Reflective Essay on the Convergence and Divergence of HRM

Download PDF

/ 18

100%

Document text

Table of Contents

S/N Content Page

1 Introduction 3

2 Globalization 4

3 Convergence and Divergence Theories of HRM 6

4 HRM in the UK 8

5 HRM in Nigeria 9

6 Compare and Contrast: UK and Nigeria 10

7 Implications of Convergence, Divergence and Cross-Vergence Theories 12

8 Conclusion and Critical Reflection 13

9 References 14

List of Figures

Figure Description Page

1 Hofstede Cultural Dimension of UK and Nigeria 11

Reflective essay on the convergence and divergence of HRM practices in the UK and Nigeria:

Introduction

Globalisation refers to the process of international integration as countries become more interconnected through the growth in technology, transportation, communication and trade (Morley et al., 2019). This has enabled the spread of multinational corporations (MNCs) who increasingly standardise and centralise their operations and practices globally (Farndale et al., 2010). Consequently, there has been significant interest in whether this is leading to the convergence of HRM practices towards a universalistic best practice approach or whether significant divergence remains due to national institutional and cultural factors (Brewster, 2007). The cross-vergence hypothesis argues for the coexistence of the two processes—the integration of practices into a wider system while retaining some national customs (Ralston et al., 1997). The aim of this paper is to analyze whether there is a tendency towards convergence or divergence in HRM and the possible cross-vergence between UK and Nigeria in a comparative way. These countries, which are selected for their different approaches in HRM and their ideology that is either Western or developing nation, are a good evidence of whether the practices are spreading or staying local. As vital HRM practices, including recruitment and selection, performance management, and talent development, come under the microscope, the audience is invited to delve into this intriguing comparative study.

The UK, with its mature economy and institutional framework reflecting Anglo-Saxon culture

(individualism and low power distance) (Hall and Soskice, 1999), and Nigeria, a fast-developing

African nation with more collectivist cultural behaviours and a weaker system of institutions,

serve as contrasting examples. Examining practices in these different regions, one can clearly see

how globalization, a powerful force in shaping HRM practices, has both promoted convergence

and divergence in the HR area, enlightening the audience about the global impact of HRM.

Globalization

Globalization signifies the trend of the growing connectedness and assimilation of the economic,

social, and cultural ties between individuals and countries on a global scale (Morley et al.,

2010). These compromises of higher levels of products, services, capital, people, technologies,

information and ideas flow across national borders and political systems. Globalization has

tremendously increased since it became a reality in the mid-20th century through drops in trade

barriers, transportation costs, and communication technologies. This has triggered the emergence

of complex transnational economic, social, technological, cultural and political interactions,

leading to a globalized world (Giddens, 2018).

Economic globalization encompasses trade among sovereign states and integrating national

economies via movements in exports, imports, finance, and foreign direct investment ( FDI )

(IMF, 2008). Trade as a percentage of world GDP increased from 27.0% in 1970 to 60% by the

end of 2010 (Ortiz-Ospina et al., 2013). FDI outflows increased rapidly from USD 50 billion in

1982, then jumped to USD 1.5 trillion in 2015 (UNCTAD, 2017). Transnational corporations

(TNCs) now control over 80% of the world trade, which is connected logically by global value

chains (UNCTAD, 2013).

Trade liberalization and reduction of trade barriers are the main factors for economic integration, and international agreements such as GATT and the WTO have contributed to this (Held et al., 1999). Declining transportation and communication costs have also enabled the coordination of global production networks (Jones, 2010). Critics argue economic globalisation has exacerbated inequality within and between countries, although its impacts are complex and contested (Milanovic, 2016; Rodrik, 2011).

Social globalisation involves the cross-border movement of people and ideas. Air travel has revolutionized mobility, with international arrivals rising from 25 million in 1950 to 1.4 billion in 2018 (UNWTO, 2019). Migration has enabled greater cultural diversity within societies, although its impacts are debated (Kivisto, 2015). Social media, satellite TV and the internet have also created a more interconnected global culture and shared identities that transcend nations (Norris, 2000).

Political globalisation refers to the development of global governance institutions that promote international cooperation, such as the UN, World Bank and WHO (Ikenberry, 2018). Binding international agreements like the Paris Climate Accord also illustrate increasing political interconnectedness. However, sceptics argue national sovereignty remains predominant over global governance (Gilpin, 2001).

Technological globalisation is underpinned by the diffusion of technologies and innovations worldwide. This is driven by international travel, FDI, supply chains and global communications facilitating cross-border knowledge transfer (Archibugi and Iammarino, 2002). The impacts of technological globalisation are complex, with benefits like accelerated innovation juxtaposed with risks like inequality, displacement and environmental damage (Scheuerman, 2018). Managing these tensions remains a key challenge of global governance.

In summary, globalisation involves multifaceted flows connecting societies across borders. However, global integration coexists with persisting cultural diversity between nations and localities (Tomlinson, 1999). Globalisation's impacts are contradictory, generating opportunities through development and interconnection, alongside risks like inequality, displacement and environmental damage (Scheuerman, 2018). Managing these tensions remains a key challenge of global governance.

Convergence and Divergence Theories of HRM

Globalisation has stimulated extensive debate around whether it fosters worldwide convergence

of human resource management (HRM) practices towards a universal model, or whether

significant national differences persist. Convergence theorists contend that globalisation impels

the diffusion of standardised ‘best practice’ HRM across countries (Brewster, 2007). Multinational corporations (MNCs) are seen as a pivotal force, transferring practices globally to achieve consistency and coordination (Farndale et al., 2010). Developing countries also face competitive pressures to implement best practices to participate and upgrade in the global economy.

Several factors drive the worldwide convergence of HRM practices. The expansion of MNCs with globally integrated operations enables rapid diffusion of uniform policies and procedures internationally (Ralston et al., 1997). Advances in information and communication technologies facilitate efficient transfer of HRM knowledge and best practices across borders (Sparrow, 2006). The hegemony of US MNCs sees American-style HRM practices proliferate worldwide, such as performance-related pay and talent management (Pudelko and Harzing, 2007). Business education globalizes around standard curricula grounded in universalist best practice models (Dibben, 2010). Developing countries often lack locally evolved HRM traditions so import Western models perceived as superior or 'modern' (Noorderhaven and Harzing, 2003). International recruitment spreads practices as managers move between countries.

However, divergence theorists contend significant national differences remain deeply embedded due to enduring institutional and cultural factors (Brewster, 2007). National culture shapes assumptions and norms about appropriate people management through characteristics like individualism-collectivism, power distance, masculinity-femininity (Newman and Nollen, 1996). Formal institutions including regulations, trade unions, and education systems exhibit strong path dependencies and rigidity that restrict convergence (Gooderham et al., 1999). For instance, contrasting labour laws shape recruitment and dismissal processes. Transferring best practices globally can prove inefficient if contextual needs are ignored (Farndale and Paauwe, 2007). Domestic firms face institutional and cultural barriers to importing foreign HRM models.

Cross-vergence theory synthesizes elements of both views (Ralston et al., 1997). It proposes a hybridization process where practices partially converge around transnational norms but retain some adaptation to local customs. MNCs transfer core universal practices globally to achieve coordination and consistency but customize others to suit national contexts (Farndale et al., 2010).

Countries adopt certain internationally legitimated HRM elements like performance-related pay but blend them with traditional preferences shaped by national culture, such as more collective approaches to appraisal (Vaiman and Brewster, 2015). This multiplicity of forces generates complex, uneven patterns of convergence, divergence and glocalization.

Cross-vergence recognizes globalisation dynamics stimulate some universalization of practices through MNCs, business education and competitive pressures. However, significant national differences persist due to enduring institutional and cultural traditions ( Brewster, 2007). Globalization does not simply overwrite embedded social frameworks. The interplay between these countervailing forces fosters variable, contested outcomes between convergence and divergence across countries, sectors and firms. HRM practices undergo ‘complex hybridization’ rather than wholesale convergence or persistence of national models (McGaughey and De Cieri, 1999). Collectiv e bargaining is decentralized and enterprise-based (Brewster, 2007).

In sum, cross-vergence theory emphasizes the need for nuanced analysis of how the global interacts with the local. It provides a sophisticated perspective attuned to the complex, fluid interplay between standardization and contextual adaptation. For HRM research and practice, a contextualized perspective recognizing enduring diversity alongside some selective transfer of global practices is imperative.

HRM in the UK

The UK's highly developed economy is grounded in an Anglo-Saxon cultural tradition emphasizing individualism, low power distance and uncertainty avoidance (Newman and Nollen, 1996). This manifests in a focus on flexibility and individual responsibility at work. The voluntarist institutional framework restricts state intervention, prioritizing employer/employee relations.

These features shape UK HRM practices. Selection stresses evaluating individual competencies

and motivation rather than relationships (Huo et al., 2002). Appraisals prioritize individual

performance measurement against objectives, with remuneration tightly coupled to performance

outcomes (Vaiman and Brewster, 2015). Talent management emphasizes individual potential,

including through assessment centres and fast-tracking graduates (Iles et al., 2010). An

individualistic culture dominates, seen in the self-reliance expected of workers.

However, institutional divergences persist between sectors (Whitley, 2001). The voluntarist

employment relations system allows variations in firm-level practices. Sectors like finance with

weak unions emphasize performance-focused individualism and merit pay, contrasting with the

public sector's more collective practices like seniority-based promotion (Gospel and Pendleton,

2005). Despite globalization, path dependencies rooted in domestic institutions continue to foster

diversity in HRM.

Critics argue the individualistic model causes problems like short-termism and excessive

executive pay (Dore, 2000). Strong social norms can partly compensate for weak institutions in

engendering responsible corporate behavior, but reforms may be needed to curb excesses (Deakin et al., 2002). However, the UK remains wedded to a unitarist, individualistic HRM

approach rooted in its institutional and cultural traditions.

In summary, the UK exemplifies an individualistic HRM model but some diversity persists due to

sectoral variations in institutions. Globalization has not erased national path dependencies.

Ongoing debates continue around correcting social inequities caused by this highly market-

driven model.

HRM in Nigeria

Nigeria represents a rapidly developing African country, with cultural values emphasizing

collectivism, high power distance and uncertainty avoidance (Kuada, 2010). Interdependence,

hierarchy and risk aversion are stressed in the predominant cultural traditions (Ahiazu, 1986).

The institutional framework remains relatively underdeveloped, with limited state welfare provisions and weak regulation of employment relations compared to Western economies (Wood

et al., 2014). Unions are less coordinated and influential than in mature industrial relations systems.

These factors shape distinctive Nigerian HRM practices. Selection relies heavily on vetting candidates’ reliability through network referencing to determine trustworthiness, reflecting collectivist norms of interdependency (Aycan, 2005). Appraisals emphasize teamwork, group loyalty and maintaining harmony amongst colleagues and between subordinates and superiors, aligning with the high power distance and collectivist culture (Jackson, 2004). Openly identifying individual talent is culturally taboo, so succession planning is rare (Horwitz et al., 2006). Extensive mentoring and long-term career development are used for retention, suiting high uncertainty avoidance values favoring stability (Wood et al., 2014).

However, modernizing forces create tensions with traditional management approaches. The growth of MNCs and Western management education has seen individualized practices like merit pay emerge, especially in major cities and foreign firms (Ahiazu, 1986). A developing professional management cadre increasing challenges traditional values by driving more results-focused HRM (Jackson, 2004). Nigeria’s strong cultural traditions remain influential but are contested by pressures to adapt to global business norms.

Critics believe that African indigenous values are the roots of the development of the norms which promote employee dedication and harmony without the need for whole westernization (Kuada, 2010; Kamoche et al., 2004). Using shared decision-making and leaders' positions based on status may contribute well to stability and cooperation if used with modern techniques. Global convergence dynamics are unable, and cultural r, ethnocultural retention and creating hybrid models bridging international bridgelences with local excellence.

The local Nigerian HRM keeps with many local traditions but has undergone the process of modernization that is being contested in many aspects. In addition, the multilevel impact of traditional cultural values and institutional legacies, along with the market and globalization pressures on HRM in developing countries, are demonstrated. Such a means is, however, a complex one; it is necessary to go beyond just cultural stereotyping while at the same time

recognizing that indigenous practices are a source of knowledge that can be integrated with the

global knowledge base.

Compare and Contrast: UK and Nigeria

Comparing HRM practices in the UK and Nigeria contexts against an unchanging background

offers a window to change vs. stable dynamics. Recruitment in the area is also very different. UK

independent spirit deems it necessary to evaluate competencies such as literacy, teamwork, and

problem-solving (Gold and Mumford, 2010). However, Nigerian collectivist values may be

relied on greatly to judge the aptitude of the candidates through network referencing (Aycan,

2005).

It is believed that some kinds of convergence arise.. Multinational corporations in Nigeria have

adopted individualised selection practices like assessment centres to evaluate potential talent

(Ahiauzu, 1986). Exposure to Western management education and best practices creates pressure

for practices like structured interviews rather than informal referencing (Wood et al., 2014). This

shows potential hybridisation through adoption of some internationally legitimated selection

methods adapted to retain local customs like referencing.

Performance management also diverges between individualism and collectivism. The UK

emphasises objective, productivity focused appraisal against individual targets, suiting its task-oriented culture (Vaiman and Brewster, 2015). Individual performance related pay reinforces this

focus. Nigeria's collectivist and status-conscious values lead more to seniority-based evaluations

focused on group harmony and loyalty (Jackson, 2004). Open ranking and rewards for individual

achievement might disrupt group solidarity.

Here convergence has been slower, as performance pay contradicts deeply held cultural values (Gelfand et al., 2007). But again, multinationals have pioneered more individualised appraisal and reward practices in Nigeria, potentially signalling gradual hybridisation as elements of Western practice diffuse (Ahiauzu, 1986). Appraisals still focus on group solidarity but include some individual productivity metrics.

Finally, talent management varies between the individualised UK approach and Nigeria’s suspicion towards singling out high-flyers. British individualism legitimises the early identification and accelerated development of stars through schemes like graduate fast-tracking (Iles et al., 2010). Nigeria’s collectivism makes such differentiation taboo, instead emphasising seniority-based advancement and extensive mentoring to retain employees (Horwitz et al., 2006).

Exposure to Western practices has led some convergence around assessment centres to identify management potential. However, in-company development remains egalitarian with limited preferential investment in stars. Deeply rooted cultural values continue to shape a divergent approach focused on retention rather than individualised advancement.

In summary, while some convergence is evident, HRM practices continue to substantially diverge between countries with contrasting cultures. Shared best practices diffuse unevenly and are adapted to fit local customs. Enduring national differences remain despite some hybridisation, supporting divergence and cross-vergence perspectives.

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

Nigeria

in comparison with the below

PDI 80 40

IDV 30 80

MAS 60 62

UAI 55 46

LTO 16 29

Nigeria UK

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

Implications of Convergence, Divergence and Cross-Vergence Theories

Nigeria represents a rapidly developing African country, with cultural values emphasizing collectivism, high power distance and uncertainty avoidance (Kuada, 2010). Interdependence, hierarchy and risk aversion are stressed in the predominant cultural traditions (Ahiauzu, 1986). The institutional framework remains relatively underdeveloped, with limited state welfare provisions and weak regulation of employment relations compared to Western economies (Wood et al., 2014). Unions are less coordinated and influential than in mature industrial relations systems.

However, modernizing forces create tensions with traditional management approaches. The growth of MNCs and Western management education has seen individualized practices like merit pay emerge, especially in major cities and foreign firms (Ahiauzu, 1986). A developing professional management cadre increasing challenges traditional values by driving more results-focused HRM (Jackson, 2004). Nigeria’s strong cultural traditions remain influential but are contested by pressures to adapt to global business norms.

Critics argue that indigenous African values, often overlooked in HRM practices, hold significant potential in satisfying the needs for employee harmony and commitment. These values, when carefully blended with modern techniques, can promote unity and stability. While global homogenization is inevitable, cultural retention allows for the development of hybrids by mixing common best practices with local knowledge, offering a fresh and intriguing perspective.

The HRM in Nigeria, characterized by the localized aspects, the discussions on modernization,

and the global market pressures, is very similar to the HRM in other developing countries as it is

also an intricate matter. However, these issues are complex and should be treated with care so as

not to generalize cultural practices. It became evident that the indigenous ways of life were a

storage of the world's knowledge which one had to understand and accept the complexities;

therefore, was the whole task made.

Conclusion and Critical Reflection

This essay argues that while there is a possibility of convergence in HRM practices between the

UK and Nigeria, divergence is unlikely due to the significant differences in social values and

institutional frameworks. This phenomenon is particularly evident in areas where practices are

less rooted in national culture, such as application processes. The review of talent and its

retention, however, still shows some disparity, underscoring the profound impact of cultural

differences.

These complicated, controversial variations of convergence, divergence and hybridisation

confirm the complex, multidimensional view of the cross-vergence theory. In the face of global

standardisation, the latter also brings persistent underlying causes of variation stemming from

national traditions. HRM research must develop a contextualised analysis that goes beyond very

simple complexity. As in the example of multinationals, they must provide the right combination of standardisation and well-thought-out adaptation to cultural dynamics.

From a critical viewpoint, HRM with diverse local practices developed from indigenous philosophy would be the alternative to the Western mode of HRM in terms of sustainable HRM. Nevertheless, it is vital to avoid cultural reductionism, a simplistic view of society being transformed via the contented processes of societal modernisation in developing countries like Nigeria. The objective is to smooth the transition between global and local processes, and a hybrid model will help.

The contrast between the two distinct nations has been done to present a picture of the actual problems. A profound and complex cross-sectoral picture is created by careful, multilevel analysis involving at least three dimensions: the differences between countries, organisations and occupational groups. Comparative studies focusing on the hybridization of MNCs on the micro level would help uncover the forces of divergence and convergence that operate within organizations at the micro level. Thus, we can conclude that grasping the nature of the global and local levels as complex and dynamic processes and addressing their intricate interdependence is the central topic that requires attention in further HRM research.

References

Ahiazu, A.I. (1986) 'Towards an African theory of management', International Studies of

Management & Organization, 16(2), pp. 37-63. Available

at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40396944 [Accessed 15 April 2024].

Aycan, Z. (2005) 'The interplay between cultural and institutional/structural contingencies in

human resource management practices', The International Journal of Human Resource

Management, 16(7), pp. 1083-1119. Available

at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09585190500143956 [Accessed

13 April 2024].

Bjorkman, I. and Budhwar, P. (2007) 'When in Rome...?: Human resource management and the

performance of foreign firms operating in India', Employee Relations, 29(6), pp. 595-

610. Available at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/01425450710826122/full/html [Accessed 14 April 2024].

Farndale, E. and Paauwe, J. (2007) 'Uncovering competitive and institutional drivers of HRM

practices in multinational corporations', Human Resource Management Journal, 17(4), pp. 355-

375. Available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1748-8583.2007.00047.x [Accessed 17 April 2024].

Farndale, E., Scullion, H. and Sparrow, P. (2010) 'The role of the corporate HR function in global talent management', Journal of World Business, 45(2), pp. 161-168. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090951609000383 [Accessed 27 April 2024].

Gamble, J. (2010) 'Transferring human resource practices from the United Kingdom to China:

the limits and potential for convergence', The International Journal of Human Resource

Management, 21(15), pp. 2659-2682. Available

at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09585192.2010.509625 [Accessed

18 April 2024].

Gold, J. and Mumford, A. (2010) Handbook of organizational consultation. John Wiley & Sons.

[Accessed 30 April 2024].

Gooderham, P.N., Nordhaug, O. and Ringdal, K. (1999) 'Institutional and rational determinants

of organizational practices: Human resource management in European firms', Administrative

Science Quarterly, 44(3), pp. 507-531. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2666999 [Accessed 15 April 2024].

Gospel, H. and Pendleton, A. (2005) 'Markets and relationships: finance, governance and labour

in the United Kingdom', in Gospel, H. and Pendleton, A. (eds.) Corporate Governance and

Labour Management: An International Comparison. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 59-92. [Accessed 28 April 2024].

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].

Horwitz, F.M., Budhwar, P.S. and Morley, M.J. (2006) 'Talent management in emerging markets', in Scullion, H. and Collings, D.G. (eds.) Global Talent Management. London: Routledge, pp. 500-519. [Accessed 25 April 2024].

Huo, Y.P., Huang, H.J. and Napier, N.K. (2002) 'Divergence or convergence: A cross-national comparison of personnel selection practices', Human Resource Management, 41(1), pp. 31-44. Available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/hrm.10018 [Accessed 20 April 2024].

Jackson, T. (2004) Management and Change in Africa: A Cross-cultural Perspective. London: Routledge. [Accessed 29 April 2024].

Jones, A. (2010) Globalization: Key Thinkers. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. [Accessed 30 April 2024].

Kuada, J. (2010) 'Culture and leadership in Africa: a conceptual model and research agenda', African Journal of Economic and Management Studies, 1(1), pp. 9-24. Available at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/20400701011028176/full/html [Accessed 26 April 2024].

Milanovic, B. (2016) Global Inequality: A New Approach for the Age of Globalization. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [Accessed 21 April 2024].

Morley, M., Brewster, C. and Chung, C. (2019) The Management of People Across Cultures: Valuing People Differently. London: Routledge. [Accessed 23 April 2024].

Newman, K.L. and 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. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/155553 [Accessed 11 April 2024].

Noorderhaven, N.G. and Harzing, A.W. (2003) 'The role of headquarters in multinational enterprises', in Ambos, B., Pedersen, T. and Sleuwaegen L. (eds.) The Internationalization of the Firm. London: Routledge, pp. 185-206. [Accessed 16 April 2024].

Pudelko, M. and 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. Available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/hrm.20181 [Accessed 14 April 2024].

Ralston, D.A., Holt, D.H., Terpstra, R.H. and 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. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/155553 [Accessed 16 April 2024].

Rodrik, D. (2011) The Globalization Paradox: Why Global Markets, States, and Democracy Can't Coexist. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Accessed 25 April 2024].

Sparrow, P.R. (2006) 'Global knowledge management and HRM', in Harvey, M. and Novicevic, M.M. (eds.) The Blackwell Handbook of Global Management: A Guide to Managing Complexity. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 103-119. [Accessed 22 April 2024].

Tomlinson, J. (1999) Globalization and Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [Accessed 20 April 2024].

Tsui, A.S. (2007) 'From homogenization to pluralism: International management research in the academy and beyond', Academy of Management Journal, 50(6), pp. 1353-1364.

Available at: https://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/amj.2007.28166219 [Accessed 28 April 2024].

Vaiman, V. and Brewster, C. (2015) 'How far do cultural differences explain the differences between nations? Implications for HRM', The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 26(2), pp. 151-164. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09585192.2014.937969 [Accessed 10 April 2024].

Whitley, R. (2001) 'How and why are international firms different? The consequences of cross-border managerial coordination for firm characteristics and behaviour', in Morgan, G., Kristensen, P.H. and Whitley, R. (eds.) The Multinational Firm: Organizing Across Institutional and National Divides. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 27-68. [Accessed 17 April 2024].

Wood, G.T., Mazouz, K. and Yin, S. (2014) 'Foreign direct investment from emerging markets to Africa: the HRM context', Human Resource Management, 53(1), pp. 179-197. Available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hrm.21578 [Accessed 12 April 2024].