Configurational Perspective on HRM
HR isn’t just a collection of good ideas—it’s a system. The configurational perspective helps us understand how different practices work together to drive performance.
Most HR theories focus on what to do: train people, reward them, manage performance.
The Configurational Perspective shifts the question to how HR practices fit together. It’s not just about picking the right tools—but designing coherent systems where all parts reinforce one another.
What Is the Configurational Perspective?
This theory views HRM as a bundle or configuration of practices that must align internally and externally. It’s not enough to implement “best practices” individually—they must be part of a logical, mutually supportive system.
This perspective builds on and expands the Best Fit model. It argues that systemic consistency is what matters most.
Horizontal and Vertical Fit
Horizontal Fit: Coherence among HR practices
(e.g., training, rewards, and performance management all reinforce the same behaviors)Vertical Fit: Alignment of HR systems with business strategy
(e.g., aggressive talent development for a growth-focused strategy)
The configurational view says both are necessary.
Key Theorists and Models
Scholars like Delery and Doty (1996), MacDuffie (1995), and Becker & Huselid (1998) developed models showing that synergy between HR practices matters more than individual practices.
Some models even describe ideal configurations for specific strategies:
- Commitment HRM bundle: High training, internal mobility, team-based incentives, employee involvement
- Control HRM bundle: Low discretion, strict performance monitoring, transactional rewards
Configurational vs Contingency Approaches
While both stress fit, the contingency approach emphasizes matching HRM to the environment, while the configurational approach emphasizes internal coherence.
In practice, they work together:
- Contingency fit sets the direction
- Configurational fit ensures consistency
Practical Applications
Use the configurational lens to:
- Audit your current HR practices: Are they working together or at odds?
- Design HR strategies that support business goals holistically
- Avoid “Frankenstein HR”—mixing trendy practices that conflict
Strengths and Limitations
Strengths:
- Encourages systems thinking
- Highlights importance of consistency
- Integrates well with strategic HRM
Limitations:
- Complex to implement
- Difficult to measure fit empirically
- Doesn’t always account for dynamic change
HR as a Systems Architect
This model reframes HR as a systems designer. Success depends not on isolated policies, but on how well practices work together and support strategic aims.
Conclusion
The configurational perspective offers a powerful lens for building strategic, high-performing HR systems.
It reminds us: Good HR is not just about having the right pieces—but fitting them together in the right way.
Next, we’ll explore how national context shapes HR systems around the world—with the lens of Comparative International HRM.