Temple , A. J.; Ho mey , K. B.
A icle
A na ional in es iga ion o he co ela ion be ween
pe cep ions o human esou ces managemen p ac ices
and o ganiza ional e ec i eness
Sou h A ican Jou nal o Business Managemen
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
Uni e si y o S ellenbosch Business School (USB), Bell ille, Sou h A ica
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Temple , A. J.; Ho mey , K. B. (1989) : A na ional in es iga ion o he co ela ion
be ween pe cep ions o human esou ces managemen p ac ices and o ganiza ional e ec i eness,
Sou h A ican Jou nal o Business Managemen , ISSN 2078-5976, A ican Online Scien i ic
In o ma ion Sys ems (AOSIS), Cape Town, Vol. 20, Iss. 1, pp. 7-12,
h ps://doi.o g/10.4102/sajbm. 20i1.933
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/218010
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
S.A .J.Bus.Mgm .1989,20(1) 7
A na ional in es iga ion
o
he co ela ion be ween pe cep ions
o
human esou ces
managemen p ac ices and o ganiza ional e ec i eness
A.J. Temple
Business Adminis a ion, Uni e si y
o
Windso , Windso ,
Canada,
N9B 3P4
K.B. Ho mey *
School
o
Business Leade ship, Uni e si y
o
Sou h A ica, P.O. Box 392, P e o ia, 0001 Republic
o
Sou h A ica
Accep ed 17 June 1988
This s udy in es iga es he ex en
o
which o ganiza ion e ec i eness can be p edic ed om human esou ces
managemen (HRM) p ac ices. The esul s a e based
on
da a ga he ed om a i ude su eys
o
a la ge sample
o
employees
in
38 companies ac oss he USA. I is ound ha
HRM
p ac ices can be summa ized
in
six
HRM
dimensions which p edic o ganiza ion e ec i eness a he depa men al le el, as pe cei ed
by
employees. Such
e ec i eness appea s
o
be linked o
HRM
p ac ices which s ess communica ion,
job
cla i y, managemen
conce n, and equi y. Oppo uni ies o u u e esea ch a e sugges ed and implica ions o managemen p ac ice
a e p esen ed.
Hie die s udie onde soek die ma e waa oe o ganisasiedoel e endheid oo spel kan wo d anui die
oepassing an mannek agbes uu sp ak yke. Die esul a e wo d gebasee
op
die analise an
da a
bekom an
houdingsopnames onde we kneme s an 38 maa skappye
in
die V.S.A.
Daa
is ge ind
da
mannek agbes uu sp ak yke opgesom kan wo d
in
ses dimensies wa o ganisasiedoel e endheid
op
depa emen ele lak oo spel, soos waa geneem deu die we kneme s. Sulke doel e endheid skyn e band e
hou me mannek agbes uu sp ak yke wa kommunikasie, helde heid an we ks e eis es, bes uu sbe okken-
heid en gelykheid aksen uee . Moon like e de e na o sing en implikasies i bes uu sp ak yke wo d
oo ges el.
• To whom co espondence should be add essed
Cu en
de ini ions
o
Human
Resou ces Managemen
(HRM)
(e.g. F ench, 1986; Milko ich & Glueck, 1985;
Schule &
Youngblood,
1986) s ess he o e iding
impo ance
o
acili a ing o ganiza ion e ec i eness.
The
aison d'e e o
HRM
is he ex en o which i s
p ac ices
con ibu e
o
a
be e
o ganiza ion.
The
pu pose
o
his s udy is
o
in es iga e
whe he
he e is, in
ac ual p ac ice, a link be ween
HRM
p ac ices and
o ganiza ional e ec i eness.
The
pa icula ques ion o
be add essed
is
whe he
i is possible
o
p edic
o ganiza ional e ec i eness om he ype
o
HRM
p ac ices ca ied
ou
in o ganiza ions.
Changing de ini ions o HRM and o ganiza ional
e ec i eness
The e
has
been
a change in
he
de ini ion
o
he ole
o
HRM
and
o
wha
is conside ed
o
be
e ec i e HRM.
The
change is bes
summed
up as a shi om an
emphasis
on
main enance
and
adminis a ion
o
co po a e
con ibu ion
and
en i onmen al scanning (e.g.
Hun ,
1984;
Odio ne,
1984).
The
concep ion which
eme ges is
o
a
HRM
unc ion which has
'come
o
age'
by ma u ing om a low-le el wel a e
depa men
o
a
co po a e-le el s a egic uni .
The
change is summa ized
by
Nkomo
(1980) as a mo e h ough h ee s ages: i s , a
de ensi e s age in which pe sonnel ac s simply
o
de end
he o ganiza ion om such hings as unions; second, a
de i ed
demand
s age, in which pe sonnel is ied o
eac ing
o
managemen 's
demands;
and
hi d, a
s a egic
human
esou ce
managemen
s age, in which
pe sonnel has
mo ed
ahead
o
line managemen in o a
p o-ac i e s ance
equmng
ini ia ing
and
adap ing
s a egies is-a- is he en i onmen .
In he ecen p ac i ione li e a u e (e.g. Bai d &
Meshoulam, 1986;
Holde ,
1986; McDonough, 1986;
Pu cell, 1985; Schneide , 1985) he consensus seems
o
be ha he
HRM
unc ion is gene ally gaining
mo e
accep ance, pa icula ly as i becomes
mo e
in eg a ed
wi h business objec i es
and
aces up
o
cu en
issues
such as imp o ing compe i i eness in e na ionally.
The e
a e
o he ,
mo e
sophis ica ed models
o
good
pe sonnel p ac ice (e.g.
Fomb un,
Tichy &
De anna,
1984;
Holman,
1985; Thu ley, 1981),
bu
he inal
pic u e is simila
o
ha
p oposed
by
Nkomo
(1980).
I
is no easy
ma e
o
de ine wha is
mean
by
o ganiza ional e ec i eness.
The
li e a u e e e s
o
c i e ia o e alua ing e ec i eness anging om
p oduc i i y
and
e iciency conside a ions
o
beha iou al
ac o s such as mo ale, o ganiza ional lexibili y,
and
job
sa is ac ion (Cunningham, 1977). Kilmann &
He den
(1976) dis inguish be ween in e nal
and
ex e nal
measu es
o
e ec i eness
and
be ween e iciency
and
e ec i eness, sugges ing
ha
he
choice
o
measu emen
c i e ia should
depend
on
he
ocus
o
he
esea che .
S ee s (1977) p o ides a easonable summa y
o
he
c i e ia when he sugges s
ha
o ganiza ional
e ec i eness
is
a unc ion
o
a
leas ou a iables:
O ganiza ional cha ac e is ics such as s uc u e
and
echnology; en i onmen al cha ac e is ics such as
economic
and
ma ke
condi ions; employee
cha ac e is ics such as
job
pe o mance
and
job
a achmen ;
and
manage ial policies
and
p ac ices.
In
8
conside ing he ole
o
HRM,
ou pa icula conce n
is
wi h he employee and manage ial componen s
o
e ec i eness. While he e
is
u he esea ch needed o
ully
subs an ia e i , much o he cu en managemen
li e a u e implies a sea ch o a ype o uni e sal
excellence. Pe e s & Wa e man (1982) se he scene
in
hei Ame ican s udy, 'In Sea ch o Excellence', which
was ollowed up
by
a B i ish s udy (Goldsmi h &
Clu e buck,
1984)
and a Canadian s udy (Innes, e al.
1986). The p inciples o e ec i e managemen ex olled
sound somewha simila
in
all h ee s udies:
pa icipa ion, communica ion, indi idual au onomy,
commi men , en husiasm, and s a egic human esou ces
planning.
O
pa icula ele ance o
HRM
is
he p ominence
gi en o he ole o good pe sonnel p ac ices
in
hese
p o iles o excellence. E ec i e o ganiza ions do ha e a
suppo i e s uc u e and economic en i onmen
o
cou se, bu hey also seem o ha e p oduc i e employees
who belie e
in
he o ganiza ion, and a HRM unc ion
which
is
closely allied o he undamen al mission
o
he
en e p ise and plays a signi ican ole
in
s a egic
hinking and business planning. Wha
is
no so clea
is
whe he o ganiza ional pa icipan s ac ually pe cei e a
link be ween
HRM
p ac ices and o ganiza ional
e ec i eness, and how o measu e he a iables
in ol ed.
The
HAM
audi
A numbe o esea che s and p ac i ione s ha e a gued
o he alue
o
ca ying ou a pe sonnel
o
HRM
audi
(e.g. F ench, 1982; Milko ich & Mahoney, 1979; Tsui,
1984; Yode & S audoha , 1982). As de ined
by
Milko ich & Glueck (1985) he HRM audi
is
a
sys ema ic and o mal e alua ion o he o al pe sonnel
p og amme
in
he ligh o he o ganiza ion's objec i es,
in
much he same way
as
mos o ganiza ions ca y ou
sys ema ic and o mal inancial audi s. An impo an
a gumen
is
ha since labou cos s make up he la ges
single pa o nea ly all ope a ional budge s, he
HRM
unc ion should be examined wi h he same ca e and
conce n gi en o
o he
ac o s o p oduc ion. The key
objec i e
o
he
HRM
audi
is
o ensu e ha he
HRM
unc ion
is
con ibu ing o o e all o ganiza ion goals
(e.g. Cascio, 1982; Dimick & Mu ay, 1978; Milko ich
& Glueck, 1985).
The e appea o be wo gene al issues ha ha e o be
examined conce ning he
HRM
audi : wha a eas
o
HRM
p ac ice o include
in
he audi , and wha c i e ia
o
o ganiza ional e ec i eness o employ. Ex ensi e
audi checklis s ha e been de eloped o use
by
p ac i ione s (e.g. F ench 1982; Yode & S audoha ,
1982), bu he e has been e y li le esea ch on he
measu emen
p o~ ies
o
HRM
audi ins umen s. In
addi ion, despi e he appa en need o ele an
HRM
audi s he e
h~s
been li le published on he ela ionship
be ween audi esul s and ou come c i e ia such as
o ganiza ional pe o mance and p oduc i i y. F om a
me hodological poin
o
iew, an ope a ional de ini ion
S.-A .Tydsk .Bed y sl.1989,20(1)
o
e ec i eness would bes be app oached h ough
ac o -analy ically de i ed scales which a e eliable and
in
which alidi y
is
de e mined h ough a eg ession-
based link o o ganiza ion e ec i eness. This is no o en
a emp ed
in
p ac ice.
An
excep ion
is
in
he s udy by Gomez-Mejia (1985)
which designed and es ed a pe sonnel audi ins umen
in
26
plan s
o
a la ge US elec onics co po a ion. The
nine ac o s which esul ed om he analysis we e ound
o be eliable (C onbach alpha > 0,70) and o p edic
execu i e pe cep ions
o
o ganiza ion e ec i eness. The
dimensions did also p edic ac ual p o i abili y, bu o a
lesse ex en . The nine dimensions co e ed we e:
manpowe lows, s a ing/EEO, compensa ion,
manage ial beha iou , labou ela ions, heal h/sa e y,
de elopmen , app aisal, and policies/p ocedu es.
The Gomez-Mejia s udy illus a es he dilemma
in
he
ype
o
c i e ia o employ.
Is
i
be e
o use an indi ec
measu e
o
e ec i eness by su eying pe cep ions o
e ec i eness?
O
is
i be e o use a di ec measu e o
o ganiza ional pe o mance, such as p o i abili y?
Employee pe cep ions a e mo e closely linked o
HRM
p ac ices, bu may be oo subjec i e, and a e,
o
cou se,
no di ec ly linked o o ganiza ional success. A di ec
measu e
o
o ganiza ional pe o mance, such
as
p o i abili y,
is
a clea ly ele an c i e ion, bu
is
mo e
indi ec
in
i s link o
HRM
p ac ices. Many
o he
ac o s
han HRM in luence o ganiza ion e ec i eness and
p o i abili y, as no ed abo e
in
S ee s ( 1977). Suppo
o he use
o
'so ' measu es
is
p o ided in a s udy
by
Engel (1977) which indica ed ha o ganiza ional
e ec i eness can be adequa ely measu ed by using he
pe cep ions
o
employees abou how well hei uni s
pe o m. Un il u he esea ch
is
comple ed, i
is
p obably wise no o p opose a inal answe o his
c i e ion dilemma, bu o a emp o eplica e Gomez-
Mejia's (1985) indings
in
o he
se ings. In addi ion,
he e we e some limi a ions
in
he Gomez-Mejia s udy.
Fi s ly, i employed indi idual and o ganiza ion-le el
a iables and hus had o make use
o
a ecip ocal
a e ages echnique o me ge indi idual and agg ega e
da a. In his p ocess, all indi iduals om a plan we e
assigned hei espec i e plan le el e ec i eness sco e,
a some loss
o
indi idual a iabili y.
Secondly, he s udy was limi ed in ocus o one
o ganiza ion and o he elec onic manu ac u ing
indus y.
This in es iga ion a emp s o build on he Gomez-
Mejia s udy
by
widening he sample o include a la ge
numbe
o
employees in di e en o ganiza ions, and by
ocusing on jus one ype
o
c i e ion, namely, employee
pe cep ions
o
o ganiza ion e ec i eness
a
he
depa men al le el. The esea ch ques ions which a e
deal wi h a e as ollows: (a) Wha a e he measu emen
p ope ies
o
a
HRM
audi ins umen made
up
o
i ems
e lec ing HRM p ac ices?; b) Wha pa e n
o
HRM
p ac ices bes p edic s o ganiza ional e ec i eness
a
he
depa men al le el, as pe cei ed by employees?
S.A .J.Bus.Mgm .1989,20(1)
The s udy
The s udy was based on su ey da a om In e na ional
Su ey Resea ch (ISR), a consul ing company based
in
Chicago and ca ying ou a i ude esea ch
in
he USA
and o e
40
o he
coun ies. ISR ca ies ou a i ude
esea ch o clien o ganiza ions based on eplies o a se
o
common
o
co e i ems d awn om a la ge a i ude
ques ionnai e. The la ge sample size o e ed a unique
esea ch oppo uni y, bu was limi ed
o
cou se by he
i ems
in
he ques ionnai e bank which we e no
speci ically designed o he pu pose
o
his s udy.
Sample
The sample consis ed
o
141
519
employees d awn om
38
US companies (see Table 1). I can be seen ha he
sample ep esen s a wide ange
o
indus ies, bu
is
p obably mo e
o
a echnical/ p o essional g oup han
he manu ac u ing sample
o
Gomez-Mejia (1985). This
conclusion
is
also sugges ed by he occupa ional
ca egq iza ion
o
he sample which was as ollows: op
Managemen 3,5%; Supe iso y 28,4%;
P o essional -23,9%; Technical -7,7%; Blue Colla
-10,3%; Sec e a ial/Cle ical -26,2%.
Table 1 Indus y- ype
b eakdown
o
o ganiza ions
sampled
To al sample Sub-sample
Indus y ype N
o;o
N
O/o
High Tech: Compu e s/Elec onics 8
21
5
29
Insu ance 7
18
4
23
Financial 5
13
4
23
Manu ac u ing 4
11
5
Re ail
3 8
Telecommunica ions 3 8 5
Cosme ics/Pha maceu ical 3 8 5
T anspo a ion 3 8
Consume Elec ical 2 5 2
10
To al 38
100
18
100
The eg ession analysis was based on
42
531
employees d awn om a sub-sample
o
18
companies o
which comple e eplies we e a ailable. (Incomple e da a
we e no a esul
o
ques ions le unanswe ed, bu we e
a unc ion
o
ques ions no being asked
in
some
companies.) An in es iga ion was made
o
he
compa abili y
o
he la ge and smalle g oups
o
o ganiza ions by means o a c oss- abula ion compa ison
on nine demog aphic a iables. I was ound ha
employees in he
18
companies we e simila o
employees in he
38
companies in e ms
o
hei enu e,
educa ional le el, union membe ship, and age. Bu
employees in he smalle g oup ended o be mo e blue
colla (i.e. less managemen le el), and ended o consis
o
mo e emale and mo e non-whi e employees han he
la ge g oup. Al hough he compa abili y
o
he wo
g oups may be somewha less o a p oblem, gi en hei
9
Table 2 HAM p ac ice and e ec i eness dimensions
Fac o Loading
Fac o
1:
Managemen ela ions
(a
= 0,80)
1.
Managemen in e es ed
in
employee
well
being
2.
Li le e o o ge employees' opinion ( e e sed)
3.
Excellen job
o
keeping employees in o med
4.
Employees ea ed wi h espec
5.
Adequa ely in o med
o
pe sonnel policies
6.
Company p omo es mos compe en people
Fac o
2:
Role cla i y
(a
= 0,58)
7.
T aining adequa e p epa a ion o wo k
8.
Objec i es changed equen ly, ouble comple ing
wo k ( e e sed)
9. New employees clea ly unde s and company
expec a ions
Fac o
3:
E alua ion equi y
(a
= 0,75)
10.
E alua ion o job pe o namce unde s ood
11.
Job pe o mance
is
e alua ed ai ly
12.
Compa ed o o he s he e am paid ai ly
Fac o 4: Pay and Bene i s
(a
= 0,63)
13.
Bene i s he e as good
o
be e han o he s
14.
Bene i p og amme i s needs
15.
Pay he e as good o be e han o he s
Fac o 5:
Wo k
ela ions
(a
= 0,60)
16.
Good coope a ion be ween employees
17.
People ge along
well
oge he
0,70
0,67
0,62
0,57
0,55
0,54
0,71
0,58
0,57
0,71
0,71
0,43
o,n
0,66
0,60
0,81
0,61
18.
Good coope a ion be ween depa men s 0,57
Fac o 6: Policy adminis a icn
(a
= single
i em)
19.
Pe sonnel policies adminis e ed ai ly 0,50
(No e: This i em also loaded 0,34 on Fac o
1)
E ec i eness c i e ion a iable
(a
= 0, 70)
20.
Depa men ope a es e icien ly
21.
Wo k
in
depa men
is
well
o ganized
22.
Excellen quali y
o
wo k
in
depa men
ela i ely la ge sizes, i was conside ed ad isable o
in es iga e he co ela ions be ween he biog aphical
a iables and he e ec i eness c i e ion. This was o
ensu e ha he sub-sample used in he eg ession
analysis did no di e subs an ially om he main sample
in
e ec i eness.
Su ey ins umen
The ins umen was made up
o
22
i ems (see Table 2)
d awn om he 'co e'
o
s anda d ques ions used by he
esea ch company. I ems we e p esen ed
in
a Like i e-
poin scale o ma anging om 'ag ee' o 'disag ee'.
I ems we e selec ed o su ey wo a eas:
O ganiza ional e ec i eness
Th ee i ems measu ing employee pe cep ions
o
o ganiza ional e ec i eness a he depa men al le el.
These i ems we e summa ed o o m a single
e ec i eness dimension.
Analysis
The s a ing poin in he analysis was o iden i y a se
o
10
composi e
HRM
audi dimensions ha would bes
in eg a e he
19
i ems desc ibed abo e. This was
achie ed
by
ac o analysing he 19 i ems using he
P incipal Componen s me hod, wi h he squa ed
mul iple co ela ion as he es ima e
o
communali y.
The
esul ing ac o s we e hen o a ed using he Va imax
p ocedu e, which is he mos widely used ac o ing
me hod (Rummel, 1970). In addi ion o he ac o
analysis, he psychome ic p ope ies
o
he dimensions
we e examined
by
calcula ing he C onbach alpha
(e )
o he dimensions (Table 2).
Sco es
on
he HRM p ac ices scales de ined by he
ac o analysis we e hen in e co ela ed wi h he
e ec i eness dimension o ge an ini ial indica ion
o
he
di ec ion
o
he indings (Table 3). The in e co ela ions
o
he biog aphical a iables wi h he e ec i eness
dimension we e also examined, o de e mine i any
o
hese biog aphical a iables should be included as
dummy a iables in he eg ession analysis. F om hese
co ela ions i was conside ed necessa y o include ace
as a p edic o in he eg ession analysis.
The
HRM
scales and he dummy a iable ace we e
hen used as p edic o s in a eg ession equa ion agains
he dependen a iable
o
e ec i eness.
The
p ocedu e
used was a hie a chical simul aneous eg ession in which
he
HRM
a iables we e en e ed simul aneously and he
dummy a iable ( ace) added in las (see Table 4).
Table 3 Co ela ions be ween HAM dimensions and
e ec i eness
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
I. E ec i eness
2.
Wo k ela ions 0,51
3. Role cla i y 0,39 0,33
4.
Mng .
ela ions 0,39 0,36 0,46 -
5.
E alua ion equi y 0,44 0,38 0,38 0,49
6. Pay and bene i s 0,19 0,23 0,21 0,38 0,29
7.
Policy admin. 0,30 0,31 0,43 0,46 0,33 0,28
8.
Race
0,()1)
0,10-0,05 0,11 0,16 0,13 0,00
Table
4 Reg ession equa ions be ween HAM
dimensions and e ec i eness
HRM
E ec i eness
Dimensions R
R2
Be a
Wo k ela ions 0,51 0,262 0,349
Role cla i y 0,56 0,319 0,153
Mng .
ela ions 0,58 0,340 0,101
E alua ion equi y 0,61 0,366 0,191
Pay and bene i s 0,61 0,366 -0,022
Policy admin. 0,61 0,367 0,026
Dummy a : ace 0,61 0,367 0,021
No e: All equa ions signi ican
a
p < 0.000
S.-A . Tydsk: .Bed y sl.1989 ,20(1)
Resul s
HAM P ac ices Dimensions
A plo
o
eigen alues esul ing om
he
ac o analysis
o
he 19
HRM
p ac ices i ems indica ed a
b eak
a h ee
and
six ac o s. Each
o
he wo solu ions was es ed by
o a ing he ac o s uc u e o he a imax c i e ion.
On
he basis
o
he o a ed ac o s uc u e
and
he
in e p e a ion
o
he ac o s, he six- ac o solu ion was
selec ed as p o iding he mos
comple e,
in e p e able,
and pa simonious solu ion o
he
analysis. The
eigen alues o all six ac o s exceeded he s anda d
c i e ion
o
1,0.
The
only i em
no
clea ly suppo ing a
single ac o was he ' ai pe sonnel policy
adminis a ion' ques ion which loaded
on
Fac o
1 as
well as de ining Fac o 6.
The
esul ing six ac o s
a e
shown in Table 2,
including hose i ems loading high
on
each ac o . A
loading was ope a ionally de ined as high
o
salien i i
eached 0,40
o
highe .
On
he
a e age,
h ee
i ems
showed salien loadings
pe
ac o .
Two
ac o s
CORsis
o
global- ype dimensions, namely: ac o 1
managemen ela ions, which includes managemen
conce n and communica ion;
and
ac o 5 - wo k
ela ions, which
is
conce ned wi h
coope a ion
and
ela ions be ween employees.
The
emaining ou
ac o s e lec he
ope a ion
o
a ious
HRM
subsys ems, aining
and
de elopmen
( ole
cla i y),
pe o mance e alua ion, compensa ion,
and
pe sonnel
policy adminis a ion. Table 2 also
epo s
he
C onbach
alpha (a) sco es o each
o
he dimensions, excep he
single i em de ining ac o 6. Reliabili y le els a e age
a ound 0,65 which
is
su icien
o
wa an
con inuing he
analysis, bu a e gene ally below he minimum
accep able le el
o
0,70 equi ed o decision-making
pu poses.
The
eliabili y le els
a e
cons ained by he
limi ed numbe
o
i ems
pe
dimension
and
sugges ha
he scales would need o
be
leng hened
be o e
using
hem o decision-making pu poses.
ln e co ela ions
Co ela ions we e compu ed be ween
he
nine
biog aphical a iables and
he
e ec i eness c i e ion.
The
co ela ions
o
e ec i eness wi h
each
a iable we e
as ollows: -0,017;
job
ca ego y: 0,062;
managemen
unc ional a ea: -0,043; enu e: -0,021; educa ional le el:
-0,024; union s a us: -0,021; age: -0,019; sex: 0,005; and
ace: 0,113. F om hese co ela ions i was decided
ha
only ace should
be
included in he eg ession analysis.
Gi en he ela i ely small co ela ion coe icien s, i
seemed easonable o conclude
ha
he
biog aphical
di e ences ound be ween
he
o al sample
o
38
companies and he subsample
o
18 companies
a e
no
likely o
be
associa ed wi h di e ences in
he
le el
o
he
e ec i eness c i e ion be ween
he
wo g oups.
F om Table 3, i can
be
seen
ha
wo k ela ions and
e alua ion equi y ha e he s onges co ela ions wi h
he e ec i eness c i e ion. Role cla i y
and
managemen
ela ions a e also clea ly associa ed wi h e ec i eness,
bu
ace does
no
appea
o
be
a signi ican a iable in
he ela ionship be ween
HRM
p ac ices and

S.A .J.Bus.Mgm .1989,20(1)
o ganiza ion e ec i eness. As was he case in he
Gomez-Mejia (1985) s udy, he able shows ha he
HRM
p ac ices dimensions a e in e co ela ed.
P edic ion
o
o ganiza ion e ec i eness
Table 4 shows he esul s o he eg ession analysis
using he
HRM
p ac ices dimensions and ace o p edic
o ganiza ion e ec i eness. Gi en he ela i ely la ge
sample sizes i
is
no su p ising ha all
o
he dimensions
a e highly signi ican agains he c i e ion sco e. Mo e
impo an ly, he amoun
o
explained a iance
is
easonably high (37%) and compa es a ou ably wi h
he le els ound in he Gomez-Mejia (1985) s udy. While
he R2 s a is ic indica es a easonable goodness
o
i
o
he eg ession model, he e a e clea ly a numbe
o
non-
HRM
a iables which de e mine o ganiza ional
e ec i eness.
The
s anda dized be a coe icien s in
Table 4 indica e ha he wo k ela ions dimension has
he mos signi ican impac on e ec i eness, ollowed by
e alua ion equi y, ole cla i y and managemen ela ions
in descending
o de
o
impo ance. No su p isingly, his
suppo s he in e co ela ions epo ed in Table 3.
Discussion and Conclusion
A majo pu pose
o
his s udy was o in es iga e he
measu emen p ope ies o a
HRM
audi ins umen .
The
indings ha e clea ly shown he alue
o
such an
ins umen and he ela i e s abili y
o
he dimensions
iden i ied by Gomez-Mejia (1985). This s abili y
is
la gely he esul
o
he e o ha Gomez-Mejia pu in o
achie ing psychome ic adequacy in his ins umen . The
esul s also indica e ha empi ical esea ch can iden i y
he
HRM
dimensions ha
will
consis en ly p edic
o ganiza ional e ec i eness.
The
ins umen used in his
s udy was ound
o
p edic pe cep ions
o
o ganiza ional
e ec i eness a mo e
o
less he same le el as he
Gomez-Mejia ins umen .
The
amoun
o
a iance
explained in his s udy was 37%. In compa ison, he
Gomez-Mejia s udy ound ha
HRM
p ac ices could
explain 22%
o
he a iance, using he c i e ion
o
execu i e pe cep ions
o
o e all o ganiza ion
e ec i eness. This ins umen was ound o ha e
p edic i e alidi y, in spi e
o
he ac ha i ems, hough
selec ed o i he Gomez-Mejia dimensions, we e
cons ained by he i em bank a ailable in he s udy.
Some conclusions can
be
d awn on he measu emen
quali ies
o
he
HRM
audi ins umen used. The i ems
ell in o easonably clea ac o s, bu wo
o
hem
(managemen ela ions and wo k ela ions) a e a he
global in scope. This occu ed
in
he Gomez-Mejia s udy
as well and may be endemic o
HRM
audi ins umen s.
I
may be ha he ine dis inc ions made be ween
di e en
HRM
p ac ice a eas in he concep ual
li e a u e, e lec an academic desi e o clea analy ical
ca ego ies, a he han necessa ily e lec ing ac ual
p ac ice.
The
esul s indica e ha he eliabili y
coe icien o some
o
he ins umen dimensions
is
less
han ideal, and would p obably be imp o ed
by
a
somewha la ge numbe
o
i ems
pe
dimension, and
would ce ainly bene i by he inclusion
o
i ems
11
speci ically w i en o he pu pose
o
e alua ing
HRM.
The esul s do show ha i
is
possible o p edic he
e ec i eness
o
an o ganiza ion om he way
in
which
HRM
is
ca ied ou .
I
appea s as i he ype
o
o ganiza ion likely
o
be judged as e ec i e wil be
cha ac e ized
by
employees who wo k well oge he
a
bo h depa men al and company le el, and ha e a
managemen eam ha communica es wi h hem and has
a undamen al conce n o hem. In addi ion, employees
in e ec i e o ganiza ions unde s and how hey
a e
e alua ed and conside his e alua ion o be equi able,
and a e adequa ely p epa ed o hei wo k and ha e
consis en p io i ies placed upon hem. In con as , i
appea s as i such a iables as he employees' ace, hei
sa is ac ion wi h pay and bene i s and he way pe sonnel
policies a e adminis e ed
in
he o ganiza ion, does no
ha e much impac on pe cep ions
o
o ganiza ion
e ec i eness.
The pic u e
o
he e ec i e o ganiza ion abo e has
some simila i y o ha epo ed in he gene al s udies
o
'excellen ' o ganiza ions (e.g. Pe e s & Wa e man,
1982). E ec i e o ganiza ions seem
o
be made up
o
employees who ha e a clea ole
in
he o ganiza ion and
wo k well wi h each
o he
in
achie ing ha ole. This
is
e y much wha Pe e s & Wa e man mean by
'p oduc i i y h ough people'. A i s glance, howe e ,
hese indings seem o di e om hose
o
he Gomez-
Mejia (1985) s udy. Tha s udy ound ha a di e en se
o
a iables had he s onges link o e ec i eness:
namely,
EEO
p ac ices, compensa ion and ewa ds,
managemen beha iou , and labou ela ions.
On
a
close look
a
he i ems wi h he highes loadings
in
he
a eas ha bes p edic o ganiza ion e ec i eness,
howe e , i appea s as i some
o
he same ac ual
HRM
p ac ices p edic e ec i eness
in
bo h s udies. Thus he
key
EEO
issues ha a e ele an a e ai ness and
job
secu i y; he highes loadings on compensa ion a e
ai ness i ems; and some
o
he mos salien i ems in he
managemen beha iou and labou ela ions a eas
conce n good employee ela ions and s ike and
g ie ance occu ences. Thus i appea s as i o ganiza ion
e ec i eness
is
linked
in
bo h s udies o issues
o
communica ion and
job
cla i y, managemen conce n,
and equi y.
Al hough i can be concluded ha
HRM
p ac ices
p edic pe cep ions
o
e ec i eness on he
pa
o
o ganiza ion pa icipan s, i
is
no so clea whe he hese
p ac ices p edic ac ual e ec i eness. This was also a
inding o he Gomez-Mejia s udy in which only 18%
o
he a iance was explained when using
HRM
p ac ices
o
p edic ne p o i
pe
capi a. A limi a ion
o
ou
s udy
is
ha he e ec i eness c i e ion ela es only o he
employee and manage ial componen s
o
he
o ganiza ion e ec i eness model
o
S ee s (1977). In
addi ion o HRM, s uc u al, economic, echnical, and
en i onmen al a iables clea ly play a c i ical ole
in
o ganiza ional success. Fu u e s udies will ha e
o
ake
hese addi ional a iables in o accoun be o e any
de ini i e conclusion can be eached on he impac
o
HRM
on o ganiza ional e ec i eness.
I
will
also be
necessa y o conside he in e ace be ween he
HRM
12
unc ion
and
he
o he
managemen a eas o in es iga e
whe he
he na u e
o
his in e ac ion makes any
di e ence. I appea s
o
be impo an ha
HRM
play
a
signi ican ole in he s a egic planning le el
~n
h.e
o ganiza ion,
bu
his was no an issue add essed m his
s udy.
Wha his s udy has shown
is
he impo an
pa
played
by human esou ce p ac ices in he way employees iew
hei
o ganiza ions. I can
be
concluded ha i
is
possible
o
p edic e ec i eness om he way human esou ces
a e managed,
and
ha
his p edic ion holds ac oss a wide
ange
o
o ganiza ions
and
a la ge
numbe
o
employees.
Re e ences
Bai d, L. & Meshoulam, I. (1986). A second chance o
HR
o
make he g ade. Pe sonnel, ol.4, 45-48.
Cascio, W.F.
(1982}.
Cos ing human esou ces:
The
inancial
impac
o
beha io
in
o ganiza ions. Bos on: Ken
Publishing Company.
Cunningham, J.B. (1977). App oaches o he e alua ion
o
o ganiza ional e ec i eness. A
cad.
Manage.
Re ., July,
463--474.
Dimick, D.E. & Mu ay, V.V. (1978). Co ela es o
subs an i e policy decisions
in
o ganiza ions: The case
o
human esou ce managemen . Acad.
Manage.
J., ol.21,
611-523.
Engel, J.E.
1977.
A s udy o he ela ionship be ween
dimensions o wo ke a i udes and measu es o
o ganisa ional e ec i eness. D.B.A. Thesis, Flo ida S a e
Uni e si y.
Fomb un,
C.,
Tichy,
N.M.
& De anna, Ma y Anne.
1984.
S a egic human esou ce managemen .
New
Yo k, NY:
John Wiley & Sons. Inc.
F ench, W.L.
1982.
The pe sonnel managemen p ocess.
Bos on: Hough on Mi lin Company.
F ench, W.L. (1986). Human esou ces managemen . Bos on,
MA: Hough on Mi lin Company.
Goldsmi h,
W.
& Clu e buck, D.
1984.
The Winning S eak.
London, England: Geo ge Weiden eld & Nicolson, L d.
Gomez-Mejia, L.R.
1985.
Dimensions and co ela es o he
pe sonnel audi as an o ganiza ional assessmen ool.
Pe s.
Psycho/., ol. 8, 293-308.
Holde , J.
1986.
Regaining he Compe i i e Edge.
Pe s.
Admin., ol.31, 35 .
S.-A .Tydsk .Bed y sl.1989,20(1)
Holman, G. 1985. In sea ch
o
excellence in pe sonnel
managemen . Pe s. Manage., No embe ,
28--30.
Hun , J.W. 1984. The shi ing ocus
o
he
pe sonnel unc ion.
Pe s.
Manage., Feb ua y, 14-19.
Innes,
E.,
Pe y, R.L. & Lyon,
J.
1986. The Financial Pos
Selec s he
JOO
bes companies o wo k
o
in Canada.
Don
Mills, Canada: Collins Publishe s.
Kilmann, R.H. &
He den,
R.D.
1976. Towa ds a sys emic
me hodology o e alua ing he impac
o
in e en ions
on
o ganiza ional e ec i eness. Acad. Manage. Re ., July,
87-98.
McDonough, E.F. III. 1988. How Much Powe Does
HR
Ha e, and Wha Can I
Do
o
Win Mo e? Pe s., Janua y,
18-25.
Milko ich, G.T. & Glueck, W.F. 1985. Pe sonnel/Human
Resou ce Managemen : A Diagnos ic App oach. 4 h
Edi ion. Plano, TX: Business Publica ions. Inc.
Milko ich, G.T. & Mahoney,
T.
1979. Human esou ces
planning and pai policy.
ASPA
Handb. Pe s. lndus . Rel ..
Washing on, DC: Bu eau
o
Na ional A ai s. 104-150.
Nkomo, S.M. 1980. S age
h ee
in pe sonnel adminis a ion:
s a egic human esou ces managemen . Pe s., ol.57,
69-77.
Odio ne, G.S.
1984~
Human esou ce s a egies o he
nine ies. Pe s., ol.61, 13-19.
Pe e s, T.J. & Wa e man,
R.H.
(J .)
1982. In sea ch
o
excellence. New Yo k:
Ha pe
& Row.
Pu cell, J. 1985.
Is
anybody lis ening
o
he co po a e
pe sonnel depa men ? Pe s. Manage., Sep embe , 28-31.
Rummel, R.J. 1970. Applied ac o analysis. E ans on:
No hwes e n Uni e si y P ess.
Schneide , W.E. 1985. The pa adigm shi in human esou ces.
Pe s.
1., No embe , ol.67, 14-21.
Schule , R.S. & Youngblood, S.A. 1986. E ec i e pe sonnel
managemen , 2nd Edi ion. S . Paul, MN: Wes Publishing
Company.
S ee s, R.M. 1977. O ganiza ional E ec i eness: A beha io al
iew. Glen iew, IL: Sco , Fo esman and Company.
Thu ley,
K.
1981.
Pe sonnel Managemen in he UK - A
case
o u gen ea men ? Pe s. Manage., ol.13, 24-29.
Tsui, A.S. (1984). Pe sonnel
depa men
e ec i eness: A
ipa i e app oach. lndus . Rel., 23, 184-198.
Yode ,
0.
& S audoha ,
P.O.
(1982). Pe sonnel managemen
and indus ial ela ions. New Je sey: P en ice Hall, Inc.