Samenvatting
Summary Strategic HRM - Articles
- Instelling
- Tilburg University (UVT)
Summary of the articles of SHRM
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 4 van de 46 pagina's
Voorbeeld 4 van de 46 pagina's
In winkelwagengesponsord bericht van onze partner
1 beoordeling
Door: annelotwesterhof • 2 jaar geleden
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
Summary SHRM1.1. Peccei, R. van de Voorde, K. (2014). HRM and performance. In: Encyclopedia of Human Resource Management.
Guest, D. & Needle, D. (Eds). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. ................................................................................................ 2
1.2. Jiang, K. Lepak D., Hu, J. & Baer, J. (2012). How does Human Resource Management influence organizational
outcomes? A meta-analytic investigation of mediating mechanisms. Academy of Management Journal, 55: 1264-1294 .... 4
1.3. 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........................................................................................................................................................................................... 7
1.4. 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. ................................................. 10
2.1. Wood, S. (1999). Human resource management and performance. International Journal of Management Reviews, 1:
367-413. Page 367-378 and 408-409. ................................................................................................................................... 12
2.2. Tzabbar, D., Tzafri, 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 ................................................................................................................... 14
2.3. Datta, D. K., Guthrie, J. P., & Wright, P. M. (2005). Human Resource Management and labor productivity: does
industry matter? Academy of management Journal, 48(1), 135-145 .................................................................................... 16
2.4. Toh, S. M., Morgeson, F. P., & Wright, M. A. (2008). Human resource configurations: investigating fit with the
organizational context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(4): 864. .................................................................................... 18
3.1. 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......................................................................................................................................................................................... 20
3.2. Ramsay, H., Scholarios, D. & Harley, B. (2000). Employees and High-Performance Work Systems: Testing inside the
Black Box. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 38:501–531. ........................................................................................ 22
3.3. Van de Voorde, K., & Beijer, S. (2015). The role of employee HR attributions in the relationship between high
performance work systems and employee attitudes. Human Resource Management Journal, 25(1): 62-78. ....................... 23
3.4. 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. ........... 26
4.1. 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. .............................................................................................. 28
4.2. Huselid, M. A., & Becker, B. E. (2011). Bridging micro and macro domains: Workforce differentiation and strategic
human resource management. Journal of Management, 37,421-428. ................................................................................... 31
4.3. 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......................................................................................................................................................................................... 32
4.4. Schmidt, J. A., Pohler, D., & Willness, C. R. (2017). Strategic HR System Differentiation between Jobs: The Effects
on Firm Performance and Employee Outcomes. Human Resource Management. ............................................................... 34
5.1. Caldwell, R. (2003). The changing roles of personnel managers: old ambiguities, new uncertainties. Journal of
Management Studies, 40(4): 983-1004. ................................................................................................................................ 38
5.2. 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. ............................................................................... 41
5.3. 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. ...................................................................................................... 43
5.4. Bos‐Nehles, A. C., Van Riemsdijk, M. J., & Kees Looise, J. (2013). Employee perceptions of line management
performance: applying the AMO theory to explain the effectiveness of line managers' HRM implementation. Human
resource management, 52(6): 861-877.................................................................................................................................. 45
1
,1.1. Peccei, R. van de Voorde, K. (2014). HRM and performance. In: Encyclopedia of Human Resource
Management. Guest, D. & Needle, D. (Eds). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
The meta-analysis of Combs et al. (2006), Subramony (2009), and Jiang et al. (2019) suggest that there is a moderately
strong positive relationship between HRM and performance. To gain a better understanding of the HRM-performance
relationship, researchers:
1. Disaggregated the more general HRM construct and focused on the effects that more specific bundles and
systems of HR practices have on performance. There is a lack of consensus of the conceptualization and
measurement of HRM, including the specific practices that make up bundles and systems of HRM. The more
general systems that have received the greatest attention in HRM-performance research are high-performance
work systems (HPWS), which comprise what are argued to be an internally coherent and self-reinforced set of
“progressive” HR practices that taken together are expected to make a positive contribution to organizational
performance.
2. Decomposed the dependent performance variable into several more specific individual and organizational
outcomes. Two developments:
a. The distinction between different aspects of organizational performance:
i. Proximal organizational outcomes, such as absence, turnover, productivity and quality;
ii. Distal organizational outcomes, such as the overall financial and market performance.
b. The growing concern of “building the worker into HRM” by applying a more behavioral perspective
that examines the effect that HR practices have on not only organizational performance, but also on
employee well-being, attitudes and behaviors at work. Important in this respect is the comparison
between mutual gains and conflicting outcome models.
i. Mutual gains models suggest that HRM has a positive effect on both employee well-being and
organizational performance.
ii. Conflicting outcome models suggest that while HRM has a positive impact on performance, it
has a negative or no effect on well-being.
3. Figured a more detailed examination of the factors and processes that help to explain how and why HR practices
have an impact on performance “black-box” problem: Through which underlying theoretical mechanisms
affects HRM performance? Models that dominate this field:
a. Resource-based view of the firm argues that organizations can build competitive advantage through
valuable, rare, inimitable, and sub-substitutable resources. Human resource advantage consists of:
i. Human capital advantage: a stock of exceptional human talent.
ii. Human process advantage: a function of inimitable, historically evolved processes within the
organization.
The RBV provides a theoretical rational for how HR practices positively affect organizational
performance through building a better human capital pool and stimulating better processes.
b. The AMO-framework argues that bundles of HR practices positively influence organizational
performance by enhancing employee skills, knowledge and ability (A), by stimulating employee
motivation and commitment (M), and by providing skilled and motivated employees the opportunity to
perform (O). For each element, more specific theoretical explanations have been proposed:
i. The ability component has been linked to performance through human capital theory and the
idea that HR practices can contribute through the development of superior employee knowledge,
skills, and abilities.
ii. The motivation component has been linked to performance through social exchange theory and
the idea that when employees receive positive treatment from the organization, they will repay
the organization by becoming more committed, work harder, and engaging in various forms of
citizenship behavior that enhance performance.
iii. The opportunity component is linked to job design theory and the idea that HR practices that
contribute to job control and discretion enhance feelings of empowerment and involvement
which, in turn, positively influences performance. However, HR practices that delegate
2
, responsibility may involve higher levels of work intensification which can have negative effect
on the overall well- being.
c. More process-oriented models of HRM highlight the importance of making a clearer distinction
between the HR policies and practices that senior management intend to implement in the organization,
the practices that are actually implemented by line managers, employee perceptions of these implemented
practices, and individual’s reactions and evaluations of these practices (behavioral outcomes). The HRM
process models help to theorize about how intended HRM is related to employee and organizational
outcomes through the enactment and perceptions of HRM.
Theoretical and empirical developments outlined above have gone hand in hand with attempts to gain a better
understanding of the conditions under which particular bundles and systems of HRM are likely to have an effect on
performance. Two main approaches to this issue:
1. The best practice perspective suggests that there are internally coherent sets of HR practices that are universally
valid and effective, irrespective of the situation.
2. The alternative contingency perspective suggests that the effectiveness of given HRM models is likely to vary
depending on the particular context or situation involved. Central to the contingency perspective approach has
been the identification of a number of individual organizational and broader contextual factors that may
potentially moderate the HRM-performance relationship, such as the overall strategy of the organization, age,
and the type of industry.
4. A final way in which researchers have attempted to advance understanding of the HRM-performance relationship
has been through the adoption of more complex multilevel models of this relationship.
It can be concluded that HRM is positively associated with organizational performance, however:
- The conceptualization and measurement of HR practices and systems require further attention.
- Further research is needed on both the positive and negative effects that HRM systems can have on employee
experiences and well-being and how this can affect employee attitudes and behavior and ultimately
organizational performance.
- Research is also needed on how the effects of HRM on both employee and organizational outcomes are
conditioned by the wider institutional context.
- HRM-performance research would benefit more from longitudinal studies that could shed light on possible
causal effects, and a multilevel approach is a highly promising area of research that can make a key contribution
to the further understanding of the HRM-performance relationship.
3
, 1.2. Jiang, K. Lepak D., Hu, J. & Baer, J. (2012). How does Human Resource Management influence organizational
outcomes? A meta-analytic investigation of mediating mechanisms. Academy of Management Journal, 55: 1264-1294
The stream of macro HRM research has several key components:
1. Organizational outcomes can be categorized into three primary groups related to HRM: HR outcomes, operational
outcomes, and financial outcomes.
2. Different types of outcomes may not necessarily have unique relationships with HR practices.
3. The specific nature of models of the mediation of HR outcomes on the relationship between HR systems and key
outcomes depends on the theoretical perspective adopted when examining the relationship.
a. According to the behavioral perspective, organizations do not perform themselves, but instead use HR
practices to encourage productive behaviors from employees and to achieve desirable operational and
financial objectives.
b. The human capital theory, emphasizing that human capital is a central driver of organizational
performance when the return on investment in human capital exceeds labor cost, and the resource-based
view, providing insights as to why human capital can help firms to outpace competitors and why processes
that organizations obtain a competitive advantage from resources that are rare, valuable, inimitable, and
non- substitutable, are more focused on the competencies of employees within organizations.
The highly varied set of HR practices can be conceptualized into one of the three primary dimensions:
1. Skill-enhancing HR practices, including recruitment, selection, and training.
2. Motivation-enhancing HR practices include performance management, competitive compensation, incentives
and rewards, extensive benefits, promotion and career development, and job security.
3. Opportunity-enhancing HR practices, including flexible job design, work teams, employee involvement, and
information sharing.
Explaining hypotheses
According to the AMO-framework, HR outcomes can be divided into human capital, motivation and opportunity to con-
tribute, and human capital (i.e. a composition of employees’ knowledge, skills, and abilities) and motivation (i.e. the
direction, intensity, and duration of employees’ effort as manifested by positive work attitudes and behaviors) are two of
the most critical mediation factors that have been examined in the literature.
The three HR dimensions may play different roles in building human capital and enhancing employee motivation.
- Skill-enhancing HR practices can directly help to optimize the levels or types of employees’ skills and abilities.
Therefore, skill-enhancing HR practices are expected to have a stronger impact on human capital than motivation-
and opportunity-enhancing HR practices. However, all HR dimensions are positively related to human capital.
- Investment in all three HR dimensions generally indicates that organizations value and support employees’
contributions, and according to the social exchange theory, employees who perceive an organization’s actions
toward them as beneficial may feel obligated to reciprocate and be motivated to exert more work effort. However, the
effect of skill-enhancing HR practices on employee motivation is relatively indirect and likely to be dependent on
the practices in the other two dimensions. Therefore, all three HR dimensions are expected to be positively related,
but skill-enhancing HR practices are less positively related to employee motivation.
- Human capital and employee motivation mediate the negative relationship between the three HR dimensions and
voluntary turnover and human capital and employee motivation mediate the positive relationship between the three
HR dimensions and operational outcomes. Voluntary turnover is seen as critical intermediate outcome that is
different from human capital and employee motivation:
o HR practices designed to enhance employee skills and motivation are significantly and negatively
associated with voluntary turnover (i.e. social exchange theory).
o Human capital theory and resource-based view of the firm indicate that employees with appropriate human
capital resulting from HR investments may be less likely to leave the organizations.
4
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper annevandentillaar. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €7,98. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 78252 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen