Labor Market Intermediaries and the New Paradigm for Human Resources
Labor Market Intermediaries and the New Paradigm for Human Resources
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/19416520.2013.774213
复制
发表时间：
2013-06-01
影响因子：
21.2
通讯作者：
Hamori, Monika
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bonet, Rocio;Cappelli, Peter;Hamori, Monika
劳动力市场中介机构（LMIs）是介于个体工人和需要完成工作的组织之间的实体。它们包括知名的业务，例如充当填补职位空缺的经纪人的猎头公司和向客户租赁劳动力的临时机构，但也包括不太熟悉的实体，例如承担就业的法律的义务的专业雇主组织（PEO）为客户服务。LMI在个体工人和需要完成工作的组织之间进行调解，塑造工人如何与组织匹配，如何执行任务，以及如何解决冲突[Autor，D.H.（2009年）。劳动力市场中介研究：导论。in d.作者（编辑），劳动力市场中介研究（pp.第1 - 26段）。芝加哥，IL：芝加哥大学出版社]。它们从根本上消除了由雇主执行的管理方面。LMI的增长和日益突出对于所有与工作场所相关的研究都很重要，因为我们不能再对组织中的工人进行研究，并假设他们都是雇员：有些可能是与代理机构签订合同的临时工，有些可能是由PEO雇用的，有些可能为供应商工作。重要的原因是因为LMI似乎改变了各方的态度和行为。例如，他们将企业与雇主的双边关系转变为三方三角关系。他们很可能会产生双重忠诚问题，个人感到与为他们提供当前工作的猎头公司以及他们的雇主或雇用他们的机构以及他们目前所代表的客户有联系。最根本的是，它们挑战了我们用来理解工作场所的现有范式：例如，当雇主雇用中介机构安排的临时工成为永久性工作时，吸引-选择-自然减员是否有任何相关性？当对你下一份工作最有影响力的人是一名猎头顾问时，职业发展意味着什么？已经有大量关于劳动力市场指数的文献，但这些文献分布在各个学科和领域，主要研究与使用劳动力市场指数相关的劳动力市场结果。文学缺乏管理的声音。我们对LMI对工作场所态度和行为的影响知之甚少，这是组织行为学的核心焦点;关于LMI和外部招聘的相关兴起如何改变我们应该如何思考招聘和选拔等主题，这是人事心理学的核心关注点;我们更不知道LMIs如何改变公司对公司能力和边界的思考方式，这是战略的核心主题，当公司的劳动力实际上被另一个组织雇用时，或者当它可以很快重新洗牌时。我们开发了一个LMIs的分类法，并使用它来分类新兴的，但脱节的文献LMIs在社会科学。我们将LMI分为三个主要属性的人力资源（HR）的做法，他们执行：信息提供者，媒人，管理员。我们首先描述了LMI活动如何不同于传统关系中雇主执行的人力资源管理实践。其次，我们概述了现有的研究LMIs如何影响就业成果，如获得就业，工资，与工作相关的态度和行为，工作条件和技能发展。最后，我们强调了管理研究，特别是新的，未充分研究的研究问题，需要解决的LMIs的影响。
Labor market intermediaries (LMIs) are entities that stand between the individual worker and the organization that needs work done. They include well-known operations such as executive search firms that act as brokers to fill jobs and temp agencies that lease labor to clients but also less familiar entities such as professional employer organizations (PEOs) that take on the legal obligations of employment for clients. LMI's mediate between individual workers and the organizations that need work done, shaping how workers are matched to organizations, how tasks are performed, and how conflicts are resolved [Autor, D.H. (2009). Studies of labor market intermediation: Introduction. In D. Autor (Ed.), Studies of labor market intermediation (pp. 1-26). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press]. They essentially disintermediate aspects of management that had been performed by employers. The growth and increasing prominence of LMI's is important for all research associated with the workplace because we can no longer do a study of workers in an organization and assume that they are all employees: Some may be temps under contract to an agency, some may be employed by a PEO, some may work for vendors. The reason that matters is because LMI's appear to alter attitudes and behaviors on all sides. For example, they change the bilateral, employee-employer relationship into a three-way triangular relationship. They may well create dual allegiance issues, where individuals feel ties to the search firm that placed them in their current job and their employer or the agency that employs them and the client on whose behalf they are currently working. Most fundamentally, they challenge the existing paradigms we have used to understand the workplace: Does attraction-selection-attrition have any relevance, for example, when employers hire temps placed by agencies into permanent jobs? What does career development mean when the person with the most influence over your next job is a search consultant? There is already an extensive literature on LMIs, but it is spread across disciplines and fields and mainly examines the labor market outcomes associated with the use of LMIs. The literature lacks a management voice. We know relatively little about the effects of LMIs on workplace attitudes and behaviors, the central focus of organizational behavior; about how LMIs and the associated rise of outside hiring change how we should think about topics such as recruiting and selection, a central concern of personnel psychology; we know even less about how LMIs change the way firms think about competencies and boundaries of the firm, central topics in strategy, when the firm's workforce is actually employed by another organization or when it can be reshuffled very quickly. We develop a taxonomy of LMIs and use it to classify the burgeoning but disjointed literature on LMIs across the social sciences. We classify LMIs in terms of three main attributes of human resource (HR) practices that they perform: Information Providers, Matchmakers, and Administrators. We describe first how LMI activities differ from HR management practices performed by employers in the traditional relationship. Second, we outline the existing research about how LMIs affect employment outcomes, such as access to employment, wages, work-related attitudes and behaviors, working conditions, and skill development. Finally, we highlight the implications of LMIs for management research, especially new, understudied research questions that need to be addressed.