Summary of articles for Work Groups Strategic Human Resource Management
Theme 1: Black-box debate
HRM, Communication, Satisfaction, and Perceived Performance: A Cross-Level Test
D.N. Den Hartog, C. Boon, R.M. Verburg, & M.A. Croon (2013)
Keywords: strategic HRM; perceived HRM; communication; satisfaction; unit performance
Abstract: The authors tested how managers’ perceptions of the HR practices implemented in the unit relate to
employee perceptions of these HR practices. The main aim is to explore managers’ communication quality as a
moderator of the relationship between manager-related and employee-related HR practices. It was also tested
whether perceived human resource management perceptions in turn relate to perceived unit performance and
satisfaction.
Introduction
SHRM research has investigated the relationship between HRM and firm performance for already many times.
This research suggests that “high involvement” or “high performance” HR practices positively affect
organizational performance outcomes, but how HR affects outcomes is not yet fully clear.
One important proposed mechanism suggests that individual employees play a central role. For example,
Wright and others stress the crucial role of employee attitudes and behaviours in translating HR practices into
performance.
The organization’s designed HR system ideally reflects its strategy and context, but having a well-designed HR
system on paper may not suffice to positively affect employees as rhetoric about the desired HR system and
the reality of what is implemented may differ from each other.
Nishii and Wright (2008) point out that besides the intended or designed HR system that firms develop on
paper, there is a need to distinguish the HR system as implemented (what managers put into practice) as well
as the perceived HR system (how employees interpret practices). The disconnection between intended HR
practices as reported by managers and the effect of actual HR practices that is explained by differential
meanings imposed on those practices by employees, is problematic if the performance effects of HR practices
are argued to come about via the perceptions of individual employees.
The key purpose of the study is to contribute to the understanding of the effects of HR practices in two ways:
1. How line manager reports on the availability of HR practices relate to employee perceptions of these
HR practices and, in turn, to HR outcomes;
- Included: job satisfaction and perceived unit performance
Expectation about between-group level: units in which the managers offer more HRM, unit employees will also
perceive more HR practices, and in turn, in such units, satisfaction and perceived performance are likely to be
higher.
Expectation about within-group level: employees who perceive more HRM are likely to be more satisfied and
perceive higher performance.
2. The understanding of the relationship between manager and employee reports of HRM by examining
the quality of managers’ communication as a moderator of this relationship.
The authors argue: when the quality of managers’ communication is high, managers’ intentions and
organizational policies are clearer to employees, resulting in a stronger relationship between manager and
employee reports of HRM.
, Summary of articles for Work Groups Strategic Human Resource Management
Manager-Rated HRM, Perceived Unit Performance, and Satisfaction
SHRM research mostly takes a systems approach to study the impact of bundles of HR practices on
performance. Several theoretical perspectives contribute to the understanding of the HRM-performance link.
The current study builds on the notion that HR practices can affect performance through building a motivated
and knowledgeable workforce and through creating opportunities for this workforce to contribute to achieving
strategic objectives. Boxall (1996) distinguishes between human capital advantage and human process
advantage.
Human capital advantage results from employing and retaining people with competitively valuable knowledge,
skills, and abilities (KSA’s).
Human process advantage results from difficult-to-imitate, highly evolved processes within the firm.
Such processes create motivating working conditions and opportunities for employees to flourish, show the
desired strategically important behaviours, and use their talents.
HR practices thus enhance performance through building a better human capital pool and creating better
processes.
Authors have proposed different synergistic combinations of practices (High Performance Work
Systems/Involvement Work Systems) that positively affect outcomes through creating human capital and
process advantages. These work systems form coherent combinations of practices that are argued to
collectively enhance organizational performance through creating better human capital and processes. Studies
generally find positive associations of these varying but integrated systems with outcomes such as productivity,
turnover, financial and service performance, commitment, and satisfaction.
Bamberger and Meshoulam (2000) hold that SHRM studies tend to feature either a resource-based
perspective or a control-based view to High Performance HR practices.
Resource-based perspective: focuses on HR practices aimed at employee development
Control-based view: focuses on managing employee performance
Bamberger and Meshoulam combined these into one overall set of High Performance HR practices that
reflects three main HR subsystems:
1) People flow
2) Appraisal and reward
3) Employment relation
These three subsystems include skills-, motivation-, and empowerment-enhancing practices.
In combination of these three practices, this work system should enhance employees’ skills, motivation, and
discretionary effort, ultimately leading to higher performance.
Current study High-Performance Work System:
1) People flow practices: training, development and promotion opportunities
2) Appraisal and reward practice: performance management
3) Employment relation practices: teamwork, autonomy, and job design
, Summary of articles for Work Groups Strategic Human Resource Management
Together, this High-Performance Work System is expected as a whole to relate positively to HR outcomes.
So in summary:
The authors of this study expect that the people flow practices such as training, development and promotion
opportunities, the appraisal and reward practice performance management, and the employment relation
practices such as teamwork, autonomy, and job design lead to positive HR outcomes.
HR outcomes are categorized into four types:
1. Employee
Employee outcomes can be affective (satisfaction) or behavioural (citizenship)
2. Unit/organizational
3. Financial
4. Market
The expectation of the authors is that the High Performance Work System that is implemented by
managers, is positively related to employee perceptions of unit performance.
High Performance HR practices are expected to enhance employees’ knowledge, skills, and abilities as
well as increase employee motivation and participation in decision making, which is likely to create
human capital and process advantages.
Such advantages are expected to be associated with higher unit performance. Therefore, the
expectation is that between-unit differences occur as perceived unit performance will be higher in
units in which the managers rate HRM higher.
Hypothesis 1a: Manager-rated HRM relates positively to perceived unit performance.
Satisfaction
Job satisfaction related to individual behavioural outcomes and unit-level performance.
Expectation: having a High Performance HR system implemented by managers will relate positively to
employee satisfaction. Because:
Part of this system is the opportunity to participate in decision making
This opportunity leads to trust between employees and supervisors
This opportunity leads to workers experiencing their jobs as challenging and intrinsically rewarding
Trust and intrinsic rewards are in turn positively related to satisfaction.
High Performance HR system Trust
Opportunity: participation in Between employees and Job Satisfaction
decision making supervisors
Intrinsically rewarding jobs
In addition, specific HR practices are also likely to relate to more specific facets of satisfaction such as
satisfaction with pay, co-workers, or tasks.
Hypothesis 1b: Manager-rated HRM is positively related to employee satisfaction.
Employee Perceptions of HR
Individual-level mechanisms are seen as potentially important in the HR-performance relationship.
Nishii and Wright (2008) propose that intended and implemented HR practices affect outcomes via employee
perceptions of these HR practices.
HR practices can be seen as signals of the organization’s intentions toward employees
A variation in HR perceptions of individual employees can be caused by:
Theme 1: Black-box debate
HRM, Communication, Satisfaction, and Perceived Performance: A Cross-Level Test
D.N. Den Hartog, C. Boon, R.M. Verburg, & M.A. Croon (2013)
Keywords: strategic HRM; perceived HRM; communication; satisfaction; unit performance
Abstract: The authors tested how managers’ perceptions of the HR practices implemented in the unit relate to
employee perceptions of these HR practices. The main aim is to explore managers’ communication quality as a
moderator of the relationship between manager-related and employee-related HR practices. It was also tested
whether perceived human resource management perceptions in turn relate to perceived unit performance and
satisfaction.
Introduction
SHRM research has investigated the relationship between HRM and firm performance for already many times.
This research suggests that “high involvement” or “high performance” HR practices positively affect
organizational performance outcomes, but how HR affects outcomes is not yet fully clear.
One important proposed mechanism suggests that individual employees play a central role. For example,
Wright and others stress the crucial role of employee attitudes and behaviours in translating HR practices into
performance.
The organization’s designed HR system ideally reflects its strategy and context, but having a well-designed HR
system on paper may not suffice to positively affect employees as rhetoric about the desired HR system and
the reality of what is implemented may differ from each other.
Nishii and Wright (2008) point out that besides the intended or designed HR system that firms develop on
paper, there is a need to distinguish the HR system as implemented (what managers put into practice) as well
as the perceived HR system (how employees interpret practices). The disconnection between intended HR
practices as reported by managers and the effect of actual HR practices that is explained by differential
meanings imposed on those practices by employees, is problematic if the performance effects of HR practices
are argued to come about via the perceptions of individual employees.
The key purpose of the study is to contribute to the understanding of the effects of HR practices in two ways:
1. How line manager reports on the availability of HR practices relate to employee perceptions of these
HR practices and, in turn, to HR outcomes;
- Included: job satisfaction and perceived unit performance
Expectation about between-group level: units in which the managers offer more HRM, unit employees will also
perceive more HR practices, and in turn, in such units, satisfaction and perceived performance are likely to be
higher.
Expectation about within-group level: employees who perceive more HRM are likely to be more satisfied and
perceive higher performance.
2. The understanding of the relationship between manager and employee reports of HRM by examining
the quality of managers’ communication as a moderator of this relationship.
The authors argue: when the quality of managers’ communication is high, managers’ intentions and
organizational policies are clearer to employees, resulting in a stronger relationship between manager and
employee reports of HRM.
, Summary of articles for Work Groups Strategic Human Resource Management
Manager-Rated HRM, Perceived Unit Performance, and Satisfaction
SHRM research mostly takes a systems approach to study the impact of bundles of HR practices on
performance. Several theoretical perspectives contribute to the understanding of the HRM-performance link.
The current study builds on the notion that HR practices can affect performance through building a motivated
and knowledgeable workforce and through creating opportunities for this workforce to contribute to achieving
strategic objectives. Boxall (1996) distinguishes between human capital advantage and human process
advantage.
Human capital advantage results from employing and retaining people with competitively valuable knowledge,
skills, and abilities (KSA’s).
Human process advantage results from difficult-to-imitate, highly evolved processes within the firm.
Such processes create motivating working conditions and opportunities for employees to flourish, show the
desired strategically important behaviours, and use their talents.
HR practices thus enhance performance through building a better human capital pool and creating better
processes.
Authors have proposed different synergistic combinations of practices (High Performance Work
Systems/Involvement Work Systems) that positively affect outcomes through creating human capital and
process advantages. These work systems form coherent combinations of practices that are argued to
collectively enhance organizational performance through creating better human capital and processes. Studies
generally find positive associations of these varying but integrated systems with outcomes such as productivity,
turnover, financial and service performance, commitment, and satisfaction.
Bamberger and Meshoulam (2000) hold that SHRM studies tend to feature either a resource-based
perspective or a control-based view to High Performance HR practices.
Resource-based perspective: focuses on HR practices aimed at employee development
Control-based view: focuses on managing employee performance
Bamberger and Meshoulam combined these into one overall set of High Performance HR practices that
reflects three main HR subsystems:
1) People flow
2) Appraisal and reward
3) Employment relation
These three subsystems include skills-, motivation-, and empowerment-enhancing practices.
In combination of these three practices, this work system should enhance employees’ skills, motivation, and
discretionary effort, ultimately leading to higher performance.
Current study High-Performance Work System:
1) People flow practices: training, development and promotion opportunities
2) Appraisal and reward practice: performance management
3) Employment relation practices: teamwork, autonomy, and job design
, Summary of articles for Work Groups Strategic Human Resource Management
Together, this High-Performance Work System is expected as a whole to relate positively to HR outcomes.
So in summary:
The authors of this study expect that the people flow practices such as training, development and promotion
opportunities, the appraisal and reward practice performance management, and the employment relation
practices such as teamwork, autonomy, and job design lead to positive HR outcomes.
HR outcomes are categorized into four types:
1. Employee
Employee outcomes can be affective (satisfaction) or behavioural (citizenship)
2. Unit/organizational
3. Financial
4. Market
The expectation of the authors is that the High Performance Work System that is implemented by
managers, is positively related to employee perceptions of unit performance.
High Performance HR practices are expected to enhance employees’ knowledge, skills, and abilities as
well as increase employee motivation and participation in decision making, which is likely to create
human capital and process advantages.
Such advantages are expected to be associated with higher unit performance. Therefore, the
expectation is that between-unit differences occur as perceived unit performance will be higher in
units in which the managers rate HRM higher.
Hypothesis 1a: Manager-rated HRM relates positively to perceived unit performance.
Satisfaction
Job satisfaction related to individual behavioural outcomes and unit-level performance.
Expectation: having a High Performance HR system implemented by managers will relate positively to
employee satisfaction. Because:
Part of this system is the opportunity to participate in decision making
This opportunity leads to trust between employees and supervisors
This opportunity leads to workers experiencing their jobs as challenging and intrinsically rewarding
Trust and intrinsic rewards are in turn positively related to satisfaction.
High Performance HR system Trust
Opportunity: participation in Between employees and Job Satisfaction
decision making supervisors
Intrinsically rewarding jobs
In addition, specific HR practices are also likely to relate to more specific facets of satisfaction such as
satisfaction with pay, co-workers, or tasks.
Hypothesis 1b: Manager-rated HRM is positively related to employee satisfaction.
Employee Perceptions of HR
Individual-level mechanisms are seen as potentially important in the HR-performance relationship.
Nishii and Wright (2008) propose that intended and implemented HR practices affect outcomes via employee
perceptions of these HR practices.
HR practices can be seen as signals of the organization’s intentions toward employees
A variation in HR perceptions of individual employees can be caused by:
