Organisational consequences of asymmetries in task dependence: the moderating role of HR practices

• Author: Heike Bruch,Florian Kunze,Simon B. De Jong
• Published date: 01 January 2017
• Date: 01 January 2017
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12126

Organisational consequences of asymmetries in

task dependence: the moderating role of HR

practices

Simon B. De Jong, University of East Anglia, Norwich Business School

Florian Kunze, University of Konstanz, Chair for Organisational Studies

Heike Bruch, University of St. Gallen, Institute forLeadership and HRM

Human Resource Management Journal, Vol27, no 1, 2017, pages 75–93

This studyintegrates recent advancesin interdependence theorywith the literature on commitment-basedHR

practices. New research on interdependence theory suggests that differences, or asymmetries, in task

dependence amongorganisational members can causeinterests to diverge. Prior researchhas shown that this

can negativelyaffect interpersonal relations, individual outcomes andteam processes. However, these insights

gained on the dyadic, individual and team levels of analysis have not yet been explored at the organisational

level and, until now, no research had yet connected these advances in interdependence theory to the field of

HRM research. Hence, the current study investigates (a) whether asymmetries in task dependence do (or do

not) matter at the organisational level and affect organisational effectiveness, (b) why this relationship may

work by assessing a key mediator, namely,trust climate and (c) if and how these relationships can bealtered

by commitment-based HR practices. Our moderated-mediation model was tested and fully supported by a

multi-source data set of 8,390 employees from 67 organisations.

Contact: Prof. Simon B. De Jong,University of East Anglia,Norwich Business School,Norwich NR4

7TJ, UK. Email: s.de.jong@uea.ac.uk

Keywords: asymmetries in task dependence; trust climate; organisational effectiveness;

commitment-based HR practices; interdependence theory;power

INTRODUCTION

It has long been argued that one of the most crucial organisational characteristics is the

structure and overall design of organisations (Thompson, 1967), because the

interdependencies created by tasks and jobs across an organisation must align in order

to create positive organisational processes and outcomes (e.g. Galbraith, 2014). One of the

key theories that guide both practice and research on this issue is interdependence theory

(e.g. Thibautand Kelley,1959; Van der Vegt et al., 2010).This theory deals with thephenomenon

that organisational members are, to various extents, dependent on each other (Lewin, 1948),

and it explains how processes and outcomes can become either positive or negative because

of the con- or divergence of interests. Empirical findings demonstrate that interdependence

can significantly influence intra-organisational processes, such as helping (Wageman and

Baker, 1997), trust (Alge et al.,2003) and team effectiveness (Saavedra et al., 1993).

However, recently it has become apparent that most studies on interdependence theory

have overlooked the possibility that differences, or asymmetries, in task dependence can

also exist between organisational members (De Jong et al., 2007) and these could affect

processes and outcomes in organisations as a whole. At the organisational level, these

asymmetries in task dependence can be conceptualised as the degree to which there are

differences across the organisation regarding the extent to which employees depend on others

HUMAN RESOURCEMANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL27, NO 1, 2017 75

©2017 John Wiley& Sons Ltd

Pleasecite this article in pressas: De Jong, S.B., Kunze, F. and Bruch,H. (2017) ‘Organisationalconsequencesof asymmetries in task dependence:the

moderatingrole of HR practices’.HumanResourceManagement Journal 27: 1, 75-93

doi: 10.1111/1748-8583.12126

bs_bs_banner

(Thibaut and Kelley, 1959). Traditionally, research has focused only on average task

dependence, defined as the mean level at which employees depend on others (cf. Nadler

and Thusman, 1997; Galbraith, 2014). Acknowledging asymmetries is important, however,

because organisational members who depend on colleagues for completing their tasks are

vulnerable to abuses of power committed by asymmetrically less task-dependent members

(e.g. Emerson, 1962; Fiske and Berdahl, 2007). These latter employees may attempt to exploit

their advantage by withholding resources or setting extra demands when dealing with

others. Recent studies have shown that asymmetries in task dependence can also be

detrimental to helping behaviour and trusting work relationships (De Jong et al., 2007),

individual job satisfaction and commitment (De Jong, 2014), and team learning and

performance (Van der Vegt et al., 2010). Based on these dyadic-, individual- and team-level

findings, it seems possible that asymmetries in task dependence might even affect

organisational processes and effectiveness.

1

However, these advances have not yet been

examined at the organisational level nor connected to the HRM literature. Hence, the main

goal of this study is to be the first to bring these new insights to a new level of analysis by

investigating whether asymmetries in task dependence within organisations can have

organisational-level effects.

Second, there is currently little insight into the theoretical mechanism through which

asymmetrical task dependence can affect organisational effectiveness. Yet good insight into

mechanisms and processes is important for scientific research and practical interventions

alike (Sanders et al., 2014). Therefore, our second goal is to investigate the mechanism

for why this organisational-level relationship might work. We draw on the literature on

trust (e.g. Rousseau et al., 1998) and intra-organisational trust climate (Huff and Kelley,

2003) to argue that a key mediating process is the climate of intra-organisational trust.

Following Huff and Kelley (2003: 82), we define the intra-organisational trust climate as

the ‘positive expectations that individuals have about the intent and behaviours of multiple

organisational members based on organisational roles, relationships, experiences, and

interdependencies.’We argue that when organisations have higher levels of asymmetries, they

also tend to have more inequalities and differences that increase the possibilities for power

abuse and the violation or exploitationof trust (Rousseau et al., 1998).Consequently, we expect

trust climate to be a key mediator between asymmetries and organisational effectiveness.

Third, the above relationships are not as straightforward as it might appear at first glance,

as the literature on power (Emerson, 1962; Keltner et al., 2003; Fiske and Berdahl, 2007)

indicates that the advantages bestowed by asymmetries are sometimes abused for personal

benefit, whereas under other circumstances, it can be used for the greater good. It is thus

unclear whether positive or negative effects will arise at the organisational level. Although

no research has yet investigated this issue, by drawing on interdependence theory (Thibaut

and Kelley, 1959), it can be argued that asymmetrical task dependence is less likely to be

abused when overarching and collective goals align different idiosyncratic interests

(cf. Bunderson and Reagans, 2011). The HR literature suggests that divergent interests can

be managed by selecting those HR practices that best fit the key characteristics of each

organisation (Delery and Doty, 1996). Scholars have argued that there are two main types of

HR practices, namely commitment-based and transactional-based HR practices (Monks

et al., 2013). In short, transaction-based practices create a more monetary, short-term,

individualistic and competitive orientation among organisational members. In contrast,

commitment-based HR practices strive to build relational, long-term, collective and

cooperation-oriented exchange relationships (Collins and Smith, 2006). To manage divergent

interests, the overarching and collective goals created by commitment-based HR practices

Asymmetriesand HR practices

76 HUMANRESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL,VOL 27, NO 1, 2017

©2017 John Wiley& Sons Ltd.