Typologies of HR roles 69

HR role typologies represent a significant part of HRM scholarship. Within them, both strategic legitimacy and competencies are largely addressed, as such models generally outline roles and competencies HR practitioners can undertake for better integration into the strategic spectrum. The first typology addressing legitimacy and strategic competency is Legge (1978). In addition to painting the predicament personnel managers found themselves in

regarding the vicious circles, the early work of Legge (1978) also put forward two roles personnel managers could take as a means of achieving greatly needed power and authority.

Legge’s typology included embracing the conformistinnovator or deviant innovator role to obtain power and influence. The ambiguity associated with

- 70 -

what role the HRF played in performance is due to overlaps with general management, and the position HR managers are placed in by having to represent employees while simultaneously sitting with management. This required HR managers to overcome such ambiguity through power and authority (Guest & King, 2004). Further aspirational strategic role topologies followed Legge.

Tyson and Fell (1986) provided three positions for the HRF that incorporated a spectrum of activities stemming from least strategic to most strategic. They used a building metaphor (Tyson, 1987) to demonstrate this continuum. This range flows from ‘low discretion to high discretion’ (Caldwell, 2001). The ‘clerk of works’ model places the role of the HRF2 _{squarely in an}

administrative support role. The position of the HRF is concerned with recruitment, record keeping and welfare. There is no involvement with business planning, nor is there any significant training given to HR

professionals, nor any authority granted to the HEF- which in turn removed the need for any political positioning of the HRF. Delegation of authority is accordingly given to the line.

‘The contracts manager’ modelhas the HRF acting on behalf of the line management, largely in the capacity of industrial relations experts who fix issues arising with trade unions. The value of the HR professional is in maintaining harmony through the ability to make timely informal agreements as well as decisions to do so. The ‘architect’ model sees the HR director as a

2 _{While the original texts of many of these early typologies used the terminology ‘personnel manager’ and ‘personnel}

management’, I have simply used the latter terms of ‘HRM’, ‘HR manager’, and ‘HRF’ in order to keep a consistent discourse.

- 71 -

part of the organisation, building a means to contribute to the business’s success through explicit policies aligned with strategic planning. There is accordingly an integrated control system. As such, the influence of these three models incorporates different traditions as outlined by Tyson (1987). ‘The Clerk of works’ model draws from the traditions of welfare and employment management, while The Contracts Manager Model also draws from these with the addition of industrial relations. The role of architect subsequently draws from professional traditions that see HR practitioners take on a role of change, in addition to also drawing from the previously discussed traditions of the other models.

Caldwell (2001) notes that while Tyson’s model is highly useful and likely the most well-known in understanding HR roles, it omits a critical element of ‘change agent’. He also draws attention to the constraints of typology that is one dimensional and linear. The ability to incorporate ‘change agent’ within such a framework accordingly presents difficulties (Storey, 1992). As such, Caldwell (2001) outlines the significance of ‘change maker’ first being portrayed in a study undertaken by Storey (1992). This resulted in the utilisation of two axes, and a more dynamic two-dimensional model. The model incorporated advisors, handmaidens, regulators, and change makers (Storey, 1992).

The vertical axis of the model runs from strategic to tactical, while the horizontal axis, which runs from left to right through the centre of the horizontal axis starts with interventionary and flows to non-interventionary. Accordingly, the change-maker role is interventionary and strategic. Advisors

- 72 -

are strategic and non-interventionary, while regulators are interventionary and tactical. Handmaidens represent the finial typology in which the role

incorporates neither strategic nor interventionary activities. Accordingly, this role (tactical/non-interventionary) represents the administrative and

operational elements HR has sought to distance itself from in its battle for legitimacy. Table 2.1 offers a comparison of these typologies. It illustrates the strategic and operational nature of the role aligned to influential typologies.

Table 2.1: Comparing HR role typologies

Taken from Welch and Welch (2012)

The impact of such earlier prescriptive typologies in practice, was however, marginal. As Caldwell (2001) noted: despite plenty of opportunity, in the 1980s HR managers appeared to have made little progress - adopting neither of these roles (Clark, 1993; Guest, 1991). Only a limited number of HR managers were found to have partly adopted the role of deviant innovator in the 1990s (Hope‐Hailey, Gratton, McGovern, Stiles, & Truss, 1997). Nearing the end of the 20th _{century, Ulrich (1997) put forward four roles in which he}

argued the HRF could create value for their organisation (Buyens & De Vos, 2001).

- 73 -

These proposed new roles of HR stressed the importance of “even closer integration with the business organisation” (Wright, 2008, p. 1068). The classifications of Ulrich and colleagues (Ulrich, 1997; Ulrich & Beatty, 2001; Ulrich & Brockbank, 2005) seemed to have significantly more impact that of previous typologies. They have been embraced by academics and practitioners alike (Wright, 2008). At the same time, Barney and Wright’s (1997) article placed HRM in a central position of the resource-based view of the firm. This position directly linked HRM with achieving competitive advantage,

accordingly by default placing the role of HR practitioners within a strategic space (Caldwell, 2011).

The emphasis on the new and more strategic role presented in prescriptive literature (Caldwell, 2011) is reflected in Ulrich’s work. He presents four roles, also operating upon a two dimensional axis like the previous work of Storey (1992). Ulrich’s model (1997) accordingly depicts the roles of strategic partner, change agent, administrative expert, and employee champion as shown in Figure 2.3. As illustrated in Figure 2.3, the vertical axis ranges between strategic and day-to-day operations, while the vertical axis captures processes and people. Rearrangement of the HRF is argued to be required (Wright, 2008), with such roles creating a means for the HRF to create value (Buyens & De Vos, 2001). The role of strategic partner is one where line managers partner with HR practitioners to enable operational effectiveness (efficiency or processes and systems) and effective creation and

- 74 -

Figure 2.3: The Ulrich model (1997)

Future/Strategic Focus

Process Strategic Partner Change Agent People

Administrative Expert

Employee Champion

Day-to day/Operational Focus Taken from Ulrich (1997)

While the influence of these typologies has been very impactful on

scholarship, as already discussed, the tension of prescriptive roles, rhetoric and reality may however, further result in tensions and role conflict. Research has shown that HR practitioners purport to act differently to a variety of HR issues, and accordingly identify with multiple roles (Caldwell, 2001;

Pritchard, 2010; Procter & Currie, 1999).