Hrm Theoretical Aspect
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND
HYPOTHESES
Existing Theories and Research on Relationships between HRM and Organizational Outcomes
Understanding tbe relationsbip between HRM and organizational outcomes is one of tbe longstanding goals of macro HRM research. Indeed,
Becker and Huselid (1998) considered this relationship as one of the essential pursuits of strategic
HRM research. This stream of research has several key components. First, organizational outcomes are viewed as multidimensional. Drawing on Dyer and
Reeves's (1995) work, researchers in strategic HRM have categorized organizational outcomes into three primary groups related to HRM: HR outcomes, operational outcomes, and financial outcomes.
HR outcomes refer to those most directly related to HRM in an organization, such as employee skills and abilities, employee attitudes and behaviors, and turnover. Operational outcomes are those related to the goals of an organizational operation, including productivity, product quality, quality of service, and innovation. Financial outcomes reflect the fulfillment of the economic goals of organizations. Typical financial outcomes include sales growth, return on invested capital, and return on assets. In this study, we use "organizational outcomes" to refer to all three categories of outcomes at the organizational level.
Second, strategic HRM research suggests that different types of outcomes may not necessarily have equivalent relationships with HR practices (Becker
& Huselid, 1998; Delery & Shaw, 2001; Guest, 1997;
Lepak, Liao, Chung, & Harden, 2006; Ostroff & Bowen,
2000). Moreover, it is commonly asserted that
HRM may influence the three types of organizational outcomes in sequence. For example, HR practices are expected to first influence HR outcomes
(e.g., employee skills and motivation), which are proximal and the least likely to be contaminated by factors beyond HR practices. HR outcomes, in turn, may mediate
HYPOTHESES
Existing Theories and Research on Relationships between HRM and Organizational Outcomes
Understanding tbe relationsbip between HRM and organizational outcomes is one of tbe longstanding goals of macro HRM research. Indeed,
Becker and Huselid (1998) considered this relationship as one of the essential pursuits of strategic
HRM research. This stream of research has several key components. First, organizational outcomes are viewed as multidimensional. Drawing on Dyer and
Reeves's (1995) work, researchers in strategic HRM have categorized organizational outcomes into three primary groups related to HRM: HR outcomes, operational outcomes, and financial outcomes.
HR outcomes refer to those most directly related to HRM in an organization, such as employee skills and abilities, employee attitudes and behaviors, and turnover. Operational outcomes are those related to the goals of an organizational operation, including productivity, product quality, quality of service, and innovation. Financial outcomes reflect the fulfillment of the economic goals of organizations. Typical financial outcomes include sales growth, return on invested capital, and return on assets. In this study, we use "organizational outcomes" to refer to all three categories of outcomes at the organizational level.
Second, strategic HRM research suggests that different types of outcomes may not necessarily have equivalent relationships with HR practices (Becker
& Huselid, 1998; Delery & Shaw, 2001; Guest, 1997;
Lepak, Liao, Chung, & Harden, 2006; Ostroff & Bowen,
2000). Moreover, it is commonly asserted that
HRM may influence the three types of organizational outcomes in sequence. For example, HR practices are expected to first influence HR outcomes
(e.g., employee skills and motivation), which are proximal and the least likely to be contaminated by factors beyond HR practices. HR outcomes, in turn, may mediate