Evidence-based HRM

Dr Russell Wordsworth and Professor Joana Kuntz summarise the findings of their recent study, undertaken with Master of Organisational Psychology student Zoe O’Sullivan, into the barriers and enablers of evidence-based human resource management.

As the field of HRM becomes more data-driven, there is increased potential for HR practitioners to adopt an evidence-based approach to decision-making. EvidenceBased Human Resource Management (EBHRM) offers a structured framework to guide the conscientious, explicit and judicious use of the best available evidence.

EBHRM involves six main steps: formulating answerable questions, sourcing relevant evidence (including scientific research, professional expertise, organisational data and stakeholder input), critically appraising its quality and applicability, synthesising findings, applying them to practice and evaluating outcomes to inform decisions.

The Case For EBRHM

EBHRM ensures decisionmaking is problemcentred, rigorous, defensible and impactful. It invites HR practitioners to ground their decisions in multiple sources of evidence to improve the likelihood of favourable outcomes and reduce the risk of costly mistakes. As such, EBHRM has the potential to enhance the credibility and strategic influence of the HR function by demonstrating measurable intervention impact, thus positioning HR practitioners as strategic advisors to senior leadership. EBHRM also fosters innovation and resilience through the development of a culture that values inquiry, learning and critical thinking.

The Persistent Gap Between Evidence And Practice

Despite these benefits, the adoption of EBHRM remains limited. Research consistently highlights a tendency among HR professionals to rely on intuition, anecdotal knowledge and what has worked in the past.

We sought to understand the reasons for the lack of adoption of EBHRM and the persistence of the ‘research-practice gap’. Here’s what we found.

Barriers to Research Use

Barriers to research use identified by HR practitioners included research accessibility, relevance and language complexity. Limited access to scholarly publications, high journal subscription costs and a preference for openaccess resources discouraged practitioners from engaging with research. A lack of dedicated time during work hours to engage with research, alongside competing operational priorities, relegated research and evidence gathering to a discretionary activity often undertaken outside of work hours or ignored altogether. For many, engaging in EBHRM was considered an unpaid and unrecognised task. Practitioners with strong research backgrounds or training were more inclined to value and apply evidence in their practice. In contrast, those without such backgrounds often held a negative disposition towards researchers and their research and were much less likely to seek out or integrate scientific evidence in their decisionmaking. Finally, insufficient organisational or leadership support was a common barrier to adopting EBHRM.

EBHRM ensures decisionmaking is problem-centred, rigorous, defensible and impactful.

ENABLERS OF EBHRM

Practitioners with strong academic backgrounds, particularly those with postgraduate education, felt equipped to overcome research translation issues, to source appropriate research and appraise evidence quality. Additionally, organisations that prioritised evidencebased practices – by offering training, allocating financial and time resources for EBHRM, and fostering a culture of continuous learning – enhanced practitioners’ capacity to integrate research into their work.

Collaboration between practitioners and academics was another enabler for co-creating practical solutions. Successful collaborations left practitioners eager to re-engage with researchers to further develop their knowledge and analytical skills. Moreover, access to practitioner-friendly resources, such as evidence summaries, made research digestible and actionable. Finally, practitioners with a strong learning orientation were more likely to engage in EBHRM, pointing to the importance of fostering a strong learning culture in organisations.

Navigating The Tensions Of Ebhrm

Practitioners identified a tension between the generic application of research findings and their need for contextspecific solutions. Some also struggled to reconcile the value of research with the value of their cumulative professional experience. However, EBHRM encourages the integration of both sources of evidence. Tension was also evident between the time required for rigorous evidence appraisal and the need for time-critical decision-making in HR. This was further reflected in a tension between the drawn-out production of robust scientific research and the need to access evidence that informs decisions around emerging or topical challenges in HRM.

BRIDGING THE GAP: OUR RECOMMENDATIONS

For practitioners: Develop your critical thinking and research appraisal skills by engaging with researchers and through reflective professional development. Learn to frame problems as answerable questions and to ask critical questions about the evidence underpinning HR practices. Engage in reading guided by academics or more experienced practitioners. Be advocates for EBHRM by fostering a culture that encourages the questioning of assumptions and basing decisions on sound evidence. For academics: Improve science communication to make research more accessible to practitioners. Use platforms like LinkedIn, professional newsletters and blogs to share practitioner-friendly research summaries. Partner with practitioners, professional bodies and organisations, and serve as advisors or consultants for research-informed projects.

For organisations: Provide resources, such as research subscriptions, funding for training and opportunities for HR practitioners to engage with research and researchers. Prioritise evidence-based practice by embedding EBHRM into HR job descriptions and creating a learning culture that values research.

For professional bodies (eg, HRNZ): Curate and share accessible research resources, host workshops and encourage knowledge-sharing forums between academics and practitioners. This will help highlight the value of evidencebased practices through certifications and conferences to drive broader adoption of EBHRM.

Dr Russell Wordsworth is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Canterbury Business School, where he teaches in the field of Human Resource Management. His core research interests centre on employee turnover and retention, career transitions and career sustainability. Russell is a Chartered Member of HRNZ and a member of the HRNZ Academic Branch.

Joana Kuntz is a Professor at the University of Canterbury. She conducted her research and consulting work in Europe and the United States of America before joining the University of Canterbury. For the past 20 years, Joana has collaborated with organisations across sectors to advance socially responsible leadership practices, focusing on ways that leaders can develop employee resilience, change capabilities and foster inclusivity.