International human resource management - Academic parochialism in editorial boards of the "top" 22 journals on international human resource management

Despite over 20 years of academic hype, international human resource management (IHRM) literature has been only partly successful in its original claim to offer a universal panacea for complexities of managing people that can transcend national, cultural and economic divides. This paper provides evidence from earlier studies on limited nature of geographic coverage of the mainstream IHRM writing and surveys the editorial membership, policies and guidelines of a select number of journals with a view to contribute to our understanding of North American and Western European domination in this field Exploring the major constraints in geographical and cultural reach of the IHRM journals and the geographic homogeneity in the membership profiles of their editorial boards, the paper offers strategies for change towards a more inclusive approach to research and writing in the field of IHRM.