Conceptual foundations for designing human resource management systems in enterprises and their classification

Abstract

The article provides a meta-level analysis of the conceptual foundations for designing human resource management (HRM) systems in enterprises and proposes their scholarly classification. It is argued that an HRM system is not a set of isolated functions or a structural unit, but a holistic configuration of interrelated practices, policies, processes, and institutional structures aimed at attracting, developing, motivating, and retaining personnel to achieve the enterprise's strategic objectives. Adjacent categories are delineated: HRM system, HR policy, HR strategy, HR function, and HR department as distinct levels of abstraction. The evolution of personnel management paradigms is traced from personnel administration through the Harvard and Michigan models to strategic HRM and the contemporary pluralistic landscape encompassing sustainable HRM, people analytics, agile HR, and common good approach. It is shown that the paradigm shift occurred as an ontological change — from viewing people as a cost item to treating them as a strategic asset. Four conceptual models of HRM system design are systematized — universalistic, contingency, configurational, and contextual — with a critical analysis of their explanatory power, limitations, and complementarity. A systems approach to HRM design is elaborated through the horizontal coherence of practices (bundles), vertical alignment with strategy, and the concept of HRM system strength as defined by Bowen and Ostroff. It is established that an HRM system simultaneously constitutes a structural reality and a socially constructed entity. A six-criteria classification of HRM systems is developed based on strategic orientation (control–commitment), HR architecture, institutional context, organizational life cycle stage, enterprise size, and industry specifics. The author's position regarding the Ukrainian context as a fragmented hybrid in transition, comprising post-Soviet, neoliberal, European integration, and war-driven layers, is substantiated. The necessity of contextual HRM design rather than mechanical copying of best practices is demonstrated.