IntroductionWhen it comes to improving business performance as a whole, there are several arguments linking HR practices to business performance in academia. One of the most notable is the concept of “best practices” or “high effort HR practices” (HPWS). According to best practice thinking, a single set of HR practices can be universally applied in any workplace and will definitely improve workplace performance. The literatures have used the terms “high performance work system” and “high involvement HR practices” synonymously (Harzing & Pinnington, 2011). There is no single agreed definition of best practices or these synonymous terms. Essentially, literatures advocating best practices have focused on universalism in human resource management by identifying the best packages of high-commitment HR practices and how these can lead to better performance. The list of HR practices involved in the high-commitment paradigm can be summarized as: (1) employment security and internal labor market; (2) hiring screening and sophisticated selection; (3) extensive training, learning and development; (4) involvement and participation in employment, voice of work; (5) self-directed terms or teamwork; (6) high compensation linked to company performance; (7) performance review, evaluation, and advancement criteria; (8) reduction of status differences; (9) work-life balance; (10) complaints system; and others. Universalists argue that all companies will see performance improvements as long as they implement some or all of the above practices. More specifically, this set of human resource management generates expected results by influencing the capabilities, motivation and opportunities (AMO theory) of employees (Applebaum, 2000). But on the other hand, universalism in human resource management has also attracted... to the center of the paper... the specific internal and external context of organizations. The formulation of HR practices should take into account a wide range of factors. Third, the complexity of implementing best practices increases the uncertainty of outcomes. Best practices can be extremely fragile, considering the idea that contextual obstacles, line manager commitment, and employee perceptions and reactions towards HR activities can all limit their effectiveness. In summary, although the universal applicability of a single HR management package although it enjoys some evidence to support linking best practices with improved establishment-level outcomes in many cases and can provide basic architecture and sources of human resource management, is still problematic with some criticisms and limitations. A broader range of contextual factors need to be considered when implementing HR practices.