Conclusion
This review has synthesized scholarly inquiry into GHRM since Renwick et al. (2008) presented the seminal review work that laid the foundation for the recent GHRM research. The first objective of the review—conceptually linking various treatments of the GHRM concept to its origins and evolution—reveals an urgent need to provide clarity to the concept of GHRM, and thereby supports the development of a systematic and valid GHRM instrument that has cross-cultural validity. The second objective of this review—evaluating theoretical perspectives—proved more difficult. Owing to the relatively young age of GHRM as a field, there is not yet sufficient variety in the theoretical perspectives utilized to assess which are likely to prove most useful for future development. Strategic HRM seems to be the dominant meta-theory for the foundation of GHRM, yet the field of strategic HRM itself has been criticized as lacking theoretical depth and sophistication (e.g., Guest, 1997, 2011). However, this weakness creates various opportunities for innovative and important research in the GHRM field. Our third objective for this review—integrating empirical evidence that explains GHRM-related phenomena—reveals a fast-growing GHRM literature with many issues still unanswered. Our proposed framework highlights and organizes several likely antecedents, consequences, and contingencies of GHRM and positions GHRM systems within an organization’s wider management context. With the continued awareness of environmental sustainability, GHRM is now clearly a legitimate field of academic pursuit. It has the potential to offer new insights into transformation of the forms and means of management, employment, and organizing not only in Asia, but across the world.