Resumo

There is a growing realization that national, institutional and cultural differences are key to determine how Human Resources Development operates but their impact is under researched (Garavan et al., 2004). Gooderham et al. (Gooderham et al. 2018) argue that the majority, of the most cited studies on the field of Human Resources Management, are on organizational performance or on the influence of Human Resources Management on individual performance. They refer to this as consequence of a central stream of research that is largely context-free. They also refer to Brewster (Brewster et al. 2016

The goal of this paper is to study the differences and similarities across countries of four variables of Training and Development and compare them to the varieties of capitalism, observing how they help to describe the complementarities across subsystems and help support or not this theory. For that purpose it was made a quantitative analyses with the Cranfield Network on International Human Resource Management (Cranet) database, in the topic of Training and Development (T&D). The study was based on comparisons between different countries to establish a dialogue with varieties of capitalism.

One of the main components of organizational development and its capacity of remaining competitive is the ability of its workforce to continuous learn and improve (Salas et al. 2012; Stavrou and Brewster, 2005; Peretz & Rosenblatt, 2011). comparative contextual framework for HRM (Gooderham et al., 2018) helped us explain how the bundle training and development, on the organizational level practices allow nation level discussions. Empirical research on comparative analyzes can be seen as an endeavor to analyze HRM in a deeper and empirical way.

In order to obtain relevant and structured data, this study was based on the Cranfield Network on International Human Resource Management (Cranet). For this study, it was used Brazilian and international Cranet database. The data was accessed by contact with members of Cranet in Brazil, followed by a mentorship on how to analyze the database responses. The data from this research was collected between May and September of 2014. comparatives analyzes on HRM enhance comparisons between different countries. Final report used had : Brazil 337 responses, Germany 220 responses and UK 141 responses

Results from this question shows that Brazilian companies estimated systematically the necessity of training more frequently than UK and Germany. Germany results for this questions are consistent with and CME country. As showed before, this variety of capitalism has the characteristics of and coordinate integration between different institutions.Results from Brazil for this question are also consistent. As Latin America has the characteristics of under skilled workers (Schneider, 2009), in many times private organizations have the necessity to enhance training and development for their workers

We found that all the variables analyzed showed that Brazil, as an HME, puts more effort in this HR subsystem and that can be explained by, the not only lower investment, but also lower quality of the national educational system, therefore offering lower level of workforce quality.

Brewster, C. & Mayrhofer, W. (2012). Handbook of research on comparative human resource management. Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing Inc. Hall, P. A., & Soskice, D. (2001). An Introduction to Varieties of Capitalism. Varieties of Capitalism, 1–68. https://doi.org/10.1093/0199247757.003.0001 Stavrou, E., & Brewster, C. (2005). The Configurational Approach to Linking Strategic Human Resource Management Bundles with Business Performance: Myth or Reality? Management Revue,16(2), 186-201. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/41782039