The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/0142-5455.htm

An integrative review of SHRM Review of

SHRM
research in South Korea: current research in
Korea
status and future directions
Jinuk Oh 155
University of Guelph, Guelph, Canada, and
Received 17 September 2019
Junsu Park Revised 27 June 2020
Barnard College of Columbia University, New York, New York, USA 22 July 2020
Accepted 23 July 2020

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this study is to determine the current status of strategic human resource
management (SHRM) research in the context of Korea as well as to provide specific recommendations for future
research.
Design/methodology/approach – An integrative literature review was performed to aggregate a body of
studies in the Korean context. In total, 39 articles were carefully selected for inclusion in the present review.
Findings – The review demonstrated that prior studies conducted in Korea have examined whether the
established relationship between strategic human resource (HR) practices and organizational outcomes has
cross-national validity in Korean contexts, the extent to which the established relationship is moderated by
contextual factors, as well as whether a combination of strategic HR practices and the congruence of HR
practices with other organizational factors affect organizational outcomes. In addition, the review revealed four
unique methodological characteristics of Korea-based studies, namely, the extensive use of self-reported
questionnaires, personnel in managerial positions serving as the main sources of primary data, secondary data
collected by Korean government research bodies being actively dealt with and an awareness of the necessity of
a longitudinal design for causal research.
Originality/value – The present review makes an important contribution to the study of SHRM in general
and the strategic human resources management model in Korea in particular. It is clear that more research is
required, although it is encouraging to note the quality of prior research concerning Korean contexts and the
specific mechanisms by which strategic HR practices influence organizational outcomes. Finally, there is a
clear need for future research that explicitly considers employees’ perceptions of strategic HR practices and
specific contextual factors in Korea, and further, that utilizes more rigorous and diverse research methods to
investigate the effectiveness of strategic HR practices in Korea.
Keywords South Korea, HR practices, Literature review, Strategic human resource management, High
performance work systems
Paper type Literature review

Within the field of strategic human resource management (SHRM), there is a clear belief that
effective HRM contributes to organizational success (Jackson et al., 2014). A number of
theoretical frameworks have been developed to help explain how HR practices can result in a
competitive advantage. The most widely accepted of these frameworks is the high-
performance work systems (HPWS; also known as high-performance HR practices, high-
involvement work systems or high-commitment work systems), which emphasize the links
between HR practices and organizational performance (Chadwick and Flinchbaugh, 2020;
Posthuma et al., 2013; Kehoe and Wright, 2013). The HR practices commonly featured within
these frameworks include selection, performance management, employment security, training
and development, and employee participation (Godard and Delaney, 2000; Pfeffer, 1998).
In line with the development of the theoretical frameworks linking HR practices to
organizational performance, the increasing emphasis on the contribution made by SHRM has
Employee Relations: The
International Journal
Vol. 43 No. 1, 2021
The initial version of this article was presented at the Administrative Sciences Association of Canada pp. 155-175
Conference in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada in June 2016. The authors would like to thank the two © Emerald Publishing Limited
0142-5455
anonymous reviewers and the editor, Dennis Nickson, for their valuable comments and suggestions. DOI 10.1108/ER-09-2019-0365
ER been accompanied by significant empirical research interest in the examination of the
43,1 aforementioned relationship. However, the majority of prior studies have focused on the
“universalistic” effect of HR practices on organizational outcomes such as employee turnover,
labor productivity and financial performance (Chadwick and Flinchbaugh, 2020).
Additionally, there is a strong focus in the existing research on just a few Western,
educated, industrialized, rich and democratic (WEIRD) countries (Farndale et al., 2017),
despite the fact that “most people are not WEIRD” (Henrich et al., 2010).
156 Given the global dominance of Western management thought, there are ongoing debates
in the international HRM literature regarding the relevance of context. More specifically, a
contrast has been noted the adoption of a universalistic vs a contextual paradigm. The
universalistic paradigm posits that if best practices are followed, the desired outcomes will be
achieved, whereas the contextual paradigm argues that when it comes to the outcomes of HR
practices, the context in which they are implemented is of significance (Farndale et al., 2017).
As this debate endures, researchers have addressed the importance of SHRM studies
conducted in the Asia–Pacific context. Further, it has been asserted that researchers should
focus on context-specific issues and develop more nuanced models for exploring the
specificity and conditionality of contextual factors. By doing so, it will be possible to examine
why the universalistic relationship has been found to exist in some, although not all, national
settings (Budhwar et al., 2016; Farndale et al., 2017).
Despite the highlighted need for context-specific research, studies that attempt to
integrate issues concerning the effectiveness of HR practices in relation to Asia–Pacific
societies remain rare, while those that do exist tend to focus specifically on China. For
instance, Cunningham and Rowley (2008) provided an overview of the convergence and
divergence in HR practices with respect to small- and medium-sized enterprises in the context
of China. In a slightly more recent study, Cooke (2009) performed an integrative literature
review of 265 studies conducted in the Chinese context during the period 1998–2007,
ultimately finding that research in the field has come up short in terms of its theoretical
contributions. The qualitative review conducted by Kim et al. (2010) found that China-based
studies have demonstrated that the major findings derived from US-based HRM models can
be extended to China, despite the different institutional and cultural environments. However,
Kim et al. (2010) also noted that while the similarities between the countries are certainly
important, more work needs to be done on isolating some of the differences between them.
South Korea (hereafter Korea) has historically been the subject of much less research
interest than China, although it is possible to learn just as much from Korea-based studies
when seeking to understand how HR practices work in distinctive contexts. Both Korea and
China can be categorized as collectivist countries (Hofstede Insights, 2020). However, Korea
should attract more meaningful international academic attention due to its unique history of
implementing Western-based HR practices in relation to managing employees since the
economic crisis of 1997–1998 (Kim and Ahn, 2011; Kim and Bae, 2004). Today, Korea is an
educated, industrialized, rich and democratic country that has established both formal and
informal institutions to govern HRM (Horak and Yang, 2019). Individualist values such as
employee autonomy, competitiveness among employees, and individual achievement are
now embedded within Korean HR practices. Some of these newly adopted HR practices have
been found to be effective in Korea (Bae and Lawler, 2000); however, the effects of such
practices may vary significantly because indigenous practices such as informal institutions
and seniority still exert an influence on HR practices (Horak and Klein, 2016; Horak and Yang,
2019). Thus, given that it represents fertile ground for the testing the models of HR practices,
Korea warrants particular attention from HRM researchers.
The aim of this article is to provide a comprehensive overview of the current status of SHRM
research in the Korea context as well as to provide recommendations for future research through
synthesizing existing discussions and discoveries. To this end, an integrative literature review was
performed (Torraco, 2005). By aggregating a body of individual studies concerning SHRM in the Review of
Korean context, the present study not only extends the systematic assessment of the studies’ SHRM
components, including the underlying theories and methodological characteristics but also provides
an evidence-based roadmap to guide future SHRM research focusing on the Korea context.
research in
Korea
Korea as fertile ground for testing the cross-national validity of SHRM models
The changes that occurred in HR practices in Korea following the 1997 Asian financial crisis
have been well reported in the literature. Prior to the formidable crisis, Korea’s unique 157
corporate cultures and informal social networks (i.e. Yongo in Korean) played a significant
role in the hiring and retaining of valuable human resources. The collectivist culture as well
as the informality that characterized HR processes lowered transaction costs, supported
quick decision-making and boosted the cohesiveness of employees within an organization
(Cho and Yoon, 2001; Horak, 2017). In this context, Korean firms applied long-term
employment principles, intensive on-the-job training and seniority-based appraisal and
reward systems, regardless of any differences in employees’ performances (Kim and Bae,
2004). In fact, once hired, an employee typically stayed and finished their career at the same
company. Ultimately, traditional Korean HR practices were designed to sustain employee
commitment and loyalty (Kim and Kim, 2003; Yang and Rowley, 2008).
However, the financial crisis marked a radical turning point in relation to Korean HR
practices (Kim and Ahn, 2011; Kim and Bae, 2004). The traditional HR practices were criticized
for fostering a very inflexible labor market and for generating unnecessary labor costs for
companies. To rectify this situation, the International Monetary Fund and other foreign
investors required Korean firms to alter their HR practices in accordance with the US-style HR
model, which emphasizes flexibility and performance (Alakent and Lee, 2010; Kim and Kim,
2003). Korean firms have, therefore, increasingly adopted US-developed ideas of HRM in an
effort to boost their employees’ contributions to firm performance, even when they do not really
need such practices (Chang, 2006; Kang and Yanadori, 2011). Moreover, HR practices that
emphasize individual ability and performance have gained in popularity, although the
collectivist, seniority-oriented organizational culture has remained uncomfortable with the
concept of an individualistic meritocracy (Yang, 2011). For example, the performance-based
pay policy, which represents a crucial element of the new HR practices, was used by only 3.6%
of Korean firms in 1997, although by 2001 it was used by 41.9% (Kang and Yanadori, 2011, p.
1842). Consequently, due to both adverse economic conditions and institutional changes,
Korean HR practices began to focus more on professional and technical knowledge and skills
than on loyalty and commitment to the firm (Kim and Kim, 2003).
However, although HR practices in Korea went through unprecedented transformations
following the financial crisis, recent studies have found that two aspects of traditional HR
practices are still pronounced and important in the field of Korean HRM. First, informal social
networks (i.e. Yongo) persist in Korea (Horak and Klein, 2016). For example, informal social
networks limit the effectiveness of expatriates in Korea (Horak and Yang, 2016) and also
represent an influential factor in relation to HR practices in small- and medium-sized
businesses, which account for 99.9% of all Korean firms (Horak, 2017). Second, seniority
remains influential and plays a dominant role in promotion-related decisions, while US-style
HR practices appear to be less effective because they cannot easily be adjusted to
accommodate the prevailing societal values (Horak and Yang, 2019). Thus, rather than
simply moving toward global convergence, Korean firms have adopted a hybrid approach
with regard to their HR practices (i.e. a combination of traditional Korean HR practices and
foreign best practices) (Chung et al., 2014; Horak and Yang, 2019).
The unique institutionalization of HR practices in Korea, as described above, suggests
that Korea-based studies may offer a more nuanced understanding of the cross-national
validity of SHRM models developed in Western contexts. Some commonly identified
ER universal effects of HR practices are important in Korea (Bae and Lawler, 2000; Jeong and
43,1 Choi, 2016), but at the same time, since the functions of seniority and informality in HR
practices still matter, newly adopted HR practices may not be fully compatible with the
prevalent cultural values in Korea (Horak, 2017; Horak and Yang, 2019). Therefore, the
contextual uniqueness of Korea may offer significant opportunities for researchers to
replicate existing HRM models outside of Western contexts as well as to identify interesting
boundary conditions relevant to the effectiveness of existing models.
158
Methods of data collection and analysis
To ensure that the scope of the review was clear, the present study followed Torraco’s (2005)
guidelines in terms of: (1) what keywords and procedures were used to search the literature,
(2) what databases were searched and (3) what criteria were used to retain or discard studies.
First, five HRM-centric journals were reviewed, namely Asia Pacific Journal of Human
Resources, Employee Relations, Human Resource Management, Human Resource
Management Journal and The International Journal of Human Resource Management.
When examining all issues of the five HRM journals, Korea-based studies were identified and
reviewed to determine whether they concerned HRM in the Korean context.
Second, the literature search was conducted using major databases such as Business Source
Complete, EBSCO, PsycINFO and Web of Science. Eight keywords linked to SHRM were used
in combination with “Korea” and “Korean,” namely (1) “strategic HRM,” (2) “human resource
management,” (3) “HR practices,” (4) “high-performance work systems,” (5) “high-involvement
work systems,” (6) “high-commitment management,” (7) “participatory HRM,” and (8) HRM
systems. In addition, terms relevant to individual HR practices were used, again in combination
well with “Korea” and “Korean,” namely (1) “compensation management,” (2) “training and
development,” (3) “performance management,” (4) “employment security,” (5) “employee
participation,” and (6) “recruitment and selection.”
Third, given the very small number of previous studies yielded by each keyword search, a
snowball sampling approach was applied using both a cited-works analysis and a citing-
works analysis (Serenko, 2013). In terms of the cited-works analysis, in all the identified
articles, all the references were reviewed to locate Korea-based studies that were cited within
the articles. With regard to the citing-works analysis, Google Scholar was used. All works
that cited articles identified during journal and database searches were reviewed to identify
additional Korea-based studies. The works cited in each additionally discovered article were
also reviewed (i.e. using the cited-works analysis).
The literature search ultimately yielded in 41 peer-reviewed academic journals
published in English up to May 2020. To be included in the present review, the articles had
to involve empirical research on HRM conducted in the context of Korea. The abstracts,
purpose statements and methods sections of all the articles identified through the
literature search were carefully reviewed in order to determine whether each article was
conceptual or empirical as well as whether HRM was the primary, rather than a peripheral,
focus. Then, following the useful suggestions made by Bryman (2007), empirical articles
were only included if: (1) the purposes of the research were clearly stated, (2) the data
collection procedures were performed systematically and related to the purposes of the
research, (3) the data were sufficient to support the interpretations and (4) the method of
analysis was explicitly outlined. In addition, only articles published in high-quality and
reputable journals, as indicated by A*, A and B rankings in the Australian Business Deans
Council (ABDC) Journal Quality List, were selected so as to ensure that all the articles
included in this review were of good quality. Thus, two articles were eliminated from the
study. In total, 39 articles published between 2000 and 2020 were selected for inclusion in
the present review.
Coding scheme and analysis Review of
To ensure that the coding scheme was as clear and objective as possible, it was based on the SHRM
approach of Kim et al. (2010), although with a few key adaptations made to address the
specific methodological characteristics of the SHRM literature. Each article was coded as
research in
follows: (1) author name(s) and year of publication, (2) journal name, (3) theoretical Korea
background, (4) all variables (i.e. independent, dependent, mediator, moderator and control),
(5) research design (e.g. survey or case study), (6) respondents for HR variables (e.g. employees
or HR managers), (7) sample size, (8) sample type (e.g. large firms or small- and medium-sized 159
firms), (9) analytic methods employed (e.g. hierarchical multiple regression or structural
equation model), (10) sample types and locations, (11) time frame (i.e. cross-sectional or
longitudinal), (12) level of analysis (e.g. individual- or firm-level) and (13) major findings. This
coding approach made it possible to identify the current status and limitations of the literature
as well as to recommend future research directions for this field (Callahan, 2010, 2014).
The coding process involved the construction of an Excel spreadsheet that the first and
second authors used to individually examine each article’s variables, theoretical background and
methodological characteristics. Both authors then met to review their initial coding to reach an
agreement as to the categorization, and to decide on which articles to include or disregard in the
final review. During these discussions, each author voiced their agreement and/or disagreement
regarding the other author’s categorization, which resulted in a consensus being reached
between the authors with regard to the coded information. Once the coding was complete, the
spreadsheet was imported into SPSS version 26 and frequency analyses were conducted to
identify the predominant characteristics of the SHRM research in the context of Korea.

Results
Growing interest in Korea-based studies
Overall, a wide range of journals published articles related to SHRM in the Korea context
during the period 2000–2020. A few of the identified articles were published in top-tier
journals such as Academy of Management Journal, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of
Management and Strategic Management Journal (Bae and Lawler, 2000; Chadwick et al., 2015;
Kim and Ployhart, 2014, 2018; Pak and Kim, 2018). Notably, a skewed pattern can be observed
in relation to the journals in which articles concerning SHRM in Korea have been published.
Indeed, Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources (e.g. Kim et al., 2018; Rhee et al., 2018) and
The International Journal of Human Resource Management (e.g. Choi and Yoon, 2015; Horak,
2017; Shin et al., 2018) published the majority of the identified Korea-based studies (see
Table 1). The overall volume of Korea-based studies has increased over time, reaching as high
as 18 publications in recent years (see Figure 1). This suggests that there is growing interest
in SHRM studies in the Korean context, and further, that SHRM in Korea is becoming a
legitimate research focus.

Theoretical perspectives adopted and contributions made by Korea-based studies

The identified Korea-based studies were found to have adopted a wide arrange of theoretical
perspectives, including the resource-based theory, human capital theory, institutional theory,
social information processing theory, signaling theory, social exchange theory and
contextual perspectives. There were two notable findings in this regard. First, a relatively
high proportion of the empirical studies were found to be based on previous literature rather
than being sufficiently informed by theory. These studies tended to use previous research
findings as a starting point for replicating well-established relationships in the Korean
context or for examining the influence of contextual factors on those established
relationships. Second, resource-based theory was found to be the most frequently applied
theory in the Korea-based literature (e.g. Bae and Lawler, 2000; Kim and Kang, 2013),although
the more recent studies applied social exchange theory (e.g. Park and Kim, 2019; Oh, 2020).
ER Journals in the 2019 ABDC journal quality list N %
43,1
A* ranking
Academy of Management Journal 2 5.1
Human Resource Management 2 5.1
Journal of Applied Psychology 1 2.6
Journal of Management 1 2.6
160 Journal of World Business 2 5.1
Strategic Management Journal 2 5.1
Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society 1 2.6
A ranking
Asia–Pacific Journal of Management 1 2.6
Business History 1 2.6
Industrial Relations Journal 1 2.6
Management International Review 1 2.6
Personnel Review 1 2.6
The International Journal of Human Resource Management 10 25.6

B ranking
Asia–Pacific Journal of Human Resources 6 15.4
Evidence-based HRM 2 5.1
Journal of Management and Organization 1 2.6
Public Performance and Management Review 1 2.6
Relations Industrielles/Industrial Relations 1 2.6
Service Industries Journal 1 2.6
Table 1. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 1 2.6
Articles by journal Total 39 100

18

14

4
3
Figure 1.
Volume of Korea-based
studies in the literature
2000-2005 2006-2010 2011-2015 2016-2020

When relying on resource-based theory (Barney, 1991), HRM has emphasized the strategic
relevance of HR in terms of achieving and sustaining a competitive advantage (Sa
a-P
erez and
Garc
ıa-Falc
on, 2002). Korean firms have recognized HR to be of the utmost importance in the
era of cut-throat global competition. Therefore, organizational efforts concerning the
recruitment and retention of highly talented employees since the financial crisis can be
effectively explained in light of resource-based theory.
 In recent years, the use of social exchange theory (Blau, 1964) has gained popularity in Review of
Korea-based studies. HR practices signal that the organization cares about its employees and SHRM
so is willing to invest in their development (Whitener, 2001). Individual employees perceive
HR practices to be a kind of personalized support, an investment in them and a recognition of
research in
their contributions. In turn, employees exhibit positive attitudes and behaviors toward the Korea
organization. For example, employees become more committed to the organization through
regular and consistent reciprocation as a result of the economic and social benefits they
receive from the organization (Kooij and Boon, 2018; Kooij et al., 2010). Therefore, social 161
exchange theory is particularly appropriate in relation to understanding HR practices from
the perspective of Korean employees (Oh, 2020).
Through applying the diverse theoretical frameworks, researchers have attempted to
explore the relationship between HR practices and organizational outcomes from three
different perspectives, namely, the universalistic, contingency and configurational
perspectives (Delery and Doty, 1996). First, the universalistic perspective is known to
focus on the importance of best practices. Delery and Doty (1996, p. 805) identified seven
practices that are “theoretically or empirically related to overall organizational performance.”
These practices include internal career opportunities, formal training systems, results-
oriented appraisals, employment security, employee participation, job descriptions and profit
sharing, and they are universally considered to be both effective and efficient in terms of
promoting organizational performance. The current popularity of the HPWS framework
stems from this perspective (Chadwick and Flinchbaugh, 2020). Second, the contingency
perspective denies the existence of best practices that lead to superior organizational
performance under any circumstance. Instead, this perspective suggests that the relationship
between HR practices and organizational performance is not stable, as it varies depending on
other contingency variables. Such contingency variables moderate the relationship between
HR practices and organizational performance (Delery and Doty, 1996). Third, the
configurational perspective builds on the other two perspectives and shifts the main focus
from the concept of universality toward the idea of an internal fit among HR practices, which
gives rise to a synergistic effect. HR practices are defined as a multidimensional set of
elements that can be combined in different ways in order to obtain a number of possible
configurations. The HR practices applied not only need to be congruent with the
environmental and organizational conditions, for example, the organizational strategy and
culture, but must also exhibit consistency (Delery and Doty, 1996; Mart
ın-Alc
azar et al., 2005).
In adopting the universalistic perspective, prior Korea-based studies have followed the
global research trend of examining the mediating mechanism that exists between HR
practices and organizational performance (Lepak and Shaw, 2008; Chadwick and
Flinchbaugh, 2020). Although Korea has very different cultural and institutional
environments when compared with Western countries (Horak and Klein, 2016; Horak and
Yang, 2019), the findings from Korea are generally consistent with those of Western-based
studies, which suggests that certain HR practices could be universally effective in terms of
enhancing organizational performance (e.g. Bae and Lawler, 2000; Jeong and Choi, 2016; Lee
et al., 2012; Oh, 2020).
With respect to the contingency perspective, other Korea-based studies have considered
several contextual moderators of the relationship between HR practices and organizational
outcomes. The investigated moderators include HRM investments (Shaw et al., 2013), HR
functions (Jeong and Choi, 2016), HR strategies (Choi and Yoon, 2015), companies’ competitive
strategies (Shin, 2014), organizational culture (Park et al., 2015) and environmental factors
(Kim and Ployhart, 2018). Collectively, these studies help to elucidate the boundary conditions
under which HR practices operate.
In relation to the configurational perspective, a few Korea-based studies have sought to
determine how the HR practices within an organization relate to each other (Kim et al., 2017a)
ER as well as to develop a contextual understanding of the effectiveness of HR practices (Chung
43,1 et al., 2014; Lee et al., 2017; Horak and Yang, 2019; Rhee et al., 2018). In terms of the internal fit,
Kim et al. (2017a) demonstrated that equity-oriented practices and involvement-oriented
practices positively interact with each other in connection with the financial performance of
Korean manufacturing firms. Taking into account the contextual differences that can alter
the effects of HR practices, Chung et al. (2014) and Horak and Yang (2019) found that Korean
firms adopt a nuanced approach so that their HRM strategies fit with local contexts, rather
162 than simply adopting global best practices. Given that their distinctive institutional
conditions are important in terms of shaping their HRM strategies, firms’ HRM strategies
involve a hybrid approach. These studies suggest that global best practices present just one
source of reference for the local optimization of HRM strategies in the Korean business
context and, thus, draw attention to the importance of contextual differences when seeking to
understand the fit between HR practices and Korean contexts.
Building on the three perspectives outlined above, there are three areas of research that are
of particular interest in the Korean context: (1) whether the established relationship between
HR practices and organizational performance has cross-national validity in the Korean
context, (2) the extent to which the established relationship is moderated by contextual
factors and (3) whether the combination of HR practices and the congruence of HR practices
with other organizational characteristics affect organizational performance in Korea.
A summary of the articles included in this review is provided in Tables 2 and 3.

Methodological characteristics
This review sought to elucidate the methodological characteristics of the Korea-based HR
literature (see Table 4). In terms of the research methods, the studies were classified into those
employing survey methods, case studies or in-depth interviews. Among the 39 included
studies, only two employed in-depth interviews (Horak, 2017; Horak and Yang, 2019).
Similarly, only one study employed case studies (Chung et al., 2014). Aside from these three
studies, all the other included studies employed survey methods. In other words, those
researchers who have previously conducted studies in the Korean context have demonstrated
a strong preference for the use of survey methods, whether they collected primary data or
used publicly available data collected by government-funded research bodies.
The SHRM research field in Korea has largely been dominated by the use of self-reported
questionnaires. Among the 36 studies that employed survey methods, 18 made use of
specially designed self-reported questionnaires and collected information for their own
specific purposes (e.g. Chang, 2006; Lee et al., 2012; Oh, 2020). Regarding the sample type and
the HR variable informant, the majority of studies specified that their sample firms were large
companies (e.g. Lee et al., 2012; Pak and Kim, 2018). Moreover, top managers, including CEOs
and executives and HR managers, were typically asked to rate the HRM variables (e.g. Bae
and Yu, 2005; Kim and Lee, 2012), although as HR practices are not necessarily implemented
as intended in Korea, employee perceptions of HR practices might prove predictive of their
outcomes than managerial reports (Choi, 2019; Horak and Yang, 2019).
Researchers in this context have actively dealt with secondary data, given that 18 of the
included studies used public datasets collected by Korean government-funded research
bodies. It is particularly noteworthy that the Human Capital Corporate Panel (HCCP) and
Workplace Panel Survey (WPS) have proved to be fruitful sources of data for Korea-based
studies. Indeed, 12 studies used some parts of the HCCP produced by the Korea Research
Institute for Vocational Education and Training (KRIVET), while three studies used some
parts of the WPS conducted by the Korea Labor Institute (KLI).
The KRIVET has conducted the HCCP survey every two years since 2005 in order to
better understand how Korean firms develop and utilize HR. The survey contains two sets of
questions. The first set concerns overall management issues, and it is intended to be
Year Authors Predictors Mediators Moderators Outcomes
Review of
SHRM
2000 Bae and Organizational High- Organizational research in
Lawler strategic variables involvement performance
HRM strategy Korea
2003 Bae et al. HPWS Pacific Rim Organizational
Countries performance
2005 Bae and Resource HRM configurations 163
Yu availability,
Institutional force,
Strategic choice
2006 Chang Individual pay for Commitment HR Affective
performance practices commitment and
work effort
2008 Yalabik HPWS Differentiation Organizational
et al. turnover
2010 Frenkel High performance Organizational Government Workplace
and Lee work practices attachment workplace performance
relations policy,
professional
management, and
business strategy
2010 Kwon et al. High commitment Top vs. other levels Affective
HR practices of performers commitment
2012 Kim and HR practices Legitimizing Firm performance
Lee capability
2012 Lee et al. HPWS Employee Customer
reaction, service loyalty
quality, customer
satisfaction
2013 Shaw et al. Human capital Workforce HRM investments Workforce and
losses productivity financial
performance
2013 Choi and HPWS Job satisfaction Employees’ Financial
Lee perception of the performance
effectiveness of
HPWS
2013 Kim and Strategic HR High-involvement Firm
Kang functions work practices performance
2013 Ryu and First-line HPWS and HR HR
Kim managers’ HR knowledge transfer effectiveness
involvement to first-line
managers
2014 Jun and Emphasis on HRM, Corporate
Rowley corporate culture performance
change, risk
management
change, choice and
focus strategy
2014 Kim and Selective staffing Firm labor Internal training Firm profit
Ployhart productivity growth
2014 Shin Union density Firms’ competitive Adoption of Table 2.
strategies HPWS A summary of
quantitative Korea-
(continued ) based studies (N 5 36)
ER Year Authors Predictors Mediators Moderators Outcomes
43,1
2015 Choi and Training Employee Strategic Operational and
Yoon investment commitment and orientation of the financial
competence HR function performance
2015 Kim et al. Mutual Adoption of
trustworthiness HPWS
164 2015 Park et al. Participative Innovative culture Organizational
management performance
2015 Chadwick CEOs’ emphasis on Commitment- Firm
et al. SHRM based HR performance
systems
2016 Jeong and HPWS Influence of the HR Firm
Choi function performance
2017 Lee et al. Perceived Employee Organizational
effectiveness of HR perceptions of commitment
practices organizational
culture
2017 Oh et al. HR-specific human Perceived Commitment to
capital organizational HR
value on HR
2017 Park and Workplace Job insecurity Work
Ono bullying engagement and
health problems
2017b Kim et al. Normative Environmental Strategic
pressure uncertainty and involvement of
adversarial IR HR departments
climate
2017a Kim et al. Involvement- Equity-oriented Financial
oriented practices practices performance
2018 Kim et al. HPWS Organizational Labor productivity
growth
2018 Lee Profit-sharing University-
incentives, industry
employment collaboration
security, and size performance
of HR
2018 Rhee et al. HPWS Organizational Organizational Organizational
trust culture capabilities
2018 Shin et al. High involvement Intrinsic Learning Worker creativity
HRM practices motivation orientation
2018 Pak and Team manager’s HPWS intensity Team and
Kim implementation of and HRM- employee
HR practices induced performance
psychological
contract
fulfillment
2018 Kim and Internal and Selection Internal and Firm performance
Ployhart external practices external
environments environments
2019 Choi HPWS Employees’ Individual- and
perception of firm-level job
HPWS satisfaction and
effectiveness ROA

Table 2. (continued )
Year Authors Predictors Mediators Moderators Outcomes
Review of
SHRM
2019 Lee Work context Employee research in
developmental
network Korea
characteristics
2019 Park and Organizational HR functions Training Organizational
Kim culture and practices commitment 165
leaders’ vision of
talent
2020 Oh Employee Affective Employee turnover
perceptions of commitment
HRM practices Table 2.

Year Author Method Research questions

2014 Chung et al. A multiple-case (1) What is the overall orientation of Korean multinational
study enterprise approaches to subsidiary-HRM practices in terms
of global standardization and localization?
(2) At which level do Korean firms intend to standardize
subsidiary-HRM practices?
(3) What is the origin of practices in the standardization of
Korean multinational enterprise approaches to subsidiary-
HRM practices?
2017 Horak In-depth (1) Does Yongo influence recruiting practices and career
interviews progression for large firms as well as small- and medium-sized
enterprises?
(2) Did HRM systems converge in Korea? Table 3.
2019 Horak and In-depth (1) Does seniority still have an influence on businesses and career A summary of
Yang interviews progression in Korea today? qualitative Korea-
(2) Does performance orientation versus seniority prevail today? based studies (N 5 3)

Methodological characteristics No. of articles Percentage

Research designs Survey 36 92%

Case study 1 3%
In-depth interview 2 5%
Total 39 100%
Data sources Primary 18 50%
HCCP 12 33%
WPS 3 8%
Others 3 8%
Total 36 100%
HR variable informant of primary data Managers 9 50%
Employees 7 39%
Both 2 11%
Total 18 100% Table 4.
Time frame Cross-sectional 29 81% A summary of
Longitudinal 7 19% methodological
Total 36 100% characteristics
ER completed by the HR director of a firm. The second set relates to employee attitudes and
43,1 behaviors within the firm, and both supervisory employees and nonsupervisory employees
are intended to complete it. The sample for the HCCP comprises firms with more than 100
employees that operate in Korea and that are listed in the Korea Investors Service (KIS)
database. Alongside the information provided by the KIS, the KRIVET also provides
financial performance data by matching each firm code (KRIVET, 2020).
Given that the HCCP datasets are large, rich, multi-year and publicly available, they have
166 been extensively used to measure various research variables, including (1) HR practices such
as HPWS (Choi and Lee, 2013; Rhee et al., 2018; Shin et al., 2018); training (Choi and Yoon,
2015; Kim and Ployhart, 2014) and selective staffing (Kim and Ployhart, 2014); (2)
organizational strategies (Choi and Yoon, 2015; Shin, 2014); (3) employee attitudes such as
organizational attachment (Choi and Yoon, 2015), job satisfaction (Choi and Lee, 2013) and
organizational trust (Rhee et al., 2018) and (4) contextual factors such as organizational
cultures (Rhee et al., 2018), organizational growth (Kim et al., 2018) and internal/external
environments (Kim and Ployhart, 2018).
The WPS represents another survey that has been conducted by the KLI every two years
since 2005 in order to collect information about the HR issues and labor relations (LR) of
Korean firms. The survey is administered to a stratified sample of firms selected from among
those with more than 30 employees. Its sample size varies each year, although more than
1,700 firms have responded to the WPS since it was first introduced. The survey contains
questions regarding each firm’s HR and LR practices as well as about basic facts such as the
number of employees, sales revenue and assets of the firm. Those questions regarding the
firm’s HR practices are responded to by HR personnel, while those regarding its LR are
responded to by both labor personnel and employee representatives (KLI, 2020).
Similar to the use of the HCCP, the WPS datasets have been used to measure various
research variables, including (1) HR-related variables such as HPWS (Jeong and Choi, 2016;
Kim et al., 2018), individual HR practices (Kim and Kang, 2013) and HR functions (Jeong and
Choi, 2016; Kim and Kang, 2013); (2) LR-related variables such as union participation (Kim
and Kang, 2013) and labor relations climate (Kim and Kang, 2013) and (3) organizational
performance variables such as organizational growth (Kim et al., 2018), labor productivity
(Kim et al., 2018), and operational and financial performance (Jeong and Choi, 2016).
The majority of HR interventions have a time-lagged effect on organizational outcomes
(Saridakis et al., 2017). However, in terms of the research time frame (i.e. cross-sectional vs
longitudinal studies), most of the identified Korea-based studies applied cross-sectional
designs that limited the elucidation of the time-lagged effects of HR practices on
organizational outcomes (e.g. Jeong and Choi, 2016; Oh, 2020). Even among the 18 studies
that made use of secondary data, only seven followed a longitudinal design (see Table 5).
These studies attempted to deal with data collected from respondents at different points of
time. For example, Choi and Yoon (2015) used three HCCP datasets, collected in 2007 (Time 1),
2009 (Time 2) and 2011 (Time 3). In their study, the training investment, as an independent
variable, was measured at Time 1.This measurement was temporally followed by the
gathering of employee outcome data at Time 2, which was, in turn, followed by the gathering
of organizational outcomes at Time 3. By applying this approach, the researchers were able to
make use of more empirically supported causal inferences concerning the relationship
between the training investment and organizational outcomes.
In summary, the findings of the present review reveal the prior Korea-based studies to
have four unique methodological characteristics. First, the field has largely been dominated
by the extensive use of self-reported questionnaires. Second, personnel in executive and
managerial positions have been the main sources of primary data, while employees’
perceptions of HR practices have relatively been neglected. Third, researchers have actively
dealt with publicly available datasets collected by government-funded research bodies.
Articles Datasets Time frame
Review of
SHRM
Frenkel and Lee (2010) Survey Data by KLI Cross-sectional research in
Shaw et al. (2013) HCCP Longitudinal
Choi and Lee (2013) HCCP Cross-sectional Korea
Kim and Kang (2013) WPS Cross-sectional
Ryu and Kim (2013) HCCP Longitudinal
Kim and Ployhart (2014) HCCP Longitudinal 167
Shin (2014) HCCP Cross-sectional
Choi and Yoon (2015) HCCP Longitudinal
Kim et al. (2015) National Survey Data Cross-sectional
Jeong and Choi (2016) WPS Cross-sectional
Kim et al. (2017a) HCCP Cross-sectional
Kim et al. (2018) WPS Longitudinal
Lee (2018) UICWP Cross-sectional
Rhee et al. (2018) HCCP Cross-sectional
Shin et al. (2018) HCCP Cross-sectional
Kim and Ployhart (2018) HCCP Longitudinal
Choi (2019) HCCP Longitudinal Table 5.
Park and Kim (2019) HCCP Cross-sectional A summary of studies
Note(s): KLI 5 Korea Labor Institute; HCCP 5 Human Capital Corporate Panel; WPS 5 Workplace Panel that used secondary
Survey; UICWP 5 University-Industry Collaboration White Paper data (N 5 18)

Fourth, the majority of studies have employed a cross-sectional research design, although
more recent studies have exhibited an awareness of the importance of a longitudinal research
design in relation to causal studies.

Recommendations for future research

This review has demonstrated the status quo with regard to SHRM studies in the Korean
context. Fortunately, the findings suggest several avenues for future research. The three post
promising research directions are detailed below.

Recommendation 1: employees’ perceptions of HR practices

Researchers have consistently highlighted the need for a more nuanced understanding of
how employees perceive HR practices (Boon et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2020). The reason for this
is that previous HRM studies have generally failed to consider employees’ actual experiences
of HR practices (Jiang et al., 2017). It remains debatable whether HR practices as measured by
those in managerial positions can accurately capture employees’ perspectives. Further, HR
practices are not necessarily implemented as intended, since employees interpret the HR
practices of their organizations differently based on their values, experiences and
expectations (Lam et al., 2009; Nishii et al., 2008).
The findings of this review echo the call to consider employees’ perceptions of HR
practices, as those who hold managerial positions have been the main respondents in the
majority of Korea-based studies. In other words, prior Korea-based studies have generally not
taken into account the opinions of employees. This is important because Korean HR practices
have undergone a dramatic transformation in recent years, although traditional elements of
HR practices are still prevalent (Bae, 1997; Horak and Yang, 2019). In this context, there could
be considerable differences in the ways employees perceive HR practices. For example,
although job autonomy could reduce employees’ turnover intentions by boosting their levels
of affective commitment in Western contexts, the effect of job autonomy has not proved to be
significant in the context of Korea (Oh, 2020). Even if an organization introduces innovative
HR practices in an effort to increase its organizational effectiveness, it will not achieve that
ER goal unless its employees are satisfied with such practices or perceive them to be an effective
43,1 means of increasing their commitment to the organization (Choi, 2019).
Therefore, it is strongly suggested that future studies should focus on employee
perceptions of HR practices when assessing the effectiveness of those HR practices. Since HR
perception studies tend to center on employee reactions to, perceptions of and experiences
with HR practices, this approach will potentially facilitate a much more in-depth
understanding of how Korea’s informal institutions and cultures affect employees’
168 experiences of HR practices (Farndale et al., 2017). In addition, such studies could help
practitioners to address practical HR problems such as employee turnover as well as to better
understand which HR practices work well under what conditions (Wang et al., 2020).

Recommendation 2: more context-specific research

The extent to which HR practices might be successfully transferred from Western cultures to
Asian cultures has long been a controversial issue (Rowley et al., 2017). This review revealed
that although several contextual moderators have been considered in prior Korea-based
studies, the potential moderating effects of Korea-specific factors such as organizational
cultures and informality in relation to HRM in Korea have been neglected. In fact, only two
studies have attempted to examine the interaction between HR practices and organizational
cultures in the Korean context (Park et al., 2015; Rhee et al., 2018). Given the call for more
attention to be paid to a variety of contingencies that might affect the nature of the
relationship between HR practices and organizational performance (Lepak and Shaw, 2008),
there clearly exists plenty of scope for further exploration of Korea-specific factors.
It is widely accepted that the Korean national culture, collectivism and high-power
distance, may mitigate the effectiveness of HR practices. However, researchers are cautioned
against adopting this conventional view without question. A meta-analytic study has shown
that the national culture does not constrain the effectiveness of HPWS. In fact, contrary to the
conventional view, the HPWS–business performance effect size was shown to be more
strongly positive in countries with a high-power distance and a greater degree of collectivism
(Rabl et al., 2014). In addition, the conventional view that Korea is a collectivist country has
been challenged in recent times. To complement the conventional view, “Korea should be
regarded as an affective-relational society in which the relational context determines whether
collectivism or individualism prevails” (Horak and Yang, 2018, p. 11). Accordingly, directly
equating the collectivist culture with all Korean employment circumstances would be a
mistake. Instead, the reflection of culture at the individual and organizational levels, as well as
affective ties and networks, would be more relevant in terms of indicating the importance of
contexts when seeking to understand the effectiveness of HR practices in Korea.

Recommendation 3: methodological rigor and diversity

With regard to the applied methodology, previous studies have consistently suggested that
more rigorous and diverse methods that encourage the utilization of a wider array of research
approaches should be adopted within the SHRM research (e.g. Jiang and Messersmith, 2018;
Kim et al., 2010). In particular, when it comes to survey methods, researchers are clearly aware
that self-reported variables can prove problematic due to both common method bias and
social desirability bias (Conway and Lance, 2010), and further, that longitudinal data are
necessary, especially in relation to causal studies (Budhwar et al., 2016; Spector, 2019). As
Korea-based studies have not traditionally followed such recommendations, the use of
longitudinal datasets is suggested over the use of a one-time dataset to determine the
temporal order among the variables of interest. Given the publicly available longitudinal
data, there are reasons to be optimistic that researchers will be able to consider the
chronological sequencing of the variables. For example, to test the effect of HPWS on
organizational performance, it is possible to consider the HPWS and past firm performance Review of
data from Time 1 as well as the subsequent firm performance data from Time 2 (Shin and SHRM
Konrad, 2017). In this way, the time dependency of the effectiveness of HR practices can be
addressed.
research in
Moreover, the use of interview methods is suggested, since only a few prior studies have Korea
endeavored to conduct in-depth interviews (Horak, 2017; Horak and Yang, 2019). As
evidenced by recent research, informal social networks and seniority remain influential in
Korea while US-style HR practices rarely work as intended in the Korean context. Yet, very 169
little is currently known about informal social networks, either as an indigenous concept or in
connection with seniority (Horak and Klein, 2016; Horak and Yang, 2019). As HR practices
reflect the values and norms of a society, more studies are needed to understand how
important and influential indigenous variables from the institutional environment enable HR
practices to work effectively in the Korean context. Qualitative methods should prove
suitable for the aforementioned purpose, since the construct of informal social networks has
not previously been established within the management literature, although it has been
comprehensively defined based on literature reviews and in-depth interviews (e.g. Horak,
2014, 2017; Horak et al., 2019; Horak and Klein, 2016). This stream of research should serve to
extend prior attempts to explore various aspects of the status quo of Korean HRM, including
how the newly adopted HR practices and cultural institutions coexit, how HR practices are
being transformed, how Korean employees perceive and experience the new HR practices,
and how such practices affect organizational outcomes today.

Limitations
It is important to recognize a limitation associated with the approach employed in the present
review. A conscious decision was made to limit the exploration of the prior Korea-based
literature to a set of studies published in ABDC-listed journals. The patterns of content
analysis might appear different had the review included articles published in domestic
Korean journals such as Korean Journal of Management. Indeed, the growing importance and
current status of SHRM studies have been addressed in domestic journals (Bae et al., 2015;
Kang et al., 2011). Thus, it must be emphasized that this study examined only a part of the
literature regarding the Korean contexts. To extend the findings of this review, studies
published in Korean journals could also be reviewed after a careful selection process has been
applied to address the standing of the research in more detail.

Conclusion
Despite the abovementioned limitation, the present study makes a unique and noteworthy
contribution to the research concerning SHRM in general and the SHRM model in Korea in
particular. By drawing on 39 Korea-based empirical studies that were published in peer-
reviewed academic journals in English, this study demonstrated that prior studies conducted
in the Korean context have examined the relationship between HR practices and
organizational outcomes from the universalistic, contingency and configurational
perspectives. It is clear that more research is required, but it is encouraging to note the
quality of prior research examining Korean contexts and the specific mechanisms by which
HR practices influence organizational outcomes. The hope is that this review inspires more
studies on specific contextual factors in Korea as well as on employees’ perceptions of HR
practices. Such studies will hopefully apply more rigorous and diverse research methods.

References

An asterisk (*) indicates that the article was included in the integrative literature review.
ER Alakent, E. and Lee, S.H. (2010), “Do institutionalized traditions matter during crisis? employee
downsizing in Korean manufacturing organizations”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 47
43,1 No. 3, pp. 622-654.
Bae, J. (1997), “Beyond seniority-based systems: a paradigm shift in Korean HRM?”, Asia Pacific
Business Review, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 82-110.
*Bae, J., Chen, S., David Wan, T.W., Lawler, J.J. and Walumbwa, F.O. (2003), “Human resource
strategy and firm performance in Pacific Rim countries”, The International Journal of Human
170 Resource Management, Vol. 14 No. 8, pp. 1308-1332.
*Bae, J. and Lawler, J.J. (2000), “Organizational and HRM strategies in Korea: impact on firm
performance in an emerging economy”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 43 No. 3,
pp. 502-517.
*Bae, J. and Yu, G.C. (2005), “HRM configurations in Korean venture firms: resource availability,
institutional force and strategic choice perspectives”, The International Journal of Human
Resource Management, Vol. 16 No. 9, pp. 1759-1782.
Bae, J., Yu, G.C. and Kwon, K. (2015), “Groundwork for theory development on Korea-type human
resource management (K-HRM)”, Korean Journal of Management, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 99-141.
Barney, J.B. (1991), “Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage”, Journal of Management,
Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 99-120.
Blau, P.M. (1964), Exchange and Power in Social Life, Wiley, New York, NY.
Boon, C., Den Hartog, D.N. and Lepak, D.P. (2019), “A systematic review of human resource management
systems and their measurement”, Journal of Management, Vol. 45 No. 6, pp. 2498-2537.
Bryman, A. (2007), “Effective leadership in higher education: a literature review”, Studies in Higher
Education, Vol. 32 No. 6, pp. 693-710.
Budhwar, P.S., Varma, A. and Patel, C. (2016), “Convergence-divergence of HRM in the Asia- Pacific:
context-specific analysis and future research agenda”, Human Resource Management Review,
Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 311-326.
Callahan, J.L. (2010), “Constructing a manuscript: distinguishing integrative literature reviews and
conceptual and theory articles”, Human Resource Development Review, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 300-304.
Callahan, J.L. (2014), “Writing literature reviews: a reprise and update”, Human Resource Development
Review, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 271-275.
Chadwick, C. and Flinchbaugh, C. (2020), “Searching for competitive advantage in the HRM/firm
performance relationship”, Academy of Management Perspectives, Advance online publication,
doi: 10.5465/amp.2018.0065.
*Chadwick, C., Super, J.F. and Kwon, K. (2015), “Resource orchestration in practice: CEO emphasis on
SHRM, commitment-based HR systems, and firm performance”, Strategic Management Journal,
Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 360-376.
*Chang, E. (2006), “Individual pay for performance and commitment HR practices in South Korea”,
Journal of World Business, Vol. 41 No. 4, pp. 368-381.
Cho, Y. and Yoon, J. (2001), “The origin and function of dynamic collectivism: an analysis of the
Korean corporate culture”, Asia Pacific Business Review, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 70-88.
*Choi, J.H. (2019), “What one thinks determines one’s actions: the importance of employees’ perception
in implementing HR systems”, Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 57 No. 1,
pp. 85-102.
*Choi, J.H. and Lee, K.P. (2013), “Effects of employees’ perceptions on the relationship between HR
practices and firm performance for Korean firms”, Personnel Review, Vol. 42 No. 5,
pp. 573-594.
*Choi, M. and Yoon, H.J. (2015), “Training investment and organizational outcomes: a moderated
mediated model of employee outcomes and strategic orientation of the HR function”, The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 26 No. 20, pp. 2632-2651.
*Chung, C., Sparrow, P. and Bozkurt, O. (2014), “South Korean MNEs’ international HRM approach: Review of
hybridization of global standards and local practices”, Journal of World Business, Vol. 49 No. 4,
pp. 549-559. SHRM
Conway, J.M. and Lance, C.E. (2010), “What reviewers should expect from authors regarding common
research in
method bias in organizational research”, Journal of Business and Psychology, Vol. 25 No. 3, Korea
pp. 325-334.
Cooke, F.L. (2009), “A decade of transformation of HRM in China: a review of literature and
suggestions for future studies”, Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 47 No. 1, pp. 6-40. 171
Cunningham, L.X. and Rowley, C. (2008), “The development of Chinese small and medium enterprises
and human resource management: a review”, Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 46
No. 3, pp. 353-379.
Delery, J.E. and Doty, D.H. (1996), “Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource management:
tests of universalistic, contingency, and configurational performance predictions”, Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 39 No. 4, pp. 802-835.
Farndale, E., Raghuram, S., Gully, S., Liu, H., Phillips, J. and Vidovic, M. (2017), “A vision of
international human resource management research”, The International Journal of Human
Resource Management, Vol. 28 No. 12, pp. 1625-1639.
*Frenkel, S.J. and Lee, B.H. (2010), “Do high performance work practices work in South Korea?”,
Industrial Relations Journal, Vol. 41 No. 5, pp. 479-504.
Godard, J. and Delaney, J.T. (2000), “Reflections on the high performance paradigm’s implications for
industrial relations as a field”, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 53 No. 3, pp. 482-502.
Henrich, J., Heine, S.J. and Norenzayan, A. (2010), “Most people are not WEIRD”, Nature, Vol. 466
No. 7302, p. 29.
Horak, S. (2014), “Antecedents and characteristics of informal relation-based networks in Korea:
Yongo, Yonjul and Inmaek”, Asia Pacific Business Review, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 78-108.
*Horak, S. (2017), “The informal dimension of human resource management in Korea: Yongo,
recruiting practices and career progression”, International Journal of Human Resources
Management, Vol. 28 No. 10, pp. 1409-1432.
Horak, S. and Klein, A. (2016), “Persistence of informal social networks in East Asia: evidence from
South Korea”, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 673-694.
Horak, S., Taube, M., Yang, I. and Restel, K. (2019), “Two not of a kind: social network theory and
informal social networks in East Asia”, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Vol. 36 No. 2,
pp. 349-372.
Horak, S. and Yang, I. (2016), “Affective networks, informal ties, and the limits of expatriate
effectiveness”, International Business Review, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 1030-1042.
Horak, S. and Yang, I. (2018), “A complementary perspective on business ethics in South Korea: civil
religion, common misconceptions, and overlooked social structures”, Business Ethics, Vol. 27
No. 1, pp. 1-14.
*Horak, S. and Yang, I. (2019), “Whither seniority? career progression and performance orientation in South
Korea”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 30 No. 9, pp. 1419-1447.
Hofstede Insights (2020), “Compare countries”, available at: https://www.hofstede-insights.com/
product/compare-countries/ (accessed 10 June 2020).
Jackson, S.E., Schuler, R.S. and Jiang, K. (2014), “An aspirational framework for strategic human
resource management”, The Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 1-56.
*Jeong, D.Y. and Choi, M. (2016), “The impact of high-performance work systems on firm
performance: the moderating effects of the human resource function’s influence”, Journal of
Management and Organization, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 328-348.
Jiang, K. and Messersmith, J. (2018), “On the shoulders of giants: a meta-review of strategic human resource
management”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 6-33.
ER Jiang, K., Hu, J., Liu, S. and Lepak, D.P. (2017), “Understanding employees’ perceptions of human
resource practices: effects of demographic dissimilarity to managers and coworkers”, Human
43,1 Resource Management, Vol. 56 No. 1, pp. 69-91.
*Jun, W. and Rowley, C. (2014), “Change and continuity in management systems and corporate
performance: human resource management, corporate culture, risk management and corporate
strategy in South Korea”, Business History, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp. 485-508.
Kang, S.C., Park, J. and Park, H.H. (2011), “Strategic human resource management in Korea: where are we
172 today and where do we go from now?”, Korean Journal of Management, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 51-108.
Kang, S.C. and Yanadori, Y. (2011), “Adoption and coverage of performance-related pay during
institutional change: an integration of institutional and agency theories”, Journal of
Management Studies, Vol. 48 No. 8, pp. 1837-1865.
Kehoe, R.R. and Wright, P.M. (2013), “The impact of high-performance human resource practices on
employees’ attitudes and behaviors”, Journal of Management, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 366-391.
Kim, D.O. and Ahn, J.Y. (2011), “Industrial relations in Korea: focusing on developments since the
1997-1998 financial crisis”, Korean Journal of Management, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 109-133.
Kim, D.O. and Bae, J. (2004), Employment Relations and HRM in Korea, Ashgate Publishing, London.
*Kim, H. and Kang, S.C. (2013), “Strategic HR functions and firm performance: the moderating effects
of high-involvement work practices”, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Vol. 30 No. 1,
pp. 91-113.
Kim, D.O. and Kim, S. (2003), “Globalization, financial crisis, and industrial relations: the case of South
Korea”, Industrial Relations, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 341-367.
*Kim, A. and Lee, C. (2012), “How does HRM enhance strategic capabilities? evidence from the Korean
management consulting industry”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management,
Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 126-146.
*Kim, Y. and Ployhart, R.E. (2014), “The effects of staffing and training on firm productivity and
profit growth before, during, and after the great recession”, Journal of Applied Psychology,
Vol. 99 No. 3, pp. 361-389.
*Kim, Y. and Ployhart, R.E. (2018), “The strategic value of selection practices: antecedents and consequences
of firm-level selection practice usage”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 61 No. 1, pp. 46-66.
Kim, S., Wright, P.M. and Su, Z. (2010), “Human resource management and firm performance in China:
a critical review”, Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 58-85.
*Kim, Y.-H., Kim, D.-O. and Ali, M.A. (2015), “The effects of mutual trustworthiness between labour
and management in adopting high performance work systems”, Relations Industrielles, Vol. 70
No. 1, pp. 36-61.
*Kim, A., Han, K. and Kim, Y. (2017a), “The relationships among participatory management practices
for improving firm profitability: evidence from the South Korean manufacturing industry”, The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 28 No. 12, pp. 1712-1738.
*Kim, A., Ryu, S., Kim, S. and Lepak, D.P. (2017b), “Determinants of the strategic involvement of
human resource departments: evidence from large South Korean firms”, Asia Pacific Journal of
Human Resources, Vol. 55, pp. 44-63.
*Kim, Y.-H., Kim, Y., Kim, A., Han, K. and Lepak, D. (2018), “High-performance work systems as a
remedy for growing pains: evidence from South Korean organizations”, Asia Pacific Journal of
Human Resources, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp. 293-316.
KLI (2020), “Workplace panel survey”, available at: https://www.kli.re.kr/wps_eng/contents.do?
key5275 (accessed 20 June 2020).
Kooij, D.T.A.M. and Boon, C. (2018), “Perceptions of HR practices, person-organisation fit, and
affective commitment: the moderating role of career stage”, Human Resource Management
Journal, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 61-75.
Kooij, D.T.A.M., Jansen, P.G.W., Dikkers, J.S.E. and De Lange, A.H. (2010), “The influence of age on the Review of
associations between HR practices and both affective commitment and job satisfaction: a meta-
analysis”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 31 No. 8, pp. 1111-1136. SHRM
KRIVET (2020), “Human capital corporate panel”, available at: http://www.krivet.re.kr/eng/eu/eh/
research in
euDAADs.jsp (accessed 20 June 2020). Korea
*Kwon, K., Bae, J. and Lawler, J.J. (2010), “High commitment HR practices and top performers”,
Management International Review, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 57-80.
173
Lam, W., Chen, Z. and Takeuchi, N. (2009), “Perceived human resource management practices and
intention to leave of employees: the mediating role of organizational citizenship behavior in a
Sino-Japanese joint venture”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management,
Vol. 20 No. 11, pp. 2250-2270.
*Lee, K.-J. (2018), “Strategic human resource management for university-industry collaborations in
Korea: financial incentives for academic faculty and employment security of industry liaison
offices”, Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 461-472.
*Lee, J.W. (2019), “Exploring the antecedents of employees’ developmental network characteristics:
does context matter?”, Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 103-124.
*Lee, S.M., Lee, D. and Kang, C.Y. (2012), “The impact of high-performance work systems in the
health-care industry: employee reactions, service quality, customer satisfaction, and customer
loyalty”, Service Industries Journal, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 17-36.
*Lee, H., Park, J.H., Ngan, S.-C. and Tian, T.S. (2017), “Vertical fit of HR practices and organizational
culture: a case of a large-sized Korean conglomerate”, Evidence-based HRM, Vol. 5 No. 2,
pp. 122-138.
Lepak, D.P. and Shaw, J.D. (2008), “Strategic HRM in North America: looking to the future”, The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 19 No. 8, pp. 1486-1499.
Mart
ın-Alc
azar, F., Romero-Fern
andez, P.M. and S
anchez-Gardey, G. (2005), “Strategic human
resource management: integrating the universalistic, contingent, configurational and contextual
perspectives”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 16 No. 5,
pp. 633-659.
Nishii, H.L., Lepak, P.D. and Schneider, B. (2008), “Employee attributions of the “why” of HR practices:
their effects on employee attitudes and behaviors, and customer satisfaction”, Personnel
Psychology, Vol. 61 No. 3, pp. 503-545.
*Oh, J. (2020), “Employee perceptions of HRM practices and their turnover intentions: evidence from
South Korea”, Evidence-based HRM, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 145-160.
*Oh, I.-S., Blau, G., Han, J.H. and Kim, S. (2017), “Human capital factors affecting human resources
(HR) managers’ commitment to HR and the mediating role of perceived organizational value on
HR”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 56 No. 2, pp. 353-368.
*Pak, J. and Kim, S. (2018), “Team manager’s implementation, high performance work systems
intensity, and performance: a multilevel investigation”, Journal of Management, Vol. 44 No. 7,
pp. 2690-2715.
*Park, S. and Kim, E.-J. (2019), “Organizational culture, leaders’ vision of talent, and HR functions on
career changers’ commitment: the moderating effect of training in South Korea”, Asia Pacific
Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 57 No. 3, pp. 345-368.
*Park, J.H. and Ono, M. (2017), “Effects of workplace bullying on work engagement and health: the
mediating role of job insecurity”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management,
Vol. 28 No. 22, pp. 3202-3225.
*Park, J., Lee, K.-H. and Kim, P.S. (2015), “Participative management and perceived organizational
performance: the moderating effects of innovative organizational culture”, Public Performance
and Management Review, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 316-336.
Pfeffer, J. (1998), “Seven practices of successful organizations”, California Management Review, Vol. 40
No. 2, pp. 96-124.
ER Posthuma, R.A., Campion, M.C., Masimova, M. and Campion, M.A. (2013), “A high performance work
practices taxonomy: integrating the literature and directing future research”, Journal of
43,1 Management, Vol. 39 No. 5, pp. 1184-1220.
Rabl, T., Jayasinghe, M., Gerhart, B. and K€ uhlmann, T.M. (2014), “A meta-analysis of country
differences in the high-performance work system–business performance relationship: the roles
of national culture and managerial discretion”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 99 No. 6,
pp. 1011-1041.
174 *Rhee, S.-Y., Oh, H.J. and Yu, G.J. (2018), “High-performance work systems and firm capabilities in
Korea: a fit perspective with organizational culture”, Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources,
Vol. 56 No. 3, pp. 317-340.
Rowley, C., Bae, J., Horak, S. and Bacouel-Jentjens, S. (2017), “Distinctiveness of human resource
management in the Asia Pacific region: typologies and levels”, The International Journal of
Human Resource Management, Vol. 28 No. 10, pp. 1393-1408.
*Ryu, S. and Kim, S. (2013), “First-line managers’ HR involvement and HR effectiveness: the case of
South Korea”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 52 No. 6, pp. 947-966.
Sa
a-P
erez, P.D. and Garc
ıa-Falc
on, J.M. (2002), “A resource-based view of human resource
management and organizational capabilities development”, The International Journal of
Human Resource Management, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 123-140.
Saridakis, G., Lai, Y. and Cooper, C.L. (2017), “Exploring the relationship between HRM and firm
performance: a meta-analysis of longitudinal studies”, Human Resource Management Review,
Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 87-96.
Serenko, A. (2013), “Meta-analysis of scientometric research of knowledge management: discovering
the identity of the discipline”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 17 No. 5, pp. 773-812.
*Shaw, J.D., Park, T.-Y. and Kim, E. (2013), “A resource-based perspective on human capital losses,
HRM investments, and organizational performance”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 34
No. 5, pp. 572-589.
*Shin, E. (2014), “Unions and the adoption of high-performance work systems in Korea: moderating
roles of firms’ competitive strategies”, The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, Vol. 25 No. 13, pp. 1858-1880.
Shin, D. and Konrad, A.M. (2017), “Causality between high-performance work systems and
organizational performance”, Journal of Management, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 973-997.
*Shin, S.J., Jeong, I. and Bae, J. (2018), “Do high-involvement HRM practices matter for worker
creativity? a cross-level approach”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management,
Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 260-285.
Spector, P.E. (2019), “Do not cross me: optimizing the use of cross-sectional designs”, Journal of
Business and Psychology, Vol. 34, pp. 125-137.
Torraco, R.J. (2005), “Writing integrative literature reviews: guidelines and examples”, Human
Resource Development Review, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 356-367.
Wang, Y., Kim, S., Rafferty, A. and Sanders, K. (2020), “Employee perceptions of HR practices: a
critical review and future directions”, The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 128-173.
Whitener, E.M. (2001), “Do high commitment human resource practices affect employee commitment?
a cross-level analysis using hierarchical linear modeling”, Journal of Management, Vol. 27 No. 5,
pp. 515-535.
Yang, H. (2011), “The trend of and challenges facing HRM systems in Korean firms”, Korean Journal
of Management, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 31-49.
Yang, H. and Rowley, C. (2008), “Performance management in South Korea”, in Varma, A., Budhwar,
P.S. and DeNisi, A. (Eds), Performance Management Systems: A Global Perspective, Routledge,
London, pp. 210-222.
*Yalabik, Z.Y., Chen, S.-J., Lawler, J. and Kim, K. (2008), “High-performance work system and Review of
organizational turnover in East and Southeast Asian countries”, Industrial Relations: A Journal
of Economy and Society, Vol. 47 No. 1, pp. 145-152. SHRM
research in
Korea
Corresponding author
Jinuk Oh can be contacted at: jinuk.oh@uoguelph.ca
175

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com