Employee performance, well‐being, and differential effects of human resource management subdimensions: Mutual gains or conflicting outcomes?

• Author: Jake Messersmith,Chidiebere Ogbonnaya
• Date: 01 July 2019
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12203
• Published date: 01 July 2019

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Employee performance, well‐being, and

differential effects of human resource

management subdimensions: Mutual gains or

conflicting outcomes?

Chidiebere Ogbonnaya

1

|Jake Messersmith

2

1

Norwich Business School, University of East

Anglia, Norwich, UK

2

College of Business, University of Nebraska–

Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA

Correspondence

Chidiebere Ogbonnaya, Norwich Business

School, University of East Anglia, Norwich

Research Park, Norwich, UK.

Email: c.ogbonnaya@uea.ac.uk

Abstract

The human resource management (HRM) literature supports

the idea that coherent systems of HRM practices can

induce attitudinal effects when perceived subjectively

by employees. Recently, scholars have proposed that

subdimensions of HRM systems exist and account for vari-

ance in outcomes. This study explores differential effects of

three subdimensions of HRM systems (skill‐, motivation‐,

and opportunity‐enhancing HRM practices) on employee

innovative behaviours and well‐being. Our predictions are

based on the mutual gains perspective, which specifies posi-

tive relationships between HRM practices and employee

performance, and the conflicting outcomes perspective that

links HRM practices to higher job demands and stress. Using

data from the Finnish 2012 Practices of Working Life Survey,

we find support for both the mutual gains and conflicting

outcomes perspectives; however, we also show that the

effects of the subsets of HRM practices are heterogeneous.

KEYWORDS

affective commitment, HRM practices, innovative behaviours, job

demands, stress, well‐being

1|INTRODUCTION

Although an extensive body of research has documented the benefits of coherent systems of human resource

management (HRM) practices (Jiang, Lepak, & Baer, 2012; Van De Voorde, Paauwe, & Van Veldhoven, 2012), critical

questions remain regarding the actual influence of such systems on employee performance and well‐being. From a

Received: 27 February 2017 Revised: 15 June 2018 Accepted: 19 June 2018

DOI: 10.1111/1748-8583.12203

Hum Resour Manag J. 2019;29:509–526. © 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltdwileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/hrmj 509

mutual gains perspective, HRM systems—including staff training, selective hiring, performance appraisal, workplace

support, team working, and job autonomy—promote performance benefits by aligning employees' interests more

closely with organisational goals (Guest, 2017; Van de Voorde et al., 2012). HRM systems create a “win–win”

situation given that employee well‐being is enhanced and performance is strengthened. By contrast, others argue

that any performance benefits of HRM systems are offset by increased job demands, stress, and work intensification

(Kroon, Van de Voorde, & Van Veldhoven, 2009; Ramsay, Scholarios, & Harley, 2000). HRM systems optimise

employees' skills and performance, but with little or no benefit to their well‐being (Ogbonnaya, Daniels, Connolly,

& Van Veldhoven, 2017). These competing views remain at the heart of HRM research and highlight the possibility

of trade‐offs between the performance and well‐being benefits of HRM systems.

One approach to understanding these trade‐offs is to consider the idiosyncratic experiences of employees. There

is evidence that individual employees' actual perceptions of HRM systems rather than managers' reports of the

intended outcomes or existence of such systems are relevant for understanding the effects of HRM systems on

employee attitudes and behaviours (Alfes, Shantz, Truss, & Soane, 2013; Jiang, Hu, Liu, & Lepak, 2017; Van De

Voorde & Beijer, 2015). This research stream suggests that the attitudinal or behavioural benefits of HRM systems

are realised if employees hold positive perceptions as to why such systems are being implemented (Nishii, Lepak,

& Schneider, 2008). Individual employees might experience the same set of HRM practices disparately and

consequently react in a heterogeneous manner (Alfes et al., 2013; Van De Voorde & Beijer, 2015). Building upon

these arguments, the present study explores the potential role of perceived HRM practices in understanding the

trade‐offs between employee performance and well‐being. The term trade‐offs highlights the importance of

perceived HRM systems in ensuring adequate levels of employee performance while also minimising any potential

adverse consequences for their well‐being.

Our main contribution lies in examining the differential performance and well‐being consequences of three

subdimensions of HRM systems. There is growing research interest in understanding how different combinations

of HRM practices influence workplace outcomes (see Gardner, Wright, & Moynihan, 2011; Gong, Law, Chang, &

Xin, 2009; Jiang et al., 2012; Subramony, 2009). In a recent meta‐analytic study, Jiang et al. (2012) reported differ-

ential effects of three dimensions of HRM systems (skill‐, motivation‐, and opportunity‐enhancing HRM practices)

on human capital and employee motivation, as well as operational and financial outcomes. However, Jiang et al.

and others (e.g., Subramony, 2009) approach this subject from an organisational standpoint, leaving gaps in our

knowledge of how subsets of HRM practices might operate from the perspective of employees. In the present study,

we focus on the relationships between subsets of HRM systems and employees' self‐reports of innovative

behaviours and perceptions of stress–relationships that have yet to be explored in this literature.

The present article builds on the work of Jiang et al. (2012) and others in creating a more nuanced understanding

of skill‐, motivation‐, and opportunity‐enhancing subdimensions of HRM practices and employee outcomes. In line

with the mutual gains perspective (Van de Voorde et al., 2012), we examine the extent to which each of these

HRM dimensions might influence employees' performance (measured by their innovative behaviours) through

affective commitment. On the basis of the conflicting outcomes perspective (Kroon et al., 2009), we examine which

HRM dimensions induce high job demands and, consequently, higher levels of stress. Our study has important

implications for debates as to whether organisations should adopt entire systems of HRM practices or focus on a

core set of practices that provide tangible benefits for both employee performance and well‐being (Boxall, Ang, &

Bartram, 2011). Our approach aims to address an important limitation in previous studies that presumes HRM

practices are experienced uniformly by employees.

2|THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESES

A dominant theme in HRM research is the notion that individual HRM practices are intercorrelated and should there-

fore be examined in bundles, rather than in isolation, to encourage desirable outcomes (Appelbaum, Bailey, Berg, &

510 OGBONNAYA AND MESSERSMITH