A national investigation of the correlation between perceptions of human resources management practices and organizational effectiveness

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.