamining and reconceptualizing concepts of HRM and/or organizational behavior and by investigating HRM practices in the temporary context. In this respect, concepts such as turnover intentions, citizenship behavior, gender equality, project collaboration, hiring policies, employee resourcing and high operation work practices have been investigated in project-based settings.

HRM concepts in the temporary context

Ferreira et al. (2013) introduce the term "Projection Citizenship Beliefs" (PCB) and study its relation to "project goal achievement" and "future personal and organizational opportunities" in the different cultural contexts of Federal republic of germany and Portugal. The study reveals the positive relation between PCB and both project goal achievement and the associated futurity personal and organizational opportunities, which may well besides ascend in and for multinational firms (which have already been studied quite extensively with regard to organizational commitment; cf. Presbitero et al., 2019).

Following the aforementioned approach, Nuhn et al. (2018) explicate the "job-related antecedents of turnover intentions" and differences betwixt permanent organizations and project teams as temporary organizations in management consulting services firms. The authors reveal that inter-role conflict has the about touch on turnover intentions in temporary organizations and argue that turnover intentions in temporary and permanent organizations can co-be, while they are not identical. This research is ane of the few studies in the field that focuses on project-based employees rather than on project managers alone (type 2 in Table 2), and the results of both studies reveal significant differences betwixt temporary and permanent contexts in terms of HRM concepts.

Moreover, Baker, Ali and French (2019a) study the effectiveness of gender equality initiatives in the projection-based context. The research investigates the touch on of such initiatives in improving "women's representation" in Australian property and mining PBOs. On the basis of signalling and contingency theory, the authors postulate and test a positive human relationship between gender equality initiatives and women'due south representation at direction and non-management levels and also the moderating issue of women in top management teams in this nexus. By using archival information from 358 organizations with a 2-year time lag, the results "partially support the main and moderating consequence hypotheses" (425).

The same authors (Baker, Ali and French, 2019b) compare PBOs and non-project-based organizations with regard to the impact of womens' representation on organizational performance. On the basis of a resource-based view of the firm and contingency theory, they predict that the touch of women in management on organizational performance volition be stronger in PBOs than other types of organizations. By utilizing a quantitative and longitudinal research design, the inquiry shows that the relationship between women in direction and organizational performance is positive in PBOs. The results also stress that for this type of organization one "may demand to consider how they increase their innovative chapters and address gender imbalances to capitalize on gender diversity benefits for organizational outcomes" (872).

Collaboration in inter-organizational projects that bring together employees from different occupational cultures and HRM systems has been studied by Calamel et al. (2012). Through the "ascertainment of two collaborative projects in one of the largest clusters in France", this study unveils "that collaboration, far from existence a given within these projects, is the product of a process of social construction that might be fostered by better managerial support" (48).

HRM practices in temporary organizations

While different HRM practices in the project-based context take been studied past project direction scholars (cf. Keegan et al., 2018), in our review sample, we plant simply few examples of enquiry in the HRM field that considers this approach. What is more than surprising is that, for the most part, they were published exterior the mainstream HRM journals. For instance, Abbaspour and Dabirian (2019) evaluate different labor hiring policies for construction projects. Drawing on system dynamics, the inquiry presents a dynamic model to assess different labor hiring policies. The results of a simulation show how unlike hiring policies touch project performance and how decision-makers tin appraise "labor hiring policies in various time intervals with different [workforce] compositions".

In a similar vein, Wickramasinghe and Liyanage (2013) investigate the outcome of "Loftier Performance Work Practices" (HPWP) on task performance in PBOs. Through quantitative enquiry conducted in software development firms in Sri Lanka, the authors identify performance evaluation, learning and development, and interest in decision-making as three main HPWPs that "significantly and positively predict chore performance of employees" (64) in PBOs.

Furthermore, the employee resourcing procedure in PBOs has been studied by Dainty et al. (2009). Their research scrutinizes HRM practices that "form the key components of the resourcing process", i.due east. "inter alia, human being resources planning, recruitment and selection, squad deployment, functioning direction, and human resources administration" (7) in PBOs. Drawing on seven case studies of structure firms, the event illuminates that "team deployment resides at the center of resourcing process for the projection-based arrangement every bit it determines the success of the projection, which in turn determines the competitiveness of the arrangement. Long-term planning and employee involvement enable team deployment to integrate with other elements of HRM effectively" (vii).

The results of these studies underscore the demand for reexamination of the HRM concepts and practices in non-permanent organizational contexts, transcending the permanency assumption. Moreover, the hybrid nature of PBOs allows non simply for comparing simply as well for the study of both contexts concurrently. Table 3 summarizes the themes and presents samples of research questions regarding HRM research on projects.

Man resources management in project-based organizations: revisiting the permanency supposition

Published online:

02 July 2020

Table 3. Dissimilar approaches to HRM research on projects/PBOs.

Give-and-take and implications for HRM enquiry

The present review ready out to answer ii enquiry questions: (ane) To what extent and with what focus have temporary forms of organizing in general and PBOs in detail been reflected in the HRM field? (2) What are the implications of this particular class of temporary organization for the time to come evolution of HRM as a scholarly field? With regard to the first question nosotros can state that, while the permanency of organizations has been assumed in HRM research throughout the evolution of the discipline, the spread of temporariness has been reflected almost exclusively in the specialized HRM journals in terms of temporary employment; by and large temporary or contract employees in permanent contexts. Comparing the number of published articles on temporary employment and on temporary organizations in the HRM journals highlights this fact (see once over again Tabular array 1).

Notwithstanding the contempo attempts to theorize HRM in temporary contexts more generally, no substantial HRM research has been carried out on purely temporary and little on temporally hybrid forms such as PBOs. This is understandable considering the beginning (blazon 1) provides few opportunities for developing HRM policies and practices, while the scarcity of HRM research on the latter (type two) may be acquired past the organizational behavior and industrial psychology authorisation in the field (Beer et al., 2015), implying mostly micro levels of analysis that tend to neglect (inter-) organizational contexts (Kaufman, 2014). 1 could argue that the fail of HRM issues in PBOs and other temporally hybrid forms of arrangement does not plant a problem because the subject is not of import. This, still, would be in sharp dissimilarity to the present and hereafter pivotal role of projects in contemporary organizations and societies (see, Lundin et al., 2015; Schoper et al., 2018).

What is less clear is why, apart from the few studies mentioned above and in low-cal of the peculiarities they unearth, projects inside a PBO or other types of temporal hybrids combining temporary and permanent elements have been largely neglected by HRM scholars. The express number of published papers in specialized journals (7 papers in twentyyears) clearly shows this neglect, which is astonishing considering HRM enquiry is already getting close to considering temporary contexts. Enquiry on temporary work agencies, for example, recognizes that these (permanent) organizations with (potentially) permanent employees deal mostly with temporary work when looking at how work is performed for the agencies' clients (Hopp et al., 2016; encounter again type iv in Tabular array 2). In this sense, it would be but a rather modest – simply nevertheless crucial – step for HRM scholars to shift the research focus from agencies as permanent entities to the temporary contexts of their clients.

In response to the 2nd research question, the typology we have presented on temporal organizational and employment forms (Table 2) illustrates unlike types of employees that, as this review shows, HRM research has overlooked in the main. Scrutinizing these neglected and/or less studied types creates an opportunity for theorizing HRM well beyond the permanency assumption. For example, there are withal lots of unknowns regarding ephemeral and projection-based employees that work for a very short period of time and or with a high sequence of attachment to and detachment from the organization due to assignents to different projects. In this sense, HRM enquiry, for example, can scrutinize the formation of the "psychological contract" (Rousseau, 1989) under this situation in temporary organizations; a topic that is traditionaly studied in permanent organizational settings. Or HRM research could investigate how the future projection job and/or chore assignment plays a role in the employer-employee relations in the projection-based context (see, Ferreira et al., 2013).

In contrast to the HRM field, project management scholars have considered at least some additional aspects of the HRM-PBO relationship at the organizational and inter-organizational projection levels of assay (run into, Keegan et al., 2018). In addition to the inquiry presented, this includes the investigation of HRM practices such every bit career planning (e.g. Bredin, 2008; Bredin & Söderland, 2013; Hölzle, 2010; Lloyd-Walker et al., 2016), competency development (e.1000. Ahadzie et al., 2008; Ekrot et al., 2016; Medina & Medina, 2014; Savelsbergh et al., 2016), citizenship beliefs (Ferreira et al., 2013), or the effects of project work on the well-existence of individuals (Asquin et al., 2010; Turner et al., 2008; Zika-Viktorsson et al., 2006).

Yet, many other important questions at the interface of HRM and forms of temporary organizing have not nonetheless been addressed. I example is the possible contribution of HRM to brand these notoriously delicate forms more than resilient. How can this be done in increasingly international contexts that, despite ongoing globalization efforts, are likely to go on to exist institutionally dissimilar? How does the present trend towards the digitalization of work impact HRM in temporary settings in comparison to more than permanent ones? How tin can HRM be organized when project work in light of this trend becomes more than mobile in spatial terms? Overall, more than comparative studies, using qualitative every bit well as quantitative or even mixed-method designs, are needed to accost such bug.

Forms of temporary organizing in general and PBOs in particular create an opportunity to revisit orthodox concepts based on the permanency supposition and to highlight the tensions and contradictions arising in this for HRM in such forms. In this respect, for example, HRM research could investigate how the HRM-strategy relationship is affected by the temporary nature of structures and actors in the unlike forms of temporary organizing. Besides, following the contempo attempts we indicated above (encounter, Ferreira et al., 2013; Nuhn et al., 2018), research could also scrutinize how traditional HRM concepts, e.g. employee turnover, satisfaction or retention, have to be reconceptualized for the temporary context.

What is more and goes across the two research questions that guided our review: Forms of temporary organizing provide a perfect context to study HRM with respect to unlike dimensions of fourth dimension and temporality. While these topics are on the ascension in direction and organization research more broadly (Ancona et al., 2001a, 2001b; Lee & Liebenau, 1999; Dawson, 2014; Reinecke & Ansari, 2015), they have not yet received much attention in HRM research. In this sense, a focus on issues of time and temporality beyond temporary/contract employees could enrich the prominent approaches. For example, different and sometimes contradictory time horizons of employees in permanent and temporary parts of temporal hybrids such as PBOs, and how these affect HRM practices, phone call for future research by HRM scholars.

Thereby, research on PBOs could contribute to the discussions about the future of HRM, including international HRM (Cooke, 2018). For instance, the prominent customer/client role in projects/PBOs facilitates research on the HRM-customer nexus that is emphasized in the "Hr and context" approach. And project-based working and organizing, as it helps HRM departments to piece of work equally "a professional person service firm" (equally the proposed configuration for futurity HRM departments), may increase organizational capabilities (Ulrich, 2011; Ulrich & Dulebohn, 2015) when facing a projectified environment (Lundin et al., 2015; Schoper et al., 2018). In summary, while the "60 minutes and context" approach emphasizes the alignment of HRM outcomes and contexts, it should also note the salient role of temporary organizational and employment forms, particularly projects and PBOs, in the contemporary business context. In a similar vein, research on HRM in PBOs could enrich the discussions nearly the role of HRM in creating sustainability. HRM research could propound the contradiction betwixt sustainability, which implies permanence, and the temporary context of PBOs. Thereby, enquiry could clarify the way in which sustainable HRM tin be achieved in this context.

In conclusion, this paper clarifies the limited extent to which HRM inquiry pays attention to forms of temporary organizing in general and PBOs in particular. Nevertheless the limited amount of HRM research on temporary organizational forms and the blurred boundaries of HRM every bit a scholarly field, it has been shown that the lack of HRM research on these organizational and employment forms offers ample opportunity for hereafter studies. The review likewise demonstrates how the study of PBOs, in conjunction with the by evolution of the HRM field and speciation of its future, could contribute to leaving behind the permanency or at least longevity of the arrangement as a taken-for-granted supposition. A number of scholars fence that the HRM literature is withal preoccupied with a "normative" and "prescriptive" trend, which fails to take notation of the "complexities and dynamism of real organizations" (Legge, 1978, p. 16; Watson, 2004). With the same token, others claim more critically that "HRM is an constructing of description, perception and logical deduction" (Storey, 2001, p. 6). Confronting these critics, careful and context-sensitive empirical research on temporary organizational forms could help HRM as a discipline to portray a more realistic motion picture of contemporary organizations with their complexities and dynamism.

kidneywaintly.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09585192.2020.1783346