global HRM staffing models

In large multinational conglomerate organizations, human resource management professionals inculcate unique staffing models. The multinational organizations may have different branches in different continents hence contain staff who can be summarized in three categories; namely, expatriate, host-country national, and third-country nationals. These categories of staff working in international companies define the models of global HRM staffing as discussed below.
Ethnocentric Staffing
In this model, HRM professionals select expatriates from the organization’s home country to occupy important positions in the Subsidiaries. This policy aims at ensuring that the subsidiaries are in line with the culture and organizational ethics of the home office. In most cases, the expatriates are appointed from the headquarter offices and transferred t the foreign office to safeguard the interest of the mother company. Ethnocentric staffing presents an advantage that the foreign subsidiaries are aligned with the interests and policies of the home offices. Also, ethnocentric staffing ensures there is no barrier to communication as well as presenting an aspect of predictability since the expatriates who are selected to serve in subsidiaries have a clear performance record. On the other hand, staffing of expatriates may be disadvantageous since it is costly as compared to hiring locals. Moreover, a company with a high ratio of expatriates may lose moral and social support from the locals (McNulty et al.

, 1312).
Polycentric Staffing
In this model, an organization staffs host-country nationals to serve across all employee positions; from clerks up to the top management positions. Polycentric staffing is common in highly industrious and developed countries including European countries, Japan, Austria, and Canada. Polycentric staffing has an obvious advantage since it is less costly; attributed to the exclusion of relocation expenses and premium compensation. Also, the local employees have a better understanding of the politics, culture, and law hence will offer guidance for the company in the foreign destinations. Moreover, a multinational organization which has a high ratio of local employees is likely to gain customer trust hence gaining competitive advantage. However, polycentric staffing poses a disadvantage in the sense that the locals may embrace their interests at the expense of the Company’s hence losing alignment with the home office (McNulty et al., 1314).
Geocentric Approach
In this approach, the multinational company hires employees with the most suitable qualities to serve in various positions, irrespective of their nationalities. The HR professionals utilizing this approach take all other factors (political, ethnic, government laws) as a constant. The HR team in the subsidiary company consults with international manpower agencies to identify the best employees for global posting. This model is advantageous since it uses an integrated business approach hence provides for a high degree of success (McNulty et al., 1318).
Regiocentric Staffing
Here, the multinational organization divides its business operations into international geographic regions. The HR professionals hire managers with the nationality of the respective region. This model is flexible since it allows for incorporation of expatriates in cases where product knowledge is crucial and hiring of regional managers where regional expertise is required (McNulty et al., 1322).
The geocentric approach is the most appropriate global staffing model since it utilizes an integrated business approach. The employees are hired purely on merit thus presenting a high probability of success. Moreover, as many scholars point out, a diverse workforce is rich in talent and skills hence it is highly productive.

Global HRM executives face challenges in managing global staff. For instance, the issue of managing a diverse workforce with cultural differences is affluent. In a case study that compared the culture of US and Dutch’s staff indicated a difference in the relevance of inclusivity of team employees. American employees believe in individualism while Dutch employees believe in collectivism in teamwork; this is a challenge in global staffing. Also, economic and legal factors may influence global staffing. For instance, in Germany, where the government recommends the use of co-determination to minimize labor conflicts has posed a challenge for global companies in Germany since they feel that the government should not decide on the management and role of organizations; hence influencing global staffing (McNulty et al., 1325).
Work Cited
McNulty, Yvonne, Helen De Cieri, and Kate Hutchings. “Do global firms measure expatriate return on investment? An empirical examination of measures, barriers, and variables influencing global staffing practices.” The International Journal of Human Resource Management 20.6 (2009): 1309-1326.