Human Resource Architectures for New Teachers in Flemish Primary Education

• Published in: Educational management, administration & leadership administration & leadership, 2016-11, Vol.44 (6), p.970-995
• Main Authors: Vekeman, Eva, Devos, Geert, Valcke, Martin
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Administrative Organization; Administrator Role; Beginning Teacher Induction; Beginning Teachers; Belgium; Coding; Educational Environment; Educational leadership; Educational Objectives; Educational Practices; Elementary education; Elementary School Teachers; Faculty Mobility; Foreign Countries; Human resource management; Human Resources; Labor Turnover; Personnel Management; Primary Education; Principals; Quality of education; School principals; Semi Structured Interviews; Teacher Recruitment; Teacher Selection; Tenure
• ISSN: 1741-1432; 1741-1440
• DOI: 10.1177/1741143215587309

Since research shows that the quality of a school’s teaching force is related to its personnel practices, there is a growing interest in human resource management (HRM) in education. Existing research has generated insights into the differences, constraints and effects of single and isolated HR practices. Yet, little research is available examining bundles of HR practices (that is, HR architecture) from a principal’s perspective. This article investigates how and why HR architectures for new teachers are configured by principals by looking at the ways principals make sense of hiring, induction and tenure practices. The analysis is based on semi-structured interviews with 54 primary school principals in Flanders (Belgium). After coding the interview transcripts using descriptive categories, the transcripts were coded based on principal’s strategic orientation and human resource orientation. Looking at the differences and commonalities in these orientations, four HR architectures were identified: an administrative, a developmental, a strategic and a strategic-developmental HR architecture. These architectures showed that only a minority of principals configure bundles of HR practices for new teachers strategically. Moreover, they point to a disharmony in principals’ beliefs regarding how new teachers should be managed. Differences between these four HR architectures can be found in the extent to which principals perceive and cope with external challenges. Suggestions for further research, limitations and implications of this study are discussed.