Summary of Articles Strategic Human Resource Management
Premaster: Human Resource Studies
University: Tilburg University, The Netherlands
Course: Strategic Human Resource Management
Year: 2020
Introduction
Strategic HRM= how HRM can help companies achieve their strategic business goals (survival & success)
The underlying assumption within SHRM is that employees are key to organizational success, therefore, HRM is
important.
In this course, it is assumed that HRM practices lead to increased performance. Four questions are proposed to
investigate this relationship more thoroughly. Each question is represented by a theme.
1. How? How is HRM related to performance? (Black Box Debate)
2. When? When does this relationship apply? (Contingency Perspective)
3. For Whom? Who is benefitting from HRM: the organization, the employee, or both? (Dark-side
Perspective)
4. For Whom? Who should receive HRM practices: all employees or only a specific group? (Differentiation)
5. Who? Who is responsible for the execution/ implementation of HRM (HR Devolution)
During the course, 20 articles are presented that relate to one of the five themes.
This summary will provide an overview of the most important aspects of the articles, including the problem/ research
aim, key aspects from the literature review, the hypotheses, results and main conclusions. When possible, conceptual
models are added to provide a more clear understanding of the relationships discussed in the articles.
1
,Contents
Black box debate.............................................................................................................................................................3
Article 1: Liao, H., Toya, K., Lepak, D. P. & Hong, Y. (2009). Do they see eye to eye? Management and employee
perspectives of high-performance work systems and influence processes on service quality. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 94(2): 371-391.........................................................................................................................................3
Article 2 : Den Hartog, D. N., Boon, C., Verburg, R. M., & Croon, M. A. (2013). HRM, Communication, Satisfaction,
and Perceived Performance: A Cross-Level Test. Journal of Management, 39(6): 1637–1665....................................7
Article 3: Peccei, R. & van de Voorde, K. (2014). HRM and performance. In: Encyclopaedia of Human Resource
Management. Guest, D. & Needle, D. (Eds). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.................................................................11
Article 4: Jiang, K., Lepak, D. P., Hu, J., & Baer, J. C. (2012). How does human resource management influence
organizational outcomes? A meta-analytic investigation of mediating mechanisms. Academy of management
Journal, 55(6), 1264-1294..........................................................................................................................................13
Theme 2: Contingency perspective...............................................................................................................................16
Article 5: Datta, D. K., Guthrie, J. P., & Wright, P. M. (2005). Human resource management and labour productivity:
does industry matter?. Academy of management Journal, 48(1), 135-145...............................................................16
Article 6: Toh, S. M., Morgeson, F. P., & Campion, M. A. (2008). Human resource configurations: investigating fit
with the organizational context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(4): 864.............................................................19
Article 7: Wood, S. (1999). Human resource management and performance. International journal of management
reviews, 1(4), 367-413...............................................................................................................................................23
Article 8: Tzabbar, D., Tzafrir, S., & Baruch, Y. (2017). A bridge over troubled water: Replication, integration and
extension of the relationship between HRM practices and organizational performance using moderating meta-
analysis. Human Resource Management Review, 27(1), 134-148.............................................................................25
Theme 3: Dark-side Perspective....................................................................................................................................28
Article 9: Van De Voorde, K., & Beijer, S. (2015). The role of employee HR attributions in the relationship between
high‐performance work systems and employee outcomes. Human Resource Management Journal, 25(1), 62-78. 28
Article 10: Jensen, J. M., Patel, P. C., & Messersmith, J. G. (2013). High-performance work systems and job control:
Consequences for anxiety, role overload, and turnover intentions. Journal of Management, 39(6), 1699-1724.....31
Article 11: van de Voorde, K., van Veldhoven, M., & Paauwe, J. (2012). Employee well-being and the HRM-
organizational performance relationship: A review of quantitative studies. International Journal of Management
Reviews, 14 (4): 391-407...........................................................................................................................................33
Article 12: Ramsay, H., Scholarios, D. and Harley, B. (2000). Employees and High-Performance Work Systems:
Testing inside the Black Box. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 38: 501–531....................................................35
Theme 4: Workforce differentiation..............................................................................................................................37
Article 13: Lepak, D.P., & Snell, S.A. (1999). The Human resource architecture: toward a theory of human capital
allocation and development. Academy of Management Review, 24, 31–48.............................................................37
Article 14: Huselid, M. A. & Becker, B. E., (2011). Bridging Micro and Macro Domains: Workforce Differentiation
and Strategic Human Resource Management. Journal of Management, 37(2), 421-428..........................................40
Article 15: Lepak, D. P., Taylor, M. S., Tekleab, A. G., Marrone, J. A., & Cohen, D. J. (2007). An examination of the
use of high-investment human resource systems for core and support employees. Human Resource Management,
46(2), 223-246...........................................................................................................................................................42
Article 16: Schmidt, J. A., Pohler, D., & Willness, C. R. (2018). Strategic HR system differentiation between jobs: The
effects on firm performance and employee outcomes. Human Resource Management, 57(1), 65-81.\..................44
2
,Theme 5: HR Devolution................................................................................................................................................47
Article 17: Caldwell, R. (2003). The changing roles of personnel managers: old ambiguities, new uncertainties.
Journal of Management Studies, 40(4): 983-1004.....................................................................................................47
Article 18: Sikora, D. M., & Ferris, G. R. (2014). Strategic human resource practice implementation: The critical role
of line management. Human Resource Management Review, 24(3): 271-281.........................................................49
Article 19: Kulik, C. T., & Perry, E. L. (2008). When less is more: The effect of devolution on HR's strategic role and
construed image. Human Resource Management, 47(3), 541-558...........................................................................51
Article 20: Employee Perceptions of Line Management Performance: Applying the AMO Theory to Explain the
Effectiveness of Line Managers' HRM Implementation.............................................................................................53
Black box debate
= Literature has shown that the implementation of HPWS lead to improved performance. But it remains unclear how
these processes lead exactly to better performance. The black box implies that the amount of steps and the content of
these steps between practices and performance is unknown.
Article 1: Liao, H., Toya, K., Lepak, D. P. & Hong, Y. (2009). Do they see eye to eye? Management and employee perspectives of high-
performance work systems and influence processes on service quality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2): 371-391
Problem: Prior research has primarily focused on managerial reports of the use of HPWS, ignoring the role of
individual employees’ actual experiences with these systems. Reason for this is (1) employee groups do not receive
similar HR practices (=between group differences) and (2) people have different perceptions (=within group
differences)
+ Most of the research is performed in manufacturing environments, thus neglecting service industries.
+ Strategic HRM research usually only focusses on macro-level outcomes instead of including what is does for
individuals.
Research Aim: to (1) examine employee perspective with the HPWS in addition to the management perspective, (2)
to integrate macro and micro level HRM research to examine the influence of HPWS on individual performance and
unit-level and (3) to examine whether unit-level employee overall service performance translates into an important
performance metric for service organization (customer satisfaction)
Literature Review:
Strategically focussed approach = all components of the HPWS should be chosen and designed to achieve a
specific organizational objective, because without an objective, work systems lack a clear direction for
employees.
Horizontal fit = practices must complement each other and be aligned with one another
Vertical fit= the work system is aligned with the organizational strategy
Two basic management strategies for service organizations:
Taylorism =minimizing costs and use mass production (may dissatisfy customers and employees in a continuous cycle)
Service-quality-focused strategy =building long-term relation with customers
Nature of services:
simultaneity of service production and consumption
intangibility of service processes and outcomes
customer involvement in service production
because of this nature, it’s impossible to run a quality check after manufacturing. Thus, front-line employees
are directly responsible for customer satisfaction
3
, High performance work system= system of HR practices that is designed to enhance employees’
competencies, motivation and performance. E.g. Training, information sharing, self-management,
participation, compensation, etc.
Authors argue that it is not good to exclude the employee perspective on the effectiveness of HPWS. Why?
1. Between-group: different employee groups may not have identical experiences of HR practices.
2. Within-group: members who theoretically should share the same HPWS practices may be treated
differently or have different perceptions or experiences of the practices in place.
Motivation consists of two constructs:
Psychological empowerment = individuals’ self-motivating mechanisms and consists of meaning,
competency, self-determination, and impact. Although psychological empowerment reflects individuals’
innate intrinsic task motivation, it can be influenced by external practices
Perceived organizational support = employees’ perceptions of the extent to which organizations value
employees and care about their wellbeing
Main variables:
Management-HPWS= implemented practices
Employee-HPWS = practices experienced by employees
Human capital = employee knowledge, skills, and abilities that are valuable for the firm
Motivation = an individual’s direction, intensity, and duration of effort. Motivation deals with the extent to
which employees are willing to utilize their capabilities (i.e. human capitals).
Messages can be understood idiosyncratically, whereby two employees interpret the same practices differently
Hypotheses:
H1: The positive relationship between employee HPWS and employee service performance is mediated by employee
human capital
-> HPWS enhance human capital. human capital will in turn lead to better performance, because employees have more skills/
knowledge etc. The most important function of HRM is selecting and developing service/ human capital.
H2: The positive relationship between employee HPWS and employee service performance is mediated by employee
psychological empowerment.
-> There is evidence that intrinsic motivation (psychological empowerment) leads to better service behaviour. Evidence for the
role of extrinsic motivation is less convincing. Therefore, this hypothesis focusses on intrinsic motivation and controls for
extrinsic.
H3: The positive relationship between employee HPWS and employee service performance is mediated by employee
perceived organizational support
-> because if employees feel appreciated, they are likely to show more satisfaction, commitment and lower turnover (Social
Exchange Theory)
H4: The positive relationship between management HPWS and individual employee human capital, psychological
empowerment, and perceived organizational support is mediated by employee-HPWS.
-> Manager-HPWS and Employee-HPWS are related because manager-HPWS provide the context for employees to form their
perception and experience of HPWS. However, employee-HPWS may have a more proximal (nearer) relationship with employee
individual outcomes, because it is the employees’ actual experiences and perception of the context, not the context itself nor the
cues obtained from the context, that directly determine their reaction
H5: A unit’s overall employee service performance is positively related to customer satisfaction with the unit’s overall
service quality.
-> Individual level: employee service performance might directly lead to customer satisfaction
4
, Unit level: customers might also be satisfied by the overall performance of the whole unit.
In order to measure individual level effects, you have to match the employee to the customer. The current study did not include
such matched data but instead assessed the individual customers’ satisfaction with the unit’s overall service.
Method: Data was collected from 91 Japanese bank branches.
There were three phases:
1; branch management filled out a survey about the HPWS practices implemented in their branch for three
employee groups of different employee status.
2; individual employees filled out a survey about their personal experiences of the work system.
3; employees filled out another survey on variables including their psychological empowerment, extrinsic
motivation, and perceived organizational support.
Results:
H1: Supported
H2: Partially supported : HPWS lead to empowerment, but empowerment only enhances knowledge intensive service
performance and not general service performance
H3: Partially supported: perceived organizational support leads to general service performance, not to knowledge
intensive service performance.
H4: Not supported: Management-HPWS does not relate significantly to Employee-HPWS. Instead, there is a direct
relationship between management-HPWS and human capital.
H5: Partially supported: Branch overall knowledge-intensive service performance was positively related to customer
overall satisfaction.
Other Relevant findings:
Employees experience and interpret the same HR-practices differently
Women were rated higher than men in general service performance
5
, Men were rated higher than women in knowledge-intensive service performance
Managers and supervisors had better knowledge-intensive service performance than employees. -> Thus,
management should pay attention to employees individual experiences of the work systems.
6
