Human Resource Management (HRM), as a sub-discipline of management science, is in its infancy. HRM practices are often Utopian in expectation and fail to incorporate a realistic view of existing knowledge bases in the psychological, social, and biological sciences. The HRM discipline relies upon theoretical approaches (eg theories of motivation, satisfaction, and performance) which are: (1) almost invariably linear in conceptualisation and depend largely upon correlational evidence, (2) frequently validated within nonrepresentative contexts that are overly constrained by researchers and (3) overly simplistic in that the constraints and patterns imposed by our biological, psychological and social systems are frequently ignored or assumed to constitute random error within the models. This frequently translates into HRM practices which map reasonably well onto theory yet fall short of yielding expected outcomes. The theories do not match the realities observed. We point to nonlinear dynamics and chaos theory as a way of conceptualising how common HRM practices may translate into observable outcomes. Such an approach will force managers to pull back from simple reliance on linear predictions and realise that truly effective HRM practices should be sensitive to the unique, complex and less systematically predictable patterns of human behaviour.

Although most managers and researchers believe planning is beneficial for organizations, many research studies have failed to prove these benefits are significant. Methodological problems have certainly detracted from researchers' abilities to show a planning-performance linkage.

The article deals with definitional issues about planning and five planning modes. Contingency propositions are developed to link the planning modes with several strategic and contextual situations. For example, it is argued that, while (1) prospector-type strategies are best implemented with externally oriented planning systems like longer-range planning or strategic planning, (2) defender-type strategies are better with internal orientations, like comprehensive planning or implementation-oriented planning. In addition to strategy, other contingency variables examined are user sector, purchase frequency and the stage of product life cycle in which the planning is undertaken.

Planning has adherents as well as detractors among managers and academics. Both sides of the debate can be seen in Mintzberg's (1994a & 1994b) recent publications on the “rise and fall” and “fall and rise” of strategic planning. Many have pointed to planning's benefits to organisations (eg Ansoff, 1977; Bryson, 1988; Langley, 1988). Yet research studies have failed to prove that these benefits are significant (eg Fredrickson & Mitchell, 1984; Fulmer & Rue, 1974; Grinyer & Norburn, 1975; Powell, 1992; Robinson & Pearce, 1983; Pearce, Freeman, & Robinson, 1987). Pearce, et al. (1987) noted a lack of attention to contextual influences; inconsistencies in operationalisation of planning; measurement validity problems; ignoring implementation factors, time frames, and size effects as the methodological problems in this area of research that may have affected researchers' chances of finding the expected link. Rhyne (1986: 423) also argued that some ambiguous findings were attributable to “the manner in which planning was actually carried out, rather than to planning itself”.

Another possible weakness in the “planning” research is that it has not discriminated between modes or approaches to planning. The assumption seems to have been that “more planning is better,” or that longer-term, strategic planning should work in all or most contexts (Bryson, 1988; Eadie, 1983; James, 1984). The present article questions this view and suggests that less sophisticated planning may be better suited to some contexts and more elaborate approaches to others. Robinson and Pearce (1983) support such an approach, suggesting that less formalised planning may be preferable in certain situations.

The article builds on Hofer's (1975) “contingency theory of business strategy,” as well as on Hambrick and Lei's (1985) “prioritization of contingency variables.” From a theoretical standpoint, a contingency approach is particularly well suited to strategy-related research (Galbraith & Kazanjian, 1986; Hofer, 1975) and this approach could hold the solution to an understanding of the elusive planning-performance link. Although past planning research has failed to provide conclusive evidence that a given planning system helps performance in all situations, certain planning systems may work well in some contexts but not in others.

This article begins with a brief discussion of planning and some definitions of different planning modes. A number of contingency propositions are then developed to link these planning modes with variables that are of interest to contemporary management researchers and practitioners.

This paper addresses some of the limitations of the current approach to the conception, adoption and installation of working arrangements. It has been argued that emphasis on bottom line, shortermism and control can result in short term benefits. This partly explains the continuous reorganization of the workplace in some companies. The paper underscores the need for organizations to articulate a “purpose” for working arrangements. It is argued that there are two dimensions of the purpose of novel working arrangement: (a) providing appropriate “intrinsic” and “extrinsic” reward for internal stakeholders and (b) achieving organizational objectives (eg meeting customer expectations). The paper proposes a framework for adopting and installing a working arrangement which is based on auditing the work system.

Organizational restructuring in Western economies has proceeded along different trajectories during the latter part of the 1980s and early 1990s. Traditional theories of organizational restructuring have inherent limitations associated with a ‘growth bias’. Various new concepts have been put forward, both prescriptively in order to shape organizational change, and analytically in order to capture the nature of those changes. By contrast, these concepts are premised on organizational workforce reduction. This article considers four widely diffused concepts of organisational restructuring - downsizing, delayering, lean production and re-engineering - and argues that the trajectories of change require a broader understanding than has been provided by existing concepts. Towards this end, an integrated model is put forward.