Six HR Models a Small Employer Can Actually Use, and When Each One Fits

Use the Ulrich model to decide what role HR plays, the Harvard framework to check that policy choices serve stakeholders, the Michigan model to align people practices with strategy, Kirkpatrick to evaluate training, Lewin to plan a change and Tuckman to understand a new team. Pick the model by the problem in front of you.

I am Mac Malbrough. I hold a J.D. and an MS-HRM, I am not an attorney, and this is general information, not legal advice. In graduate school I learned these models as vocabulary for exams. In practice I use them as thinking tools, the way a carpenter reaches for a particular saw. A model does not make a decision. It shows you where to look. I wrote this for small employers and solo HR professionals who hear these names in meetings and want to know whether any of them is worth the time.

The problem this solves: Training and HR decisions get made on whoever spoke last, with a model name thrown in, and nobody can say afterward whether the money changed anything.

How UHR solves it: The training needs analysis workbook ($39) finds and ranks the real gaps first, and the Training Evaluation Kit ($29) measures whether behavior changed afterward.

Why do HR models matter to a company of 40 people?

They matter because they give a shared language and a checklist for your own thinking. When you are the only person in HR, you have no colleague to ask whether you have missed something. A model asks the questions for you.

They also have limits. Most were developed with large organizations in mind. A small company will not run a full strategic alignment process or a formal four-level evaluation for every class. So for each model below, I give the idea, the source, a small-employer example and the part you can safely skip.

1. What is the Ulrich model, and when does it fit?

Dave Ulrich described a model of HR roles in his 1997 book Human Resource Champions. It is often summarized as four roles: a strategic partner who aligns people practices with business goals, an administrative expert who runs efficient processes, an employee champion who represents the workforce, and a change agent who helps the business adapt. A later version, popularly called the HR business partner model, grew from this work.

Use it when you are deciding where your time goes. If you spend nearly all of it on administration, the model shows what you are not doing. List your week and sort every task into the four roles. For a small company, the first goal is rarely a perfect balance. It is moving a few hours from paperwork to a business conversation. For how to build that skill, see how an HR business partner develops business judgment.

Safe to skip: the full structure of separate teams for each role. In a small company, one person plays all four.

2. What is the Harvard framework, and when does it fit?

The Harvard framework comes from the 1984 book Managing Human Assets by Michael Beer and colleagues. It connects the interests of stakeholders, such as owners, employees and the community, and situational factors, such as the labor market and the business strategy, to four sets of HR policy choices: employee influence, human resource flow, reward systems and work systems. The results are measured in commitment, competence, congruence and cost effectiveness.

Use it when you are changing a policy that affects many people, such as a new schedule system or a bonus plan. Ask who has a stake, what the market allows, and what the policy will do to commitment and cost. A small restaurant group changing its tip pooling, for example, would use the model to ask about every stakeholder before announcing anything. In California, also check the legal rules first, because some choices are not optional.

Safe to skip: a formal long-term outcomes study. A one-page stakeholder list and a six-month review will do.

3. What is the Michigan model, and when does it fit?

The Michigan model comes from the 1984 book Strategic Human Resource Management by Charles Fombrun, Noel Tichy and Mary Anne Devanna. It treats the HR cycle as four connected activities: selection, performance appraisal, rewards and development. It argues that these should all fit the business strategy and structure. If you hire for one set of skills, reward a different set and appraise a third, the system fights itself.

Use it when hiring, reviews and pay feel disconnected. Take a single role and trace it through the four activities. What do you hire for? What do you rate? What do you pay for? What do you train? Gaps between the answers are your work list.

That is also where structure helps. A consistent interview scorecard, a performance review form and a development plan make the cycle visible. The structured interview scorecard system ($79) and the performance review and PIP documentation set ($129) are two pieces of that cycle.

Safe to skip: a heavy strategy exercise. A one-page statement of what your business needs from people this year is enough to start.

4. What is the Kirkpatrick model, and when does it fit?

Donald Kirkpatrick introduced four levels for evaluating training in a series of articles published in 1959. The levels are reaction (did people like it), learning (did they gain knowledge or skill), behavior (are they doing something different at work) and results (did the business improve). Most small companies stop at level one, a happy-sheet survey.

Use it when you pay for training and want to know if it worked. Before the session, decide the behavior you expect to change, such as a manager running one-on-ones every two weeks. After 60 days, check whether it happened. The jump from level one to level three is where the value lies. The Training Evaluation Kit: Learning, Not Completion ($29) is built around that move.

Safe to skip: level four measurement for every course. Reserve it for training that is costly or tied to a clear business number.

5. What is Lewin’s change model, and when does it fit?

Kurt Lewin proposed in his 1947 paper on group dynamics that change involves loosening current habits, moving to a new pattern and fixing the new pattern in place. People often call the three stages unfreeze, change and refreeze. Lewin also described forces that push for change and forces that resist it.

Use it when you are introducing something people may resist, such as a new timekeeping system or a new performance process. Before launch, list the forces for and against. Reducing the resisting forces, for example by explaining why and giving training, is often easier than pushing harder. After launch, keep checking that the new way holds, because old habits return when attention moves elsewhere.

Safe to skip: the idea that change is a tidy three-step event. Real change in a small company is messy and ongoing.

6. What is Tuckman’s team model, and when does it fit?

Bruce Tuckman proposed in a 1965 article in Psychological Bulletin that small groups tend to move through forming, storming, norming and performing, and he later added adjourning with a coauthor. The stages describe a new team’s path from politeness through conflict to a working rhythm.

Use it when a new team or a new manager is struggling. Conflict in the second month is not always a sign of failure. It is often a normal stage. The role of the leader is to help the team set clear norms so that conflict becomes productive. The 30-60-90 onboarding kit ($99) gives new hires and managers a shared structure for those first months.

Safe to skip: treating the stages as a strict sequence. Teams loop back, especially when membership changes.

How do you choose the right model for the problem?

• “Where should I spend my time as HR?” Ulrich.
• “Will this policy work for everyone it touches?” Harvard.
• “Do hiring, reviews and pay point the same way?” Michigan.
• “Did the training change what people do?” Kirkpatrick.
• “How do I bring people through a change?” Lewin.
• “Why is my new team in conflict?” Tuckman.

Notice that none of these tells you what to decide. They sharpen the questions. The decision, and the accountability for it, stay with you.

What if a model does not fit your business?

Then use the question it raises and drop the structure. A model is useful for a few minutes of thinking, not as a reason to build a process. If a framework creates more paperwork than insight in a company your size, set it aside. Also be careful with models that sound scientific. The ones here are thinking tools built by respected scholars, and they are not laws of nature, so test them against what you see.

How does the UHR training needs workbook put these models to work?

The problem for most small employers is that training decisions start with a request from whoever spoke last, and nobody can say afterward whether the money mattered. Combining Kirkpatrick’s focus on behavior with a clear view of the actual gap fixes that. The training needs analysis workbook ($39) walks you through finding the real skill and performance gaps first, ranking them, and deciding what training, if any, fits. Then the Kirkpatrick levels tell you what to measure afterward. You spend on the gaps that matter and you can show what changed.

If you are still deciding which HR practices to build first, The Small Employer HR Field Guide: 13 Principles, Real Scenarios and Starter Checklists is $19.

For a practical use of the evaluation levels, see why training does not stick and a four-step follow-through plan.

What should you do this week?

1. Pick the one problem you face now and choose the model from the list above.
2. Spend 20 minutes answering its questions in writing for your own business.
3. Share the one-page result with the person who decides, and ask what they would change.
4. Set a date to review whether the model helped you decide faster or better.

If you want a second view on how your HR practices fit together, the HR compliance check-up covers the basics, and fractional HR support can apply these frameworks to your business with you.

For a related angle, see what each organizational structure means for HR.

Sources

• Ulrich, Dave. Human Resource Champions. Harvard Business School Press, 1997.
• Beer, Michael, Bert Spector, Paul Lawrence, D. Quinn Mills and Richard Walton. Managing Human Assets. Free Press, 1984.
• Fombrun, Charles, Noel Tichy and Mary Anne Devanna. Strategic Human Resource Management. Wiley, 1984.
• Kirkpatrick, Donald. Series of articles on evaluating training programs. Journal of the American Society of Training Directors, 1959.
• Lewin, Kurt. “Frontiers in Group Dynamics.” Human Relations, 1947.
• Tuckman, Bruce. “Developmental Sequence in Small Groups.” Psychological Bulletin, 1965.

McKinley holds a J.D. but is not a licensed attorney. Articles here are general information, not legal advice. For your specific situation, talk with an employment attorney.

Data current as of November 2026. Sources are linked where each figure appears.