Storey’s Typologies of HRM

Introduction: HRM Is Not One-Size-Fits-All

One of the biggest challenges in HR is recognizing that there’s no universal model of how it should function. Organizations vary in goals, culture, leadership, and workforce composition—and their HR practices reflect these differences.

John Storey’s typologies offer a powerful way to classify and understand these variations. First introduced in 1992 and refined in 2001, his framework provides four distinct types of HRM based on two dimensions: hard vs soft and utilitarian vs developmental.

The Two Axes: Defining the Dimensions

Storey’s model is based on two intersecting dimensions:

1. Hard vs Soft HRM

   • Hard HRM: Focus on control, efficiency, and viewing employees as resources
   • Soft HRM: Emphasis on communication, trust, commitment, and treating employees as valued contributors

2. Utilitarian vs Developmental

   • Utilitarian: HR is used as a tool to achieve organizational ends
   • Developmental: HR aims to help people grow, not just meet business goals

These axes intersect to create four distinct typologies.

The Four Typologies

1. Hard-Utilitarian

• People as costs
• HR used to maximize efficiency
• Focus on performance, control, discipline
• Examples: tightly managed retail, manufacturing

2. Soft-Utilitarian

• People as assets
• HR used to increase performance through motivation
• Emphasis on incentives, communication, culture
• Examples: sales-driven tech firms

3. Hard-Developmental

• People as future value
• HR focuses on upgrading skills to meet strategic needs
• Strong workforce planning and upskilling
• Examples: engineering firms with long lead times

4. Soft-Developmental

• People as inherently valuable
• HR helps employees reach their potential
• Emphasis on coaching, well-being, purpose
• Examples: NGOs, learning organizations

Practical Use of Storey’s Typology

This model is useful for:

• HR diagnostics – Understand current positioning
• Strategic alignment – Match HR approach to business strategy
• Culture shaping – Align HR with values and leadership style
• Change management – Shift from one type to another over time

Critiques and Cautions

Storey’s typologies are descriptive, not prescriptive. They don’t tell you which model to choose—but help you understand the implications.

Limitations include:

• Over-simplification – Real-world HR is often messy and mixed
• Context-dependence – Industry, region, and culture affect application
• Time-bound – The model reflects a 1990s view of HR that may need updating

Real-World Example

Conclusion: Know Your HR Identity

Storey’s typologies offer HR professionals a way to name and frame what they do—and what they want to become. Whether you’re designing policies, coaching leaders, or reshaping culture, knowing your HRM identity is a crucial first step.

There’s no “best” quadrant—only the one that fits your organization’s mission and people.