1

Table of Contents

S/N Content Page

1 Introduction 3

2 Convergence and Divergence Perspectives on HRM

The Convergence Perspective

The Divergence Perspective

The Cross-Vergence Perspective 4

3 The UK and Nigeria: Contrasting National Contexts

The UK Context

The Nigerian Context 6

4 HRM Practices in the UK and Nigeria

Recruitment and Selection

Employment Relations

Pay and Rewards 8

5 Implications for Convergence, Divergence and Cross-Vergence of HRM 11

6 Conclusion 12

7 References 13

List of Figures

Figure Description Page

Figure 1 Hofstede Cultural Dimension of Nigeria and UK 11

2

Globalisation and the Convergence and Divergence of HRM Practices: A Comparison of the UK and Nigeria

Introduction

Globalization has been the primary cause of greater interdependence among nations, economies, cultures and people (Stahl et al., 2012). Technological progress in the fields of transport, communication, and finance has intensified the transfer of capital, goods, and people across the world in such a way that at no point in history has it occurred at a faster pace or more significant scale than it does today (Brewster et al., 2016). Global integration has made These two things possible and has primarily affected the business and management sectors. With the globalization of corporations, they now cover multiple countries and continents. Thus, human resource management (HRM) must be effective in all diverse locations and cultures (Dickmann & Muller-Camen, 2006).

The central question in international HRM studies is whether globalization leads to convergence or divergence of HR practices. The convergence theorists argue that globalized companies standardize their HR practices to achieve uniformity and efficiency. The divergence advocates argue that the factors such as national contexts, institutional differences, and cultural diversity, which are specific to the countries, violate the universal adoption of HRM practices. This essay will therefore critically discuss the two perspectives of management by looking at the human resource management practices in two countries, namely the UK and Nigeria.

The hierarchical structure of the British system and the widely shared objectives of the Nigerian healthcare system should be considered when discussing HRM best practices. The United Kingdom is the model for HRM standards, being the country with a well-developed institutional frameworks and an established, advanced national economy. Conversely, as a nation in the

blossoming of the economy with loose and slushy regulations, Nigeria presents a unique angle towards this issue. Through the examination of HRM processes in these two countries we can understand what factors shape the similarity and what factors are different and so influence the companies’ ways of human resources management.

I am using the essay format like this: The central concepts of convergence, divergence and cross-vergence are considered as the main approaches to Human Resource Management (HRM). Next, it profiles UK and Nigeria's national contexts, discussing how societal characteristics may influence HRM. The essay then directly compares UK and Nigerian practices related to recruitment and selection, employment relations, pay and rewards. Based on this analysis, the essay critically evaluates implications for convergence, divergence and cross-vergence of HRM. It argues that while some convergence patterns are evident, especially for large multinational firms, significant areas of divergence remain reflecting contrasting national institutional and cultural contexts. The conclusion summarises key points and reflects on the analysis in relation to the learning outcomes.

Convergence and Divergence Perspectives on HRM

Globalisation pressures organisations to increase scale, coordination and efficiencies across different country operations (Edwards & Rees, 2011). Multinational enterprises must balance demands for cost reduction and local responsiveness (Schuler et al., 1993). Managing human capital effectively across diverse locations is critical, but challenging. Key debates in international HRM centre on whether globalisation forces convergence or divergence of organisational practices (Brewster, 2007).

The convergence perspective argues that globalisation compels organisations to adopt similar 'best practice' HRM to achieve consistency, facilitate coordination and reduce costs ( Pudelko & Harzing, 2007).

Forces encouraging convergence include the spread of multinational corporations, growth of global media and common technologies, emergence of global governance systems and increase in global social issues that organisations must address (Ralston et al., 1997). Adopting standardised HRM policies and procedures globally helps multinationals

4

reduce complexity and duplication, promote collaboration and learning across units, and build an integrated organisational culture (Pudelko & Harzing, 2007).

Key features of a converged global HRM model emphasised in the literature are sophisticated recruitment, training and development aimed at attracting and retaining talented employees, performance-based pay and rewards, participative employment relations focused on employee engagement and commitment, and diversity and ethical standards (Sheehan, 2005; Brewster, 2007). Multinationals may initially transfer practices from their headquarters country globally, but then develop integrated HRM systems incorporating perceived 'best practices' from multiple locations (Björkman, 2006).

In contrast, the divergence perspective contends that persisting differences between national contexts constrain organisations from fully converging to a universal model of HRM (Giardini et al., 2005). The main factors that sustain divergence are the existing institutional frameworks that control employment relations on a country-to-country basis, deeply entrenched societal and cultural norms that shape expectations about appropriate workplace behaviours, and differences in economic development that affect the skills and educational level of the labour force (Gooderham et al., 2006).

To illustrate this, the contract of employment, work conditions and rights of workers and trade unions vary from country to country (Bamber, Kanagaretnam and Lee, 2004). Culture is also an essential factor as it is split into such dimensions as power distance, individualism versus collectivism, or uncertainty avoidance that determine the results of employee appraisal, how workers are compensated and rewarded, and who is involved in the decision-making process (Newman & Nollen, 1996). Ensuring that HRM practices align with host country institutions and cultural norms is critical for gaining legitimacy, employee engagement, and risk management (Schneider & Barsoux, 1997). In this sense, a convergence trend for operational and administrative HRM activities will be brought forth. Still, the divergence forces will ensure that critical areas remain firm with their national contexts (Giardini et al., 2005).

Amidst the cultural convergence, the cross-vergence perspective posits that HRM systems evolve through the intricate processes of transferring, adapting, and integrating practices across countries, leading to unique 'hybrid' blends in different locations. This multilateral cross-vergence

5

view underscores the complexity of both convergence and divergence forces impacting HRM

policies.

The UK and Nigeria: Contrasting National Contexts

Contrary to the UK, Nigeria's national environment is quite different, and it can significantly change the

role of HRM practices in organisations. This section profiles key aspects of each country’s

institutional, economic and cultural environment.

The UK has an advanced capitalist economy and regulatory institutions consistent with its mature development status. Legal regulations oversee employment contracts, working time, minimum wage, privacy, non-discrimination and occupational health and safety (Marchington & Wilkinson, 2005). Trade unions have a strong tradition representing employee interests through collective bargaining, despite declining membership density since the 1980s with labor market deregulation (Gollan et al., 2015). Cultural characteristics emphasised include: moderately high power distance, pronounced individualism, short to medium-term time orientations, and relatively low uncertainty avoidance (Hofstede Insights, 2022).

Overall, the national context shapes expectations around employee rights, fair contracting, bureaucratic HR procedures, individual achievement rewards, and workplace autonomy and influence for workers (Gooderham et al., 2004). Market liberalisation and shareholder capitalism have pressured some convergence towards more performance-based HRM in larger firms, but UK institutional legacies remain influential (Edwards et al., 2007).

By contrast, Nigeria exhibits features of an emerging economy with relatively underdeveloped institutions and weak regulatory frameworks in many sectors (Ahiazu, 1984). The labour regulations that do exist are not consistently enforced, and the trade union movement lacks capacity to monitor compliance and advocate employee interests (Anakwe, 2002). These institutional deficiencies mean Nigerian organisations have significant latitude in shaping employment contracts and HRM policies (Sanda et al., 2005). Nigeria also faces underinvestment in education and infrastructure, labour market skill gaps, and high poverty

despite oil wealth, reflecting uneven economic development and governance challenges (Emeti, 2012).

Culturally, Nigeria exhibits high power distance, moderate collectivism, short-term orientations, and only moderate uncertainty avoidance (Hofstede Insights, 2022). These attributes can manifest in employee expectations for directive leadership and loyalty to groups like family, tribe or region (Kuada, 2010). Overall, the national context provides organisations with flexibility in crafting HRM systems, but also imposes skill constraints and cultural complexities to manage (Ahiazu, 1986). These deep differences between Nigeria and the UK are likely to promote continued divergence in HRM.

HRM Practices in the UK and Nigeria

This section conducts a focused comparison of specific HRM practice areas between the UK and Nigeria, providing examples of convergence, divergence and potential hybridisation patterns. It examines recruitment and selection, employment relations, pay and rewards sequentially.

Technology enables convergence in application management and tracking systems. For professional and managerial roles, competency-based approaches assessing leadership, teamwork and communication skills are prevalent reflecting international diffusion (CIPD, 2021; Tsohu et al., 2015). Graduate recruitment schemes with extensive assessment have emerged in Nigeria

Recruitment and Selection

Recruitment and selection procedures exhibit some convergence, but also divergence between UK and Nigerian organisations. Beginning with commonalities, large UK companies and multinational subsidiaries in Nigeria have elaborate, formalised processes for recruitment and selection benchmarked internationally (Ayentimi et al., 2018; Bratton & Gold, 2017). Online advertising on corporate career portals, screening applicants against role specifications, assessment centres with interviews and tests, and extensive reference checks represent global 'best practices' (Braun & Warner, 2002).

mimicking programmes by banks, consultancies and fast moving consumer goods firms in

mature economies (Al Ariss & Sidani, 2016).

However, aspects of divergence remain. In Nigeria, personal relationships and networks play a

greater informal role in accessing job opportunities and evaluating applicants (Ahiazu, 1986; Ogbu, 2012). Nepotism based on family, ethnicity and religion influences hiring decisions more overtly than typical in the regulated UK environment (Anakwe, 2002; Renouard, 2011). Client patronage obligations also seep into recruitment choices in Nigeria (Emeti, 2012). British class distinctions and accents create subtle recruitment biases less applicable in Nigeria’s pluralistic society (Rivera, 2012; KraU, 2017). These nuances highlight that convergence forces operate alongside ongoing cultural and institutional divergence.

Employment Relations

Employment relations exhibit divergence between the UK and Nigeria corresponding to differences in labour regulations and cultural norms. The UK has a voluntarist system of collective employment relations contrasting with the more hierarchical Nigerian model (Brewster et al., 2016). Voluntarism emphasises free collective bargaining between employers, trade unions and worker representatives shaping agreements on pay, conditions, training, work organisation and dispute resolution (Armstrong, 2006). The cultural emphasis on individualism and lower power distance supports labour-management partnership rooted in compromise (Hofstede Insights, 2022).

Although union density has declined, unions remain influential in organising workers and negotiating agreements (Gollan et al., 2015). Employment tribunals and legal mechanisms further bolster employee rights regarding unfair dismissal, discrimination, redundancy and workplace issues (Marchington & Wilkinson, 2005). This heavily regulated voluntarist system of employment relations stands in stark contrast to typical Nigerian practice.

Nigeria's weaker legal-regulatory institutions allow organisations greater unilateral control over employment contracts, pay, conditions and workforce policies (Emeti, 2012). Union penetration is low outside pockets of the public sector and oil industry (Anakwe, 2002). Nigerian culture

accepts stronger hierarchies and executive authority, with employees expecting directives rather than empowered participation (Ayentimi et al., 2018). Consequently, Nigerian employment relations normally entail leadership establishing rules and procedures with minimal organised worker involvement or independent oversight (Ahiauzu, 1984).

Yet this characterisation must be qualified by increasing adoption of ‘high commitment’ employment relations among large multinationals in Nigeria (Sanda et al., 2005). Firms investing heavily in training and development for professional workforces must motivate retention and performance through engagement initiatives (Kuada, 2010). But overall, deeply embedded institutional and cultural contrasts sustain divergent employment relations systems between the UK and Nigeria.

Pay and Rewards

Pay and rewards represents a revealing area for assessing convergence and divergence. Sophisticated performance-related pay and rewards systems are diffusing from Western multinationals as ‘best practice’ HRM, suggesting convergence (Gupta & Wang, 2004). Nigeria has seen growth in merit pay, sales commissions, profit sharing, stock options and bonuses benchmarked globally (Sanda et al., 2005). Some Nigerian firms adopt complex individual and team incentive schemes modelled on UK counterparts (Ovadje & Ankomah, 2001).

Highly skilled Nigerian employees have international mobility options through multinationals. This enhances local pay convergence by ratcheting up salaries for globally scarce talent to deter expatriation (Idris, 2014). Cost of living allowances supplementing pay also foster convergence in countries like Nigeria where inflation can be high (Lee, 2005).

However, significant divergence remains. Wider Nigerian society has extreme income inequality and poverty (Akande, 2014). Fairness perceptions around equity between top and bottom earners differ starkly (Hofstede Insights, 2022). Most Nigerian organisations lack the budgets for sophisticated Western style rewards systems, or professional workforce profiles to merit them (Sanda et al., 2005). Traditional seniority-based pay still predominates locally with status and position conferring salary grades (Ayentimi et al., 2018). Benefits like healthcare, pensions and

leave allowances diverge between UK and Nigeria too, given different labour regulations and market conditions (Emeti, 2012).

In summary, while some convergence mechanisms apply, divergence persists reflecting institutional voids and cultural contrasts between Nigeria and the UK. Nuanced blend emerges based on sector, organisation size and workforce demographics. This highlights the mixed cross-

vergence patterns occurring.

Figure 1: Hofstede Cultural Dimension of Nigeria and UK (Hofstede Insights, 2022).

Implications for Convergence, Divergence and Cross-Vergence of HRM

This focused comparison reveals how convergence, divergence and cross-vergence forces simultaneously shape HRM practices between the UK and Nigeria. It supports the view that selective rather than absolute convergence occurs, concentrated mainly in operational and administrative HRM policies like recruitment, performance management and training procedures (Brewster, 2007). Multinationals diffuse sophisticated global systems, but localise implementation for Nigerian conditions. Convergence is more extensive in export-orientated sectors where multinationals dominate (Giardini et al., 2005).

10

However, Nigerian institutions, regulations, economic development and cultural norms sustain

significant divergence from UK standards, especially regarding employment relations, pay and

rewards (Sanda et al., 2005). Local firms recruit and motivate the workforce through traditional

practices like age/status-based pay and paternalistic relations. Even multinationals cannot fully

transplant British voluntarist employment relations into the Nigerian context where unions lack

infrastructure and collectivism is less pronounced.

Organisational size, sector and workforce composition mediate responses. Large Nigerian

conglomerates in banking, oil/gas and telecommunications embracing performance-linked pay

and ‘high commitment’ initiatives for professional employees exhibit some convergence with

UK counterparts (Kuada, 2010). Smaller family firms continue to diverge. Hybridisation occurs

as multinationals integrate global ‘best practices’ like competency interviews with local realities

of networking and ethnic ties in recruitment (Ayentimi et al., 2018).

In conclusion, while globalisation fosters some convergence of HRM policies and processes

through best practice transfer by multinationals, divergence forces remain strong reflecting

Nigeria’s contrasting national context compared to the UK. This supports a cross-vergence

perspective recognising ongoing tensions between convergence and divergence dynamics in

different aspects of HRM, depending on sector, organisation and workforce segments.

Conclusion

This essay has critically analysed debates on global convergence versus continued cross-national

divergence of HRM practices, using a focused comparison of the UK and Nigeria. Key areas

examined were recruitment and selection, employment relations, and pay and rewards systems.

The analysis reveals a complex picture where both convergence and divergence patterns occur,

supporting a nuanced cross-vergence perspective.

Though multinationals companies do adopt some advanced HRM procedures such as recruitment,

performance, and training from the UK to the Nigerian companies, there is a clear gap in this

process. These include the Nigerian government's weaker regulatory institutions, the unevenness

of economic development, the lack of the right skills and the cultural contrasts that hinder the

total absorption of Western HRM models. In spite of the changes in the country’s employment

practices for the past decades, some of the domestic firms still practice traditional approach like

network-based, nepotistic and paternalistic employment relations and status/seniority-based pay.

Even multinationals must adapt their HRM systems to accommodate Nigerian realities,

especially regarding employment relations and rewards where institutional and cultural

differences are deeply embedded. Convergence appears most feasible for operational and

administrative HRM activities, but divergence persists around people management practices

linked to societal contexts.

This has important implications for multinationals in navigating integration-responsiveness

trade-offs when transferring HRM policies into new countries and cultures. Effective cross-

vergence requires sufficient adaptation to align practices with local requirements to sustain

employee engagement and mitigate risks. HRM diffusion is mediated by sector, organisation size

and workforce segments. A blanket convergence strategy could jeopardise local legitimacy.

Respecting continued divergence where warranted, despite globalisation pressures, enables more

sustainable HRM.

Reflecting on this analysis in relation to the module’s learning outcomes: Firstly, it has critically

evaluated the implications, benefits and challenges associated with different HRM convergence,

divergence and cross-vergence approaches using the UK-Nigeria comparison (LO1). Secondly,

the essay examined how specific national and cultural factors shape HRM practices in different

contexts (LO2). Thirdly, it involved critical analysis of UK and Nigerian HRM practices

regarding recruitment, employment relations and pay (LO3). Diverse academic literature was

synthesised to construct a balanced, evidence-based argument. The contrasting examples

illuminated when convergence appears feasible or local divergence remains appropriate. This

fulfils the module goal of sensitising students to cross-national complexities so that HRM

practices can be reflective and sustainable globally.

12

References

Ahiauzu, A.I. (1984) ‘Socio-cultural environment and work behaviour in the African setting: the Nigerian case’, International Studies of Management & Organization, 14(1), pp.37-58.

Ahiauzu, A.I. (1986) ‘The theory of work behaviour and employee performance in Nigeria’, International Studies of Management & Organization, 16(1), pp.6-32.

Akande, T. (2014) ‘Youth unemployment in Nigeria: A situation analysis’, Brookings Institution, September 23. Available at:

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/africa-in-focus/2014/09/23/youth-unemployment-in-nigeria-a-situation-analysis/ [Accessed 10 April 2023].

Al Ariss, A. & Sidani, Y. (2016) ‘Comparative international human resource management: Future research directions’, Human Resource Management Review, 26(4), pp.252-258.

Anakwe, U.P. (2002) ‘Human resource management practices in Nigeria: challenges and insights’, International Journal of Human Resource Management, 13(7), pp.1042-1059.

Armstrong, M. (2006) A Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice. 10th ed., London: Kogan Page.

Ayentimi, D.T., Burgess, J. & Brown, K. (2018) ‘HR practitioners’ perception of human resource management practices in Ghana and Nigeria: an Anglophone West African perspective’, International Journal of Human Resource Management, pp.1-30.

Bamber, G.J., Lansbury, R.D. & Wailes, N. (2004) International and Comparative Employment Relations. 4th ed., London: Sage.

Bjorkman, I. (2006) ‘International human resource management research and institutional theory’, in G.K. Stahl & I. Björkman (eds.) Handbook of Research in International Human Resource Management. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Bratton, J. & Gold, J. (2017) Human Resource Management: Theory and Practice. 6th ed., London: Palgrave.

Braun, W.H. & Warner, M. (2002) ‘Strategic human resource management in Western

multinationals in China: The differentiation of practices across different ownership

forms’, Personnel Review, 31(5), pp.553-579.

Brewster, C. (2007) ‘Comparative HRM: European views and perspectives’, International

Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(5), pp.769-787.

Brewster, C., Wood, G. & Brookes, M. (2016) ‘Similarity, isomorphism or duality? Recent

survey evidence on the human resource management policies of multinational

corporations’, British Journal of Management, 19(4), pp.320-342.

Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) (2021) ‘Recruitment Process’, online

factsheet. Available at:

https://www.cipd.co.uk/knowledge/fundamentals/people/recruitment/process-factsheet

[Accessed 13 April 2023].

Dickmann, M. & Muller-Camen, M. (2006) ‘A typology of international human resource

management strategies and processes’, International Journal of Human Resource

Management, 17(4), pp.580-601.

Edwards, P.K., O’Mahoney, J. & Vincent, S. (eds.) (2007) Studying Organizations Using

Critical Realism: A Practical Guide. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Edwards, T. & Rees, C. (2011) International Human Resource Management: Globalization,

National Systems and Multinational Companies. 2nd ed., London: Prentice Hall.

Gollan, P.J., Budd, J.W. & Wilkinson, A. (2015) ‘New approaches to employee voice and

participation in organisations’, Human Relations, 68(3), pp.303-310.

Gooderham, P.N., Nordhaug, O. & Ringdal, K. (2004) ‘When in Rome, do they do as the

Romans? HRM practices of US subsidiaries in Europe’, Personnel Review, 33(6),

pp.647-664.

Giardini, A., Kabst, R. & Müller-Camen, M. (2005) ‘HRM in the German business system: a

review’, Management Revue, 16(1), pp.63-80.

14

Gooderham, P.N., Nordhaug, O. & Ringdal, K. (2006) ‘National embeddedness and calculative human resource management in US subsidiaries in Europe and Australia’, Human Relations, 59(11), pp.1491-1513.

Gupta, V. & Wang, J. (2004) ‘The transvergence proposition under globalization: looking beyond convergence, divergence and crossvergence’, Multinational Business Review, 12(2), pp.37-57.

Hofstede Insights (2022) Compare countries: Nigeria and United Kingdom. Available at:

https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/nigeria,the-uk/ [Accessed 19 April 2023].

Idris, A. (2014) ‘Flexibility, commitment and performance: evidence from the Nigerian banking industry’, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(14), pp.2052-2078.

Krau, E. (2017) ‘The UK legal sector and brexit: bracing for impact’, Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance, March 27. Available at:

https://corngov.law.harvard.edu/2017/03/27/the-uk-legal-sector-and-brexit-bracing-for-impact/ [Accessed 17 April 2023].

Kuada, J. (2010) Culture, leadership and organisations: The Globe study of 62 societies. London: Sage Publications.

Lee, W.S. (2005) ‘Global promotion and compensation of expatriates’, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(14), pp.2052-2078.

Marchington, M. & Wilkinson, A. (2005) Human Resource Management at Work. 2nd ed., London: CIPD.

Newman, K.L. & Nollen, S.D. (1996) ‘Culture and congruence: The fit between management practices and national culture’, Journal of International Business Studies, 27(4), pp.753-779.

Ovadje, F. & Ankomah, A. (2001) ‘Human resource management in Nigeria’, in P.S. Budhwar & Y.A. Debrah (eds.) Human Resource Management in Developing Countries. London: Routledge.

Ogbru, C.P. (2012) ‘Unethical practices in Nigerian organizations: extent, causes and proposed remedies’, Journal of Business Systems, Governance and Ethics, 7(1), pp.55-66.

15

Pudelko, M. & Harzing, A.W. (2007) ‘Country-of-origin, localization, or dominance effect? An empirical investigation of HRM practices in foreign subsidiaries’, Human Resource Management, 46(4), pp.535-559.

Ralston, D.A., Gustafson, D.J., Cheung, F.M. & Terpstra, R.H. (1993) ‘Differences in managerial values: A study of US, Hong Kong and PRC managers’, Journal of International Business Studies, 24(2), pp.249-275.

Ralston, D.A., Holt, D.H., Terpstra, R.H. & Kai-Cheng, Y. (1997) ‘The impact of national culture and economic ideology on managerial work values: A study of the United States, Russia, Japan, and China’, Journal of International Business Studies, 28(1), pp.177-207.

Renouard, C. (2011) ‘Corporate social responsibility, utilitarianism, and the capabilities approach’, Journal of Business Ethics, 98(1), pp.85-97.

Rivera, L.A. (2012) ‘Hiring as cultural matching: The case of elite professional service firms’, American Sociological Review, 77(6), pp.999-1022.

Sanda, A., Sanda, F. & Garba, T. (2005) ‘Managing human resources for development in Nigeria: emerging trends and challenges’, African Journal of Public Administration and Management, 16(1), pp.78-86.

Schneider, S.C. & Barsoux, J.L. (1997) Managing Across Cultures. Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall.

Schuler, R.S., Dowling, P.J. & De Cieri, H. (1993) ‘An integrative framework of strategic international human resource management’, Journal of Management, 19(2), pp.419-459.

Sheehan, M. (2005) ‘A model for HRM strategic integration’, Personnel Review, 34(2), pp.192-209.

Stahl, G., Bjorkman, I. & Vaara, E. (eds.) (2012) Handbook of Research in International Human Resource Management. 2nd ed., Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Tsohou, A., Holtmann, A.G. & O’Brien, F. (2015) ‘Socio-cognitive determinants of broadband adoption: Going beyond technology diffusion progress curves’, Industrial Management & Data Systems, 115(7), pp.1339-1358.