The purpose of this paper is to examine the similarities and differences in human resource (HR) practices between large and mid‐sized organizations.
With organization life cycle as the theoretical base, this study collects data on HR practices from a sample of mid‐sized firms in one western state and compares the results to a previously published study of HR practices in much larger firms. Mid‐sized firms are defined as having between 300 and 3,000 employees (mean=1,205); the average number of employees in the large firm sample was 30,700.
While there are some similarities in HR practices, it appears that HR organizations in large firms are more targeted at strategic business issues and have achieved a greater degree of outsourcing and/or information technology application for the routine, file maintenance aspects of HR work. On the other hand, HR informants in mid‐sized firms are more operationally focused, appear to be more satisfied with the skills and knowledge of their significantly smaller HR staffs, and give their HR organizations higher ratings on performance along multiple dimensions.
Limitations to the present study include the use of a single informant and a limited sample of mid‐sized firms (n=32). However, the study suggests numerous possibilities for future research, including expansion of the sample both in size and geographic scope, the collection of measures of performance for comparison with those of HR satisfaction, and fuller development of a set of expectations for HR focus dependent on the size and rate of growth of the organization.
The HR practices of large and small (less than 500 employees) firms have been studied in the past. This paper fills a gap in organization life cycle theory by examining HR practices in mid‐sized firms, suggesting in particular that the drive to refocus HR on strategic issues in large firms may be inappropriate in enterprises with 300 to 3,000 employees.
