defining strategic hrm：an overview of the field.ppt

DefiningStrategicHRM:AnOverviewoftheField,PatrickM.WrightProfessorofHRStudiesCornellUniversity,天马行空官方博客：,MyBiases,Ideologically,IwantHRtomatterPeoplearevaluable(Judeo-Christianethic)Professionally,myroleisgatekeeper/scientisttoexplorerigorouslyifitdoesPositivist,EmpiricistPerspectiveResultisaverycriticalapproachtostudyingStrategicHRM,MyBiases,EmphasiswillbeonmyworkNotbecauseitstruthNotbecauseitsthebestNotbecauseitsperfectNotbecauseothersworkdoesntmatterbutBecauseitswhatIknowandwhatImpassionateabout,WhatisHRM?,IsitPractices?IsitPolicies?IsitProcesses?IsitPhilosophy?,WhatisHRM?,HRMisalloftheactivitiesaimedatbuildingthehumanpotentialandperformancewithinanorganizationIncludes:HRPhilosophy(Values,Culture,etc.)HRPolicies(Whatshouldbedone)HRPractices(Whatactuallygetsdonebymanagersimplementingpolicies)Communications,WhatisStrategicHRM?,ThepatternofplannedhumanresourceactionsanddeploymentsintendedtoenablethefirmtoachieveitsgoalsWright1994)Huselid(1995)MacDuffie(1995)DeleryandDoty(1996),HRPracticesandPerformance:SomeAdditionalStudies,Welbourne(1996)+Youndtetal.(1996)+DelaneyWrightetal,1995)Mediation(Snell,1991;SchulerHuselidArthur,1992;HuselidCappelliWorkingandStudents(2X2)Subjectspresentedwithdescriptionsofhighandlowperformingcompanies,thenaskedtoindicateHRpracticesandHReffectivenessComparedfactorstructuretoHuselid(1995)Expectedperformanceeffect,andthatitwouldbemostpronouncedforHR/Students,Skillsandorg.structures,Info.,Sharing,e1,Attitude,Surveys,e2,Payfor,Performance,e3,Training,e4,Grievance,Procedure,e5,Employment,Test,e6,Employeemotivation,Merit,Promotions,e9,Performance,Appraisal,e8,Merit,Pay,e7,FIGURE2PerformancexExperienceInteractionforHRPracticeUsageandEvaluationofHRFunction,Implications,SimilarfactorstructureindicatesimplicittheoriesPerformanceeffectindicatesthatknowledgeofperformanceCANimpactratingsofHRSurprisingthatgreatesteffectsforworkingmanagers,TheoreticalIssues-Conclusion,StillGreaterneedforapplicationandtestingofrelevantorganizationaltheoriesinSHRMNeedformorespecifictheorydevelopmentregardingtheprocessthroughwhichHRimpactsperformanceNeedforbetterempiricalresearchthatspecificallyteststheory,ConductingEmpiricalStrategicHRMResearch:OvercomingthePast;MovingTowardtheFuture,PatrickM.WrightProfessorofHRStudiesCornellUniversity,EmpiricalIssuesinSHRM,LackofGoodTheorytestingMeasurementIssuesUnreliabilityofHRMeasuresLevelsofAnalysisMostlyCorporatebecausethereispublicperformanceinformationDesignIssuesConcurrent,notcausaldesigns,HumanResourceManagementandFirmPerformance:MeasurementIssuesandtheirEffectonCausalandPolicyInferences,BarryGerhartPatrickM.WrightGaryC.McMahanScottA.Snell,HRandFirmPerformance,NumerousStudiesDemonstrateRelationshipbetweenHRPracticesandFirmPerformance1SDincreaseinHRpracticesresultsin20%increaseinprofitsPromising,but.WhataboutConstructValidity?,HRPracticesandReliability,Randomvs.SystematicErrorRandom-Attenuatesrelationship.80rxx-rxy*1.25.50rxx-rxy*2Systematic-Mayinflaterelationship,MeasuresandMentalModels,AremeasuresofHRpracticesreliable?Ifnotreliable,thenwhydowefindanHR-firmperformanceeffect?HowcanwebestmeasureHRpracticestobereliableandvalid?,GeneralizabilityAnalysis,Generalizabilityanalysisseekstopartitionerrorvarianceintodifferentsources(rater,items,time,etc.)Itprovidesimplicationsforthebestwaytoincreasereliability(e.g.,toaddratersoritems),Analyses,ICC(1,1)-EstimateofthereliabilityofasinglerespondentmeasureICC(1,k)-Estimateofthereliabilityofanaggregated(acrossrespondents)measureBothestimatesareessentiallyinterpretedasapercentageofthevarianceinthemeasurethatistruescorevariance,AreHRMeasuresReliable?,14firmsAveragesizeapprox40,000employeesSurveysofHRpracticesandHReffectivenessMultipleHRrespondentsforpracticesAlsolinerespondentsforeffectiveness,Results,Avg.ICC(1,1)forpracticesBestCaseHourly.204.418Managerial.162Avg.ICC(1,1)forEffectiveness.301.475(scale),WhyNotReliable?,RespondentsDontKnowCorporateisthewrongplacetoaskbecausetoomuchdiversity(geography,divisions,businessunits,sites,jobs)CoveragethewrongwaytoaskAdvantage-ObjectiveDisadvantage-notthewayrespondentsthink/focusMissessophistication,specificity,execution,Canwedevelopbettermeasures?,Objectivevs.EvaluativeObjective-assumesnosubjectivity,thusnoneedtoassessreliabilitySubjective-maybemoreaccurate,butMUSTdemonstratereliabilityRightitems,IfnoRxx,thenwhytheRxy?,RxxdoesnothavetobetoohighRespondentsImplicitPerformanceTheories(I.e.,systematicerror),QuestionsAboutReliabilityofHRPracticeMeasures,TypicalDesignisSingleRespondent,CorporateHeadquartersGerhartet.al.foundlowinterraterreliabilityofHRpracticemeasures(meanrxx=.164)HuselidandBeckerdisputedfindings,HuselidSpring200016;Winter200022Datafrom51BusinessUnits,Procedure,PartofalongtermresearchprojectWave1(Winter1999/2000)54%ofoperatingcompaniesWave2(Spring2001)-67%ofoperatingcompanies-Performancedataonlyavail.on22companiesHRManagersadministeredsurveysto20-100%of6jobgroupsUseddatafrom3Corejobs112surveysperbusinessunit5706surveysBusinessUnitPerformanceDatafromCorporateOffice,Procedure(cont.),11QuestionMeasureofHRPracticesSkill(selectionandtraining)Motivation(perf.mgmt.,bonuses,payforperf.,promot.Empowerment(communic.,grievance,partic,decision)5QuestionMeasureofCommitmentEmployeesineachcompanyrandomlysplitinto2groupsAggregateICC(1).10-.19ICC(2).70-.85,TheModel,HRPractices,Profits,R=.353*,R=.348*,*Topis3-9monthsmonths,bottomis9-15months,TheModel,*Topis3-9monthsmonths,bottomis9-15months,TheModel,HRPractices,OperationalPerformanceWorkersCompensationProductivityQualityShrinkage,9-15monthsinparentheses,R=-.400*(-.523*),R=.196(.164)nsboth,R=.416*(.469)*,R=-.266(-.268)p=.06(both),TheModel,TheModel,OrganizationalCommitment,OperationalPerformanceWorkersCompensationProductivityQualityShrinkage,R=-.444*(-.434*),R=.436*(.358*),R=.272p=.06(.359*),R=-.268p=.06(-.212)ns,9-15monthsinparentheses,TheModel,9-15monthsinparentheses,TheModel,OperationalPerformanceWorkersCompensationProductivityQualityShrinkage,Profits,R=-.368*(-.280*),R=-.408*(-.405*),R=-.433*(-.347*),R=.583*(.564*),9-15monthsinparentheses,TestingReverseCausation,Table1.CorrelationsbetweenHRandPerformanceWorkersProd-QualityShrinkExpenseProfitCompuctivityTimingofPerformance-9to-3-.086-.137.468-.368-.306.242-3to+3-.438-.155.470-.318-.369.346+3to+9-.400-.196.416-.266-.401.353+9to+12-.523-.164.469-.266-.358.348Boldsignificantatp.05,one-tailed.,TestingReverseCausation,Table2.CorrelationsbetweenOrganizationCommitmentandPerformanceWorkersProd-QualityShrinkExpenseProfitCompuctivityTimingofPerformance-9to-3-.528-.364.368-.355-.444.284-3to+3-.367-.408.330-.322-.500.375+3to+9-.444-.436.272-.268-.498.323+9to+12-.434-.358.359-.221-.450.337Boldsignificantatp.05,one-tailed.,TestingPredictiveModelControllingforPastPerformance,Table3.PartialCorrelationsbetweenHRandPerformanceControllingforPastandSimultaneousPerformance+3to+9mos.+9to+15mos.Controllingfor:rpastsimultaneousrpastsimultaneousProfits.353.271.080.348.260.070Expenses-.401-.360-.190-.358-.200-.003WorkersComp.-.400-.150-.060-.523-.420-.320Productivity-.196-.230-.060-.164-.220-.050Quality.416-.070-.100.469.200.190Shrinkage-.266.060.090-.268-.080-.060Boldsignificantatp.05,one-tailed.,TestingPredictiveModelControllingforPastPerformance,Table4.PartialCorrelationsbetweenOrganizationCommitmentandPerformanceControllingforPastandSimultaneousPerformance+3to+9mos.+9to+15mos.Controllingfor:rpastsimultaneousrpastsimultaneousProfits.323.170-.120.337.210-.040Expenses-.498-.270-.060-.450-.130-.080WorkersComp.-.444-.190-.270-.434-.430-.280Productivity-.436-.290-.170-.358-.080-.070Quality.272.240.220.359.330.310Shrinkage-.266.030.090-.212-.010.030Boldsignificantatp.05,one-tailed.,Conclusions,HRactuallypredicts(ratherthanrelatesto)futureprofitabilityHRalsopredictsoperationalperformancemeasures(quality,productivity,shrinkage,workerscompensation)HRsimpactonperformanceisatleastpartiallymediatedbyitsimpactonorganizationalcommitment,Conclusions(contd),OrganizationalCommitmentpredictsoperationalperformancemeasuresTheseoperationalperformancemeasuresrelatetoprofitabilityControlsindustry,size,technology,andoccupationbuiltintothestudy,Conclusions(contd),EvidenceofdualcausationCorrelationsdecreasewhencontrollingforpast/presentperformanceNonrecursivemodel(shouldendupinbi-modaldistribution)Outside3rdvariablecausingboth(e.g.,Leadership?),Contributions,ThisstudytestsanextremelythoroughmodelofhowHRimpactsfirmprofitabilityThestudyprovidesabetterbasisforcausalconclusionsbecausetheHRmeasurescompletelyprecedetheperformancemeasuresThestudyeliminatesanypercept-perceptrelationship,OurFutureResearch,WorkonHRpracticemeasuresstillneedconceptualwork(overallindexversusmorespecificmeasures)Needbehavioral,inadditiontoattitudinaldataIntegrationofturnoverdata,FutureResearch(cont.),StudiesattheWorkGroupLevelAdditionalOutcomeMeasuresAntecedentsofHRStrategiesTestingofMediatingModel,OverallConclusions&Recommendations,WithinIndustryStudiesBusinessandPlantLevelStudiesReliableMeasuresofHRPracticesMultipleRespondentsMoreFocusedTarget(job,site,business)MorespecificmeasuresQualitativeResearch,BridgingtheMicro/MacroGap,StrategicHRMIndustrialRelationsHPWS,IsolatedFunctions,Traditional/FunctionalHRMI/OPsych