Balancing Interests in the Search for Occupational Legitimacy: The HR Professionalization Project in Canada

• Author: Dionne Pohler,Chelsea Willness
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21579
• Published date: 01 May 2014
• Date: 01 May 2014

Human Resource Management, May–June 2014, Vol. 53, No. 3. Pp. 467–488

© 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com).

DOI:10.1002/hrm.21579

Correspondence to: Dionne Pohler, Johnson-Shoyama Graduate School of Public Policy, University of

Saskatchewan, 101 Diefenbaker Place, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, S7N 5B8, Canada, Phone: 306.966.1748,

Fax: 306.966.1967, E-mail: dionne.pohler@usask.ca.

BALANCING INTERESTS

IN THE SEARCH FOR

OCCUPATIONAL LEGITIMACY:

THE HR PROFESSIONALIZATION

PROJECT IN CANADA

DIONNE POHLER AND CHELSEA WILLNESS

Despite broad debates surrounding how the human resource management

occupation can increase its legitimacy, researchers have yet to examine the

collective steps HR practitioners are taking in this regard and the extent to

which they have been successful. We conduct a case study of the HR profes-

sionalization project in Canada via multisource qualitative and quantitative

data, which we analyze using a unique integration of the trait and control

models from the sociology of professions, as well as isomorphism from in-

stitutional theory. Viewed through the lens of these frameworks, we fi nd that

HR practitioners are attempting to emulate traits that defi ne traditional no-

tions of professions, and are aspiring to transcendent values associated with

balancing the sometimes confl icting interests of employers and employees.

Objective data from external stakeholders and institutions show that these

collective strategies have been somewhat successful in garnering greater le-

gitimacy thus far, particularly when comparisons are made with the HR pro-

fessional project in the United States. We highlight numerous implications

for future research and practice surrounding the legitimacy of the HR profes-

sion. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Keywords: international HRM, content analysis, qualitative research meth-

odology, ethics, institutional theory, professions

468 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, MAY–JUNE 2014

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

To the extent that

the long-term

sustainability and

effective functioning

of organizations and

society depend upon

striking a balance

between efficiency

and equity, what

is at stake in the

search for legitimacy

goes far beyond

the self-interest of

HR practitioners

wishing to secure

a seat at the senior

management table.

Introduction

The role of human resource manage-

ment as a function and its legitimacy

in the eyes of its stakeholders has

long been a subject of debate (Brandl

& Pohler, 2010; Farndale & Brewster,

2005; Legge, 1978, 2005; Wright, 2008).

Although proponents have claimed that the

legitimacy of the occupation is now recog-

nized worldwide (Losey, 1997, 1999), critics

still claim that HR is a low-level, reactive, and

cost-focused administrative function with

little autonomy, going as far as condemning

it as nothing more than a management con-

trol tool used to encourage ever-increasing

productivity while at the same

time minimizing investments in

employees (Hammonds, 2005).

Normative discursive argu-

ments abound surrounding what

HR “should” do in order to

increase its legitimacy, most focus-

ing on the need to create strategic

value for the organization (Beer,

1997; Lawler & Mohrman, 2003;

Ulrich, 1997; Ulrich & Brockbank,

2005), while few emphasize its role

as a moral and ethical steward in

balancing the pluralistic and some-

times competing interests of parties

to the employment relationship

(Kochan, 2004, 2007; Legge, 2005).

However, to the extent that the

long-term sustainability and effec-

tive functioning of organizations

and society depend upon striking

a balance between efficiency and

equity (Budd, 2004), what is at

stake in the search for legitimacy

goes far beyond the self-interest of

HR practitioners wishing to secure

a seat at the senior management

table. It requires a broader recog-

nition of the role that HR practi-

tioners can play in safeguarding a

transcendent value in a modern

democratic society (Freidson, 2001), vastly dis-

tinguishing HR from other managerial occu-

pations where the predominant emphasis is

on enhancing organizational efficiency.

Academic research on the legitimacy

of the HR function and its broader role has

examined how top managers view HR and HR

practitioners (Brandl & Pohler, 2010; Guest &

King, 2004), as well as how HR practi tioners

view themselves (Brown, Metz, Cregan, &

Kulik, 2009; Wright, 2008). However, to our

knowledge, there have been no systematic

studies of the collective activities performed

by HR practitioners in the search for legiti-

macy, and whether the approach has been

focused on increasing organizational effi-

ciency and enhancing strategic value or

balancing competing interests. Also absent

from the extant literature are objective indica-

tors of the extent to which such efforts have

been successful in garnering legitimacy from

external stakeholders. Furthermore, despite

attempts to integrate research on the legiti-

macy of the HR occupation with frameworks

developed in the broader sociology of pro-

fessions literature (e.g., Farndale & Brewster,

2005; Legge & Exley, 1975; Preece & Nicol,

1980; Watson, 1977), there remains a lack of

published empirical studies of the HR profes-

sionalization project in any country. Since

professionalization has been defined as the

collective struggle of members of an occupa-

tion group to delineate the scope and prac-

tice of their work, exert market control over

the provision of services, and/or to legitimate

their occupation (Collins, 1979; DiMaggio &

Powell, 1983; Larson, 1977), these are seri-

ous gaps in the research surrounding the

legitimacy of HR that must be addressed.

Therefore, the key research questions we ask

are: What are the collective activities undertaken

by HR practitioners in striving for occupational

legitimacy and to what extent have such efforts

been successful?

To answer these questions, we examine

the HR professionalization project in Canada

by applying an institutional theory lens to

two different models of professionalization:

the trait and control models (Legge & Exley,

1975; Preece & Nicol, 1980). We argue that HR

practitioners in Canada are attempting to cre-

ate occupational legitimacy by emulating the

traits of established, traditional professions

(a process described as institutional isomor-

phism by scholars such as DiMaggio & Powell,