The international HRM literature identifies different stages of internationalisation (ethnocentric, polycentric, regiocentric, geocentric); with a progression towards the later, most “advanced” stage. This paper uses information from European international companies to argue that most organizations still organize international HRM along ethnocentric lines and that, for a number of reasons, they are right to do so. We argue that a model where nearly all cases fall into one category may have reached the limits of its usefulness.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mayrhofer et al. (1996) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: