Human Resource Management
No TL;DR found
Abstract
Despite continuing interest in employees’ well-being, there are still large gaps in our understanding of the mediating role this concept plays in the human resource management (HRM)–performance relationship. In addition, more insights as to how HRM is implemented by leaders are required, as studies largely center either on leadership or on HRM, with little research addressing how HRM and leadership jointly determine employees’ well-being and performance. This study examines the link between well-being-oriented human resource management (WBHRM) and performance in a sample of very large organizations, based on the job demands–resource model and social exchange theory. In addition, we explore the moderating role of middle managers’ leadership in the relationship between WBHRM and employees’ well-being. The results reveal that engaging leadership behavior fosters genuine implementation of WBHRM and has a direct impact on employees’ performance. Mentorship quality is an important aspect of mentorship effectiveness, yet we know little about its predictors. Using social identity theory, we examined the relationship between mentor alcohol use norms and mentorship quality as perceived by protégés. Our study also considered the mediating role of protégé identification with the mentor and the moderating role of protégé traditionality. The findings, based on mentor-protégé dyadic data collected through a three-wave survey in China, indicate that mentor alcohol use norms are negatively related to mentorship quality, and that this relationship is mediated by protégé identification with the mentor. Furthermore, the traditionality of protégés alleviates not only the negative relationship between mentor alcohol use norms and protégé identification with the mentor, but also the indirect relationship between mentor alcohol use norms and mentorship quality via protégé identification with the mentor. The results underscore the value of focusing on mentor behavioral norms that are not directed toward the protégé. We conclude with a discussion of the theoretical and practical implications for mentoring research. This study contributes to human capital resource literature by providing a robust and theoretically grounded examination of the relationship between unit-level tenure and performance. We (a) posit and test the notion of a positive nonlinear relationship between aggregate tenure and labor productivity and (b) expand the current conceptualizations of unit-level tenure to examine the joint and interactive effects of aggregate tenure and tenure dispersion on labor productivity. Utilizing time-lagged data collected from a field-sample of 514 college bookstores, we report findings suggesting that unit- level aggregate tenure has a positive but nonlinear relationship with labor productivity such that increasing tenure beyond an optimum point produces diminishing returns. These results are replicated in a second study conducted with a cross- sectional sample of 727 service organizations in the United States. Further, our findings indicate that tenure dispersion is negatively related to labor productivity but positively moderates the relationship between aggregated tenure and labor productivity. Even while attempting to explain the same outcomes, research on leadership and on human resource management (HRM) have largely progressed on parallel trajectories. We extend recent efforts to bring these fields closer together by testing how employee perceptions of a high-performance work system (HPWS) and transformational leadership (TL), independently and jointly, influence four important employee attitudes. Analyses of 308 subordinates of 76 managers in five multinational companies suggest that a HPWS substitutes for much of the independent influence of TL and constitutes an important boundary condition for some of this influence. Implications for future research on HRM and leadership are discussed. Prior research has shown that humility in the workplace can provide many advantages. However, the literature has largely focused on leaders rather than employees. There is an important distinction between the two, because leaders have already achieved professional success that may or may not be due to humility (i.e., survivorship bias), whereas employees may feel pressure to focus on behaviors seemingly at odds with humility (i.e., getting ahead). Drawing on the social capital theory of career success, this study investigates whether and how humility helps employees achieve both short-term (job performance) and long-term (promotability) job success. We posit that, in the Chinese context, humility can promote employees’ objective job performance and promotability by accessing social resources from team leaders and coworkers. The beneficial effects can be explained by the mediating effects of leader–member exchange and employee advice network centrality. We conducted a path comparison on the relationship between the mediators and career success to further explain the mechanisms, and tested the model using a three-wave survey with a sample of 689 employees and their leaders from 137 teams. Our findings largely support our theoretical predictions and extend our understanding of employee humility and career development. When high-performance work systems (HPWS) positively affect firm performance, both internal and external contingencies play potentially salient roles in its influence. Our study pays attention to organizational (unabsorbed) slack and industry instability as important boundary conditions in the relationship between HPWS and firm performance. Based on 307 Korean firms in 39 industries, our research found moderating effects of unabsorbed slack and industry instability in the relationship between HPWS and firm performance. We found that HPWS’s positive effect on firm performance is strongest when a firm possesses more slack resources in an unstable industry. Downsizing is widely assumed to detrimentally affect surviving employees’ engagement and health through increased demands and decreased resources. Building on job demands–resources theory, we assess whether these effects occur and whether job demands and resources moderate the detrimental effects of downsizing on employee health and engagement. We conceptualize downsizing as a stressor event, and we explain its relationship with employee health through the job demands work overload and job insecurity are (two) job demands, as well as its relationship with employee engagement through the job resources supervisor support and opportunities for development are job resources. Using data from two large representative samples of German employees, we show that job demands mediate the negative relationship between downsizing and employees’ psychological and physical health and that job resources mediate the negative relationship between downsizing and engagement. We find little support for the assumption that job resources alleviate the indirect effects of downsizing on surviving employees’ health, or that job demands strengthen the indirect effects of downsizing on surviving employees’ engagement. We discuss how these findings expand our understanding of downsizing and outline practical implications for human resource practitioners. is to shed light on the effects of the CEO pay ratio and say-on-pay votes on directors’ concerns about CEO pay equity. Investigation of the pay ratio disclosure rule offers opportunities to gain insights into whether equity perceptions associated with mandated pay ratio disclosure have significant effects on remuneration decisions in organizations. We conduct an online experiment with practicing corporate directors to examine the effects of CEO pay ratio disclosures and say-on-pay (SOP) votes on director decisions. Results indicate that CEO pay ratio disclosures significantly influence directors’ decisions regarding executive compensation, leading directors to be less willing to increase CEO pay when the pay ratio is above the industry average pay ratio. Results also demonstrate that say-on-pay votes only influence directors’ compensation decisions when the CEO pay ratio is above the industry average. Directors in firms with pay ratios that are above the industry average are less willing to increase CEO pay when they anticipate shareholder votes against a CEO pay increase than when they anticipate positive SOP voting outcomes. Directors in firms with CEO pay ratios that are below the industry average, however, are willing to increase CEO pay regardless of SOP voting outcomes.