The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0306-8293.htm

IJSE
34,6 Human resource management and
Native people: a checklist of
concerns and responses
374
Alf H. Walle
Abstract
Purpose The paper aims to show that human resource management professionals need to consider
the uniqueness of Native, indigenous, and traditional people.
Design/methodology/approach A number of key issues demanding attention are analyzed in a
non-exhaustive discussion of relevant topics.
Findings The paper finds that organizations may lack the perspectives, insights, and skills they
need to effectively respond to the needs and demands of employees/potential employees who are
members of Native, indigenous, and traditional cultures.
Originality/value This paper provides a timely discussion of this important topic in ways that have
immediate practitioner application as well as suggesting additional research, dialogue, and thought.
Keywords Communities, Culture, Developing countries, Human resource management, Research
Paper type Conceptual paper

International Journal of Social
Economics
Vol. 34 No. 6, 2007
pp. 374-387
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0306-8293
DOI 10.1108/03068290710751795
Introduction
There was a time when most Western organizations did not require sophisticated
strategies for dealing with distinct cultural enclaves because contact with such people
was minimal. Some local individuals may have been hired, but they were usually
employed in relatively menial positions and little attempt was made to address their
needs in concrete and systematic ways. These people, even when hired, were seldom
fully integrated into the organization.
That old pattern is rapidly changing. One significant cause of this transformation is
the fact firms increasingly seek to do business within the hinterland. Various goods
and raw materials, for example, are most readily available in developing areas that are
peopled by distinct cultural enclaves. In the contemporary world, these people usually
possess a sophisticated understanding of the value of the commodities they control
(such as oil, minerals, timber, etc.) and they gain power and negotiating clout as a
result. When companies seek concessions and contracts, local people increasingly
make demands that include employment opportunities for local people.
Rural populations and ethnic enclaves increasingly have access to skilled
negotiators who broker deals on their behalf; as a result, the issue of jobs for local
people often arises. Native people can no longer be easily exploited. Although legend
tells us that White settlers bought Manhattan Island for a mere $24, such bargains are
no longer available.
Because more and more people in developing countries have the income they need to
buy products that were once out of reach, outside firms are reaching out to a wider
range of consumers, including Native, traditional, and indigenous people. The services
of local people may be needed to effectively attract and satisfy these new target
markets. Human resource professionals must recruit and deal with such employees.
 For a variety of reasons, many firms hope to replace expatriates with local Human resource
employees in order to save money. In countries that are not largely Westernized, this management and
process of hiring locally can result in members of distinct ethnic groups joining the
organization. Under such circumstances, human resource specialists need to skillfully Native people
deal with a wider variety of people, not merely those who have become Westernized
in their attitudes, perspectives, and ways of life. This paper addresses such issues.
375
Who are we talking about?
Although the terms Native indigenous and traditional have specific meanings
that can be important to human resource professionals, confusion often exists
regarding exactly what these terms mean. As a result, a brief discussion is provided.
The term Native (with a capital N) typically refers to people (and their
descendents) who lived in an area immediately before the current era of Western
expansion. American Indians, the Maori of New Zealand, and Native Hawaiians are
representative examples of Native people. The term native (with a small n) refers to
someone who was born and/or raised in an area, but is descended from later immigrants.
Thus, a White person born and raised in New Zealand would be a native while a Maori
would be a Native.
The term Indigenous typically refers to Native people who face (or once faced)
some sort of mistreatment, discrimination, or handicap as a result of their racial and/or
cultural identity. Consider the following definition provided by Wiessner (1999, p. 60):
. . . indigenous people are best described as groups traditionally regarded, and self-defined, as
descendants of the original inhabitants of the lands . . . These people are and desire to be
culturally, socially and/or economically distinct from the dominant groups in society,
at whose hands they have suffered, in past or present, a pervasive pattern of subjugation,
marginalization, dispossession, exclusion, and dispossession.
Not all Native people are indigenous. The people of Iceland, for example, certainly
fit the criteria of Native people because they are descended from the first human
inhabitants of the region. They, however, control their government and are not
persecuted or treated as second-class citizens. Thus, Icelanders, do not fit the criteria of
indigenous (as described in the definition above) even though they are indisputably
Native.
Besides the terms Native and indigenous a third term is traditional people.
Traditional people may or may not be descended from the original population of a
region. And, perhaps, traditional people face minimal discrimination. But these
people still possess a culture that gives them a distinctiveness that is recognized
both by themselves and by outsiders. A classic example of non-Native traditional
people is Appalachian hill folk of the Southeastern USA. Being descendants of White
immigrants of the eighteenth century, they are not Native. Although some prejudice
against them may exist (outsiders often depict them using derogatory terms such as
hillbilly poor White trash and red neck), Appalachians are not systematically
discriminated against in a pervasive manner that parallels the experiences of many
indigenous people. Nevertheless, traditional people (such as Appalachian hill folk)
share many of the concerns and pressures that are faced by Native and indigenous
people. Their members, for example, often complain that their culture is being
overwhelmed by the modern world and by the intrusions of outsiders.
IJSE When Native and indigenous people practice a lifestyle that is traditional and distinct
34,6 from the mainstream population, they may simultaneously be traditional people. Thus,
the term traditional people refers to lifestyle, Native people refers to descendants of
the original populations that maintain a distinctiveness that can be identified, while
indigenous people is a term that is reserved for Native people who face (or have
historically faced) discrimination, hardship, etc. because of their racial/ethnic identity.
376 These terms are important because ethnic and cultural enclaves may possess
distinct, priorities, rights, privileges, etc. that firms need to consider and address.
By being aware of these orientations and the demands that stem from them, human
resource professionals can be more effective when dealing with Native, indigenous, and
traditional people.

Opportunities, respect, and optimum utilization

People tend to judge others by their own yardstick and evaluate them accordingly.
This tendency can create profound challenges for those who are different from the
dominant Westerners with whom they interact. Not fitting the mold can lead to
situations where local people are unable to make important contributions to the
organization and be recognized as significant participants.
Human resource professionals need to embrace a leadership role in order to create
an environment where Native, indigenous, and traditional people are treated with the
parity and dignity they deserve as they help the organization to achieve its mission.
Doing so is morally correct as well as being a good organizational strategy.
Westerners often have trouble appropriately evaluating and developing appropriate
respect for those who embrace a heritage that is different from their own. I have spent
considerable time in interior Alaska and I recall an older Native individual who the
average Westerner could easily write off as a nobody. He wears old clothes that,
while neat, are worn and mended. He speaks with a heavy accent and his English is
hard to understand. His teeth bear the scars of backwoods neglect. He is soft-spoken
and understated in his manner. To all outward appearances, he is merely a marginal
old fellow, easily and painlessly ignored.
In reality, the man is an honored and respected Elder within his community.
He is astute in his observations and informed in his knowledge. Although seemingly
poor and inconsequential, he is the opinion leader who sways the decisions of the entire
community and its formal decision makers.
Some people who appear to be marginal have great knowledge and the ability to
either serve outside organizations or undercut their goals. Their abilities, however,
might be masked by the fact that they do not have the credentials, education, persona,
etc. that in the West are recognized as indicators of professionalism.
The medical industry that has developed in the West, for example, often views itself
as inherently superior to what came before it. In some ways, this opinion can be
justified. In other circumstances, such feelings of superiority might be an artifact of
unjustified pride. Native, indigenous, and traditional peoples have their own medical
and psychological specialists. These professionals are often very effective when they
are dealing with their own people. Consider a person with psychological
problems, for example. A Native healer would possess cultural insights that are
not available to the Western therapist. This situation would put the Western therapist
at a disadvantage because:
 Both the Western and transcultural approaches . . . support the importance of a shared Human resource
worldview between counselor and client . . . The presence of a shared worldview . . . [can] set
the stage for positive expectations and to allow the healer to offer explanations or rationales management and
for distress that fit with the clients view of the world (Fischer et al., 1998, p. 537). Native people
As a result, the non-Western practitioner would have contributions to make that
cannot be duplicated by Western trained professionals. This reality needs to be
accepted and strategies of therapy need to be built upon it. 377
This observation raises issues regarding how traditional healers should be ranked
within the hierarchy of a healthcare organization. Will Native practitioners be granted
equal standing as fellow professionals on an equal footing with their mainstream
colleagues or will they be dismissed and marginalized because their training does not
reflect Western standards?
In actual practice, these Native healers (skilled and knowledgeable though they
may be) are often treated in a rather shabby manner within medical organizations.
Such problems are discussed at length in Ellerbys (2001, p. 6) Working With
Aboriginal Elders: A Handbook. He observes:
. . . Western ethnocentrism and the perception that Western paradigms are flawless and
superior are factors that lead to the artificial magnification of cultural differences.
Even Westerners who are more enlightened often have trouble evaluating the skills
and abilities of counterparts who come from an entirely different tradition of healing:
. . . many non-Aboriginal professionals have little capacity to gauge the relative skill or ability
of a given Elder. This discrepancy in understanding has ramifications for Aboriginal people
that reach beyond the management of individual patients. Socio-political power relationships
are epitomized and maintained through the cultural dominance of Western practitioners
(Ellerby, 2001, p. 7).
Summarizing his opinions, Ellerby (2001, p. 6) observes:
. . . it has become clear to me that the most common source of cross-cultural conflicts and
problems is a lack of cultural education on the part of non-Aboriginal institutional staff
and professionals.
Thus, Ellerby notes that indigenous practitioners are often not treated in a respectful
manner and their insights are often not taken seriously. This has often had dire results
for the organization, the Native practitioner, and (most importantly) the patients/clients
that the organization serves:
The lack of recognition on the part of institutional personnel regarding the need for an Elders
professional development and personal support often leads Elders to burnout or become unable
to continue to work in health care settings. Poor understanding and compromise around these
issues has led to a high turn over of Elders in many institutions (Ellerby, 2001, p. 44).
Nonetheless, as Fischer et al. (1998) observe, successful therapy often depends upon
the therapists possessing a similar worldview to that of the patients/clients. Thus,
a significant input from Native healers may be an essential ingredient of treatment.
Apparently, the low status given to Native healers within Western-dominated
organizations is inhibiting effective treatment provided to patients. This is because
the creation of an uncomfortable or even hostile work environment undercuts the
effectiveness of Native healers.
IJSE Not just complaining, Ellerby goes on to provide suggestions regarding how to
34,6 encourage teamwork and he provides guidelines regarding how to interact with local
healers in an appropriate way. Sections are included, for example, on hiring,
compensating, and evaluating local practitioners as well as how to make them feel that
they are a respected part of the health care team.
The basic point I want to make is that on many occasions, members of the Western
378 healing professions have not developed the ability to work effectively with their local
counterparts, even though these people have significant contributions to make.
The suggestions that Ellerby makes can help human resource professionals to
more effective and appropriately deal with Native healers and parallel individuals.
Human resource management should, where appropriate, develop guidelines, provide
orientations regarding how to interact with local healers, better define the role
Native healers have within the organization and therapeutic process, establish the
status to which they will be entitled, etc. In a situation where Western medical
professionals have been unable to create the cooperative atmosphere that is so badly
needed, perhaps, the human resource management profession can make a positive
contribution in this vital area.
In a second example that transcends the human services industry, Krupnik and
Jollys (2002) The Earth is Moving Faster Now: Indigenous Observations of Artic
Environmental Change demonstrates the benefits that can gained when Western
scientists and Native people work together in a spirit of partnership, equity, and parity.
The research project discussed in . . . Moving Faster . . . shows how it is possible to
structure research in ways that taps the insights and wisdom of all who are involved
in the project and treats all stakeholders in a respectful manner. In that book,
Jose Kusugak, a Native Inuit leader observes:
[The] Inuit can provide the rest of society with useful and timely information because we are
at the forefront where the impacts and effects of climate change are felt and may be the most
severe (vii).
Native people are able to make such contributions when they interact on a level
playing field. Human resource professionals may have a vital role in creating this kind
of environment. Doing so can enhance the effectiveness of the organization.

Legal matters
When dealing with Native, indigenous, and traditional people, certain legal issues often
require attention. In order to provide a general discussion, this paper avoids a detailed
analysis of the unique laws of specific countries regarding Native or indigenous people
even though such topics are very important. In the USA, for example, Indians who are
members of recognized tribes are accorded special rights that human resource
professionals need to address. People of Indian descent who are not members of such
Native political entities, however, do not enjoy these special privileges. And while Indians
receive special treatment, Native Hawaiians (another Native/indigenous people in the
USA) do not. Traditional people without a Native or indigenous heritage tend to have no
special rights. Remember, every country is different; human resource professionals need
to check local laws when doing business in a specific country or region[1].
Some legal relationships, such as those involving intellectual property rights,
might uniquely impact relationships with Native, indigenous, and traditional people
while others (drug testing, criminal records, etc.) may involve all employees in the Human resource
organization. A sampling of both unique and generic legal issues is discussed. management and
Native people
Intellectual property rights
Organizations hire employees in order to tap their expertise. What the employee
discovers or contributes typically becomes the property of the employer. Thus,
if employees write a computer program, discover a chemical formula, etc. that 379
information typically becomes the property of the company that hired them.
When Native, indigenous, or traditional people contribute certain types of
information, however, the situation may become complicated because of the evolving
nature of intellectual property rights. This issue needs to be considered by human
resource professionals. Although local variations can be found, a general pattern does
exist. According to the mainstream legal system that operates internationally and is
based on the Western legal tradition, when people discover or create something, they
(or the organization they work for) are usually able to protect, own, and profit from this
knowledge. These intellectual property rights can be very valuable.
The issue of who owns certain rights can become very complicated when
dealing with Native, indigenous, or traditional people because the mainstream system
of intellectual property is centered around the individual while in many local
communities intellectual property is collectively owned by some the members of
specific group or the culture as an entity. This difference between the local traditions
of intellectual property and that of the mainstream legal system can create difficulties
that need to be addressed.
If a firm hires local a person in order gain access to information, will the firm own
the information that is provided by the employee? Maybe so, maybe not.
If the hiring organization seeks to patent or copyright the information provided by
such employees, for example, challengers may point out that this knowledge is actually
a part of a long cultural tradition and, therefore, it is in the public domain and cannot be
protected by intellectual property rights. In addition, questions might arise regarding if
employees actually own the information that they provide to the organization or if
they merely have access to collectively owned information that they did not have the
right to give it to a third party. Increasingly, such issues are being considered and
organizations need to address them.
Facing these circumstances, Native, indigenous, and traditional communities often
seek to systematically protect their intellectual property. Many local communities, for
example, are creating committees that are responsible for dealing with outsiders when
issues involving intellectual property arise. Such committees often negotiate with
outsiders, provide advice and leadership to the community and its members, create
standardized forms that outsiders must sign before conducting research, etc. When
organizations seek to do business in such communities, they may be required to honor
some sort of intellectual property rights guidelines stipulated by the local population.
As a result, human resource professionals may need to assess the degree to which
employees or potential employees have the right to transfer ownership of the
knowledge that they provide. By taking action in this important area, human resource
professionals can protect the assets (knowledge) that firms seek to acquire by formally
creating relationships with those who have the right to make decisions regarding the
transfer of such knowledge.
IJSE Special rights due to a Native or indigenous heritage
34,6 Certain Native and indigenous people have special rights because of their status.
According to Walleri (2005), a lawyer working in Interior Alaska who has many
Native clients, observes that Native Americans who are members of recognized tribes
or bands possess certain rights and privileges due to their status at tribal members.
Native Hawaiians, in contrast, do not enjoy these same rights. The Maori of
380 New Zealand currently enjoy special rights, but they are controversial and are being
challenged by political action. Because Native and indigenous people may have special
rights, human resource professionals need to be aware of relevant laws, policies,
regulations, etc. that impact the situation.

Generic legal issues

Organizations are increasingly adopting overarching standards regarding employees.
In general, human resource professionals often seek uniformity so that all people are
treated in approximately the same manner. Doing so is a good policy that helps insure
parity and equity throughout the organization.
Drug testing and screening employees/potential employees for criminal records are
examples that readily come to mind. In many cases, firms justifiably want the entire
organization to be held by a universal standard, and they have a right to set up such
requirements for employment. Nonetheless, organizations need to clearly communicate
these policies to all people at every stage in negotiation. As a result, human resource
professionals need to be involved in a project from its inception.
Wright et al. (2005) have noted that when deals are being made between Native
peoples and outside firms, a corporate negotiation team typically makes all sorts of
promises regarding the possibility of jobs for the local population. A rosy picture is
painted and the community is told that Native candidates will be given a priority
during the hiring process. The deal is signed and the community anticipates a
considerable number of Native people will get good jobs.
When hiring time comes, the organization, while keeping its promises, may act in
ways that shock and disappoint the community as many potential Native employees
are rejected because they cannot pass a drug test and/or have a criminal record that
disqualifies them from consideration. As a result, the jobs originally earmarked for the
local community go to outsiders.
Wright et al. do not complain about the fact that organizations have requirements
for employment (such as being drug free, etc.), but they are concerned that this
information (while perhaps being available somewhere in the small print of the
contract or in some obscure employee handbook) is usually not forcefully
acknowledged during negotiations. The observation was made that, in most cases,
only negotiators from the firm were available when the contract was being brokered.
And these negotiators were responsible for selling the deal and, therefore, they were
not motivated to point out any aspects of the firms policies that might work against
the best interests of the community or its members. Human resource professionals
arrive after the fact to (among other things) enforce company policies that work against
the interests of Native applicants. As a result, communities are disappointed and they
feel seduced and abandoned by the company they have partnered with. Local people
might may vent their anger at human resource professionals and blame them for a
situation they did not create.
 Wright et al. suggest that human resource professionals should be involved at every Human resource
stage of a project (including negotiations). While Wright et al. acknowledge that management and
companies have a right to set reasonable and uniform standards for employees,
they also affirm that communities should be provided with a full understanding of the Native people
implications of the proposed deal. Sadly, this often does not occur.
Thus, in a number of ways, the organizations human resource management policies
have a significant impact upon Native, indigenous, and traditional communities. As a 381
result, human resource professionals need to be included throughout the entire
negotiation process.

Adjusting work to the needs of Native people

Within human resource management, there is currently a great emphasis upon
devising new and flexible ways to structure work in order to meet the needs, desires,
and lifestyles of employees. Many people in the industrialized West, for example,
currently benefit from innovations regarding work that historically have not been
available. As a result, people have a wider variety of employment options. This is good.
Examples of this trend include flextime and a condensed workweek in which
employees are given a degree of freedom in choosing when they work. Some employees
select a schedule of ten hours a day for four days in order to gain a three-day weekend.
Besides a condensed workweek, employees might start work at non-traditional hours
and, thereby, avoid traffic jams and the rush hour. This trend has become significant;
in 2002, it was reported that almost 60 percent of major firms have some type of
flextime arrangement (Hewitt Associates, 2003). As a result, people are better able to
enjoy a particular lifestyle and/or avoid problems that otherwise would exist.
Telecommuting is the process of working from a remote location and keeping
connected to the job via a computer network. Doing so can permit employees to stay at
home and only visit the office when required for some special reason. In recent years,
this innovation has emerged as an important option that keeps employees productive
even though they work in a non-traditional setting. Some employees (such as mothers
with small children), for example, may be important contributors to the firm, but have
commitments that prevent them from functioning in an on-site 8 to 5 work
arrangement. Telecommuting provides a more flexible way for employees to meet their
obligations. This manner of adjusting work around the needs, priorities, and
preferences of the employee has been lauded as both employee-friendly and a good use
of human resources.
The concept of job sharing involves dividing one fulltime position among more
than one person. Benefits are typically allocated on some kind of prorated basis that is
agreed to by all. The work is divided up in a manner that is agreeable to the employees
and to management. Job sharing is ideal for people who want to work, but are not
available on a full time basis.
These innovative options are mentioned in order to affirm that organizations
actively pursue ways to adjust employees responsibilities in ways that fit their needs
and lifestyles. Perhaps these and other innovations can be embraced in order to help
qualified Native, indigenous, and traditional employees serve organizations in
productive and on-going ways.
The assertion is often made that Native, indigenous, and traditional people tend
to be poor and irresponsible employees who do not fit into the organization.
IJSE The problems that arise when hiring with these employees are often showcased in
34,6 order to draw the conclusion that they are not dedicated to the job or the organization
and, as a result, they should be avoided. A reference, for example, is often made to
so-called Indian time in order to emphasize that Native people cannot keep schedules,
forget to go to work, fail to honor commitments, etc. Such observations are often used
to justify the decision to hire outsiders and/or to make a minimal effort to recruit local
382 people of Native descent.
On many occasions, in contrast, Native people are motivated to be good, stable,
and long-term employees. Nonetheless, these same people may have other
commitments that prevent them from fitting into a classic 8 to 5, five day a week
schedule. As a result, they often fail to work out as employees.
In Alaska, for example, many individuals structure their economic and material
well-being around a subsistence lifestyle. In other words, much of their livelihood is
earned by hunting, fishing, and trapping. When this is true, the individual has no
choice except to fish when the salmon are swimming upstream, etc. The rhythms of
nature, not the schedules of the organization are the dominant forces that dictate what
people will do and when they will do it. These individuals cannot let a carved in
granite job schedule interfere with their subsistence priorities.
Some organizations may insist that this situation prevents hiring Native employees,
even if they are bright, hard-working, and motivated. On the other hand, these same
companies may have a system where a woman who is following the rhythms of her
reproductive cycle is able to telecommute or engage in job sharing in order to care for
young children at home, etc. If the needs of these mainstream employees can be
accommodated with innovative work arrangements, why cannot the needs and
challenges of Native, indigenous, and traditional people be taken into account?
Care might need to be taken, however, in order to be sure that the strategies of the
firm continue to reflect good business practices. Native-owned corporations that
routinely hire their own stakeholders as employees, for example, may suffer when good
business practices are sidestepped in order to address other priorities.
A Native organization that is heavily involved in tourism, for example, lost a
significant amount of money in 2000 and the losses continued in 2001 after the 9/11
tragedy (Plenda, 2001). Ultimately, the layoff of a significant number of workers took
place.
Clues suggest that this action was overdue. Before the crisis triggered by 9/11, the
firm had not taken any steps to reduce its managerial staff even though new
accounting software allowed fewer people to do the same work (Plenda, 2001). Various
managerial workers had 12-month positions even though the tourism season is
only three months long (Plenda, 2001). The human resource manager of the firm
justified this policy by observing:
Weve always kept these people through the winter in order to keep the talent we have even if
there wasnt much for them to do (Plenda, 2001).
A clue to why the corporation operated the way it did is provided by a comment by the
director of human resources who observed:
Its hard to quantify what we are losing . . . This has a real human quality to it because
they were not only employees but also shareholders . . . To my thinking its been terrible.
Its still fresh and its been very emotional around here (Plenda, 2001).
This comment raises questions regarding the degree to which the Native corporation Human resource
had fallen into a pattern of making human resource decisions for reasons that extend management and
beyond good business practice. Was the corporation making unwise decisions in order
to provide jobs to stakeholders and to be a good corporate citizen? While every attempt Native people
should be made to accommodate all employees and potential employees, their tenure on
the job needs to be based on the contribution they are making. While a concern for the
community and shareholders is fine, emotions must not get in the way of good 383
business practices.
The point is that many Native firms seek to serve the community and its members
by providing jobs. While this is laudable, care must be taken to insure efficiency and
profitability. Some decisions are painful and all the harder to make within a small and
close-knit community.
In summary, many Native, indigenous, and traditional people need a wage-paying
job even though they pursue other economic activities (such as practicing a subsistence
way of life). Organizations may be able to advance their own interests as well as serving
the local community by developing ways to tap the skills and talents of these people,
instead of rejecting them as unsuited for employment. An enlightened and innovative
use of existing methods (such as flextime, job sharing, etc.) can go a long way in helping
Native, indigenous, and traditional employees join firms as productive and valued
employees. As discussed above, mainstream workers often benefit from such options
and firms often brag about offering them. The time has come to provide similar
opportunities for Native, indigenous, and traditional people. To do otherwise is to refuse
to grant parity and equity to the Native, indigenous, and traditional community.

Career development
Many Native, indigenous, and traditional people are highly motivated; they want
careers, not just jobs. These workers hope to win promotions and they seek interesting
jobs where they can make a difference in addition to earning a decent wage. While
this is true, Native, indigenous, and traditional people often have other priorities and
responsibilities that might inhibit their career development. Many of these people,
for example, are committed to remaining within their local community. Such choices
can work against Native, indigenous, and traditional people in ways that hurt both the
employee and the firm.
Consider a hypothetical company that has a training program that requires that
a managerial trainee program be completed before the individual is eligible for a
significant promotion. Multi-year managerial trainee positions often entail frequent
relocation in order for the incumbent to visit various divisions of the company and
work in a number of different locations. The company hopes this experience will groom
the trainees into well-rounded employees that will be more effective on the job and
more valuable to the company. The ability to win a meaningful promotion often
depends upon the successful completion of such an assignment.
Native, indigenous, and traditional employees in a rural area, however, may have
such close ties to the community that they are unavailable to leave home for an
extended period of time. These people are likely to find themselves at a plateau in low,
menial, and dead end positions no matter how motivated, intelligent and hard
working they may be. This is because only outsiders (who have completed the
managerial training) will be eligible to be promoted to positions of responsibility.
IJSE Such an employment development policy might cause problems. Outsiders who
34,6 come into the area (perhaps a rural area off the beaten track) may not be happy in their
new environment; this can result in a high level of turnover among the management
team. Even when on the job, these outsiders may lack an understanding the
community and its people and be ineffective. This situation can work against the best
interests of the company. If true opportunities do not exist for local employees,
384 furthermore, they are likely to become demoralized, such attitudes and feelings can
hurt the firm. If corporate policies allow local people to rise up the corporate ladder
(at least locally) without being forced to relocate, the situation could be greatly
improved and the firm could benefit. This would be a win-win situation for all.
Many employees/potential employees who may want to do well and contribute, may
have other competing responsibilities. As mentioned above, those who live a
subsistence lifestyle are not available for a straight 8 to 5 a day, 50 weeks a year job.
Because these people have other commitments, however, does not mean that these
people are marginal employees to be kept in the most menial of positions. This raises
the issue: can human resource professionals create a situation where these people can
enjoy career development opportunities even though they choose a non-traditional
niche in the company?
On many occasions, companies help employees or potential employees to develop
their skills in order to be employable and/or gain promotions. While doing so is good,
care needs to be exercised. Wright et al. mention programs where Native people have
been given significant job training in anticipation of jobs. This is good. We also saw
that after these people successfully completed their training they were rejected because
they could not pass a drug test. The complaint was made that the firms human
resource professionals did not forcefully alert these people regarding the drug-testing
requirement and its implications. Sad stories abound in which Native Alaskans have
worked hard in a training program and mastered a skill only to be rejected because of
a drug test that had a positive result. The pain and shame that occurs in such
situations is staggering and deflating.
The author of this paper has earned a degree in substance abuse management and
he is aware that different drugs stay in the body for varying periods of time. Alcohol is
burned by the body and mixes with water that will be flushed out of the body in a short
period. Marijuana, in contrast, settles in the fatty tissues of the body and, as a result,
it can be detected by drug tests long after the use of the drug has stopped. These are
facts that those who face drug tests need to consider.
When employees/potential employees seek training in order to gain a job, human
resource professionals should make trainees aware of any drug tests that may be
required. In addition, human resource professionals need to advise these people
regarding how long various drugs will remain in the system and how long they can
be detected. An individual who is gaining training in order to get a job is probably
willing to quit using drugs use in order to take advantage of an attractive employment
opportunity. These people, however, may need to know how long they will test positive
after they stop using drugs so they can quit in time to pass the test. Many people,
unfortunately, are unaware that certain drugs can be detected long after use stops.
Human resource professionals need to provide this information. Doing so is not helping
people to skirt the law; it is creating a level playing field for people as they seek to
change their lives by gaining a good job.
Employee and community well-being Human resource
A few years ago, Alaska Native Napoleon (1996) wrote a short book that detailed some management and
of the pain and disruption experienced by his people, the Yupik. In the old days,
Napoleon observes that much of the pain felt by Native Alaskans was caused by Native people
horrible events such as epidemics of killer diseases and terrible poverty. It is easy to
see how these events and circumstances caused unhappiness and despair.
Napoleon, however, also notes that in recent years poverty has largely been eliminated 385
and the material well-being of Native people has risen dramatically. The plagues of the
early twentieth century, furthermore, are history. Nonetheless, Napoleon laments that a
terrible unhappiness seems to hang over his people and many other Native communities.
The pain is so bad that in recent years the suicide rate has risen at an alarming rate and
substance abuse has reached epidemic proportions within the Native community. Such
responses are indicators of unhappiness, stress, depression, and hopelessness.
Napoleon reminds us that happiness and a good quality of life are not merely
dependent upon the material well-being that a job can provide. Human resource
professionals need to keep this fact in mind when their companies enter a region and
provide employment to local people.
Social and economic change can cause pain even if the end result is for the good. Thus,
Appell (1977, p. 14) has observed, A society undergoing change . . . has a right to access to
its cultural traditions, its language, and its social history. Appell feels that people
experiencing change often suffer from what he calls the social separation syndrome.
This term refers to the pain and dysfunctional responses that occur when people are cut off
from their heritage. Economic changes triggered by new economic development projects
and the jobs they bring can be a source of this stress even if they simultaneously bring
many benefits. Human resource professionals need be aware of whatever negative
influences the company creates as well as the benefits employees and the community
receive. Human resource professionals have a significant role to play in mitigating any
negative impacts triggered by the company and the jobs it brings to the community.
Enlightened human resource professionals need to predict these hurtful outcomes
and take actions that mitigate them. According to observers, such as Cushman (1990),
contemporary people face profound social change; he continues by observing that we
live in an era of increased urbanization, secularization, and industrialization. Families,
traditions, and the age-old sense of community have begun to lose their strength due to
the massive impersonal forces of the modern world. These changes can result in what
Cushman calls the empty self that he describes as an increased distance from
significant others and the eclipse of meaningful world-views that could, otherwise, help
people to cope with the challenges they face.
When outside firms enter a rural area, the degree of change and stress is likely to be
far more powerful than in the mainstream world that Cushman writes about. Human
resource professionals need to act in a forceful manner in order to minimize these
negative impacts on employees, families, and the community at large.
Thus, while economic development plans are often vital, the communitys culture
and heritage are also important. Not only are traditions valuable as ends in themselves,
they often have the power to protect people from the tensions and pain of change. As a
result, this heritage often needs to be protected and nurtured. New economic
development projects and local people starting new careers can be disruptive even
though they are simultaneously beneficial in many ways. Human resource
IJSE professionals need to keep this fact in mind and work so that the pain and disruption
34,6 caused by the firm is minimal and mitigated wherever possible.
When outsiders estimate the cost of doing business, unfortunately, they typically
deal with employees largely as rational beings that correctly calculate the costs and
benefits of the job. Certainly, there is a recognition that people gain some emotional
rewards from their work, but the focus is upon the rational decisions they make that
386 are based on factors of which they are consciously aware. However, this might not be
true. Hopefully, human resource professionals will implement aggressive preventative
strategies in situations where the firm and the employment opportunities it creates
may trigger changes that can be stressful and hurtful.

Discussion and conclusion

The purpose of this paper is to point to a number of important ways in which human
resource management professionals need to be aware of the distinctiveness of Native,
indigenous, and traditional people. Equipped with this information and the
perspectives it creates, more effective strategies that serve the best interest of both
the firm and its employees can be developed.
In order to give the reader of taste of these issues, a number of topics were briefly
discussed including:
.
how to create opportunities that more effectively utilize Native, indigenous, and
traditional people;
.
a discussion of relevant legal issues;
.
a consideration of how jobs can be adjusted to mesh with the needs of the local
community;
.
encouraging appropriate career development aimed at Native, indigenous, and
traditional employees; and
.
implementing strategies that lead to employee and community well-being.

While the topics addressed are not exhaustive, they do point to a number of important
considerations that those in human resource management need to address when they
deal with Native, indigenous, and traditional people. By keeping them in mind,
strategies that serve the firm, its employees, and the larger community can be
established. It is hoped that the discussions above will lay the groundwork for more
substantial consideration of this important issue.

Note
1. My thinking in this area has been influenced by Walleri (2005). Walleri is an Attorney in
Private Practice Working in Fairbanks, Alaska who specialized in Native and rural law. While
I am indebted to Walleri, I have independently written this section using perspectives
provided, in part, by him. Any errors or oversights are mine and they cannot be traced to him.

References
Appell, G.N. (1977), The plight of indigenous people: issues and dilemmas, Survival
International Review, Vol. 2 No. 3.
Cushman, P. (1990), Why the self is empty: towards a historically situated psychology,
American Psychologist, Vol. 45, pp. 599-611.
Ellerby, J. (2001), Working with Aboriginal Elders: An Introductory Handbook, Winnipeg Human resource
Manitoba Native Studies Press/University of Manitoba, Winnipeg.
Fischer, A.R., Jome, L.M. and Atkinson, D.R. (1998), Reconceptualizing multicultural counseling:
management and
universal healing conditions in a culturally specific context, The Counseling Psychologist, Native people
Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 525-88.
Hewitt Associates (2003), Hewitt Study Shows Work/Life Benefits Hold Steady Despite
Depression, Hewitt Associates, Lincolnshire, IL, May 13. 387
Krupnik, I. and Jolly, D. (2002), The Earth is Moving Faster Now: Indigenous Observations of Artic
Environmental Change, Artic Research Consortium of the United States, Fairbanks, AK.
Napoleon, H. (1996), Yuunarag: The Way of Being Human, Alaska Native Knowledge Network,
Fairbanks, AK.
Plenda, M. (2001), Tourism shortfall mean 40 jobs lost from Goldbelt Inc., Alaska Journal of
Commerce, www edition (accessed May 11, 2001)
Walleri, M. (2005), discussion provided to a class (RD 451) on human resource development
taught by Miranda Wright for the University of Alaska, personal communication,
September 19.
Wiessner, S. (1999), Rights and status of indigenous peoples: a global and comparative and
international legal analysis, Harvard Human Rights Journal, Vol. 12.
Wright, M. et al. (2005), Human resource development and native people, college course taught
by Miranda Wright in the Rural Development program of the University of Alaska at
Fairbanks (fall semester).

Further reading
Brascoupe, S. and Erdermann, K. (1999), Intellectual Property and Aboriginal People: A Working
Paper, Minister of Indian Affairs, Ottawa, available online.
Hansen, S. and VanFleet, J. (2003), Traditional Knowledge and Intellectual Property: A Handbook
on Issues and Options for Traditional Knowledge Holders in Protecting their Intellectual
Property and Maintaining Biological Diversity, American Academy for the Advancement
of Science, New York, NY.
Salzman, M.B. (2001), Cultural trauma and recovery: perspectives from terror management
theory, Trauma, Violence, and Abuse, Vol. 2, pp. 172-91.
Walle, A.H. (2004), The Path of Handsome Lake: A Strategy of Recovery for Native People,
Information Age Publishers, Greenwich, CT.

Corresponding author
Alf H. Walle can be contacted at: alfwalle@yahoo.com

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints