Linking performance pressure to employee work engagement ...
Linking Performance Appraisal Quality with Employee ...
Transcript of Linking Performance Appraisal Quality with Employee ...
Linking Performance Appraisal Quality with
Employee Participation in Informal Learning
Activities through Psychological Empowerment
By
Aamer Waheed
CIIT/SP12-PMS-005/ISB
PhD ThesisIn
Management Sciences
COMSATS University Islamabad
Islamabad Campus - Pakistan
Fall, 2018
ii
COMSATS University Islamabad
Linking Performance Appraisal Quality with
Employee Participation in Informal Learning
Activities through Psychological Empowerment
A Thesis presented to
COMSATS University Islamabad
In partiall fullfilment
Of the requirement of the degree of
PhD Management Sciences
By
Aamer Waheed
CIIT/SP12-PMS-005/ISB
Fall, 2018
iii
Linking Performance Appraisal Quality withEmployee Participation in Informal LearningActivities through Psychological Empowerment
A Post Graduate thesis submitted to the department of Management Sciences
as partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of Degree of Ph.D in
Management Sciences.
Name Registration Number
Aamer Waheed CIIT/SP12-PMS-005/ISB
Supervisor
Prof. Dr. Qaisar Abbas
Director
COMSATS University Islamabad
Lahore Campus
Co-Supervisor
Dr. Omer Farooq Malik
Assistant Professor
Department of Management Sciences,
COMSATS University Islamabad
iv
Certificate of Approval
This is to certify that research work presented in this thesis, entitled “LinkingPerformance Appraisal Quality with Employee Participation in Informal LearningActivities through Psychological Empowerment” was concluded by Aamer Waheedbearing Registration No.CIIT/SP12-PMS-005/ISB, under the supervision of Prof. Dr.Qaisar Abbas. No part of this thesis has been submitted anywhere else for any otherdegree. This thesis is submitted to the Department of Management Sciences,COMSATS University Islamabad in the partial fulfillment of the requirement for thedegree of Doctor of Philosophy in the field of Management Sciences.
Student Name: Aamer Waheed Signature: ____________________
Examination Committee:
External Examiner 1: External Examiner 2:
Prof. Dr. Hafiz Mushtaq AhmadDepartment of Management SciencesBahria University Islamabad
Prof. Dr. Masood-ul-HassanChairmanDepartment of CommerceBZU Multan
Prof. Dr. Qaisar AbbasSupervisorDirectorCOMSATS University IslamabadLahore Campus
Dr. Samina NawabChairpersonDepartment of Management SciencesCOMSATS University IslamabadWah Campus
v
Author’s Declaration
I, Aamer Waheed, bearing registration No. CIIT/ SP12-PMS-005/ISB, hereby state
that my thesis titled “Linking Performance Appraisal Quality with Employee
Participation in Informal Learning Activities through Psychological Empowerment” is
my own work and has not been submitted previously by me for taking any degree
from this university i.e. COMSATS University, Islamabad or anywhere else in the
country/world.
At any time if my statement is found to be incorrect even after I graduate the
University has the right to withdraw my PhD degree.
Date: 09 December, 2019 _____________________
Aamer Waheed
CIIT/SP12-PMS-005/ISB
vi
Plagiarism Undertaking
I solemnly declare that research work presented in the thesis titled “Linking
Performance Appraisal Quality with Employee Participation in Informal Learning
Activities through Psychological Empowerment” is solely my research work with no
significant contribution from any other person. Small contribution or help wherever
taken has been duly acknowledge and that complete thesis has been written by me.
I understand the zero-tolerance policy of HEC and COMSATS University Islamabad
towards plagiarism. Therefore, I as an author of the above titled thesis declare that no
portion of my thesis has been plagiarized and any material used as reference is
properly referred / cited.
I undertake if I am found guilty of any formal plagiarism in the above titled thesis
even after award of PhD Degree, the University reserves the right to withdraw/revoke
my PhD degree and that HEC and the university has the right to publish my name on
the HEC/University website on which names of students are placed who submitted
plagiarized thesis.
Date: 09 December, 2019 ____________________
Aamer Waheed
CIIT/SP12-PMS-005/ISB
vii
Certificate
It is certified that Aamer Waheed, Registration No. CIIT/ SP12-PMS-005/ISB, has
carried out all the work related to this thesis under my supervision at the Department
of Management Sciences, COMSATS University, Islamabad and the work fulfills the
requirement for award of PhD degree.
Date: 09 December, 2019Supervisor:
______________________Prof. Dr. Qaisar AbbasDirectorCOMSATS University IslamabadLahore Campus
In-charge / Head of Department:
_____________________________Department of Management SciencesCOMSATS University Islamabad
viii
DEDICATION
This research work is dedicated to my parents
Abdul Waheed and Safira Begum.
ix
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, I acknowledge the bounty and support of my creator ALLAH Almighty,
who bestowed me with this great strength, courage and the power to perform the work
that I was assigned. He showed us the light of knowledge through which I found right
way to success. After that, Holy Prophet Hazrat Muhammad (peace be upon him) who
is the cradle of light, guidance and inspiration for all the creation of this universe. I
express extreme gratitude to my supervisor, Prof. Dr. Qaisar Abbas and co-supervisor,
Dr. Omer Farooq Malik for their invaluable help, skillful guidance, and continuous
dedication throughout my research work. Both supervised the study with personal
dedication words fail to adequately express. Whenever I faced difficulty, they always
helped and guided me to solve the problem. I am eternally grateful to my head of
department, Dr. Aneel Salman, for his investment in my academic, professional, and
personal development. I also appreciate the contributions of Dr Timothy Colin
Bednall, Senior Lecturer, University of New South Wales, Australia for sharing his
knowledge and guidance. I am also grateful to Ms. Saba Bahareen Mansur, Assistant
Professor, English Language Center, for English editing and proof reading of
manuscript. I would like to thank all the faculty members who participated in the
survey and provided the valuable information. Without their support, time and
patience this research would not have been completed. To my best colleagues and
friends, Dr. Usman Ayub, Dr. Asif Shehzad, Dr. Malik Faisal Azeem, Muhammad
Shahid Iqbal, Arooj Khan and Muhammad Waqas Maharvi, thank you. I want to
acknowledge the support from the administrative staff, Dr. Abubakar Saeed (In-
charge graduate programs), Muhammad Zahid Malik and Imtiaz Ali (program
officers) and Mr. Muhammad Kamran (Naib Qasid). I am surrounded by family,
friends, and colleagues who provide unconditional love and encouragement including
my parents Abdul Waheed and Safira Begum, my wife, my children Rehab and
Adeen, brothers Asim Waheed, Mudassir Waheed and Afaq Mohsin, brother in-law
Inam-ur-Rehamn, and all family members.
Aamer Waheed
CIIT/ SP12-PMS-005/ISB
x
List of Publications
1. Waheed, A., Abbas, Q., & Malik, O. F. (2018). ‘Perceptions of PerformanceAppraisal Quality’ and Employee Innovative Behavior: Do PsychologicalEmpowerment and ‘Perceptions of HRM System Strength’ Matter? BehavioralSciences, 8(12), 114. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs8120114
2. Shahzad, A., Waheed, A., Khan, M. A. (2012). The Mediating Effect of IntrinsicMotivation on Perceived Investment in Employee Development and WorkPerformance, International Journal of Research in Commerce, Economics &Management, 2(5), 27-35.
3. Abbas, Q., Hameed, A., Waheed, A. (2011). Gender Discriminating & Its Effecton Employee Performance/Productivity, International Journal of Humanities andSocial Science, 1(15), 170-176.
4. Malik, O.F., Abbas, Q., Kiyani, T.M., Malik, K.U., Waheed, A. (2011). Perceivedinvestment in employee development and turnover intention: A social exchangeperspective, African Journal of Business Management, 5(5), 1904-1914.
5. Malik, O.F., Waheed, A., Malik, K.U. (2010). The Mediating Effects of JobSatisfaction on Role Stressors and Affective Commitment, International Journalof Business and Management, 5(11), 223-235.
xi
ABSTRACT
Linking Performance Appraisal Quality with Employee
Participation in Informal Learning Activities through
Psychological Empowerment
Organizations are facing increased economical, technological and labor market
challenges. In addition, they are confronted with the pressure to broaden the
employees’ participation in learning for sustainable development. Despite, manifold
efforts made towards learning in the workplace, the trends in adult learning
participation in Pakistan have remained unchanged for decades. The organizations are
relying more on formal training and learning activities whereas informal ways of
learning are not used to a large extent. The employee engagement in informal learning
activities (ILAs) is more important than formal learning because it contributes to more
than seventy percent of total learning.
The connection between human resource management practices and organizational
performance has been well established in variety of settings through employees’
participation in ILAs. There are some theoretical and methodological gaps that need
further investigation. The main research question to guide this study is how does
HRM system (content and process) impact employee participation in ILAs that
includes reflection (RE) on daily activities, knowledge sharing (KS) and innovative
behavior (IB) at the workplace. The purpose of this study is to propose a model that
explains the process in which HRM system, in terms of content (Perceptions of
performance appraisal quality) and process (perceptions of HRM system strength), is
linked to these ILAs under HR system strength (HRSS) theory.
Additionally, it is highly advised by the literature the relationship of HRM system
with organizational performance is no more recognized as a direct relationship. The
psychological empowerment (PE) as a positive job attitude plays a vital role in
shaping the behaviors of individuals in the workplace. Thus, building on the HRSS
theory, social cognitive theory and empowerment theory, the PPAQ and ILAs
relationship is better explained as mediated by PE. Moreover, it becomes imperative
xii
to examine the moderating role of PHSS in the relationship of PPAQ with employees’
attitudes (PE) and behaviors (ILAs) simultaneously.
Quantitative cross-sectional data were collected from the faculty members of twelve
public sector Higher Education Institutes/Universities (HEIs) of Islamabad Pakistan.
Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) is used for statistical
analysis of the quantitative data collected through self-administered questionnaire.
Confirmatory factor analysis was used to determine the construct validity, composite
reliability, convergent validity and discriminant validity. It appeared that the
perceptions of performance appraisal quality (PPAQ) is positively linked with PE,
RE, KS and IB. The PE is appeared to positively influence ILAs (RE, KS and IB). In
addition, PE mediates the relationship between PPAQ and these three ILAs. Further,
perceptions of HRM system strength (PHSS) as a moderator is supportive to
employees’ PE and ILAs (RE, KS and IB). The direct and interaction effect models
have small predictive relevance for all three ILAs.
The contribution of this study is manifold as it integrates the different views and
approaches into one single model to explain the mystery of ‘black box’ in HRM and
organizational performance relationship. The novel is the mediating role of PE in
explaining the relationship fetched new understandings for the researchers and
practitioners in the field of organizational behavior, organizational learning and
human resource development (HRD). In addition, the study contributes to the
literature by demonstrating that PHSS have incremental effects on employees’ PE and
ILAs. The practical implications and future directions are also discussed.
Keywords: Informal learning activities, Perceptions of performance appraisal quality,
HRM system strength, Knowledge sharing, Reflection, Innovative behavior
xiii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction ……………………………………………………... 01
1.1. Overview of the Chapter ……………………..…………. 02
1.2. Introduction of the Study ……………………..………… 02
1.3. Background of the Problem ………………..…………… 08
1.4. Problem Statement ………………………..…………….. 11
1.5. Purpose of the Study …………………………………….. 141.6. Research Questions ………………………………….….. 14
1.7. Research Objectives ………………………………….…. 15
1.8. Significance of the Study ………………………..……… 16
1.9. Thesis organization …………………….….……………. 18
1.10. Definitions of Terms ………………..………….………... 20
1.11. Summary …………………………..….…………………. 21
2. Literature Review …………………………..……….………….. 22
2.1. Introduction ……………………….……….……………. 23
2.2. Theoretical Orientation for the Study ….……..………… 23
2.3. Human Resource Management ……………….………... 24
2.3.1. Different Conceptualization of HRM ………… 25
2.3.2. Different Conceptualization of HRM Practices. 26
2.4. HRM and Organizational Performance ………………… 28
2.4.1. The Nature of Relationship …………………. 29
2.4.2. Diffeent Approaches to HRM ………………. 30
2.5. Underpinning Theories …………………………………. 33
2.5.1. Attribution Theories …………………………. 34
2.5.2. Multilevel Model Linking HR and FirmPerformance ……………………………….…. 35
xiv
2.5.3 HR System Strength Theory ……………….… 37
2.5.4 Social Cognitive Theory ……………….…….. 38
2.6. HR System Strength Theory and OrganizationalPerformance....................................................................... 39
2.7. Learning ……………………….…………………….…. 40
2.8. Workplace Learning ……………………….…………… 41
2.8.1. Formal Learning ………………….…………. 42
2.8.2. Informal Learning …………………………… 43
2.9. Informal Learning Activities (ILAs) ………………….... 52
2.9.1. Reflection …………………….………………. 53
2.9.2. Knowledge Sharing ………………….………. 57
2.9.3. Innovative Behavior ………………….………. 62
2.10. Perceptions of Performance Appraisal Quality …….…... 67
2.11. Psychological Contract and Psychological Climate ……. 71
2.12. Organizational Empowerment …………………….…….. 72
2.12.1. Social-Structural Empowerment ……...…..….. 73
2.12.2. Psychological Empowerment ………..………. 75
2.12.2.1. Meaning …………………………. 78
2.12.2.2. Competence ……………….……... 79
2.12.2.3. Self-Determination ………….…… 79
2.12.2.4. Impact …………..……..…...…… 80
2.13. Perceptions of HRM System Strength …………..….…… 82
2.13.1. Distinctiveness …………………………..…. 83
2.13.2. Consistency ………………….………………. 85
2.13.3. Consensus …………………………..………… 86
2.14. Conceptual Framework …………………………..……... 87
2.15. Hypotheses Development …………………………….… 88
2.15.1. Perceptions of Performance Appraisal Quality
xv
and Psychological Empowerment ……….….... 88
2.15.2. Psychological Empowerment and Informallearning activities ……….……………………. 90
2.15.2.1. Psychological Empowerment andReflection ………….……………. 92
2.15.2.2. Psychological Empowerment andKnowledge Sharing ………….…... 93
2.15.2.3. Psychological Empowerment andInnovative Behavior ………..……. 94
2.15.3. Perceptions of Performance Appraisal Qualityand Informal Learning Activities ………….…. 95
2.15.3.1. Perceptions of PerformanceAppraisal Quality and Reflection.. 97
2.15.3.2. Perceptions of PerformanceAppraisal Quality and KnowledgeSharing………………………….. 98
2.15.3.3. Perceptions of PerformanceAppraisal Quality and InnovativeBehavior ………………………… 99
2.15.4. Mediating Role of PsychologicalEmpowerment ………………………………... 100
2.15.5. Moderating Role of Perceptions of HRMSystem Strength ……………………………… 101
2.16. Conceptual Model ………………………………………. 103
2.17. Summary ……………...…………………………………. 105
3. Research Methodology …………………………………………. 107
3.1. Introduction ……………………………………………. 108
3.2. Research Methodology ………………………………… 109
3.2.1. Research Philosophy ………………………… 109
3.2.2. Research Approach …………………………. 110
3.2.3. Methodological Choices ……………………. 111
3.2.4. Research Strategy …………………………… 113
xvi
3.2.5. Time Horizon …………………..…………... 113
3.2.6. The Purpose of the Research ……………..… 113
3.2.7. Data Collection and Data Analysis …………. 114
3.3. Industry Setting ………………………………………... 115
3.4. Population ……………………………………………... 118
3.5. Sampling ………………………………………………. 119
3.6. Measurement and Scales ………………………………. 122
3.6.1. Informal Learning Activities ….……..……… 123
3.6.2. Perceptions of Performance Appraisal Quality. 124
3.6.3. Perceptions of HRM System Strength …….… 124
3.6.4. Psychological Empowerment ……………….. 125
3.6.5. Demographics and Control Variables ……….. 126
3.7. Research Ethics …………………………...……………... 126
3.8. Pilot Study ………………………….………….………... 127
3.9. Evaluation of Underlying Assumptions of MultivariateData ……………………………………………………… 128
3.9.1. Missing Values Analysis …………….………. 128
3.9.2. Multivariate Outliers …………...…….……… 128
3.9.3. Normality Test ………….…..………….……. 129
3.10. Data Analysis ……………………….……………….…. 129
3.10.1. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) ……..…. 130
3.11. Measurement Model …………………………….……… 132
3.11.1. Internal Consistency Reliability ………...…… 133
3.11.2. Indicators Reliability ………………..….……. 133
3.11.3. Convergent Validity ………………….………. 134
3.11.4. Discriminant Validity ………………………… 134
3.12. Structural Model ………………………..………….……. 136
3.12.1. Coefficient of Determination (R2) …………… 136
xvii
3.12.2. Effect Size (f 2) ……………………..….……. 136
3.12.3. Path Coefficient Estimates ……..…….………. 137
3.12.4. Predictive Relevance Q2 and q2 ……..……..... 137
3.13. Summary...………….……………………………………. 139
4 Data Analysis ……………………………………………………. 140
4.1. Introduction……..………………………………………. 141
4.2. Evaluation of Underlying Assumptions of MultivariateData………………………………………………………. 141
4.2.1. Missing Value…..…………………….………. 141
4.2.2. Collinearity ………………….……….………. 142
4.2.3. Heteroscedasticity…………………….………. 142
4.2.4. Common Method Variance ………….………. 142
4.3. Respondents Profile ……………………..……………… 143
4.4. Descriptive Statistics and Reliability of Measures …..…. 145
4.5. Graphical Representation of Descriptive Statistics ……. 147
4.6. Structural Equation Modeling ………….………………. 147
4.7. Measurement Model ………………….………………… 147
4.7.1. Internal Consistency Reliability ……………... 147
4.7.2. Composite Reliability ………….……………. 148
4.7.3. Convergent Validity …………………………. 148
4.7.3.1. Hetrotrait-Monotrait (HTMT) Test 151
4.7.3.2. Fornell-Larcker ……………..…… 151
4.7.3.3 Cross Loadings …………………. 151
4.7.3.4 Correlation ………………………. 152
4.8. Structural Model ……………………………...…………. 158
4.8.1. Main Effect ………………………..…………. 158
4.8.2. Mediating Effect …………………..…………. 161
4.8.3. Moderating Effect ……………………………. 165
xviii
4.8.4. Interaction ……………………….…………… 167
4.9. Effect Size (f 2) and Predictive Relevance (q2) …………. 169
4.9.1. f 2 and q2 for Main Effect Model…………….... 170
4.9.2. f 2 and q2 for Moderating Effect Model………. 172
4.10. Control Variables ………………...……………………… 175
4.11. Summary………….……………………………………… 175
5. Discussion ………………………………………………………... 177
5.1. Summary ……………………...…………………………. 178
5.1.1. Research Design ……………..………………. 179
5.1.2. Population and Sample……….………………. 179
5.1.3. Instrumentation ……………….……………… 180
5.1.4. Scale Reliability ……………….……………... 180
5.2. Findings …………………………..……………………... 180
5.3. Discussions ………………………...……………………. 183
5.4. Theoretical Contributions ……………………..………… 187
5.5. Practical Implications …………………...………………. 189
5.6. Limitations and Future Directions ………………………. 190
5.7. Concluding Remarks …………………………………... 191
References …………………………………………………………... 193
Annexure-I: Questionnaire………………………………………… 226
Annexure-II: Graphical representation of Constructs.…………... 232
xix
LIST OF FIGURES
Fig 2.1. Multilevel Model Linking HR Systems and Firm
Performance (Ostroff & Bowen, 2000) ………………..36
Fig 2.2. Kolb’s (1984) Experiential Learning Styles ……………. 44
Fig 2.3. Watkins and Marsick’s (1992) Informal and Incidental
Learning Framework ………..……………….………….47
Fig 2.4. Cseh, Watkins and Marsick’s (1999) Informal and
Incidental Learning Framework ……………..………….48
Fig 2.5. Bennett’s (2012) Four-part Informal Learning Model …. 50
Fig 2.6. Gibb’s (1988) reflective cycle………..…….…………… 55
Fig 2.7. Luan and Serban’s (2002) classification of knowledge … 58
Fig 2.8. Nonaka and Takeuchi’s (1994) SECI Model with Chini’s
(2004) developmental tools ……………….…………….60
Fig 2.9. Proposed Conceptual Model ……………...……………. 104
Fig 4.1. A Main Effect Model ……………………..……………. 160
Fig 4.2. Interaction Effect Model: Perception of HRM System
Strength as a Moderator …………………………………166
Fig 4.3. Interaction effect of perception of HRM system strength
on perceptions of performance appraisal quality and
psychological empowerment. ………………...…………
167
Fig 4.4. Interaction effect of perception of HRM system strength
on perceptions of performance appraisal quality and
reflection………………………………………………....
168
xx
Fig 4.5. Interaction effect of perception of HRM system strength
on perceptions of performance appraisal quality and
knowledge sharing. ………………………………….....
168
Fig 4.6. Interaction effect of perception of HRM system strength
on Perceptions of performance appraisal quality and
innovative behavior …………………………………….
169
xxi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1. Summary of Research Process …………………………. 114
Table 3.2. Summary of Responses (case wise) ………………….… 121
Table 3.3. Features of Reflective Measurement Models ………....... 132
Table-3.4. Main Guidelines/Rules of Thumb for Assessing
Reflective Measurement Models………………...……….135
Table 3.5. Guiding principles for structural model evaluation...…… 138
Table 4.1. Collinearity Assessment (Reflection, Knowledge
Sharing, Innovative Behavior: Dependent Variable)....…143
Table 4.2. The Descriptive of the Sample (N = 360) ...……………. 144
Table 4.3. Mean, Standard deviation, Skewness, Kurtosis,
Cronbach, Items Description.………………….…………145
Table 4.4. Results summary for reflective measurement model.…. 149
Table 4.5. Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT)…………...………. 153
Table 4.6. Fornell–Larcker test for discriminant validity…..……… 154
Table 4.7. Cross Loadings…………………………………………... 155
Table 4.8. Results of Main effect model……………………………. 159
Table 4.9. The mediating effect of Psychological Empowerment (IV
= Perceptions of Performance Appraisal Quality) ………162
Table 4.10. Bootstrapping Results of the indirect effect
(DV=Reflection)…………………………………………163
xxii
Table 4.11. Bootstrapping Results of the indirect effect
(DV=Knowledge Sharing) …………………..…………..163
Table 4.12. Bootstrapping Results of the indirect effect
(DV=Innovative Behavior) …………..……….…………164
Table 4.13. Results of PLS-SEM Moderation Model………………... 165
Table 4.14. Effect size and predictive relevance for mediating
variable (DV=Reflection) ……………….……………170
Table 4.15. Effect size and predictive relevance for mediating
variable (DV=Knowledge Sharing) …………………….171
Table 4.16. Effect size and predictive relevance for mediating
variable (DV=Innovative Behavior) ……………………171
Table 4.17. Effect size and predictive relevance for moderating
variable HRM System Strength (DV=Psychological
Empowerment) ………………………………………….
172
Table 4.18. Effect size and predictive relevance for moderating
variable HRM System Strength (DV=Reflection) …….173
Table 4.19. Effect size and predictive relevance for moderating
variable HRM System Strength (DV=Knowledge
Sharing)…………………………………………………..
173
Table 4.20 Effect size and predictive relevance for moderating
variable HRM System Strength (DV=Innovative
Behavior) ………………………………………………...
175
Table 4.21 Decision about Hypotheses……………………………… 174
xxiii
LIST OF ABBREVIATION
AMOS Analysis of Moment Structures
CO Competence
CS Consensus
CT Consistency
DI Distinctiveness
HEC Higher Education Commission of Pakistan
HEIs Higher Education Institutes/Universities
HR Human Resource
HRD Human Resource Development
HRM Human Resource Management
HRSS HRM System Strength Theory
IB Innovative Behavior
IL Informal Learning
ILAs Informal Learning Activities
IM Impact
KS Knowledge Sharing
ME Meaning
OP Organizational Performance
PE Psychological Empowerment
PHSS Perceptions of HRM System Strength
PLS Partial Least Squares
RE Reflection
SD Self-Determination
SEM Structural Equation Modeling
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
2
1.1 Overview of the Chapter
This chapter provides the basis of this thesis and provides the general
introduction of the theme and topic of the study (Section 1.2). The background of the
problem is explained in Section 1.3 and problem statement in Section 1.4. The
purpose of the research is explained in Section 1.5. Section 1.6 outlines the research
aims, objectives and questions. Brief overview of the methodology is provided in
Section 1.7. The significance of the study is explained in Section 1.8 and theoretical
framework is presented in Section 1.9. Section 1.10 provides summary of the thesis
structure and organization. The terms are defined in Section 1.11 and the summary of
this is presented is Section 1.12.
1.2 Introduction of the Study
The success and sustainable existence of any organization is confronted with
many challenges in today’s competitive world. Organizations are facing economic,
technological and labor market challenges. They are required to cope up with these
challenges for the survival, success and growth (Noe et al., 2014). The stakeholders
demand for optimal level of satisfaction leading to economic challenge. Organizations
need to develop expertise in mobile computing and get access through social media
for improvement in communication means with internal as well as external parties to
tackle the technological changes (Noe et al., 2013). Labor market challenges call for
utmost assistance from the talents and abilities of the available labor force. On the
other hand, workers differ with each other in terms of gender, age, race, skills, and
capabilities making it more contestable (Toossi, 2009). Furthermore, workers’
expectations are also changing in terms of work, workplace, and behaviors (Butts et
al., 2013).
In such a highly demanding business environment, organizations strive for
competitive advantage by utilizing their corporate resources intelligently and
optimally. In other words, the management and deployment of these resources is
critical for success and sustainability (Oladigo, 2018). According to the resource-
based view, firms can get competitive advantage, especially in terms of sustenance
and development, by capitalizing their associated resources (Barney, 1991). The
associated resources can be categorized in three broader themes; financial capital,
3
physical resources, and human capital. Financial capital can be expressed in terms of
money or cash that a firm or organization holds. Physical resources are the capital or
material resources composed of tools, machinery, equipment, infrastructure, and
technology. At last, workers or employees are used as one of the significant input or
resource by the firms in their business.
The human capital is an intangible asset that provides services to the employer
and is recognized as the most valuable asset that the firms should focus upon to get
competitive advantage (Katou et al., 2014; Noe et al., 2010). Together with this, the
organizations are underrating the importance of their intangible assets or more
precisely; human capital (Oladejo & Odetoye, (2018). This human capital contributes,
at its best, to the firm’s competitive advantage especially when they are valuable,
intellectual, unique, and different (Barney & Wright, 1998). Human resource or
human capital is a polished and matchless resource for an organization especially
when their knowledge, abilities, and skills come across with other assets/resources
(Ployhart & Moliterno, 2011).
All this call for the special attention towards the importance of human
workplace learning for success and survival. This is due to the fact that the markets
are becoming more technology intensive, competitive, and global in nature (Clarke,
2004; Marsick & Volpe, 1999). Workplace learning associates the human capital
development and the organizational development, with the vision of sustainability in
the learning processes and outcomes. The concept of workplace learning involves two
approaches i.e. formal learning and informal learning.
The formal learning involves the enrollment of employees in on-the-job
training programs with a certain level of education or certification and completing
various courses according to the job description (Jacobs & Park, 2009). For this,
organizations are making efforts to augment the potential and increase performance of
workforce through employee development programs (Marsick, 1988a). These
development programs being conducted by the organizations and are considered as a
top-down hierarchical practice (Noe et al., 2014). In such a practice, the team leaders
or the senior managers are responsible for identifying the employee learning
requirements and accordingly, conducting the training programs for them (Bednall &
Sanders, 2016; Bednall et al., 2014).
4
These programs include mandatory participation in the training programs that
emphasizes on attaining knowledge and improving the skills and abilities to adapt and
predict situations to achieve strategic goals and objectives for the organization
(Kraiger and Ford, 2006). Introduction of such training programs have proved to be
successful in enhancing the performance of employees in different areas (Aguinis &
Kraiger, 2009; Noe et al., 2014; Bednall et al., 2014). The organizations are investing
millions of dollars on training programs to promote and encourage formal learning to
have competitive advantage (Choi & Jacobs, 2011). For that reason, it is not
unexpected that employee training and development has become not only an ordinary
industry but a multibillion-dollar industry (Noe et al., 2010). Despite, its importance
in the development of human capital, this form of learning has some drawbacks as
well.
The formal learning through training has been criticized by different
researchers as such trainings bear high costs, requires extra time, and need extra
efforts to put in those trainings which may divert the employees from their natural
work environment (Cormier-MacBurnie et al., 2015; Schei & Nebro, 2015; Lohman,
2009; Wilson & Berne, 1999; Hall, 1996; Lohman, 2006). In addition, learning and
knowledge is not restricted to the formal activities in a classroom environment.
Workplace learning is comprised of more productive learning activities in the
authentic workplace. It is therefore, necessary to recognize and understand the
currently changing trends of workplace learning (Jacobs & Parks, 2009).
For long term prosperity, success and sustainable development of human
capital, the skills should be developed through lifelong continuous learning
procedures which are significantly different from formal training and
development programs (London & Sessa, 2006). In the new global and competitive
economy where sustainability is the focus of every organization, diversity in learning
is an important source of competitive advantage (Crick, Haigney, Huang, Cobourn, &
Goldspink, 2013; Kynd, 2016; Clus, 2011).
The concept of informal learning (IL) is synonymous to incidental learning
and self-development (Marsick & Watkins, 1990; Marsick et al., 1999; Orvis &
Leffler, 2011). IL is generally “characterized as unstructured, experiential, and non-
institutionalized” (Marsick & Volpe, 1999), activities initiated by employees in the
5
natural working environment with an intention to learn something new (Cerasoli et
al., 2017). IL is considered as more effective than formal learning because of its
effectiveness and contribution to development. In comparison to the formal training,
IL provides the individuals/employees more meaningful learning experiences by
providing them with the latest set of skills and knowledge (Tannenbaum et al., 2010).
It includes cognitive activities, such as learning by one own self (own experiences),
learning from others (mentor, supervisor, peers), and learning from non-interpersonal
material resources (books, papers, online material) thus helps in polishing the skills
and expertise of employees (Lohman, 2005; Doornbos et al., 2008).
Geijsel et al. (2009) says that ILAs are those which is least partially controlled
by the employees. It is “a set of connected activities carried out individually or in
interaction with others, aimed at optimizing individual or collective practices” (Van
Woerkom et al., 2002). Crouse et al. (2011) and Clarke (2004) has identified that job
rotation, trial and error, mentoring, working with others, reading and researching, job
shadowing, surfing the web, reflection on action, observing others, and networking
are the major types of ILAs in which employees are engaged.
Similarly, Lohman (2005; 2006) has identified that talking with others,
searching journals and magazines, collaborate with others, searching the internet,
sharing material and resources, observing others, trial and error, and reflection on
other’s practices are considered as ILAs. Self-directed projects are also considered as
informal types of learning (Chan & Auster, 2003). De Groot et al. (2012) and Van
Woerkom et al. (2002) has presented that learning from mistake, asking for feedback,
critical reflection, vision sharing, knowledge sharing, social interaction and
experimentation are the critical behaviors in which employees are engaged. It includes
the activities such as interacting with others, self-reflection, reading job relevant
material and experimenting with new ways of performing tasks (Noe et al., 2013).
The employee involves in different types of activities or behaviors that are
considered as ILAs. The literature varied in describing the types and nature of ILAs
(Jeong et al., 2018). However, Bednall et al. (2014) made a judgement that despite,
different classifications and types of ILAs consensus has been found for three
activities. In current study, reflection on daily activities (RE), knowledge sharing
6
(KS), and innovative behavior (IB) are considered as representative ILAs (Jeong et
al., 2018; Bakkenes et al., 2010; Kwakman, 2003).
Reflection on daily activities or reflection (RE) is an important workplace ILA
for building knowledge and expertise in employees. Marsick et al. (2014) argue that
ILAs are initiated by the reflective strategies, which is a dialectical process of action
and reflection. It is believed that reflection helps employees to consolidate
knowledge, recognize improvement areas and exchange of routine behaviors (Frankel
et al., 2012a; Van Woerkom, 2004; Parsons & Stephenson, 2005). Reflection
following one’s actions, or the actions of others, and personal experimentation, are
examples of learning on one’s own (Jeon & Kim, 2012; Lohman, 2005).
Knowledge sharing (KS) is a set of behaviors that helps in exchange of
acquired knowledge among individuals, groups and organizations (Chow & Chan,
2008; Ryu et al., 2003). The sharing of success and failures through informal chats or
meetings is also considered as KS behavior (Kwakman, 2003). Individuals are highly
socialized to share their best practices and mistakes with colleagues (Frankel et al.,
2012b; Yu & To, 2013). KS is a social interaction process of imparting new
knowledge at individual, group and organizational level (Jeon & Kim, 2012; Van den
Hooff et al., 2012; Lin, 2007). The transformation of individual knowledge into
organizational knowledge is known as KS (Foss et al., 2010) and it is an enabler of
knowledge management (Alavi & Leidner, 2001). KS is an informal way of learning
in which employees discuss their problems, share ideas, and seek advice from their
colleagues through informal feedback and support (Bednall et al., 2014).
Innovative behavior (IB) is vital for performance improvement (Cesario &
Chambel, 2017; Janssen et al., 2004), organizational effectiveness and success
(Thurlings et al., 2015; Scott & Bruce, 1998; Woodman et al., 1993) by creating or
introducing new product, technology or process. IB was initially recognized as extra-
role behavior (Organ, 1997) but now importance with respect to job and performance
has been acknowledge and attained the status of in-role behavior as a part of normal
job assignment or routine work (Dorenbosch et al., 2005; Janssen, 2000). The
creativity is a component of IB (Jong & Hartog, 2010). Irrespective of emanates of
innovation, the flow is from individual to group and then organization (Mumford,
7
2000). The individuals and their inspirations are the main source of innovation by
displaying IB (Woodman et al., 1993).
The participation in ILAs (RE, KS and IB) is meant obligatory for accountants
(Wahab et al., 2016), managers (Choi and Jacobs, 2011), nurses (Svensson et al.,
2004; Bjørk et al., 2013), teachers (Van Eekelen et al., 2005; Lohman, 2009), and
HRM practitioners (Crouse et al., 2011). The employees can learn by their voluntary
participation in these ILAs (Milia & Birdi, 2010). Informal learning is dependent on
many factors such as personal abilities of an individual and on the context of learning.
This type of learning is initiated by the learner according to his/her learning interests,
by the actions and reflection and on need basis. It depends on the motivational level
and experience that is not a part of formal classroom learning (Tannenbaum et al.,
2010; Lohman, 2009; 2006). The organizations are still facing the challenge of “how
best to encourage and enable informal learning to enhance the performance” (Bednall
et al., 2014).
Since the early work of Marsick (1988a, 1988b) and Marsick and Watkins
(1990) the interest in informal learning has grown substantially. With this the
development and support to ILAs was a big challenge faced by HR practitioners and
researchers (Marsick, 2009; Ellinger, 2005). A number of conceptual and empirical
studies have been carried out to show the ways and means through which ILAs can be
facilitated (Schurmann & Beausaert, 2016; Choi & Jacob, 2011). There are different
factors that are used to decide the degree of involvement and effectiveness in informal
learning programs. The personal features and characterizes of an individual affect
their actions and decisions (Enos et al., 2003).
Research has recognized that the development of employees through informal
learning is influenced by individual level socio-demographic factors (Sibaran et al.,
2015; Nilsson & Rubeson, 2014), personal characteristics (Noe et al., 2013; Hoekstra
et al., 2009) and job characteristics (Schurmann & Beausaert, 2016; Sutherland, 2016;
Jeon & Kim, 2012). Similarly, the study focusing on group level antecedents of
informal learning found that leadership (Pifer et al., 2015; Ouweneel et al., 2009),
feedback (Holly et al., 2016; Nisbet et al., 2015; Hoekstra et al., 2009), networking
(Schurmann & Beausaert, 2016; Doornbos et al., 2008) and interpersonal relationship
8
(Cuyvers et al., 2016; Cunningham & Hillier, 2013; Lai et al., 2011) positively
stimulates IL by engaging employees in different ILAs.
Moreover, the organizational level factors like organizational characteristics
(Nisbet et al., 2015; Nilsson & Rubenson, 2014), organizational culture and
environment (Cormier-MacBurnie et al., 2015; Neher et al., 2015; Pifer et al., 2015)
organizational interventions (Schurmann & Beausaert, 2016; Cunningham & Hillier,
2013; Lohman, 2000) work tools and resources (Cuyvers et al., 2016; Kyndt et al.,
2009; Lohman, 2009) influence employees’ participation in ILAs. The above
mentioned studies have attempted to identify individual, group and organizational
level characteristics that affect IL. However, very little research (as per researchers’
knowledge) has been done to investigate the role of HRM in facilitating and
promoting IL (Bednall et al., 2014). The underlying mechanism through which HRM
affects performance in terms of ILAs has also not received considerable attention in
literature.
There is a well-established relationship between HRM and OP (e.g.,
Messersmith et al., 2011; Macky & Boxall, 2007; Wright et al., 2005; Delery & Doty,
1996). Literature also suggests that the focus should be made on proximal variables
or individual outcomes while studying the effect of HRM on performance (e.g.,
Gruman & Saks, 2011; Wright et al., 2003) because these proximal variables have
effect on distal variables or organizational outcomes. The ILAs (RE, KS and IB) are
known to be related with proximal outcome i.e. employee performance (Bednall et al.,
2014; Enos et al., 2003). This study is undertaken to investigate the direct and indirect
effects of HRM on these three ILAs.
1.3 Background of the Problem
The human resource or human capital is strategically important because it
helps organizations to achieve competitive advantage (Barney, 1991). It is valued for
its degree of complexity and inimitability as compared to other tangible and intangible
assets (Huselid, 1995). Further, the complexities and ambiguities in human attitudes
and behaviors make it more difficult to imitate by other organizations. Therefore,
researchers and practitioners focused more on human resource or employees. They
paid attention in studying the possible factors or mechanism through which the
9
organization can attain maximum benefits from human resource. Because of this, it
was established and realized that human resource needs to be managed with due care
and attention. As a result, HRM as a system succeeded in capturing the attention of
scholars and practitioner over the past three decades.
The positive relationship between HRM and performance is supported through
substantial empirical evidences. Despite, the sufficient support from literature there is
a central issue in this regard that how and why HRM system contributes to
performance (Bednall et al., 2014; Messersmith et al., 2011; Savanevicience &
Stankeviciute, 2011); Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). There are many stages between HRM
and performance which is referred to as ‘black box’ by the researchers.
The ‘black box’ mystery can be resolved through theory refinement (Guest,
1997). In response to Guest’s call, the employees’ behavioral perspective was the
focus of literature to link HRM with performance. The behavioral mechanism of
performance is mainly related to how the HRM system affects performance. It is
conceptualized that HRM system affects the most proximal variable which in turn
contributes towards distal organizational outcomes (Kanfer, 1992). Employees’
attitudes and behaviors are recognized as a main proximal variable in the relationship
of HRM with performance (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004; Dyer & Reeves, 1995).
The most researched employees’ attitudes are job satisfaction, organizational
commitment in the relationship between HRM and performance. Ostroff and Bowen
(2000) presented a multilevel framework in which they highlighted the mediating role
of psychological climate in HRM-performance relationship. In addition, Amenumey
and Lockwood (2008) demonstrated that organizational level psychological climate
positively influences individual level PE. The focus of the current research/study is on
PE. The PE as a positive job attitude plays a vital role in shaping the behaviors of
individuals in the workplace (Dust et al., 2014). The PE explains the psychological
mechanism through which HRM system affects performance (Messersmith et al.,
2011). The effectiveness of HRM systems depends on function of inspiring
employees and contributing towards positive outcomes.
In line with this PE is considered as more suitable in predicting employees’
behavior than organizational commitment and job satisfaction. In current study we
10
propose that PE is a mediating link or mechanism (psychological mechanism) through
which the HRM system directly and indirectly affects organizational performance.
Although the behavioral perspective is essential for achieving a positive
organizational performance, the integration and study of other perspective is required
to better comprehend the nature of HRM-performance relationship (Jiang et al.,
2012b).
The other theoretical consideration found in literature is that employees
perceive the HRM system differently which may result in deviant behaviors. These
results or outcomes could be different from what an HRM system aims to accomplish
(Bowen & Ostroff, 2004; Nishii & Wright, 2007; Boselie et al., 2005). Therefore, the
HRM system and its implementation are equally important alongside the content of
HRM. Secondly, the perception of HRM system is more important and it will not
produce the desired results if the perception is not made properly. The HRM system is
characterized by shared perceptions of interrelated activities. It communicates the
expected behaviors that are rewarded (Ostroff and Bowen, 2016; Becker et al., 1997).
Therefore, a strong system is created when it exists distinctively, it communicates
messages consistently, and consensually accepted at all levels of organizational
hierarchy (managers and employees) with respect to HR practices and HRM system
objective.
Regardless of the important role that an HRM system (HRM content and
HRM process) has in enhancing the knowledge of how an HRM system is linked with
organizational performance, most of the studies focuses on defining the content of
HRM (Hewett et al., 2018; Hauff et al., 2017; Farndale & Sander, 2017; Piening et al.,
2014; Ostroff & Bowen, 2016; Delmotte et al., 2012). This one-sided focus of the
researcher on HRM system led Bown & Ostroff (2004) to divert the attention of the
researcher towards studying the process approach together with content approach.
Consequently, the current study is the extension of existing empirical research
undertaken to examine the relationship of HRM system with performance. This is
being done by joining the behavioral perspective (ILAs) and psychological
perspective (PE) into one single model. It provides additional support to the HRM and
performance literature by presenting a integrated model that incorporates both, the
content (PPAQ) and process of HRM (PHSS). This is undertaken to answer the main
11
research question that how HRM system is directly or indirectly linked with ILAs in
terms of RE, KS and IB in higher education sector in Pakistan.
1.4 Problem Statement
Theoretically, the relationship of HRM and performance (employee and
organizational) has been challenged by many researchers due to its ignorance of many
related variables. For better understanding of this relationship it is highly
recommended to include and study the role of other mediating and moderating
variables (Farndale & Sander, 2017; Bednall et all, 2014; Katou et al., 2014; Katou,
2012). There are many model proposed by the HRM literature on the linking
mechanism of HRM system and performance. The AMO (Ability, Motivation, and
Opportunity) model is one of them but the focus of AMO model is on the content of
HRM. The HR system strength (HRSS) theory by Bowen & Ostroff (2004) which is
based on the multilevel framework (Ostroff & Bowen, 2000) has been theoretically
addressed by many scholars (e.g., Baluch, 2017; Gilbert et al., 2015; Bednall et al.,
2014) resulting in a robust and solid theoretical ground (Hewett et al., 2018) in
explaining the HRM and performance relationship.
The HRSS theory (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004) addresses the content and process
perspectives of HRM. The mediating links between HRM and performance
(individual and organizational) is the focus of this theory. Given the importance of
multilevel framework (Ostroff & Bowen, 2000) in conceptualizing the mechanism
through which HRM system (content and process) affect performance (individual and
organizational), the empirical studies have tested the model by incorporating different
attitudes and behavior (e.g., Hauff et al., 2017; Messersmith et al., 2011) and have
invigorated attention in this area (Hewett et al., 2018). However, they did not
investigate the psychological mechanism that may be responsible for transmitting the
effect of HRM on employees’ behaviors. The theory (Dust et al., 2014; Bowen &
Ostroff, 2004) also posits that PE as a positive job attitude plays a vital role in shaping
the behaviors of individuals in the workplace. Thus, it becomes imperative to examine
the mediating role of PE in the relationship between HRM and employee behaviors.
Further, there are two main approaches of HRM found in the literature; HRM
content and HRM process are used while studying different relationships (Bednall et
12
al., 2014; Li, 2010). The focus of HRM content approach is on the HRM practices
that constitute the HRM system whereas to address how HRM practices deliver
messages to employees is the focus of HRM process approach. In addition,
employees’ perceptions of the HRM system that create a shared climate is addressed
through the HRM process approach (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). The content approach
was the focus of majority of studies at the cost of process approach. The employees’
perceptions of HRM system (HRM process) shape employees’ outcome i.e. attitudes
and behavior (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004), Therefore, it is suggested that the content
approach alone is not enough to explain the HRM and performance relationship.
However, the process approach must be considered along with content of HRM
system.
The HRM process approach in an HRM system has been addressed through
conceptualizing the strength of an HRM system. The employees’ PHSS moderates the
relationship of HRM and performance (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). A noticeable study
(e.g. Bednall et al., 2014) investigating such relationship has focused only on
behavioral perspective i.e. ILAs. Unfortunately, no study to the best of our
knowledge, found that investigates the moderating effect of PHSS as a process of
HRM on relationship between HRM content (PPAQ) and PE (psychological
perspective). Additionally, the HRM content and process are two complementary
facets of an HRM system in bringing out positive work attitudes and behaviors. The
studies integrating the content and process approaches as suggested by Bowen and
Ostroff (2004) are scarce.
Practically, the higher education institutes/universities in Pakistan have
witnessed many improvements since the educational reforms during the military
regime (i.e. 1999-2007) and the establishment of Higher Education Commission
(HEC) of Pakistan. The national level reforms and huge investment has been made for
the development of higher education institutes (HEIs) in Pakistan (Rasheed et al.,
2011). HEC is aimed to carry the same through different innovation program, faculty
development programs and quality improvement programs. Such changes have
created a competition among the two sectors in HEIs i.e. public and private sector
HEIs. The number of degree awarding institutes/university has increased from 42
13
(1980) to 175 (2016) (Mahmood, 2016) and 194 at the end of 2018
(www.hec.gov.pk).
It has been noted that during the last 10 years, Pakistan has enormously
increased its research productivity (Herciu, 2015; hec.gov.pk). These changes have
created demand for well-equipped professionals for the sustainable development. The
formal learning and training programs are insufficient, fragmented and unfocused
(Chaudary & Imran, 2012). The formal learning and training programs are objectively
designed for nominated individuals or small group. These programs are insufficient to
cater the development need of all the individuals. It is supplemented that formal
learning programs are designed for imparting specific knowledge, expertise or skills
which is not enough to address all the aspects of employee development (Kwakman,
2003; Enos et al., 2003; Burns et al., 2006).
Among different aspects of individual learning activities in an organization, IL
has drawn considerable attention, as it is the major form of learning that is related to
adults, especially in the work environment (Marsick, 2009; Marsick et al., 2006;
Ellinger, 2005; Marsick and Watkins, 1990). The IL contributes 70 to 80 percent of
workplace learning (Cross, 2007; Rothwell et al., 2003) and even some authors
counted it to 90 percent (e.g. Li et al., 2009). Despite, the evidences that IL help in
achieving the competitive advantage (Gijbels et al., 2012) the trends in adult learning
participation in Pakistan have remained unchanged for decades. The HEIs of Pakistan
fail to recognize its importance and address the issues hindering employee
participation in ILAs and devising mechanism to promote informal ways of learning.
Additionally, the majority of studies on IL have carried out in the developed
context i.e. Western contexts. However, such studies are very rare in Asian context,
particularly very few studies done on IL in Pakistan (e.g., Wahab et al., 2016; Khan et
al., 2013; Chaudary & Imran, 2012; Khalid et al., 2011; Nawab, 2011). Unfortunately,
no research has been found in Pakistan that surveyed the impact of HRM on ILAs in a
higher education sector of the country. Furthermore, the HRM system (content and
process) is recognized to be the important tool through which the HEIs can develop
such a skilled and learned workforce. Despite the significance of the HRM system to
influence employees’ ILAs (RE, KS and IB), no previous study was found to address
14
the ‘black box’ mystery that how HRM as a system (content and process) affects ILAs
to improve performance of higher HEIs in Pakistan.
1.5 Purpose of the Study
The main purpose of this research is to solve the ‘black box’ puzzle by
developing and presenting a comprehensive model based on the theory of HRSS
(Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). It is obligatory to establish a comprehensive model for
studying the influence of content of HRM system (PPAQ) on ILAs (RE, KS and IB)
by observing the psychological mechanism (PE) and incorporating the process of
HRM system (PHSS) effects.
In current study, we aim to establish empirical link of HRM content and more
specifically PPAQ with PE. Second, direct links between PE and ILAs (RE, KS and
IB) are explored. Third, the direct influences of PPAQ on ILAs (RE, KS and IB) are
examined. Fourth, the mediating role of PE as posed by Bowen and Ostroff (2004) is
examined as this relationship is yet unexplored (based on researchers’ knowledge).
Lastly, the influence of employees’ HRM process (PHSS) on PE is facing paucity to
the best of our knowledge whereas the influence of PHSS on ILAs needs clarity
(Bednall et al., 2014).
Such an investigation adds value in the field of organizational behavior,
performance appraisal and PE. A sound framework for depicting the employee
(faculty) participation in ILAs with respect to the quality of performance appraisal
does not exist. The present examination aims to add such a conceptual framework by
investigating the role of HRM (content and process) and more particularly the PPAQ
and PHSS in promoting ILAs through PE among the faculty members working in
Pakistani HEIs.
1.6 Research Questions
The previous studies (e.g., Bednall et al., 2014) have reported the value of the
perceptions of HRM system (content and process) to attain better performance
characterized by employee participation in ILAs. However, the further clarity is
needed for the underlying mechanism through which HRM system (content and
15
process) contribute towards ILAs. The main research question to guide this study is
how does HRM system (content and process) impact employee participation in ILAs
(RE, KS and IB) as a proxy for organizational performance? Additionally, this study
examined the effect that PE had on ILAs (RE, KS and IB) in isolation and in
relationship with PPAQ. There are few sub-questions that need to be answered in
support of the main research question. These sub-questions are as under:
1. Does PPAQ impact PE?
2. Does PE impact ILAs including; RE (2a), KS (2b) and IB (2c)?
3. Does PPAQ impact ILAs including; RE (3a), KS (3b) and IB (3c)?
4. Does PE mediate the relationship between PPAQ and ILAs including; RE (4a),
KS (4b) and IB (4c)?
5. Does PHSS moderate the relationship PPAQ and PE (5a) and ILAs including; RE
(5b), KS (5c) and IB (5d)?
1.7 Research Objectives
The objective of the study is to develop and test a widespread model that
captures the HRM System (Content and Process), Psychological (Psychological
Empowerment) and Behavioral Perspectives (Informal Learning Activities) in
explaining HRM and Performance link. A model that incorporates the mediating
variable (PE) and moderating variable (PHSS) in relationship between HRM content
(PPAQ) and ILAs (RE, KS and IB). This can be achieved by through review the
literature related to HRM and performance and more specifically, PPAQ, PE, PHSS
and ILAs (RE, KS and IB) in order to determine the factors and relationship among
these constructs. Secondly, to develop a logical understanding and build a study
model that relates the way in which HRM content (PPAQ) is linked to ILAs (RE, KS,
IB), including PE that mediate the relationships and PHSS that moderate the
relationships. Lastly, to empirically test and validate the model to provide implication,
offer recommendation and note limitation of the study for theory and practice. This
can be achieved by looking the specific objective.
1 To examine the relationship between PPAQ and PE.
2 To examine the relationship between PE and ILAs (RE, KS and IB).
3 To examine the relationship between PPAQ and ILAs (RE, KS and IB).
16
4 To investigate the mediation of PE on the relationship between PPAQ and ILAs
(RE, KS and IB).
5 To investigate the moderation of PHSS on the relationship between PPAQ and
PE, RE, KS and IB.
1.8 Significance of the Study
The literature indicates the individual, group and organizational level factors
to promote ILAs (RE, KS and IB) in different contexts (e.g., Cuyvers et al., 2016;
Sutherland, 2016; Schurmann & Beausaert, 2016; Noe et al., 2013; Wahab et al.,
2016; Choi and Jacobs, 2011; Bjørk et al., 2013; Van Eekelen et al., 2005; Lohman,
2009, & Crouse et al., 2011). Only limited studies (Bednall et al., 2014) focused on
determining the impact of HRM by observing the behavioral perspective of
employees through their participation in ILAs that leads to organizational
performance. The current study is significant with respect to answering the theoretical
and practical gaps as discussed under.
First, to solve the ‘black box’ dilemma, there are many studies carried out to
examine the effect of HRM on individual and OP. These studies are insufficient to
define the clear mechanism through which this relationship occurs (Baluch, 2017;
Farndale & Sander, 2016; Messersmith et al., 2011). A promising trend has found in
the literature to clarify the mediating mechanism through which HRM system affect
employees’ performance (Jiang et al., 2012a). According to Bowen & Ostroff (2004),
such systems operate through influencing employees’ attitudes and behaviors.
Unfortunately, literature has focused only on the behavioral perspective of mediating
mechanism. It is well supported by literature that PE as an employee attitude
influences behavior which in turn contributes to performance at individual and
organizational level. Based on the HR system strength (HRSS) theory (Bowen &
Ostroff, 2004), this study is important as it is among the first to study PE as mediator
in the HRM (content and process) and performance relationship in terms of ILAs (RE,
KS and IB).
Second, it has been well understood that to get the clear view of the HRM and
performance relationship the HRM system approach should be considered. It is
important to observe the presence of HRM system. In addition, the employees’
17
perceptions of such system should also be considered (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004; Nishii
& Wright 2007). It means the integration of HRM content and process approaches is
important to enhance our viewpoint of the process through which the HRM system
(content and process) is connected to organizational performance. Additionally, the
HRM system affects organizational performance by developing employees’ attitudes
and behaviors (Bowen & Ostroff 2004). Therefore, this study is an attempt to present
a theoretical model that incorporates both the approaches (content and process) in
meaningful way.
Finally, the influence of HRM system on employees’ attitude or behavior is
examined in independent studies. There is a dearth of studies investigating the
moderating links by including the employees’ attitude and behavior as suggested by
Bowen & Ostroff (2004). This study is significant because it is designed to address
the above-mentioned theoretical gaps. It is undertaken to empirically examine the
moderating effect of PHSS (HRM process) by including the both employees’ attitude
(PE) and behavior (RE, KS and IB) to represent the comprehensive linkages in HRM-
performance relationship.
Contextually, a large number of studies on HRM system and performance
relationship have carried out in Western context (Katou et al., 2014; Katou &
Budhwar 2010). However, the focus on Asian countries and especially Pakistan is
very limited (Chaudary & Imran, 2012). Thus, higher education sector and HEIs
operating in Pakistan is selected. The faculty members’ participation in ILAs is
essential for sustenance in today’s knowledge economy. The higher education sector
of Pakistan comprises of 194 HEC recognized degree awarding HEIs. These include
115-public and 79-private HEIs operating all over Pakistan.
Further, after the establishment of Higher Education Commission in 2002, this
sector has shown phenomenal growth. The HEIs are facing severe competition form
national and international institutes/universities in imparting quality education
(Majoka & Khan, 2017). Thus, the development of human capital or HR is big
challenge for HEIs. The HEIs are making huge investment in the development of HR
for gaining market share and competitive advantage. Despite of this, until recently
there has been no reliable evidence found for investigating the effect of HRM system
(content and process) on ILAs as a proxy for employee performance of higher
18
education sector of Pakistan. Therefore, this study is undertaken to fill this gap by
putting focus on the important sector of Pakistan’s economy.
Furthermore, this study is significant because it highlights the importance of
HRM system for the HEIs operating in Pakistan, and the role that the HR managers
and policy makers can play to develop their workforce through ILAs (RE, KS and
IB). The human capital is recognized as one of the most valuable assets that
contribute towards achieving the competitive advantage (Barney, 1991). It is the
degree of complexity and inimitability of intangible assets, especially HR that makes
it more valuable and important for achieving sustained competitive advantage
(Huselid, 1995).
Lastly, the human attitudes and behaviors also hold complex and ambiguous
causal relationship. It increases the inimitability by creating barriers for other
organizations. Consequently, researchers and practitioners in the field of HRM have
shifted their attention towards investigating the all possibilities of obtaining maximum
benefit from HR. Therefore, it is important to study the mediating and moderating
links by which human resource is capitalized and operationalized.
1.9 Thesis Organization
The study is presented into five chapters as under:
Chapter 1 (Introduction): The research topic is introduced in this chapter by
demonstrating the importance of informal learning and background of the problem. It
provides the theoretical and methodological gaps or research problems. It also
outlined the purpose of the study, the research aims, research objectives and research
questions. The justification for methodology, significance of the research and the
thesis structure is presented at end.
Chapter 2 (Literature Review): The theoretical orientation of the study is
presented in this chapter. It provides the theoretical background of the study through
comprehensive and critical review of the published literature. It starts with literature
review of HRM, HRM and performance relationship. Further, different issues and
trends like HRM practices and HRM system, direct and indirect relationship, best fit
and best practices, content and process approaches are critically reviewed. In the
19
section of underpinning theories different attribution theories are discussed. The HRM
system strength (HRSS) has anchored in support of this study. Furthermore, the
literature is reviewed for ILAs (RE, KS and IB), PPAQ, PE and PHSS. After this the
proposed conceptual model and the relationships are explained in theoretical
framework. The relationships and hypothesis of the study are outlined. The discussion
has been made on the PE (mediating variable) and PHSS (moderating variable).
Chapter 3 (Research Methodology): The methodological issues are
discussed in this chapter. It includes the issues that this research intends to deal for
achieving its stated objectives. The justification for adopted methodology, which is
the quantitative methodology, is explained and discussed. Next the overview of the
education sector of Pakistani HEIs, the population and sampling design are explained.
Further the measurement and scales, research ethics, pilot study, assumptions of
multivariate data analysis are briefly addressed. Lastly, the chapter provides the
reasons for selecting different statistical techniques that are used.
Chapter 4 (Data Analysis): This chapter outlines the analysis and results of
current study. In the first part of this chapter, the information regarding the
demographics of the respondents is presented. In addition, descriptive and the
appropriateness of data is ensured by addressing the assumptions for multivariate data
analysis. In second part, the final results of the study are presented. The results for
main effect, mediation effects and moderating effects including inferential statistics
are presented in this chapter. It also provided the numerical support for the acceptance
and rejection of research hypotheses.
Chapter 5 (Discussion): The findings of the research are summarized in this
chapter. The results and study hypotheses are discussed in light of previous findings
and studies. Further the major theoretical contribution and practical implications of
the results and findings ae explained. Furthermore, this study suggested some future
researches which are outlined by keeping in view the limitations of current study.
Lastly, this chapter offers the concluding comments of the thesis by summarizing the
main purpose, methodology, results and contributions of this study.
20
1.10 Definitions of Terms
The constructs of this study include: (1) informal learning, (2) reflection, (3)
knowledge sharing, (4) innovative behavior, (5) perceptions of performance appraisal
quality, (6) psychological empowerment, and (7) perceptions of HRM system
strength. These key words are defined as follows:
Informal Learning: IL is defined as “a process in which individuals are
objectively engage themselves informally by initiating different activities for the
achievement of their personal and organizational goals” (Marsick & Velope, 1999;
Lohman, 2005)
Reflection: RE is defined as “a degree of intentionality or show on their
experience” (Marsick, 1988b). Reflective practices enable individuals in using
experience to learn about their work, personal and professional relationships,
themselves and society. It enables them to travel through hard situations and bring
enquiry into feelings, values and beliefs (Bolton, 2014).
Knowledge Sharing: It is defined as the activities in which individuals, groups
and organizations are involved in the dissemination or transfer of knowledge (Terry et
al., 2013; Lee & Choi, 2003).
Innovative Behavior: IB is the individual behavior of generating novel
solutions to problems; promoting idea by convincing colleagues; and implementing it
within group, unit or organization (Van der Vegt & Janssen, 2003; Scott & Bruce,
1994).
Perceptions of Performance Appraisal Quality: It is defined as the
“perceptions of employees regarding the appraisal feedback in terms of its clarity,
regularity, and openness” (Bednall et al., 2014).
Psychological Empowerment: PE is defined as “a set of cognitions or states
influenced by the work environment the helps and create an active-orientation to
one’s job” (Thomas & Velthouse, 1990).
Perceptions of HRM system strength: The employees’ perceptions of HR
message and polices as distinctive, consistent, and consensual is known as strength of
21
HRM system. These clear, consistent and unambiguous messages create perception of
strong HR system (De Winne et al., 2013; Bowen & Ostroff, 2004).
1.11 Summary
In this chapter the importance of ILAs (RE, KS and IB) and the factors
stimulating ILAs are discussed. The role of HRM as a system and its impact on
performance in terms of ILAs (RE, KS and IB) is meant obligatory for survival and
competitive advantage. Irrespective of promising trend investigating the HRM and
performance relationship, there are many theoretical and practical gaps which are
discussed. The summary of these gaps is expressed in one single question that is:
‘how does the HRM system in terms of content and process contribute to individual
and organizational performance’? This question is referred to as ‘black box’ and the
present study was undertaken to fill this gap by investigating the effect of HRM
system (content and process) on employees’ ILAs (RE, KS and IB).
The purpose of the research, aims, objective and questions are outlined on the
basis of the gaps and problem statement. The research methods section provided
overview of the methodology adopted for this study. A quantitative methodology by
using the survey questionnaire was adopted to test the proposed theoretical model. An
effort has been made to present a comprehensive model to address this issue. The
conceptual framework was built by including the behavioral and psychological
perspective of HRSS theory. The current study is important and significant because it
integrates the content and process approaches of HRM along with behavioral and
psychological perspectives of employees into one single model. This proposed model
enhances our understanding and contributes to knowledge by defining the mechanism
through which HRM system affects ILAs (RE, KS and IB) and employee
development.
22
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
23
2.1 Introduction
Chapter 1 describes in detail the background to the problem being examined in
this thesis and sets out the study aims and objectives. This chapter is designed to
address the first objective of the current study and it provides the theoretical basis for
the research. It covers the review of literature for HRM, its importance for
performance, different issues and debates in HRM research. The theories in HRM
research are discussed in support of current study. The in-depth review of the relevant
literature and historical development is provided for ILAs i.e. RE, KS with colleagues
and IB. In addition, the literature is reviewed for, PPAQ, PE and PHSS. Further, this
chapter addresses the second research objective and presents the theoretical model.
The three main parts of the model are HRM content and process (PPAQ, PHSS), HR
outcomes i.e. attitudes (PE) and Behaviors (ILAs). The detail about the study
variables/constructs, literature review and operationalization are needed to develop
study hypothesis. The development of hypotheses is discussed in detail and summary
concludes the current chapter.
2.2 Theoretical Orientation for the Study
The positive relationship between HRM and OP is demonstrated by many
studies. For example, in a meta-analysis Combs et al. (2006), determine that a high
performance work system (HPWS) is positively related to employee performance
(productivity and retention) and organizational financial outcomes (business growth
and market returns). In their study they consider HPWS as a set of different HR
practices. Subramony (2009) provides further meta-analytic evidence that the effects
of the HPWS is significantly larger than individual HR practices in terms of operating
performance, employee retention, financial performance, and overall performance
ratings.
Recently Hauff et al. (2017) establish that HRM system as known, understood
and accepted by the employees help in achieving the attitudinal HRM targets. These
studies indicate that the features of an HRM system operate synergistically to
influence performance. However, our knowledge pertaining to (1) conceptualization
and measurement of an HRM system and (2) the mechanisms through which a HRM
system affect employee and business performance (the so-called ‘black box’ problem)
24
remain limited (Messersmith et al., 2011; Bednall et al., 2014; Becker & Huselid,
2006; Wright et al., 2001; Ostroff & Bowen, 2000; Becker & Gerhart, 1996).
The next sections provide a theoretical background to the thesis. The concept
of HRM and the two theoretical debates are first reviewed. Two prevailing types of
conceptualization of a HRM system i.e. the content of HRM and the process of HRM
are than reviewed. The progress in conceptualizing HRM suggests application of a
psychological approach is also discussed. A promising research model linking HRM
and employee performance has been proposed by Ostroff and Bowen (2000). After
critically reviewing this model, this chapter concludes by outlining the approach
adopted in this thesis based on Bowen and Ostroff’s model.
2.3 Human Resource Management (HRM)
The business environment is changing and it is inevitable. The local and
international markets are witnessing the technological, economic, communication and
political changes. These changes are phenomenal in influencing organizations and the
ways of doing businesses. The organizations are now adapting new technology,
methods and strategies to achieve competitive advantage. It is very unfortunate that
these resources can be easily copied and imitable by other organizations. However,
among all the resources human capital is considered as the most difficult to imitate
when it is well qualified, trained and motivated (Ferguson & Reio, 2010).
According to Barney and Wright (1998), human resource (HR) or human
capital is recognized as an important factor for gaining competitive advantage. It
cannot be easily copied in comparing with equipment and other tangible assets.
Further, investment in the growth and development of firm’s HR or human capital
decreases the chances of such intimation. As a result, researcher and practitioners
have diverted their attention towards HR and taken as a strategic resource to achieve
competitive advantage (Dessler, 2006). In resource-based view of the firm, the human
capital generates the complicated social relationship within organization, that are
inimitable and contributes to firm’s competitive advantage (Barney 1991).
Consequently, HRM has become the fundamental to all firms, irrespective of their
size and nature of business (Abzari et al., 2011).
25
The literature varies in defining the construct of HRM. It can be defined as a
“set of managerial activities and tasks concerned with developing and maintaining a
qualified work force in ways that contribute to organizational effectiveness” (Denisi
& Griffin 2005). Therefore, it can be said that well managed and qualified human
resource will have positive effects on organizational performance. When the
employee performance will rise it will automatically raises the OP.
The relationship between HRM system and organizational performance has
been the focus of many scholars and academicians over the past few decades. It is
well known that HR has a significant contribution in achieving a competitive
advantage. After realizing the value of HRM for firm performance, the focus of the
researchers was on investigating the nature and practices of HRM and how it is linked
with OP. The following sections discuss the two theoretical debates or challenges that
are prevalent in the HRM literature.
2.3.1 Different Conceptualiztion of HRM
The HRM has been studied and conceptualized from two different viewpoints
by the researcher. The individual HRM practice and its impact is the focus of first
perspective whereas; HRM system is the focus of second perspective. The objective
of both the perspectives is to link the HRM practices or HRM system with
organizational performance. Numerous scholars have paid attention on studying the
relationship of individual HRM practice like staffing (Terpstra & Rozell, 1993),
training (Bartel, 1991) and compensation (Gehart & Milkovich, 1990) with
organizational performance. These studies have been conducted in early development
stage of HRM (Katou, 2012).
The focus of research has shifted and attention has been paid to system
perspective of HRM than individual HRM practice (Katou, 2012). Under the HRM
system perspective an individual HRM practice is not sufficient and cannot work in
isolation rather in combination with other HRM practices. Secondly, different HRM
practices are functioning simultaneously so the employees are exposed to all of them
(Jiang et al., 2012a). In addition, the HRM system is more effective than individual
HRM practices because of its advantage for having mutually reinforcing support of
HRM practices in a system (Ahmad & Schroeder 2003, p. 22).
26
A bundle or a set of different HRM practices developed for a workgroup is
known as HRM system (Boxall et al., 2011, p. 1505). The synergy among different
HRM practices and the complexity of HRM system enables organizations to create a
competitive advantage (Barney & Wright, 1998). The synergy among different HRM
practice can have a positive or negative impact on performance as well as on
competitive advantage. Therefore, the organization must develop HRM system with
utmost attention to avoid such deadly combination (negative effects) of HRM
practices (Jiang et al., 2012b). At last, Becker and Gerhart (1996) present an abstract
level HRM in which they categorize different HRM practices into four main groups.
Performance appraisal is one of the groups defined by them. So, the current study
focuses on performance appraisal. The employees’ perceptions of performance
appraisal is the focus of this study instead of specific practice.
2.3.2 Different Conceptualization of HRM Practices
In addition to HRM practices or system perspective there are two distinctive
approaches found in the literature. These first approache is known as the “best
practice approach” in the HRM literature and the second approach is known as “best
fit approach”. The justifications have been made for the best fit approach in
conceptualizing HRM (Savaneviciene & Stankeviciute 2011). Based on the
contingency theory (Wright & Gardner, 2000), the strategic HRM research focused on
best fit approach. The internal fit and external fit is the basic assumption of the best fit
approach. Under this approach the consistency in HRM practices has ensured through
the alignment with organizational strategic goals. The internal fit is further
categorized as horizontal and vertical fit among the strategies (Ubeda-Garcia et al.,
2013). In best fit approach the positive organizational performance is possible when
HRM system is designed in such a way that it contributes towards the firm level
objective and strategies.
In addition, the organizational contexts are different based on their economic,
legal, social, cultural, political and technological factors (Frankel et al., 2012a). These
factors undoubtedly affect the implementation process within organization. Thus, it is
inappropriate to propose or declare the best practice that fits all organizations. As a
result of this a fit has been created between HRM and organizational environment.
The organizations must design their HRM practices in compliance with the
27
requirement of external and internal environment (Yousaf et al., 2016). The best
practice HRM for one organization can be adopted by other organization. The
sustained competitive advantage through best practice HRM alone cannot be achieved
(Bartel, 2004). Therefore, the best fit approach is more appropriate for organization to
achieve sustained competitive advantage.
According to Wright and Gardner (2000), the best fit approach is failed to
receive the empirical support in contrary to best practice approach. This drawback has
created a gap and the link has been created between specific HRM practices and
desired organizational outcomes (Pfeffer & Villeneuve, 1994; Pfeffer & Jeffrey,
1998). This relationship exists regardless of internal and external fit with their
environment. Based on ‘universalist approach’, the best practice approach proposes
that a single best HRM practice can be effective for those all organization that adopts
these practices (Ferguson & Reio, 2010; Neal, West & Patterson, 2005). It is
advantageous to adopt best practice approach because of empirical support received in
the HRM field (Ubeda-Garcia et al., 2013). The best practice approach has the
empirical support but it is criticized for having the same effect on the organizational
performance by different HRM practices.
This is an ongoing debate and lack consensus among the researchers on single
integrated definition of HRM. In addition, there is lack of consensus on the practices
that actually constitute HRM (Wright & Gardner, 2000). Ahmad and Schroeder
(2003) are of the opinion that the context, strategy, regulations and some other factors
could create these differences. Therefore, studies (e.g., Becker & Gerhart, 1996;
Youndt et al., 1996) suggested studying the HRM at the theoretical level instead of
specific set of HRM practices.
In a meta-analysis Boselie et al., (2005) grouped the HRM practices in four
categories including, “recruitment and selection, training and development,
compensation and performance appraisal” or performance management. These
findings are similar to Becker and Gerhart (1996) distribution of HRM practices.
Accordingly, it is assumed that organizations are similar when best practice (abstract
level HRM system) is considered and different when best fit is considered (sub-
practices). The current study eliminates or controls the differences by proposing an
abstract level approach to HRM by including the PPAQ and PHSS.
28
2.4 HRM and Organizational Performance
A literature review shows that there has been a considerable time and effort
paid to examine the link between HRM system and OP (Bednall et al., 2014; Ho,
2010). Regardless of substantial evidences on this promising relationship, there are
few unanswered questions also known as the ‘black box’. A very little is known about
the intervening and mediating role of other variables they can have in HRM-
performance relationship.
The HRM and performance relationship can be distributed in three different
phases. In the first phase, the HRM and performance relationship has received
attention of scholars in early 1980s. A link between HRM and business strategy has
been created in a study by Miles and Snow (1985). The development in the field of
HRM and its relationship with organizational performance has laid the foundations
for survey-based methods. In second phase, mid-1990s different studies (e.g.
Ichniowski et al., 1997; Delery & Doty, 1996; Huselid, 1995) are leading in survey-
based HRM research. The overall findings of these studies demonstrate that HRM
practices are considered as critical factors for improving organizational performance.
The focus of these studies is on presenting the empirical results for HRM and
performance relationship whereas conceptual and theoretical issues are less focused.
Further development is the introduction of third phase in which the theoretical
and conceptual issues are considered. In this phase arguments have been made for
clarity in the relationship between HRM and OP (e.g., Guest, 2011; Messersmith et
al., 2011). The questions regarding how, why and what are the mechanisms through
which HRM is linked with the performance has emerged. These queries are known as
the ‘black box’ and demand has been placed for refinement in theories and
development of comprehensive model (Bowen and Ostroff, 2004). There is an
agreement among the researcher that HRM directly cannot be linked to organizational
performance. The opening the ‘black box’ means that there should be some
intervening or mediating variables present in the link between HRM system and
performance.
29
2.4.1 The Nature of Relationship
In the early stages of the investigating the link between HRM and
organizational performance, it was assumed that there is a direct relationship between
these constructs (Terpstra & Rozell, 1993). Later, this was challenged by many
researchers. The direct relationships are missing theoretical rigor which means it is
not valid. There is a possibility of having other intervening and mediating variables
(Katou, 2012). Therefore, it is inevitable to investigate the mediating variables for
better understanding of HRM and performance relationship. The study of mediating
link is a significant development in the field of HRM and a reply to Guest’s (1997)
call who ask for further development and refinement in the theory. Afterwards, the
researchers have developed and tested the theoretical model by including the
mediating and intervening variables.
It is evident and the indirect relationship (HRM and organizational
performance) has succeeded to find the theoretical and empirical support of many
studies. It was agreed that the inclusion of at least one intervening (mediating or
moderating) variable in studying the relationship is of worth or theoretical
contribution (Wright & Gardner, 2000). In addition, there is an agreement that
organization do not perform but the ‘people’ do (Colvin & Boswell, 2007). Therefore,
the inclusion of individual-level intervening variable is highly recommended in the
HRM system and OP relationship.
Furthermore, the HRM system does not have a direct impact on organizational
performance; instead, it affects the employees’ attitudes and behaviors, which in turn
affect OP (Dyer & Reeves, 1995; Katou & Budhwar, 2010). Thus, inclusion of an
intervening (moderating or mediating) variables in the relationship between HRM
system and organizational performance is addition in literature and imperative for
explaining relationship. Dyer and Ravees’s (1995) argument on the mediating
variables enabled researchers to classify them into proximal and distal variables.
Further, Wright et al. (2003) argues that the focus should be made on proximal
variables (individual outcomes). These proximal variables than contribute to or have
an effect on distal variables (organizational outcomes).
30
A large body of knowledge has studied these causal links (i.e. HRM and
organizational performance) through the responses of employees by including the
proximal variables (e.g. Bednall et al., 2014; Messersmith et al., 2011; Sanders et al.,
2008). According to the literature employee’s behavior including AMO (Ability,
Motivation, Opportunity), Turnover, OCB (Organizational Citizenship Behavior), and
employees attitudes including job satisfaction and commitment (organizational) are
frequently studied as proximal variables linking HRM system and organizational
performance (Messersmith et al., 2011; Boselie et al., 2005).
Similarly, employees’ ongoing learning (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009) and their
participation in ILAs by depicting the behavior of RE, KS and IB as proximal
variables contributes to distal outcomes (Bednall et al., 2014). There are still some
theoretical questions that need further refinement which will be discussed in coming
sections.
2.4.2 Different Approaches to HRM
In last section the answer was made to the question that how HRM system
affects organizational performance. It is proposed that there must be mediating
mechanism that link HRM system with organizational performance or through
proximal variables. This is insufficient while explaining the relationship in the ‘black
box’. In addition to mediating mechanism, researchers have documented that the
focus of existing literature is on investigating the content of the HRM system.
Moreover, the attention has been made on the content of mediating variables. With
this importance, the execution process of the HRM system was focused less
(Delmotte et al., 2012).
The two dominant types of HRM conceptualization has revealed in the
literature studying the HRM system and organizational performance relationship.
These approaches are known as the HRM content and process approaches. The
content approach of an HRM system seeks to answer questions such as: what form
should HR practices (e.g. selection, performance appraisal & recruitment and
training) take in order to foster organizational performance? Although this approach
has generated a considerable amount of supporting empirical evidence (see Combs et
31
al., 2006 and Subramony, 2009, for a review), there are studies that challenge this
view (Kaufman, 2010; 2015; Wall & Wood, 2005).
Recently, it has been acknowledged that more emphasis needs to be placed on
employee perceptions and interpretations of HRM system including policy and
practice (Baluch, 2017; Farndale & Sanders, 2016; Yousaf et al., 2016; Nishii et al.,
2008; Sanders et al., 2008). This is because employee attitudes precede and are likely
to strongly influence performance as part of the causal chain. Hence, the HRM
process approach emphasizes more on HRM delivery system. It asks how an HRM
system can be designed and implemented effectively, to achieve the business goals. In
process approach the emphasis has been given on how these practices are
communicated and implemented (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). While both approaches
focus on an HRM system, they have associated conceptual and methodological
problems, as discussed below.
The first phase includes the development of HRM concept in 1980s where the
emphasis has been made on the defining the content of HRM (Delmotte et al., 2012).
According to literature a bundle, or a set, of HRM practices have developed and these
are linked with performance (financial and operational). The key assumption of this
approach is that a bundle of HR practices, each practice interacting with one another,
contributes to performance (Huselid, 1995; Boxall & Macky, 2007; Macky & Boxall,
2009; Boxall & Mackay, 2009 Sanders & Yang, 2016). With specific strategic foci
(content), different sets of HR practices have been identified, such as ‘high-
performance’ (Harley et al., 2007; Orlitzky & Frenkel, 2005), ‘high-commitment’
(Benkhoff, 1997), and ‘high-involvement’ (Batt, 2002) work systems.
Bowen and Ostroff (2004) argue that the relationship between HRM and OP
can be better explained through the combination of content and process approaches. A
well-developed HRM system cannot make difference if it is not implemented properly
or as planned (Khilji & Wang, 2006). Further, the content approach might deliver
incorrect inferences or conclusions. The implementation of HRM practices might be
inconsistent, so employees perceive and interpret these practices differently (Nishii
and Wright 2007; Bowen & Ostroff 2004). Subsequently, the HRM system and
organizational performance relationship can greatly influenced by employees’
perceptions of these practice. There is a significant difference found between the
32
intended (planned) HRM practices and actual (implemented) HRM practices (Nishii
& Wright, 2007). Therefore, it can be said that the relationship is better explained
with the combination of both: the content and the process approach of HRM system
(Bednall et al., 2014).
Methodologically, a related issue concerns who should rate HR practices?
There is general understanding that intended HR practices may differ from
implemented practices, which are likely to be perceived and evaluated differently by
employees (Purcell & Hutchinson, 2007). Literature (e.g., Nishii & Wright, 2007)
argued that the employees’ perceptions of HRM practices differ significantly. This
difference is generated by the implementation process of HRM practices. According
to Huselid and Becker (2000), the HR managers are the right medium for collecting
information about HRM practices. However, employees’ assessment of HRM practice
is more appropriate when the objective is to collect information about the
implemented or actual HRM practices than the intended or planned (Gerhart et al.,
2000). Therefore, HR manager’s assessment should be replaced with employees’
assessment. The employee experience HRM practice regularly so they are more
reliable in providing the realistic view of the actual HRM practices.
The other reason for selecting the process approach is its ability to generalize
the findings. The content of HRM system is mostly context specific whereas process
of HRM system is more generic in nature and applicable in different settings
(Delmotte et al., 2012). They argue that, every organization does not have formal HR
department and pay for performance strategy, but an employee can pronounce upon
HR decision and justice. Thus, it is worth studying the process through which HRM
system (content and process) affects employee performance and ultimately the
organizational performance (Baluch, 2017; Yousaf et al., 2016).
The literature supported that HRM system in terms of content and process
affects organizational performance. This relationship is largely based on employees’
perceptions of the HRM system. In addition, an agreement was found on the issue that
HRM system and performance relationship can be better explained by exploring the
mediating link underlying this relationship. The attitudes and behaviors of employees
are considered as one of the major mechanisms of the ‘black box’ (Messersmith et al.,
2011; Bednall et al., 2014). Further, an investigation of proximal variables (individual
33
outcomes) can generate more accurate results for distal variable i.e. organizational
performance. The proximal variables are based on employees’ perceptions and they
are directly associated with the attitudes and behaviors of employees (Frankel et al.,
2012a; Sanders & Frankel 2011). The attitudes and behaviors than contribute towards
organizational performance (Guest, 1997). Thus, there is a need to study the
employees’ perceptions of HRM while investigating the HRM and performance
relationship (Nishii et al., 2008).
The literature review shows that the intended HRM practices are significantly
different from implemented or actual HRM practices. These practices are differently
perceived and interpreted by the employees. This idiosyncratic perception is normal
because employees tends to respond in such a way that benefits them. Further,
psychologically and empirically it is validated that employee perceive and react
differently to the same set of HRM practices (Nishii & Wright, 2007). These
individual perceptions further contribute to create a larger view at organizational
level.
The difference between the planned and actually implemented HR practices
creates differences at organizational level which may negatively affect organizational
performance (Kepes & Delery 2006). Therefore, it is important that employee
perceive HRM practices in same way and it depends on how these practices are
implemented (Edgar & Geare, 2009). Bown & Ostroff (2004) provided a solution to
this problem. They argue that the shared perceptions among employee can be created
through the effective implementation of a strong HRM system. In next section the
theories for HRM and performance relationship are discussed in detail.
2.5 Underpinning Theories
The literature exhibits different micro and macro theories for the study
constructs. As the theories at micro level spotlight the individuals, small structures
and processes unlike theories at macro level that spotlight structures, processes and
problems in social context and their relationships with each other. The review exhibits
multiple theories for the justification and development of the study constructs. In past
numerous theoretical frameworks like self-determination theory (Deci and Ryan,
2000), theory of reasoned action (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975), social exchange theory
34
(Blau, 1968), theory of planned behavior (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980) have been used by
scholars to explain the HRM and performance relationship. Particularly, these theories
are used by the researcher to explain the effect of different HR practices on
employees’ attitudes and behaviors. The attribution theories play an important role in
the development of theoretical framework for current study. The implications and
developments in these theories are discussed under.
2.5.1 Attribution Theories
Attribution theories created great interest from social psychology and the
explanation of situation by the people in which they are dealing or operating. The
responses of people are the core of attribution theories. The work of Heider (1958),
Kelly (1973), and Weiner (1979) put forth the theoretical foundations of attribution
theories. Heider (1958), explaining the psychology of interpersonal relations fixed
bases for attribution theories.
Heider’s attribution theory is based on the premise that the perceived causality
affects the perceiver’s responses and actions. Heider’s attribution theory is further
expended by Kelly (1967, 1973) and proposes that, people apply the covariation
principle to conclude the causes. The theory is based on the covariation principle of
distinctiveness, consistency and consensus (Kelly, 1967) can called theory of specific
attribution.
The final model of attribution was developed by Weiner (1979) and termed as
attributional theory. Weiner’s (1979) attributional theory explains how future
expectations, emotions, and performance are influenced by causal attributions. The
core of his theory is the search for the cause of outcomes in terms of locus of
causality, stability, and controllability.
According to Weiner (2008), attribution theory gained the attention of social
psychologist in early part of its development but now is on the decline. However,
there is an accelerated use of attribution theories in the field of HRM has seen in the
last two decades (Hewett et al., 2018). The dynamics in the field of HRM has drawn
different elements of attribution theories with little integration of the different
perspectives.
35
There are two noticeable developments in attribution theories have been made
in the last two decades. The first development is HR System Strength (HRSS) Theory
by Bowen and Ostroff (2004) based on multilevel framework for HRM-performance
linkage by Ostroff & Bowen (2000). The second development is the HR Attribution
Theory by Nishii et al., (2008). The HRSS is the most prominent theory in support of
this research. Ostroff and Bowen (2000) have developed a multilevel framework for
HRM-performance linkage that provides the foundation for HR system strength
theory. Multilevel framework for HRM-performance (Ostroff & Bowen, 2000) and
HR system theory (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004) are discussed in next sections.
2.5.2 Multilevel Model Linking HR and Firm Performance (Ostroff
& Bowen, 2000)
Ostroff and Bowen (2000), made an effort to comprehend the model while
catering the need of dichotomy of micro and macro research from multiple levels and
perspectives. They suggested that individual level research is used to draw inferences
about the organizational level performance and effectiveness. They undertake the
research with a goal to integrate the individual, organizational and cross or multilevel
streams into a framework in explaining the link between HRM system and firm
performance as mentioned in the figure 3.1.
This multilevel conceptual framework hold the structural features of an
organization that should fit with the environmental and technological demands.
Organizational design alone is not sufficient in ensuring the organizational
effectiveness but it requires support from the members of the organizations to achieve
organizational goals. The organizational goals and objectives are achieved through the
commitment and willingness of employees. The model explicitly demonstrate that
how HRM system helps organizations to achieve the desired performance through
developing employees’ attitudes and behaivors. Further, HR practices are critical in
creating the employee perceptions, attitudes and behaviors.
In the framework they proposed that at organizational level, HR system
influence organizational climate and normative contracts that shape human capital
development and collective attitude and behaviors. These in turn influence
36
organizational performance. To answer the question that how these normative
contracts and organizational climate develop? They proposed that HRM system
should shape individuals’ perceptions of what the organization is demanding
(psychological climate). It defines the expectations about the exchange between
employees and employers (psychological contract). When these are shared across
employees within the organization, the organizational climate and normative contracts
are formed.
Figure 2.1: Multilevel Model Linking HR Systems and Firm Performance
(Ostroff & Bowen, 2000)
As shown in the Figure 3.1, the multilevel constructs in which individual level
constructs contributes to organizational performance. In the same model they created
the distinction between the content of HR system and process by which HRM is
enacted in the organization. They propose that shared climate perceptions and shared
contract expectations will occur only when the process of the HRM system is strong.
It is argued that employees’ attributes are believed to be the mediating mechanism
linking HRM and firm performance. They also made a distinction between
psychological and organizational climate. Psychological climate is based on the
individuals’ perceptions of the work environment and can be idiosyncratic.
Organizational climate is a summary of employees’ perceptions of the work and
workplace. This multilevel framework is accepted as large and refined. The further
37
theoretical development in this model is the development of HR System Strength
Theory (HRSS) by Bowen and Ostroff (2004). The detail about HRSS is discussed
next.
2.5.3 HR System Strength Theory (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004)
HR System Strength Theory (HRSS) by Bowen and Ostroff (2004) is based on
Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1986) and the Attribution Theory of Kelley (1967,
1973). The basic premise of HRSS theory is that the organizational goals are achieved
when the HRM system sends signals to employees about the important organizational
goals, and expected behaviors, that are valued and rewarded by organizations (Bowen
& Ostroff, 2004). The HRSS theory established a link between HRM and
performance through HRM system strength. HRM system is basically the integration
of content and process approach of HRM. The content approach represents a specific
set or bundle of HR practices, which signals to employees, to engage in certain
behaviors. In process approach the design and implement of HR practices in the
responsibility of HR department. The department in the process approach is
responsible for communicating the HRM messages to employees.
The HRSS theory is based on the co-variation principle of attribution theory
(Kelly, 1967; Kelly & Michela, 1980). According to HRSS (Bowen and Ostroff,
2004) the HRM system is strong when employees perceive the HRM system as
distinctive, consistent and consensual. These perceptions have been created through
the implementation of different HR practices. The HRSS theory explains the process
of making attribution for individual behaviors as well as situational factors. The
distinctive HRM system refers to employees’ perceptions of HRM system in terms of
its visibility, authenticity, relevance and understanding of the messages. Employees
perceive consistency when the same messages have been received from different HR
practices over time, people and contexts (Nishii & Wright, 2007; Khilji & Wang,
2006; Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). Consensus refers to the fairness in decision making,
agreement among employees and policy makers (HR and line manager), that they are
sending the same messages (Delmotte et al., 2011; Bowen & Ostroff, 2004).
38
The effective implementation of HR practices is the core of strong HRM
system. The strong HRM system ensures the implementation of HR practices as
envisioned or planned (Nishii et al., 2008; Khilji & Wang, 2006). Strong HRM
system sends clear, unambiguous and consistent messages to employees. The HRM
system creates strong organizational climates that provide support and encourage
employees to display desired attitudes and behaviors. The psychological perspective
of HRSS theory (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004) is based on social cognitive theory which is
explained next.
2.5.4 Social Cognitive Theory
This theory is based on social cognitive psychology to study the motivation,
behaviors and actions of individuals. Different theories have different
conceptualization of human nature in understanding their behaviors and motivation.
Social cognitive theory examines how people can take charge and control over their
own life.
Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1986) is based on triadic reciprocal
causation. The personal factors, behavioral patterns and environmental events interact
and operate bi-directionally which is the emergence of interactive agency (Bandura,
1986, 1999). The personal factors comprise of cognitive, effective and biological
events. Also, the environment is not a monolithic entity rather and structures are
imposed, selected or constructed environment (Bandura, 1999). Social Cognitive
Theory is more comprehensive than social learning theory of Bandura (1974) for
knowledge acquisition.
The seminal studies by Bandura (1986, 1989, 1992, 1999, 2001) have
advanced the concept of self-efficacy. The human actions are controlled through the
psychological mechanism in which their belief in capabilities produced the desired
outcomes. Bandura (1991) investigated that how self-efficacy functions with socio-
cognitive factors of social cognitive theory are helpful in defining human motivation,
adaption and variation. The Social Cognitive Theory is based on motivational and
self-regulatory mechanisms in which knowledge acquisition is a cognitive process in
contrast to modifying behaviors and reinforcing consequences. The ‘social’ part of
39
theory consider environment, whereas ‘cognitive’ part recognizes individual cognitive
process in influencing motivation, actions and behaviors (Stajkovi & Luthans, 1998).
In next section we explain how social cognitive theory supports the assertion and
application of HRSS theory.
2.6 HR System Strength Theory and Organizational
Performance
Attribution theories like HR system strength theory (HRSS) have applied in
different areas of research like organizational behavior, management and more
specifically HR research to explain HR processes (Hewett et al., 2018). Bowen and
Ostroff (2004) made an effort to explain the concept that how an HRM system
strength can be used in determining the HR-performance linkage. The question how
HR practices lead to organizational outcome is addressed through the integration of
content and process approaches. The content is the specific HR practice or bundle of
practices with and intended performance outcome (Khilji & Wang, 2006). The
process is the support and process of HR followed in by the organization through
policy maker and managers. The fundamental is that how an HRM system is
perceived by the employee and stimulates desired behaviors and outcomes.
Although the model was not empirically examined by Bown and Ostroff
(2004) but there are substantial evidences for the relationship between HRM system
and performance. A notable study by Sanders et al., (2008), found that the strength of
an HRM system affect employees’ affective commitment. HRM system strength is
used to determine the HRM performance linkage like, satisfaction with HR practices
(Delmotte et al., 2012), justice and emotional exhaustion (Frankel et al., 2012a), work
performance (Guest & Conway, 2011), achievement of HR targets (Hauff et al.,
2017), work satisfaction, intention to quit and vigor (Li et al., 2011), motivation and
opportunity (Gilbert et al., 2015), organizational climate and organizational
performance (Pereira & Gomes, 2012), job strain (Van et al., 2015), HR effectiveness
(De Winne et al., 2013), work overload and job involvement (Shantz et al., 2016), job
satisfaction (Tandung, 2016), perceived organizational support (Chen & Wang, 2014).
40
Bednall et al. (2014) made an effort to study the HRM-performance link by
studying ILAs. The effect of PPAQ on ILAs is examined through moderating role of
PHSS. The current study is designed in support of his finding and by filling the gap.
According to Aguini and Kraiger (2009), the quality and consistency of employees’
performance can be enhanced through ILAs and these employees’ performance
enhances the organizational performance. The direct influence of PPAQ and
moderating role of PHSS in stimulating ILAs needs more clarity. Secondly the
mediating mechanism or psychological climate as proposed by Ostroff and Bowen
(2000) and Bowen and Ostroff (2004) based on the social cognitive theory (Bandura,
1986) is yet unexplored.
By applying the HR system strength theory (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004), an
effort is made to re-investigate the link between HRM content i.e. PPAQ and ILAs as
an indicator of employee as well as organizational performance. Secondly the role of
HRM process i.e. PHSS to empower employee and facilitate informal learning will be
explored. Lastly employee’s feeling of PE as an outcome of HRM system (content
and process) and its role in stimulating participation in ILAs will be explored. The
literature on workplace learning, formal learning and IL is summarized under. Further
the literature on ILAs RE, KS and IB is explained in subsequent sections.
2.7 Learning
Learning is a complicated process that happens continuously and can be
affected by many factors. There is extensive research on internal cognitive processes
that create learning situations and how different factors can influence the
effectiveness of a persons’ learning. There are some external processes as well by
which learning occurs and how factors influence the informal learning activities
(ILAs) are lacking attention. Moreover, formal learning has received intense scrutiny
whereas the informal learning (IL) instances have not been given the due importance.
Most of the employees’ learning experience is comprised of the learning occurred
through informal ways (Anderson et al., 2003). In this paper IL in the workplace is
defined as the progression by which a transformation in knowledge happens. The
process happens naturally, guided by the learner and it depends on the surrounding
workplace environment. Examples of ILAs include employees’ RE, KS with
41
colleagues or peers, and IB. These learning activities affect the growth and success of
an organization. The framework presented for ILAs are somewhat focused or limited
to contexts, so a comprehensive understanding is not created (Anderson et al., 2003).
IL affect organizational performance (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009) but the factors
promoting IL within work settings and specifically the role of HRM system is less
focused. The next sections provide the review of literature on workplace learning,
formal and IL.
2.8 Workplace Learning
Hicks et al. (2007) define workplace learning as a process of acquiring
knowledge, skills and attitudes at workplace. It enhances the individual and
organizational performance. In their view workplace learning is a broader concept in
comparison to education and training. Workplace learning enables employee to deal
with the complex situations and consistent changes in work environment (Hall &
Steven, 1996). Ongoing learning benefits organizations by retaining the skillful
workforce (Bednall et al., 2014). Workplace learning is a way in which individual
engage themselves in activities and interactions on the basis of relational
interdependence (Maxwell, 2014).
Jacob (2001) defines workplace learning from two perspectives i.e. individual
level learning and organizational level learning. The learning at organizational level is
defined as; the workplace learning is an institutional process of enhancing employees’
performance by addressing their development needs. From individual perspective, it
is a process in which individuals succeeds in achieving their personal and professional
goals. Workplace learning involves the participation of employee in different
development programs. These programs are designed by the organization with the aim
of enhancing employees’ knowledge, skills and attitudes. In other terms individuals
are trained and equipped with the knowledge and skills required to deal with the
challenges at workplace.
The objective of learning programs is the attainment of personal and
organizational goals (Jacob, 2001). Workplace learning brings consistency and quality
in employees’ performance that result in improved performance of organization
(Auginis & Kraiger, 2009). Nawab (2011) argues that the workplace learning is a
42
ongoing process in which the knowledge is created and transferred at work setting.
The workplace learning is a broader term and can be further classified in two types of
learning i.e. formal learning and informal learning (Watkins & Marsick, 1997).
Researchers (e.g., Marsick, 1988a; Jacobs & Park, 2009) suggest that the
workplace learning can be classified into two broader categories. First, it can be a
deliberate and planned process which is known as formal learning. Second, it can be
unintentional and spontaneous learning which is known as IL. The knowledge
development and knowledge transformation are the main objectives of these two
types of learning (Endres, et al., 2007). Other than similarities these can be
differentiated in terms of control, facilitation and other features. The details on each
are as under:
2.8.1 Formal Learning
The formal learning normally takes place outside the working environment
(Marsick & Watkins, 1990). Further, it can be said that it is ‘off the job’ activities or
programs in which employees are engaged to learn something new. Additionally, it is
created within formal educational setting and is a classroom-based learning. It is a
planned and systematic process in which the objectives are well-defined. The design
and implementation of these programs depends on the predetermined outcomes
(Jacobs, 2003). Eraut (2002) presents the formal learning framework and extends the
definition of formal learning. According to him formal learning can be characterized
as, the design of events or packages based on objective outcomes, for implementation
with the support from trainers and rewarding them for their services.
In the view of Aguinis and Kraiger (2009) workshops, trainings and seminars
are the methods of formal learning in which the skills and knowledge of employees
are developed. These activities lead to improved performance of individual, groups
and ultimately the firm performance (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009). These planned
learning activities in the workplace intend to help individuals in gaining specific
knowledge, skills and awareness in different areas, and also helps them in performing
a better job. These programs are well-structured and generally sponsored by the
institutions. The formal learning activities include all the training and development
programs that an organization has to offer. It is normally conducted in a contextual
43
manner, away from the workplace, with specific learning objective and outcomes in
mind. Formal learning creates the sense of organizational ownership among
employees. It sends signals to employee that the organization value their growth and
development.
According to Vrasidas and Glass (2004) formal learning is a top down
approach and learning needs are determined by the senior leaders. The organizations
offer different training and development programs to fulfill these demands. These
programs are successful and beneficial in enhancing employee performance (Aguinis
& Kraiger, 2009). Despites of its importance and contribution the formal learning
approach has been largely criticized for many reasons. First it is expensive because
large amount of budget is required for such programs. Second, these programs are
conducted in a planned and organized manner, so these are time consuming as well.
Lastly, these programs disconnect employees from their daily work as these programs
are normally conducted outside or away from the job (Hall & Steven, 1996). The
importance and effectiveness of these programs cannot be neglected but more
emphasis is placed on IL because of many reasons. In next section the nature and
importance of IL is explained.
2.8.2 Informal Learning (IL)
The concept of IL has received a considerable attention of the scholars and
practitioners over a long period of time but lacks consensus on single
conceptualization (Skule, 2004). Malcolm et al. (2003) argue that formal learning and
IL are not totally different from each other but a relational continuum. Similar to
formal learning, there are different conceptualizations and definitions of IL exists in
literature like, experience learning, learning by doing, self-managed learning,
incidental learning, continuous learning (Watkins & Marsick, 1992) reactive learning,
implicit learning and deliberate learning (Eraut, 2004). According to Marsick et al.
(2006) IL indeed has received the attention since the early work of Lindeman (1926)
on adult education. Further, a book “A dynamic theory of personality” by Lewin
(1935) sheds light on individual’s training and learning. The other notable work on IL
is the book titled “The adult learning theory” of Knowles (1984). Knowles (1984)
presented the assumptions and principles of andragogy. The term andragogy is similar
to adult education.
44
In the same period Kolb (1984) has written a book “Experimental Learning” in
which he presents the four distinct experiential learning styles or cycle of experiential
learning; also known as “Kolb’s experiential learning theory”. According to Kolb
(1984) “learning is the process whereby knowledge is created through the
transformation of experience”. It is basically the interpretation of one’s own
experience and learning.
According to Kolb (1984) individual learns through four interconnected stages
that are experience, reflection, conceptualization and test. A person’s experience
reflected in work leads to abstract concepts and its experimentation which further
leads to new experience. Kolb (1984) has presented the four learning styles. The first
style is based on the feelings and doing known as accommodating. Second is based on
the feeling and observation i.e. diverging. Third is watching and thinking i.e.
converging. Last is thinking and doing i.e. assimilating. These styles clarify the
learning process through which an employee enhances his/her abilities by learning
different things
Figure 2.2: Kolb’s (1984) Experiential Learning Styles
Marsick (1988a) further extends the Kolb’s (1984) experiential learning model
for the staff development. She outlines the answers for what if, why, what and how
regarding staff development. Theory building or conceptualization of idea, actions,
direct experience and reflection are the answer to these questions. She adds that the
45
quality of work life is enhanced through training, IL and other systematic changes.
These changes also bring improvements in productivity by establishing new cultural
norms in work design. The leadership and learner centered principles strengthen the
training orientation. She further adds that the networking of employees with
colleagues foster IL.
Consequently, Marsick’s (1988a; 1988b) work on learning is known as
paradigm shift. She argues that the business trends are changing where entrepreneurial
spirit, participative management, and empowerment culture are fundamentals for
progress and growth. Further, she says that the changes in human values, social
interactions, commitment, service orientation, risk taking and independent thinking,
are also observed. These arguments have shifted the focus from mechanistic and
behaviorism paradigms to technical, interpretative and strategic paradigms.
Based on logical positivism, technical paradigm focuses objectively on body
of knowledge, skills and transmission process. The humanistic and phenomenological
known as interpretative paradigm emphasize on how experiences facilitate learning in
personalized situations. This paradigm considers learning as a process in which
interaction leads to understand the importance of experience, knowledge and
capabilities. In strategic paradigm people learn social norms when they pursue tasks.
In this paradigm different forces like, economic, cultural and social forces shape
meanings (Marsick, 1988b).
In Marsick’s (1988b) view the worker’s life have been neglected in formal
training and emphasis is made on job-related knowledge and skills. The objective of
learning is not only the organizational productivity, but the personal growth of
individual is equally important. Leaning theories in social sciences can better explain
the workplace learning than behaviorism. She introduced three types of learning i.e.
dialogic, instrumental and self-reflective. Dialogic learning takes place when people
interpret the policies, procedures, goals and objective in work settings to understand
the consensual norms in society. Instrumental learning is task oriented also known a
prescriptive learning. It consists of the identification of problem, formulation of
action, implementation and observation of results. The self-reflected learning is a
46
mechanism of understanding the personal change and impact which is also known as
meaning perspective.
In Marsick’s (1988b) emphasis is made on reflection and critical reflection for
learning in the workplace. Reflection is defined as an intentional action of individual
employee to display or show his/her experience. She explains that when reflections
are in action it means IL is in action. She argues that the training and education are
known as transformation systems whereas learning is the acquisition, interpretation,
recognition, change and assimilation of feelings, skills and information.
Marsick and Watkins (1990) extend their work by presenting the informal and
incidental learning model. This model is rooted in the viewpoint of action science
(Argyris & Schon, 1978) learning from experience (Dewey, 1938) and interaction
science theory (Lewin, 1935). Marsick and Watkins (1990) explain the need and
nature of IL by separating it from formal learning and training. They argue that a
learning without designated place or without expectation is known as IL. IL is
integrated with daily work routine and linked with learning from others. The people
face problems and challenges in their work. Their experiences provide them guidance
to tackle these situations (Marsick & Watkins, 1990).
Incidental learning is defined as the learning through trial and errors or
learning through the organizational cultural norms (Marsick & Watkins, 1990). IL is
mostly done unconsciously and triggered by spontaneous internal and external events
or situations. It is an inductive process of reflection and action and happens
haphazardly by chance. Further Marsick and Watkins (1990) outline the factors that
promote IL. They identify that time and space for learning, internal and external
environment scanning, attention to goals, heighted consciousness, reflective skills,
inductive mindset, collaborating others and trust are the important factors for
promoting IL at workplace (Marsick & Watkins, 1990).
Consequently, Watkins and Marsick (1992) has developed the theoretical
framework by differentiating the formal, informal and incidental learning based on
action and reflection. Their framework is presented in Figure 2.3. They are of the
opinion that formal learning occurs in the absence of action, highly structured and
institutionally sponsored. Incidental learning is known as the by-product of some
47
other activities and it is a subset of IL. In incidental learning people learn by trail-and-
error (Tikkanen, 2002) and through interaction with others (Van der Heijden et al.,
2009).
According to Watkins and Marsick (1992) IL is a planned or spontaneous
learning occurred through experience. It takes place in an unstructured way and it is
not based on classroom activities. Additionally, these activities are not sponsored by
the organization rather it is initiated by the learner. It is self-directed learning based
on networking, coaching and mentoring. It is through continuous awareness, resource
sharing and experimentation.
Figure 2.3: Watkins and Marsick’s (1992) Informal and Incidental Learning
Framework
Watkins and Marsick (1993) highlight the importance of learning and more
importantly IL for organizational effectiveness. The organizations are required to
continuously develop their employees’ skills and knowledge through formal and IL
for better performance. In this perspective they focused more on ‘continuous learning’
which is synonyms to IL.
Meanwhile, a notable contribution is the identification of learning style.
Kolb’s (1984) work on learning was further refined by Honey and Mumford (1992) in
their book “The manual of learning styles”. They present the four learning styles as
activist, theorist, pragmatist and reflector. Activist learn by doing and they are people
with dirty hand, open mind and unbiased. Theorist concentrates on systematic
analysis of models, facts, logic or theory to take action. The pragmatist are the people
48
with ambitions of trying the learning or bringing the abstract concept into practice.
Reflectors are known as observers who avoid interruptions and analyze the
information and data to make conclusion. Mumford and Honey (1992) provide
answers to a question that how people actually learn? According to them learning
requires the assessment of individual’s learning strength, encouraging them to
advance their learning potential, and guiding them for improvement through their
preferred style.
Watkins and Marsick (1997) refine their informal and incidental learning
model by applying the double-loop learning framework of Argyris and Schon (1978).
Cseh (1998) highlights the importance of context and found that it pervades in every
stage of learning process, which were missing in Watkins and Marsick (1997) model.
Cesh, Watkins and Marsick (1999) provide the refined model after including the
context in the learning process. The proposed model is presented in Figure 2.4.
Figure 2.4: Cseh, Watkins and Marsick’s (1999) Informal and Incidental Learning
Framework
The context is defined as the opportunity that provides base for IL. The
context is the trigger/action that initiates the learning process. The individual’s
reactions are initiated by the triggers that generate solution/strategy to continue with
the process of IL. Likewise, the later stages of the learning process occur as;
producing proposed solutions, assessing consequences, lessons learned, and framing
the business context (Marsick & Watkins, 2001).
49
The individuals are the major source of devising a new plan and applying it in
his/her daily life. One cannot say that the model is cyclical and even inclusive, yet it
gives a good understanding of IL at least starting with agreed upon “trigger” point.
Summing, it is imperative that the employer/administrator creates a trigger to initiate
the IL process. Marsick and Watkins (2001) highlight the following features of IL.
It works or combined with daily routines.
It is triggered by an internal or external environment.
It is a result of unconscious thought process.
It results by chance and thus is unstructured.
It is an inductive process of reflection and action.
It is related with learning of others
Like formal learning, IL is also important for enhancing the knowledge and skills
of employees within their workplace. IL doesn’t work through the organized
programs rather it works in an unusual way and in natural work settings or
environment. Additionally, no one is ready to learn something but unintentionally
they become the part of the IL process. Thus, IL makes use of a well-balanced
combination of individual concerns such as logical interest, self-directedness and
motivation (Beckett & Hager, 2005).
The learning in which the skills, knowledge and expertise are developed
through informal ways and outside the educational setting is known as IL
(Livingstone, 1999). It is a learning process in which personal needs are satisfied
without having the explicit objective like formal learning (Marsick & Velope, 1999).
Livingstone (2001) note that ILAs is less focused by the scholars because of its
presence and connection with other social and related activities. The study further
adds that comprehension and assessment of ILAs is difficult because of their nature
and pedagogies. Marsick and Watkins (2001) place IL as a by-product of incidental
learning which occurs spontaneously.
The other notable development is the classification of IL based on the
consciousness and intentionality of learner. Schugurensky (2000) propose that there
are three forms of IL namely; tacit, self-directed and incidental learning. The
50
consciousness-based model is further refined by Bennett (2012) and proposed the
fourth form i.e. integrative learning as presented in Figure 2.5.
Bennet (2012) is of the view that IL is self-directed when it is done
consciously and with intent to learn. The incidental learning is also a conscious
learning, but it is unintentional and spontaneous. Tacit learning comprises of both i.e.
unconscious and unintentional learning. In this learning intention was not there but
unconsciously learned something. Lastly, the integrative learning is a form of learning
in which learning occurs unconsciously but with intention.
Figure 2.5: Bennett’s (2012) Four-part Informal Learning Model
So, it can be conscious-unconscious or intentional-unintentional learning but
above all it considers as an IL. Bennett (2012) further argues that the learners should
be encouraged to learn through experience. This statement provides support to the
assertion of Schon (1983) that tacit knowledge is embedded but can be altered or
assessed through reflective practices.
The comparative analysis of formal and IL is made by Eraut (2000) in which
formal learning is classroom-based whereas IL is experience-based. IL is learning
from others and not a planned activity as compared to formal learning. He introduces
the third type of learning which is non-formal and lies between formal and IL. Eraut
(2004) defines IL as an experience-based learning which occurs without any formal
arrangement. Accordingly, it is more flexible in terms that it allows learners to learn
socially by providing freedom as compared to formal learning.
51
IL is defined as the learning which is not formal (Colley et al., 2002). Lohman
(2000; 2005) defines IL as the learning activities at workplace in which the focus is
on the professional development. Further, it involves the learner’s psychical,
emotional and cognitive efforts for developing knowledge and skills. Lohman (2006)
outlines the IL procedure as: knowledge exchange, experiment, and environmental
scanning. Knowledge exchange is the sharing of experience based on information
given by others. Second, experimenting is the incidental learning from daily/routine
activities. Lastly, experimental scanning is the learning done outside the organization
and based on personal interest and time.
IL is not formal but intentional. Strimel et al. (2014) says that IL take place
when individuals participate in any formal development programs in contrast to IL
that is the acquisition of new knowledge through real-world experience. Kyndt et al.
(2013) conceptualize the IL as the activities in which low degree of planning and
organization found. Further, these activities are not defined in terms of objective,
time, context and support. IL is not limited to a certain context or environment
(Cunningham & Hillier, 2013). It occurs as a result of engagement in daily work
routines at individual or group level. The outcomes of IL are unpredictable because it
happens spontaneously and without an instructor (Kyndt et al., 2013).
Throughout the review we agree with Skule (2004) that it is difficult to find
consensus among scholar on the conceptualization of IL. However, for our research
drawing on Marsick and Velope (1999) and Lohman (2005) IL is defined as a process
in which individuals objectively engage themselves informally by initiating different
activities for the achievement of their personal and organizational goals.
In next section the literature is reviewed for ILAs in which employees
including teachers (faculty members) are engaged.
52
2.9 Informal Learning Activities (ILAs)
ILAs are non-institutionalized activities in which employees are engaged for
the purpose of acquiring new knowledge and skills (Cunningham & Hillier, 2013).
Marsick et al., (2006) argue that incidental learning is different from IL (Manuti et al.,
2015). IL is not fully dependent on planned development or organized programs, but
it is embedded in the context of practice, and arouse during critical moments of need.
It is based on the unintended activities and situations where learning is not the main
objective. It can be evolved as a result of personal experience or engagement, group
activities, mentoring, coaching and organizational policies (Manuti et al., 2015). The
mentoring and coaching, the relationship with peers and job restructuring are included
in the general framework for IL (Cunningham & Hillier, 2013).
According to Carasoli et al., (2018) ILAs are largely field-based and initiated
by learners with an intention to learn. Van Woerkom et al. (2002) define the ILAs as
a set or bundle of related activities undertaken individually or collectively for the
purpose of improving individual or organizational performance. Literature varied in
describing the types of learning activities. Crouse et al. (2011) and Clarke (2004)
identify that job rotation, trial and error, mentoring, working with others, reading and
researching, job shadowing, surfing the web, reflection on action, observing others,
and networking are the major types of ILAs in which HR professional are engaged.
Similarly, Lohman (2006; 2005) identify the eight ILAs in which teachers are
involved. These activities include talking with others; sharing material and resources,
searching journals and magazines, trial and error, collaborate with others, observed
others, searching the internet, and reflection on other’s practices. Self-directed
projects are also considered as informal types of learning (Chan & Auster, 2003). Van
Woerkom et al. (2002) present that learning from mistake, critical reflection, asking
for feedback, vision sharing, challenging group think, sharing knowledge, social
interaction and experimentation are the critical behaviors resulted from job
characteristics and motivational factors (De Groot et al. (2012).
In addition, external environmental scanning, learning through interaction with
others and self-experimentation are the types of activities in which the managers
53
involve (Choi & Jacobs, 2011). Doornbos et al. (2008) present a framework in which
searching; brainstorming, reflection on performance, consulting advisors, peers’
feedback and observing superiors are the major activities of work-related learning of
teachers. The teachers’ IL can be categorized as learning by doing, learning by
considering own teaching practice, learning through experimentation and getting ideas
from others (Kwakman, 2003; Hoekstra et al., 2009). Lai et al (2011) add self-
directed learning as a type of IL activity. Similarly, Van Der Heijden et al. (2009)
speaks about interpersonal interactions that trigger IL and De Groot et al. (2012)
suggests critical reflection as a major learning activity.
Similar to the view of Skule (2004) about definition and conceptualization of
IL, the literature varied in describing the types and nature of ILAs as well (Jeong et
al., 2018). However, Bednall et al. (2014) made a judgement that although there are
different classifications and types of ILAs consensus has been found for three
activities. Reflection (RE), knowledge sharing (KS), and innovative behavior (IB) are
known as representative ILAs (Jeong et al., 2018; Bakkenes et al., 2010; Kwakman,
2003). For current study we follow the proposition of Bednall et al. (2014) and the
detail of these three activities are as under:
2.9.1 Reflection (RE)
RE is a learning process in which individuals learn through their everyday
experiences and it is recognized as an integral part of teaching and research. The
employees of educational institutes are encouraged to use the designed models of RE
to determine their capability and replicate on their experiences during teaching
practice. RE has been conceptualized differently in many studies. We observed that
the titles or names are changed frequently but the meanings and conceptualizations
are more or less same. Some speak of RE, whereas others speak of critical reflection,
reflection-in-action, reflection-for-action, reflection-on-action and self-reflection.
The theoretical roots of RE is connected with the early work of Dewey (1933;
1938), Habermas (1981), Schon (1983), Kolb (1984), Gibbs (1988) and Johns (2000).
Dewey’s (1938) theory of inquiry believes that individuals learn through their
reflections on experience not from experience. In his theory the ‘autonomy of
thought’ is established through the ‘ladder of knowledge’. He argues that the logic to
54
solve a problem is dependent on empirical reflective thought or inquiry. The meaning
of logic is determined by inquiry into inquiry or turning logic back to inquiry. The
inquiry is perceived as open-ended, transactional and inherently social. When we
replicate what we already know is the appreciation of the competence developed
through prior experience. This reflection on experiences is the conversion of tacit
knowledge ito explicit knowledge (Schon, 1992).
The early work of Schon’s (1983) on reflective practices was influential. He
was curious to know that how people solve work problems in their profession (Reece
& Walker, 2007). Schon (1983) explains the reflecting on incident from two
perspectives. The first perspective is known as reflection-in-action in which when
someone reflects through the action, he/she become aware of the context of actions. It
allows more freedom and less dependence on well-established theory and techniques.
A new theory is being developed for that specific context. Reflection-in-action refers
to the immediate response or application of experience, knowledge and skills on-the-
spot for making adjustments (Bolton, 2014).
The second perspective is known as reflection-on-action in which the previous
results or actions guides the present actions. It helps to re-discover the contributions
and outcomes. It refers to the future action based on previous experience and learning
and also termed as “thinking on feet” by Schon, (1983). Reflection comprises of the
activities such as evaluation of performance and goal achievement, recognizing
strengths and identification of weaknesses, and developing strategies to remove
obstacles (Schon, 1983).
Further, Killion & Todnem (1991) explain the reflection from three
perspectives or directions. They introduce the third direction i.e. reflection-for-action
in Schon’s (1983) model. In their view, reflection-on-action requires thinking back on
what one has achieved by examining the activities, attentions, and product. In
reflection-in-action, the individual is accountable for reflecting while performing or
doing the job. The third direction reflection-for-action refers to the individuals’
review or analysis of accomplishment, identifying the helpful plans and procedures to
follow in future tasks.
55
The learning cycle of Kolb (1984) as discussed earlier in Section 2.8.2, is
based on experiential learning theory. He presents the four stages for learning based
on experience. First, concrete experience is the learning through active involvement
of learner in assigned task. Second, reflective observation refers to the review of
experience made by leaner during the work. Third, abstract conceptualization is a
stage in which the learner grasps understanding of events through learning a lesson.
Last, active experimentation is the practical implications of what has learned by the
learner.
His (i.e. Kolb, 1984) model was applied in education and training for the
development of abstract concept and applications through reflection. In his learning
cycle, the feeling sense and thought process, are used to perform some action which is
known as reflection. The emphasis has been made on the use of information for doing
something. Reflection is not an abstract term, but it leads to experimentation and
development of new experience. The learning experiences are transformed through
reflective observations (Helyer, 2015). With the growing interest in reflection Gibbs
(1998) develops the reflective cycle to inspire individuals to think and learn
systematically. According to him the reflection is a cyclical pattern of behaviors in
which individuals’ future actions are determined by the previous reflections. The
Figure 2.6 below shows the six stages in reflective cycle presented by Gibbs (1988).
Figure 2.6: Gibb’s (1988) reflective cycle
56
First, description refers to the recalling of previous events, activity, incident or
experience with precision and impartiality. Second stage, feelings refer to the
apprehension of consequences or individual reactions of the events like result, output,
and product. Third, evaluation is the individual thoughts or judgment made by the
learner by considering the positive and negative aspects. In fourth, analysis the
anticipatory thoughts or deliberate interaction has been manifested by the learner.
Fifth, conclusion refers to the learning of individuals by summarizing the responses to
the events and deciding the appropriate action or response for future. Last, action plan
refers to the strategies, approaches and tactics to formalize the outcome of the
learner’s reflection.
In addition, Lewis and Haviland-Jones (2000) conceptualize a model for
structured reflection. The model is developed for nursing profession but can be
applied to other disciplines as well. In their view the reflection is a structured
procedure comprises of description, reflection, influencing factor, evaluation and
learning. In description the learner defines the events followed by estimation of
consequences in later stage i.e. reflection. In next the learner identifies the internal,
external, and knowledge factors that affect decision making. In evaluation stage the
learner analyzes the choices and results of alternatives. The learning stage refers to the
experience of individual by comparing the results with pre-determined targets.
Reflection is also known as self-reflection (Noe et al., 2013). Self-reflection
refers to the recognition of strength by an employee and defining the development
areas, monitoring the progress, and bringing change in personal behaviors to deal with
the perceived challenges (Parsons & Stephenson, 2005). Reflection provides
assistance to employees in consolidating the knowledge, identifying the improvement
areas, reassessing the current conception of high performance and stimulating routine
behavior (Van Woerkom, 2004).
Eraut (2004) uses the term ‘reactive learning’ in which the current practices
generate the future behaviors. Reflection is an intuitive mode of cognition. He is of
the opinion that individual gets familiarity with the situation based on patterns and
intuitions by using reflection. Reflection is a degree of intentionality or show on their
experience (Marsick, 1988b). Reflective practices through experience help individuals
to learn about their work and their personal and professional relationships among
57
themselves and with the society. It enables them to tackle the hard situations and
bring enquiry into feelings, values and beliefs (Bolton, 2014).
Reflection is a valid learning tool that instigates critical thinking. The
individual critically reviews the experiences to develop understandings and
knowledge to draw conclusion or action plan for future events. It is a private stuff as
well as a legal requirement (Nicol & Dosser, 2016). The current study adapts the
conceptualization of Van Woerkom (2004) and defines reflection as a behavior in
which employees consolidate their knowledge to identify the areas for improvement
for achieving better performance.
2.9.2 Knowledge Sharing
Knowledge possess by individuals is a source of comparative advantage
(Drucker, 1995) as well as competitive advantage for organizations (Sadegh, 2015;
Jeon et al., 2011). Knowledge possessed by the individuals is an intangible asset of
value for organizations. The focus is on the acquisition of knowledge, knowledge
creation, knowledge management and knowledge promotion in every discipline
(Tzokas & Saren, 2004).
Knowledge is known as the awareness of facts or events. It emerged through
understanding, reflection, involvement and learning the reality at specific time and
context. The available knowledge is known as an economic resource which is
strategically important for organizations (Grant, 1996a; 1996b; Van Den Hooff &
Ridder, 2004). Knowledge must be developed, managed and valued (O’Dell &
Grayson, 1998). Knowledge is classified in two broader categories i.e. explicit
knowledge and tacit knowledge (Luan & Serban, 2002). The classification is
presented in Figure 2.7.
Explicit knowledge is somehow formal and created systematically whereas
tacit knowledge is developed through intuitions, insights and hunches (Nonaka &
Takeuchi, 1995). Explicit knowledge is documented and codified information
available in hard form which is easily transferable. Implicit knowledge is personal and
context specific, so it is difficult to articulate and document. Explicit knowledge is
easy to share whereas tacit knowledge sharing is difficult to capture, communicate
and share (Luan & Serban, 2002).
58
Figure 2.7: Luan and Serban’s (2002) classification of knowledge
Organizations learn through the knowledge sharing process. Organizational
learning is recognized as a process of accessing new knowledge and using it for
developing capabilities. These capabilities are developed through formal and informal
learning process. The knowledge economy and global competition are the compelling
terms to acquire new knowledge. There is a need to reassess the requirements and
ways for acquiring new knowledge. This new knowledge generates new skills for
gaining competitive advantage and organizational success. The organizations can
create and learn knowledge through different ways (Inkpen, 1998).
The sharing of knowledge and especially tacit knowledge is very critical. It is
a big challenge for organizations in the knowledge management process. The
individuals are not willing to share their tacit knowledge. Knowledge hiding affects
the flow of knowledge and knowledge management process. Knowledge hiding is
natural because the employees are coming from different background and with
different values, beliefs and habits at work (Bukowitz & Williams, 1999). They are
reluctant to share knowledge because of its value. Davenport and Prusak, (1998)
demonstrate that lack of time, cultural differences, time and work space, recognition
and rewards, intolerance towards mistake, and lack of ability to acquire knowledge
are the main barriers or challenges for the acquisition of new knowledge.
The organization should develop strategies to promote tacit knowledge sharing
and overcome these barriers in knowledge management process (Bukowitz &
Williams, 1999). Senge (1990) termed this as learning organization in which
knowledge sharing is being facilitated. The learning organizations are those where
employees are continuously engaged in expanding their capacity. The objective is to
create the difference and produce desired results. In learning organizations, the
59
collective goals are set free, new thinking patterns are developed and the employees
learn continuously and collectively (Senge, 1990).
Marsick and Watkins (1996) presented a framework for learning
organizations. The framework explains the dimensions of learning in organizations.
They major elements of their model are as under:
Encouraging collaboration and team learning
Promoting inquiry and dialogue among employees
Providing continuous opportunities for learning
Creating systems to capture and share learning by integrating it in daily work
Empowering employees towards collective vision
Connecting organizations with its environment
Strategic leadership for learning
Further, Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) present a model for knowledge creation
and knowledge sharing. Their model is also known as “SECI (Socialization,
Externalization, Combination and Internalization) model”. The SECI model is further
refined by Chini (2004) in which the tools for development are proposed. The
modified model is presented in Figure 2.8., in which four forms of knowledge sharing
are discussed.
First, socialization is based on the principle of sharing feelings, emotions and
experiences by developing tools for brainstorming, rotation, secondary projects and
guidance. In socialization knowledge is transferred through imitation, reflection,
direction and practices. Second, the externalization involves the transfer of tacit
knowledge through the transfer of expert knowledge, problem solving technology,
team collaboration tools, informal chat groups and decision support system. Third, the
combination is the joining of best practices and databases through internet and web-
based learning. Fourth, internalization involves learning by doing, on the job training
and learning by observation. The informal meeting and chats are also considered
under internalization.
60
Figure 2.8: Nonaka and Takeuchi’s (1995) SECI Model with Chini’s (2004)
developmental tools
Dixon (2000) defines knowledge sharing as a process that involves knowledge
diffusion, knowledge distribution, knowledge transaction and knowledge exchange
(Dixon, 2000). Knowledge sharing is set of behaviors that helps in exchange or
dissemination of acquired knowledge (Chow & Chan, 2008; Ryu et al., 2003). It is
exchange among individuals, groups and organizations in which knowledge, success
and failures are shared through informal chats or meetings (Kwakman, 2003).
Davenport and Prusak, (1998) demonstrate that knowledge is an asset of
organization and the knowledge management is critical for organizational success.
They identify that the acquired knowledge, dedicated knowledge, fusion knowledge,
adaptation knowledge and networking knowledge are the main sources of knowledge.
Further, they propose the four steps that organizations should follow for effective
knowledge management. First, they must create the knowledge repositories. Second,
the existing knowledge or repositories must be accessible to all in organization. Third,
organization should facilitate the sharing environment and lastly management and use
of knowledge for achieving objective and goals.
Individuals are highly socialized to share their best practices and mistakes
with colleagues (Yu & To, 2013). Knowledge sharing is a socialization process in
which knowledge workers are engaged in developing new ideas and creating new
business opportunities (Grant, 1996a). Lodhi and Ahmad (2010) added that the
knowledge management policies affect the knowledge sharing behavior of employees.
61
The knowledge sharing is recognized as the creation of new knowledge. New
knowledge is crated through either exploitation or combination.
In other word, knowledge sharing is a social interaction process at individual,
group and organizational level (Van den Hooff et al., 2012). Knowledge sharing at
individual and group level is comprises of knowledge donation (sending of
knowledge) and knowledge collection (receiving of knowledge). In this the
employees are motivated to communicate, consult and learn from other colleagues
(Van Den Hooff & Ridder, 2004; Lin, 2007; Foss et al., 2010). Knowledge sharing at
organizational level includes capturing, organizing, and transforming the experience-
based knowledge to all employees. As whole, knowledge sharing is the exchange of
information, experience and skills with colleagues in work setting (Lin, 2007).
Knowledge sharing is a process in which knowledge is being transferred or
shared among individual, groups or organization through collaboration and
involvement (Terry et al., 2013). In knowledge sharing the new knowledge has been
created through the exchange of tacit and explicit knowledge (Lee & Choi, 2003). It is
a process of mutual exchange for sharing tacit and explicit knowledge which creates
new knowledge (Wu & Cuvusgil, 2006; Nonaka et al., 2008). The sharing of tacit
knowledge requires extra efforts from employee as compared to sharing of explicit
knowledge (Hau et al., 2013). Newmann and King (2000) further says that knowledge
sharing is a process in which employees exchange their ideas with colleagues, discuss
their problems and asks for help or advice.
In the view of Foss et al. (2010) when individual knowledge is transformed
into organizational knowledge than it is known as knowledge sharing. The knowledge
management is only possible when the knowledge is shared among employees at
organizational level (Alavi & Leidner, 2001). It is the transformation process in which
individual knowledge is transferred at organizational level through the development
of new product, service and process (Van den Hooff & Ridder, 2004).
Baalen et al (2005) argue that knowledge is only valuable when it is shared.
They further say that organizations can manage the knowledge resources effectively if
the knowledge is shared. It enhances the organizational learning capacity by
62
facilitating individuals to exchange knowledge. It works for the community by
increasing their capabilities and skills (Dyer & Nobeoka, 2000).
Knowledge sharing is beneficial as it provides informal feedback, sharing of
new ideas, and attains social support (Van Eekelen et al., 2005). Knowledge sharing
with colleagues means providing feedback for their work and performance, sharing
new ideas and providing social support (Van Eekelen et al., 2005; Kwakman, 2003).
It is an informal way of learning in which employees discuss their problems, share
ideas, and seek advice through informal feedback and support (Bednall et al., 2014).
Similarly, the knowledge sharing is important for academicians in imparting
knowledge and skills to students during their course of study. Further, the faculty
members are supposed to face the negative emotions of students which can be
overcome by motivating them, increasing performance and by teaching (Rowe &
Fitness, 2018). Further, the implementation and promotion of mindfulness practices
by the faculty members help students to reduce their stress level (Hj Ramli et al.,
2018). The academic staff should provide psychological support and counseling to
students for coping problems like stress (Iorga et al., 2018).
Faculty members learn from their colleagues (Viskovic, 2006), experiences
(Lawler, 2003), and by performing active roles (Merriam & Caffarella, 2007). The
managers/administrator of educational institute who value human behavior are more
effective in terms of organizational efficiency.
2.9.3 Innovative Behavior
In this competitive knowledge-economy innovation is vital for sustainability
and success of organizations (Zhu, 2015; Thurlings et al., 2015). Innovation is
recognized as an important factor to meet the challenges by developing, implementing
and promoting new knowledge, ideas, technology and business models (Wan et al.,
2015; Omri, 2015; Axtell et al., 2000; Scott & Bruce, 1998). For long-term survival
and sustainability in the competitive world the organizations must promote innovation
and encourage their employee to take active part in developing new and better ways
of doing things.
63
According to Aalbers et al. (2014) IB of employees is considered as an
important factor for organization performance and competitiveness. There are
informal networks that play a vital role in promoting innovation and IB.
It is normally observed that other than coaching and mentoring - informal
meetings, get together parties, tea and lunch breaks, and combine activities
undertaken outside the job - offer foundation for informal networks that are important
for innovation and IB. In addition, these informal activities are considered as
investment made by the organizations (Aalbers et al., 2014; Peng et al., 2014).
IB or innovative work behavior was initially recognized as extra-role behavior
(Organ, 1997; Roberts, 2003) but later attained the status of in-role behavior as a part
of normal job assignment or routine work (Dorenbosch et al., 2005; Janssen, 2000). It
is deliberate behavior of an employee that can be initiated within individual’s work
role, group or organization (Javed et al. 2017; Scott & Bruce 1994). IB is recognized
as an individual level framework to study innovation. IB is the result of collaborative
activities in which individuals are involved in creating, presenting, testing and
implementing the new ideas (Kanter, 1988).
The seminal work of Katz’s (1964, 1966) leads in developing understanding of
innovative work behavior. In views of Katz (1964) IB is not a formal action of
individuals to deal with uncertainties and contingencies. The organizations depend on
the blueprints of their employee’s IB in delicate social system. This description of
organizational environment provided by Katz (1964) does not fully address the rapid
changes and developments in business environment. The later studies succeeded in
collecting evidences and acknowledged the importance of IB for organizational
performance (Yuan & Woodman, 2010).
After the two decades of Katz’s (1964, 1966) propositions, Kanter (1988)
presents a model for IB comprises of innovative activities or behaviors at micro level.
She poses that idea generation, coalition building, idea realization and diffusion are
the main components of innovative work behaviors. First, Idea generation is the
initiation of innovation process by identifying the similarities and differences in the
work environment. The entrepreneurs or innovators are the agents to promote
innovations and enhance effectiveness. Second, Coalition building represents the
64
search for power, help and support from different stakeholders to develop novel
solution. This new idea or solution is the response to the problems faced by
stakeholders in work environment. Third, idea realization refers to the intentions of
developing, adopting or introducing the new idea in practices within organization,
group or individual level. The sample of idea, product or model is prepared for testing
in this phase. Last, transfer or diffusion represents the implementation and
development of product or idea into practice. For diffusion the employees devote
substantial effort to convert ideas into reality (Kanter, 1988).
In the same period Amabile (1988), also develops a model for IB in which
ideas are generated by setting the agenda, related information and resources. Her
model was criticized as it distinguishes between idea generation and idea realization.
The focus of model is on creativity whereas implementation of novel solution is
ignored (Dorenbosch et al., 2005). In response to this Axtell et al. (2000) presented a
framework and make addition in her model of IB by introducing ‘idea suggestion’
stage. Idea suggestion is the earlier phase from coalition building and closely linked
with creativity (Axtell et al., 2000). In addition, suggesting the idea means that the
new idea is developed or generated prior to make suggestions. Secondly, if there is no
idea is suggested than it does not guarantee that the idea may not generate. It might be
generated but not shared or suggested. So, in the view of Axtell et al. (2000) the idea
suggestion is more important than idea generation.
The other notable development is the conceptualization of IB by Scott and
Bruce (1994). According to them innovation process is comprises of activities and
behaviors. These activities and interconnected but do not follow a sequence. As a
result of these interconnected or combined activities the employees’ behaviors are
shaped accordingly. This involves problem recognition, generation of solutions and
ideas, sponsor seeking and idea production (i.e. implementation) (Scott & Bruce,
1994).
Janssen (2000) extends the work of Kanter (1988) and presented the universal
view of IB at work. IB is the individual’s ability to reach an idea or a solution for a
complex situation or problem faced by the organization (Janssen, 2000). In idea
generation, the novel solution or useful idea is formed in any area or realm. Further he
notes that the work-related problems, inconsistencies, breaks/gaps, changing
65
environment and business trends are the initiators for the creation of novel ideas. In
idea promotion, the employees engage themselves in social activities and networking
to attract sponsors and supporters through coalition building. In idea realization, the
sample solution is tested within organization, group or work role.
Kleysen and Street (2001) propose the principle dimensions of IB by
combining the search on creativity and innovation literature. Creativity is different
from innovative work behavior, but it is considered as the critical factor in stimulating
IB (Slatten & Mehmetoglue, 2011). According to Kleysen and Street (2001) the
innovation process is comprised of four applications. The first is opportunity
exploration in which the term ‘exploration’ used symbolically to express the
knowledge of innovation opportunities. This is similar to travelling (exploration) as it
enhances knowledge about countries.
In opportunity exploration they identify that attention, searching, recognizing
and gathering information about opportunities are the four types of behaviors. Second,
generativity refers to the guiding behaviors for benefiting or growing the future
people, organization, product and process. The third application is known as
formative investigation. It is the conceiving of idea, opinion or solution. Forth
application is championing which refers to as the social-political behaviors of
individuals in innovation process. Last application refers to the implementation of
innovation as part of normal business (Kleysen & Street, 2001).
Dorenbosch, et al., (2005) present the modified model of IB based on the
models presented by Janssen (2000) and Scott and Bruce (1994). The focus is given to
IB of employee at job level or small-scale innovation at work. They propose that the
IB comprises of “problem recognition, idea generation, idea promotion and idea
realization”. This conceptualization of IB is similar to Janssen (2000) and Scott and
Bruce (1994). Similar to Dorenbosch et al. (2005), recently, De Jong & De Hartog
(2010) provide the universal view of innovative work behavior comprises of “idea
generation, idea championing and idea implementation”.
The IB and innovation process as explained in these models is basically
discussing the same set of actions but with different labels. All the suggestion,
extensions and improvements have been made after the early work of Kanter (1988).
Idea generation and innovation activation (Kanter, 1988) is exchanged with problem
66
recognition and generation of solution (Scott & Bruce, 1994). Similarly, idea
generation (Janssen, 2000; Dorenbosch et al., 2005; De Jong & De Hartog, 2010) is
replaced opportunity exploration and generativity (Kleysen & Street, 2001). Lastly,
idea realization (Janssen, 2000; Dorenbosch et al., 2005) has renamed as idea
production (Scott & Bruce, 1994), idea implementation (De Jong & De Hartog, 2010)
and idea application (Kleysen & Street, 2001).
These researchers make an assertion that the organizations should appreciate
practicing the past experience to generate new ideas. It brings informal and innovative
ideas into practice while dealing with crises and mistakes. MacKenzie et al., (2005)
argue that these scholars have just played with the terms rather making any substantial
contribution. It is simply the denomination of construct with different labels where
overlapping and contamination are likely to occur. However, the conceptualization
made by Janssen (2000) is more comprehensive and all-inclusive. IB is the individual
behavior of generating novel solutions to problems; promoting idea by convincing
colleagues; and implementing it within group, unit or organization (Van der Vegt &
Janssen, 2003; Janssen, 2000; Scott & Bruce, 1994).
According to Kanter (1998) the nature and complexity of problem define the
origin of innovation and IB. The problems which involve low degree of complexity
can be resolved by the individuals. The employees provide the simple innovation for
the small problem. The team efforts, specific knowledge, competencies and skills are
required to deal with the problems of great complexities or complex innovations. The
IB is such type of behavior that is initiated within a work role by introducing a new
and useful idea to a group or organization for achieving desired objective (Farr &
Ford, 1990).
Kleysen & Street (2001) define IB as the concentrated effort made by the
individuals to generate, introduce and apply the novel solution. The solution can be at
any level of organizational hierarchy or in work role. The solution includes the
newness in product, idea generation, technological development or administrative
change. The main objective is to improve the working relations by applying the new
idea for the efficiency and effectiveness (Kleysen & Street (2001).
IB is an individual’s ability of reaching to an idea or solution for a complex
situation or problem faced by organization. Idea generation, idea promotion and idea
67
implementation are the major components of IB (Janssen, 2000). The innovative
employees keep on searching the new opportunities to satisfy their creative appetite
(Haq et al., 2017). IB includes the originating the different solutions to problems,
encouraging peers to implement the new tactics, and eventually executing them within
the organization (Vander Vegt & Janssen, 2003).
Innovativeness is the modifications, simplification or improvement in work
routines or services with the element of newness in specific context. IB or innovation
is the outcome of the individual interaction with present situation and providing
solution based on previous knowledge or experience (Yu et al., 2007). For this
research IB is the individual behavior of generating novel solutions to problems;
promoting idea by convincing colleagues; and implementing it within a group, unit or
organization (Van der Vegt & Janssen, 2003; Scott & Bruce, 1994).
2.10 Perceptions of Performance Appraisal Quality (PPAQ)
The HRM practices, high commitment human resource management
(HCHRM), high performance work system (HPWS), high involvement, high
performance work practices (HPWP), are used interchangeably (Datta et al., 2005;
Guthries, 2001; Subramony, 2009). It is basically a bundle, a set of practice or a
system which is designed to enhance employees’ skills, satisfaction, commitment,
motivation and productivity. The practices include recruitment, training, feedback,
evaluation, compensation, promotion, development, performance appraisal,
incentives, benefits, and job security” (Aryee et al., 2012; Jiang et al., 2012b; Denisi
et al., 2014; Datta et al., 2005).
The concept of formally evaluating employees has been around for centuries.
However, only recently (i.e., the past 50 years) has the concept of rating employees
been an accepted practice in a large number of organizations (Murphy & Cleveland,
1995). Performance appraisal is an important but controversial HR practice (Lilley &
Hinduja, 2007; Roberts, 2003), initially used by organization as a control system to
enhance productivity and performance (Boswell & Boudreau, 2002). According to
Murphy and Cleveland (1995), performance appraisals have followed two basic
trends over the past 30 years.
68
The first trend deals with how the appraisal methods have moved from more
trait-based approaches to more behavioral and results-oriented approaches. This
approach has allowed the appraisal of an employee to be more objective as well as
provide more specific feedback to employees based upon these more objective criteria
(Murphy & Cleveland, 1995). So, under this approach performance appraisal is
structured, formal and systematic evaluation of individual performance after a period
based on objective outcomes. The objective of performance appraisal is to effectively
utilize the employees’ knowledge and skills (Denisi et al., 2014).
The second trend deals with how the uses of performance appraisal
information have expanded. Specifically, for quite some time the performance
appraisal system was used primarily for administrative purposes such as salary or
promotion decisions. However, performance appraisals have more recently begun to
be used for employee development and feedback, legal documentation, and research
(Murphy & Cleveland, 1995). This expansion of performance appraisal usage has
allowed for both supervisors and employees to use all of the behavioral information
about an employee and work toward raising performance as well as increasing
satisfaction levels of both the supervisor and the employee. Bell and Arthur (2008)
suggested that the effective performance appraisal should always be supportive,
reliable, realistic and acceptable.
In performance appraisal the supervisors made the subjective and objective
judgements of employee performance, so the complexity and variation found in
performance appraisal process (Brown et al., 2010). The focus of objective
performance appraisal is the quantifiable results or aspects of job performance. The
performance appraisal become complex when subjective judgements are made. In
subjective performance appraisal the quality of performance appraisal is diluted.
There is a possibility that the supervisor may be biased, or results and
emotions are misinterpreted (Murphy & Cleveland, 1995; Longenecker et al., 1987).
This leads to understanding of performance appraisal quality holistically and it is
crucial because of more subjective in nature (Treadway et al., 2007). As it stands,
though, performance appraisals are one of the least popular aspects of the human
resources systems in many organizations (Murphy & Cleveland, 1995). Neither
69
supervisors nor subordinates look forward to participating in the performance
appraisal process and they are rarely satisfied with the overall results of the process.
This dissatisfaction is often due to the fact that the system used by their
organization does not help raise performance levels. Therefore, the quality of
performance appraisals is an issue that needs to be addressed in order for the
satisfaction of both supervisors and employees to be increased as well as for valuable
information that can be used by the organization to be obtained (e.g., for employee
development, training, and legal documentation).
The attitude of supervisor in the appraisal feedback is important because it is
considered as a source of quality perception by employee in performance appraisal
process (Brown et al., 2010). The quality of performance appraisal includes; detailed
discussion, privacy, individual attention and determining the development needs
(Roberts, 2003). Brown et al. (2010) defines performance appraisal quality as an
assessment made by the employees regarding the performance appraisal process. The
quality of performance appraisal is defined through the treatment and procedures
adopted in the performance appraisal. It is the performance appraisal qualtiy that
enhances the employee’s capacity to positively influence the desired outcomes
(Brown et al., 2010).
The employees perceive quality in appraisal feedback “in terms of its clarity,
regularity, and openness” (Bednall et al., 2014). When the supervisor regularly held
appraisal meeting, clearly communicate the feedback and openly discusses the
problems than employee perceive quality in the feedback (Bendall et al., 2014). These
practices and events send signals, communicate promises and psychologically
empower employee for desired contributions (Ostroff and Bowen, 2000).
The effectiveness of performance appraisal is determined by the quality of
feedback or the perceptions of quality in performance appraisal process (Roberts,
2003). The quality of performance appraisal is determined by the procedures followed
in formal performance appraisal and the interactive handling of employees during the
formal appraisal. The organizations must show commitment with the whole
performance appraisal process to achieve its objective (Brown et al., 2010).
70
The employees’ attitudes and behaviors are influenced by the perception of
HR practices (Alola et al., 2018; Bowen and Ostroff, 2004). Well implemented and
aligned HR practices helps organizations to maximize employees’ performance by
facilitating positive reactions at work and motivation (Boxall & Prucell, 2008;
Huselid, 1995). It communicates to employees about the expected behavior that are
rewarded (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). Performance appraisal motives employee to
display behaviors that are consistent with organizational strategic objective (Datta et
al., 2005).
The ongoing feedback has been provided to individuals regarding their actual
performance and expected performance. The development needs are highlighted
through the feedback (Chuang & Liao, 2010; Deepa et al., 2014; Lepak & Snell,
2002). The feedback delivery mechanism is more important (Hattie & Timperley,
2007). In addition, the employees’ reactions to these appraisals are critical because the
fairness and quality of appraisals leads to improved performance of individual,
motivation (Aguinis & Pierce, 2008; DeNisi & Pritchard, 2006; Tziner et al., 1998),
self-regulation (Van den boom et al., 2004), self-monitoring (Kwakman, 2003) and
increased self-efficacy (Zimmerman & Schunk, 2013). The ineffective performance
appraisal leads to negative behavior like job turnover (Dailey & Kirk, 1992).
According to Brown et al. (2010), employees are sensitive to the quality of
performance appraisal. It is a process of evaluation after which the rewards and
appreciation is given to better performers. The poor or low performers are first
counseled and on subsequent poor performance the extreme steps are taken i.e.
demotion, dismissal or pay decrease (Brown et al., 2010; Roberts, 2003; Mayer &
Davis, 1999).
Employees’ perceptions of low quality in performance appraisal have
detrimental effects on their attitudes and behaviors (Fugate et al., 2008). It is a big
challenge for organization to provide the quality feedback to motivate and retain
employees (Heathfield, 2007). In addition, the past experience of employees with
performance appraisal affects the subsequent participation in performance appraisal
process (Brown et al., 2010).
In current study we perceive the quality of performance appraisal as the
perceptions of employees regarding the appraisal feedback “in terms of its clarity,
71
regularity, and openness” (Bednall et al., 2014). The clarity refers to the employees’
familiarity with the performance appraisal process in term of its purpose and their
role. It comprises of performance expectation and providing the correct information
regarding current and desired performance during the feedback (Kluger & DeNisi,
1996; Brown et al. 2010).
The regularity indicates the pattern of ongoing feedback. The employee
should communicate the performance feedback in regular intervals to judge and make
improvements. The openness refers to the level of communication in which the
employees and supervisor share their views and feedback on performance appraisal
(Brown et al., 2010). The literature suggests that the organization should encourage
open dialogue in feedback process (Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick, 2006).
In next sections summary of literature is presented for psychological contract
and psychological climate. It leads the further development of organizational
empowerment concept. The structural empowerment and psychological empowerment
concepts are than reviewed. First, the discussion on psychological contracts and
psychological climate is meant obligatory for better understanding of the construct
because of its different operationalization and varieties in literature.
2.11 Psychological Contract and Psychological Climate
The psychological perspective or empowerment is found in the seminal work
of Argyris (1957a; 1957b) but it did not gain popularity till 1995 when Rousseau
(1995) set basis for organizational psychological contract in his book “Psychological
Contract in Organizations: Understanding Written and Unwritten Agreements”. The
employment relationship can be better understood through a psychological contract
which is based on the agreement among employers and employees (Rousseau, 1995).
According to psychological contracts, employees and employers interact with
each other based on mental models or existence of cognitive schema. The jobs can be
made valuable to workers using idiosyncratic arrangements. This is more prevalent
when the involved features are not easily obtained from other employers. If special
opportunities for training and development are provided to employees then it is
72
believed that their psychological contract will be relational with the employer
(Rousseau, 2005).
Based on mutual beliefs, perceptions, and informal obligations, psychological
contracts are unwritten mutual expectations defined by the relationship between an
employer and an employee. Ostroff and Bowen (2000) model for multilevel
performance framework highlighted the mediating role of psychological climate. It is
conceptualized in many ways, so uncertainty is there in its perception and
operationalization. It is used with different terms like organizational climate,
collective climate, organizational culture and psychological climate as well. Secondly
organizations have different climate at different levels like at unit and group level.
Thirdly, there is a lack of agreement about the dimension of psychological climate to
make a construct under the scope of definitions (Amenumey & Lockwood, 2008).
The psychological climate is the perception of environment at organizational
level and psychological empowerment is the feeling of cognition at individual level
(Schneider, 1990). The more clarity is given by Amenumey and Lockwood (2008)
and proved that the organizational level psychological climate positively influences
the PE at individual level. There is agreement on the dimensions and
operationalization of PE that eventually leads to organizational level empowerment in
contrast to psychological climate. The next section explains the concept of
organizational empowerment.
2.12 Organizational Empowerment
The participative management and the employee involvement theories are
used to explain the notion of empowerment (Spreitzer, 2007). There are two distinct
theoretical views are found in literature for organizational empowerment (Wallace et
al., 2011). Empowerment is generally considered as either social-structural
empowerment or psychological empowerment (Mathieu et al., 2006; Spreitzer, 1995;
Spretizer, 2008).
The social-structural empowerment focuses on the macro level view of the
organizational empowerment whereas; psychological empowerment focuses on micro
level empowerment at the workplace. The basis of social-structural empowerment is
73
on contextual factors or social structures of empowerment in the workplace at macro
level. Cognition or psychological perspectives are the focus of PE at micro level
(Spreitzer, 2008). The detail and review is as under:
2.12.1 Social-Structural Empowerment
The social exchange theory and social power theory set foundation for the
concept of social-structural empowerment. The early work of Kanter (1977) on
women’s empowerment set foundations for social-structural empowerment theory and
research. The social-structural empowerment is also known as structural
empowerment, relational contract or managerial perspective of empowerment. The
structural empowerment is grounded on the theory of social exchange (Blau, 1968)
and social power theory (French, 1956).
The focus of structural empowerment is on structures, policies, processes and
practices. The relational aspect of empowerment focuses on empowerment generated
through shared and expressive connection with others at work. (Spreitzer, 2008).
Generally, it is observed that at lower levels of an organization, an individual requires
the responsibility along with authority to be an effective employee. However, these
individuals are not empowered with authority and greater burden of function of
responsibility is placed on them. This phenomenon leads to less effectiveness of an
individual which ultimately leads to poor performance of individuals and
organizations as well.
In this regard, managers empower their employees through the process of
empowerment in which they delegate the authority at lower level of organizational
hierarchy along with responsibility (Wellins et al., 1991; Mathieu et al., 2006).
Structural empowerment is a managerial practice of granting authority to the
subordinates (Huselid et al., 1997). The delegation of authority at lower level and
providing opportunities for making decision related to work routines and tasks is
known as structural empowerment (Spreitzer, 2008). Structural empowerment is that
how manager transform power and authority at lower level employees.
Structural empowerment for individuals and social groups rotates around
needs, concerns and strategies. It helps individuals and groups in expressing their
74
needs, showing their concerns and devising strategies to achieve the socio-cultural or
political needs with better decision making. From the individual point of view,
empowerment is the acknowledgement of the individual position in a group in terms
of his capability and power, self-efficacy, control, independence, knowledge, growth
and self-determination (Spreitzer et al., 1997). Structural empowerment is a process in
which organizational and other forces eliminate the conditions of helplessness in the
organization. It can be the institutional processes, cultural impacts, political changes,
economic effects or social pressures that foster transformation and promote
empowerment (Liden & Arad, 1996). Organizations empower employees and ensure
high involvement, sharing of information and knowledge, adequate rewards by
bringing change in their structures, police and practices (Bowen & Lawler, 1995).
The manager’s needs to maintain the right balance, or in other words, the
“right mix” of available information, knowledge, power and pay to work in parallel to
effective management control and direction. The information in “right mix” includes
processes, quality, customer feedback and events. The knowledge encompasses the
work itself, the power to make decisions, and actions regarding rewards and growth
(Lawler, 1992, 1994). Empowerment brings changes in employees’ interaction with
colleagues and bosses, customer and suppliers, by applying the democratic
approaches in communication. Empowered employees enjoy the personal and firm
level benefits of these motivating practices (Spreitzer, 2007)
The nature of structural empowerment is advantageous in a manner that it
leads the organization for better effectiveness. The outcomes of it include less
spoilage, less absenteeism, better quality output, better problem solving and decision
making and lower turnover (Dennison, 1984). Most importantly, empowerment is not
a general trait applicable to different situations; it is a perception-based asset formed
by a work environment and applicable in particular circumstances (Thomas &
Velthouse, 1990). The employee enjoys the powerfulness in decisions at work
(Menon, 2001).
The employees provide unique ideas, otherwise not attended upon, to solve
the problem of the firm. However, there are conditions to it; the employee/worker
should be in closer contact with actual production. The employees are empowered and
also action is taken on the ideas submitted and incorporated into production processes.
75
Kanter (1977) also set basis for the link between social-structural empowerment and
PE. It was demonstrated that the power tools are critical for PE of middle managers
(Spretizer, 2008).
Similarly, Spreitzer (1996) study on social-structure found that the unit level
factors promote PE of teams. The work of Seibert et al., (2004) demonstrated that
social-structural empowerment at macro level enhances PE at individual or micro
level. Likewise, Morgeson & Campion (2003) examined the mediating role of PE in
the relationship between social-structural empowerment and individual level
outcomes. In next section the literature is reviewed, and discussion has been made on
the construct of psychological empowerment.
2.12.2 Psychological Empowerment
The structural empowerment focuses on how work has to be done whereas;
the focus of psychological empowerment (PE) is on how employee experiences their
work. Conger and Kanungo (1988) are known as pioneer in conceptualization of PE.
PE shapes individual behavior above and beyond the aptitudes of structural
empowerment (Parker & Griffin., 2001). The focus of PE is on cognitional and
emotional perspective of individual attitudes. Conger and Kanungo (1988) are the first
to offer psychological perspective on empowerment (Han et al., 2016). They provided
the new insight to social scientist for understanding of empowerment.
Conger and Kanungo (1988) define empowerment as a process in which the
employees’ feeling of self-efficacy is enhanced. The work role, conditions, and tasks
are designed in such a way that discourages powerlessness among employees. This is
achieved by adopting the formal and informal techniques. The formal techniques are
considered as organizational practices while the informal are providing efficacy
information. In their view empowerment is not only the delegation of authority and
power to subordinate instead a personal belief of employee about their roles and
relation to organization (Spreitzer, 2008).
According to Conger and Kanungo (1988) the employee self-efficiency can
be enhanced by delegating the authority and sharing of resources. PE is seen when
employees are provided with authority, autonomy and freedom in carrying out their
76
work (Hancer & George, 2003). Conger & Kanungo (1988) classify the process of
empowerment in five stages: Stage one includes the identification of the conditions
that are promoting powerlessness among employees.
They identified that the contributing factors are supervisory role, reward
system, nature of job and organizational factors are the concern of the employee in
first stage. Next, in second stage, managers try to deal with the external conditions
that are promoting powerlessness among employees. To deal with external challenges,
they identified that strategies like goal setting, participative management, job
enrichment, performance-based rewards, feedback system and modeling are helpful.
In stage three, self-efficacy information is provided to employees through
verbal encouragement, vicarious experience, dynamic interaction, enactive attainment
and emotional encouragement. Therefore, in stage four, employees have the feeling of
empowerment due to the receiving of self-efficacy information. Consequently, the
employee experiences the behavioral effects of empowerment in last stage.
The work of Conger & Kanugo (1988) is further refined by Thomas and
Velthouse (1990) in which they present a theoretical framework of empowerment
known as cognitive model of empowerment. According to them empowerment is not
a dispositional trait but the manifest of the four cognition of intrinsic task motivation.
Thomas and Velthouse (1990) define empowerment as a tool through which the
employees’ cognitions or states are shaped by the work environment. This creates an
alignment between personal and organizational goals (Spreitzer, 2008). They propose
that, in a cognitive model, the individual’s personality and work context
(environment) shape the employees’ empowerment. They provided the interpretive
style of work role in which the circumstances and conditions, work as a source of
intrinsic task motivation.
The task motivation suggests that the employee’s orientation and
empowerment are related to his/her role at workplace. It consists of a set of four
cognitions; meaningfulness, competence, choice and impact. The meaning is related
with the perceived value of an employee’s work. The competence refers to the skills
and capabilities possessed by employee to perform the task or work. The competence
is similar to self-efficacy of Conger and Kanungo. It refers to the employees’
77
perceptions of their effectiveness for the task or job. The choice refers to the
employees’ ability of making decision regarding actions. Impact refers to the
employees’ ability to affect organizational outcomes.
The principle of Thomas and Velthouse (1990), and Conger and Kanungo
(1988), is the intrinsic task motivation of employees inculcated by the compelling
organizational environment (Krishnan, 2012). The further advancement in PE
construct is the development of its measurement scale. Spretizer (1995) has developed
the multidimensional measures of PE in workplace. 12-item scale was established to
measure each dimension of PE with 3 items and on 7-point Likert scale. She assumes
that PE is not a dichotomous, and employees perceive different degree of
empowerment. The four dimensions are distinct in second order confirmatory factor
analysis. Spreitzer (1995) scale was validated at individual, unit and team level;
different languages, cultures and different contexts.
According to Spreitzer (1995), PE is mindfulness and obligation-based design
which requires that an individual is actively orientated to work role. Furthermore, the
work environment shapes the cognitive element of the worker. This is contrary to the
belief that a fixed personality attribute shapes the cognitive aspect of the worker. PE
has evolved over time leading to various schools of thought; these include work of
Conger and Kanungo (1988), Thomas and Velthouse (1990) and Spreitzer (1995). In
their view PE is the psychological responses or cognitive inspirations of individuals’
in reply to organizational approaches and practices.
In order to ensure that the four dimensions proposed by Thomas and
Velthouse (1990) explain the true essence of PE Spreitzer (1997) refines their work.
Modern theories in psychology and sociology advocate that work, or performance of
individual should lead to personal development of the employee. The provision of
employee with the power and motivating them to express their capabilities and skills
to the fullest extent is the basic premise for these theories. The employees’
satisfaction can be achieved if the working environment allows them to use his/her
skills, increase intellectual capacity and make responsible decisions. This will develop
a sense of personal control and a strong self-esteem. This is the basic assumption of
self-actualization theorists (O’Brien, 1986).
78
Spreitzer et al. (1997) refine the construct of PE by drawing the
interdisciplinary literature on psychology, education, social work and sociology. They
further define the four cognitions reflecting the active orientation of employee work
role as; “meaning, competence, self-determination and impact”. The Conger &
Kanungo’s dimension of choice is synonymous to self-determination. Meaning
involves a match between employee personal values, beliefs and standards with work
demands (Thomas & Velthouse 1990).
Competence or self-efficacy is the employee’s belief on one’s capability to
successfully perform the assigned task or work (Bandura, 1989). Self-determination
or choice is personal control or autonomy over work and implies job involvement
(Deci, Connell, and Ryan 1989). Impact refers to the perception of influence one has
on outcome and implies organizational involvement in contrast to self-determination
(Thomas & Velthouse 1990; Spretizer et al., 1997; 1999). The details of these
dimensions are as under;
2.12.2.1 Meaning
The term meaning (Spreitzer, 1995) or meaningfulness (Thoman and
Velthouse, 1990) is similar to Hackman and Oldham’s (1980) term of meaningfulness
for specific task or project. Conger and Kanungo (1988) recognized the prominence
of meaning with reference to individuals’ feeling of power at work to manage people
and situations. The importance of evaluation of task against the personal standards is
considered as meaningfulness (Spretizer, 1995). Meaning refers to a kind of influence
that the task or work have on psychic energy of individual (Abdulrab et al., 2017). It
is the value of individuals’ work with respect to personal goals and standards
(Thomas &Velthouse, 1990; Okyireh & Simpeh, 2016). It refers to the
appropriateness of principles, standards and actions at work (Brief & Nord, 1990).
Stander and Rothmann (2010) define meaning as a perception of employees towards
their work and abilities. Meaning is something when employees feel that they are
empowered and can make their own work decision. Their competence and job
performance enhance, and they see the effect of their work (Chiang & Hsieh, 2012).
Laziness, detachment and discrete behaviors are the signals of low degree of
meaningfulness in employee in contrary to energetic, commitment and high
79
involvement show high level of meaningfulness (Conger & Kanungo, 1988). It
enhances employee empowerment and performance at work by having fair reward
and recognition system (Herrenkohl et al., 1999).
2.12.2.2 Competence
The term competence is similar to agency beliefs or performance expectancy
(Bandura, 1989) and studied as self-efficacy in clinical psychological literature
(Bandura, 1977; 1986). It is observed that low self-efficacy leads to avoidance
behavior by escaping from confrontation and results in low competency and self-
esteem. The high competency leads to extra efforts, persistence in problem solving
and IBs at work (Bandura, 1977). Competence is the confidence that employee have
on his or her skills to perform task activities (Thomas & Velthhouse, 1990; Spretizer,
1995). The lack of confidence will emerge as a lack of PE. The competence is
affected by the power and jurisdiction of employees in decision making (Conger &
Kanungo, 1988). It is employees’ perception of their abilities to carry out work and
task skillfully (Okyireh & Simpeh, 2016; Corsun & Enz, 1999, Thomas & Velthouse,
1990). Spretizer (1995) also concluded that high self-esteem lead to feeling of
competence in employee. She added that the performance feedback from supervisor is
important for strengthening the sense of competence in employees. The recognition of
employee as important part of organization and providing them authority are the basis
for employee feeling of PE (Spretizer, 1995).
2.12.2.3 Self-Determination
Spreitzer’s (1997) used the dimension of self-determination similar to the
choice dimension of Thomas and Velthouse (1990). Thomas and Velthouse (1990)
made an assertion that it is the causal responsibility for employees’ actions which is
analogues to the locus of causality (DeCharms, 1968). The locus of causality and
locus of control are the two different terms with different meanings and interpretation
(Deci & Ryan, 1985). The focus of locus of control is on outcome contingencies and
how it deals with uncertainties (Rotter, 1966). The locus of causality is the perception
of person’s behavior as self-determined and basic requirement of intrinsic motivation
(DeCharms, 1968). Deci and Ryan (1985) added self-determination as an important
80
element of intrinsic motivation along with competence. The self-determination is the
employees’ perception of control over the work and autonomy in decision making
(Spretizer, 1997). The high level of self-determination leads to motivation in
controlling in work environment (Hancer & George, 2003) and job satisfaction
(Thomas & Velthouse, 1990). The employee feels self-determination when they
perceive that they are no just following the rules of higher authorities rather have
freedom and autonomy in decision making to affect the work (Spretizer, 1997).
2.12.2.4 Impact
It refers to the perceived control of an employees’ over the environment and
how the accomplished task makes difference by affecting environment (Thoamas &
Velthouse, 1990). It is similar to knowledge of results (Hackman & Oldham, 1980)
and learned helplessness (Abramson et al., 1978). It is related to work context, so it is
different from locus of control. Spreitzer (1995) refer impact as an event of employee
that has influence on organization. Employee feel empowerment if they sense
progression towards goals. Okiyireh and Simpeh (2016) define impact in which
individuals successfully create the differences at strategic, managerial and functional
levels of organization and work outcomes.
The work of Thomans and Velthoouse (1990) and Spretizer (1995) on PE in
term of conceptualization, operationalization and measurement was remarkable. There
work is vastly admired by the researcher and practitioners across the globe in different
context, at different level and in different industries. The criticisms and applauses are
the beauty of the research and vital for creation of new knowledge. Similarly, in
social science research suggestions, recommendation and directions are proposed to
enhance the body of knowledge. It is impossible to explain every research and its
contributions to the construct of PE but few of them are discussed under;
Menon (2001) further confirm that it is a measurable psychological state and
considered as a continuous variable rather simply answering empowered or not
empowered. PE is a personal psychological determinant and reactions to work
conditions. It is passive orientation and individual personal beliefs of their role in
organization (Quinn & Spreitzer, 2001).
81
Bowen and Lawler (1992) view PE as managerial practice that leads to
increase profitability. Few studies like Niehoff et al. (2001) argue that PE helps
employees in coping stress at work. The two seminal changes (i.e. Hancer & George,
2003; Hanser et al., 2005) have made in which the authors proposed the three
dimensional and two-dimensional structure of PE. In contrary, studies (like Stander &
Rothmann, 2009; Uner & Turan, 2010) confirmed the four-factor model for PE and
scale after assessing the validity and consistency of the constructs in first order and
second order.
PE has received reasonable attention from the scholars and practitioners in
the field of HRM. It plays a vital role in shaping the individuals’ organizational
behaviors in the workplace (Dust et al., 2014). The number of studies has undertaken
to identify the antecedents and consequences of PE. Ledoux et al. (2018) found that
PE plays a vital role in the development of compassion among employee in medical
as compared to structural empowerment. Structural empowerment does not influence
nursing staff effectively.
The importance of empowerment has been realized by every discipline (Paul
et al., 2000). They added that the productivity and quality of work life can be
improved by involving the employee and empowering them. Empowerment plays a
critical role in making decision regarding. It involves providing authority with
responsibility at lower level employees (Paul et al., 2000).
Thomas & Velthouse (1990) and Spretizer (1995) have identified a set of four
cognitions or dimensions of PE. Similarly, Spretizer (1995) also added that the
combination of these dimensions gives better understanding and insights of the
construct (Koberg et al., 1999). The exclusion of single aspect diminishes the overall
empowerment perception and combination gives the proactive essence of
empowerment (Spretizer & Quinn, 1996). In current study the PE is studied
collectively by combining all four dimensions into a single construct.
82
2.13 Perceptions of HRM System Strength (PHSS)
The different between the content of HRM and process of HRM is explained
by Bowen and Ostroff (2004). They are of the opinion that HRM-performance linkage
can be better understand with the strength of HRM system. Strength is basically the
integration of HRM content and process. The HR practices are effective when they
are aligned with the strategic objectives. It means that these practices should be
horizontally and vertically aligned with the strategic goals of the firm (Pereira &
Gomes, 2012).
The role of HR department is critical as the development of HR policies and
implementation is the responsibility of HR department in which they communicate
the HR messages to employees (Guest and Conway, 2011). The system is strong
when these practices and policies are properly implemented. It means the line
managers have to implement the practices in accordance to the agreed plan or as
intended (Nishii et al., 2008; Khilji & Wang, 2006).
According to HR system strength theory (HRSS) of Bowen and Ostroff
(2004), the system communicates the performance requirements to employee
regarding their performance. It sends signals to employees about the expected
behavior that are rewarded for the achievement of organizational goals (Bowen &
Ostroff, 2004; Nishii & Wright, 2007). In addition, the strong system is characterized
by high level of its distinctiveness, consistency in practices and consensus in the
messages by HR department (Hewett, 2018; Delmotte et al., 2011; Bowen & Ostroff,
2004).
In addition, the PHSS is conceptualized differently. First it is the perceptions
of employee about the package, bundle or set of practices implemented. The higher
the number of practices means the more signals by the HR department to employee
about their performance (White & Bryson, 2013). This number perspective does not
ensure that the practices are distinctive and consistent. The higher number of practices
does not imply the censuses among the policy makers as well.
Second, it is conceptualized as the ratings on content of HRM i.e. specific HR
practices. The higher ratings on particular practice indicate a strong system (Stumpf et
al., 2010) as the ratings justify the shared perceptions of stronger system among
83
employees (Veld et al., 2010). Third, the above operationalization of HRM system is
lacking focus on the three meta-features as proposed by Bowen and Ostroff (2004)
based on the co-variation principle of attribution theory (Kelley, 1973). Under this
theory it is mandatory that the organization must provide distinct, consistent and
consensual HR messages (i.e. at all levels).
These clear, consistent and unambiguous messages create perception of strong
HR system which in turn leads to a strong organizational climate (De Winne et al.,
2013; Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). The strong climate generated through strong system
motivates employee to depict anticipated attitudes and behaviors (Wright & Nishii,
2007; Nishii et al., 2008; Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). The three meta-features i.e.
distinctiveness, consistency, and consensus as proposed by Boswen and Ostroff
(2004). The conceptualization of these meta-features is as under:
2.13.1 Distinctiveness
Distinctiveness refers to the delivery of visible, understandable, legitimate and
relevant HR messages to employee (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). They further added that
HRM system cannot be separated from the content of HRM i.e. HR practices. The
complete understanding of these HR practices by the employees refers to the
realization of HRM system by them. The comprehendible HR practices help
employees to make attributions of these practices (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004).
The visibility refers to the observable and salient HR practices in term of
communicating the HR messages to employees. The employees must be clear about
what lies under the domain of HR and what goes beyond its domain (Delmotte et al.,
2012). For example, if the objective of training is not clear then the employees are not
certain about the desired behavior. This will generate the tendency in employee for
interpreting the situation or practice based on their prejudices or opinions. Thus, leads
to different behaviors and week situations are likely to exist.
Bowen and Ostroff (2004) argue that the organizations are required to enhance
the visibility of HR practices to a wide range of employees for creating the strong
situations The HR practices must be designed and aligned with the personal goals of
84
employees (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004) or vertical alignment (Pereira & Gomes, 2012)
to ensure the visibility.
Understandability of HR messages refers to the extent to which these are
understood by the employees. The individuals differ in their comprehension and
understanding so the messages must be unambiguous. The HR practices and
procedures developed by the organization must be easy to understand by all
employees regardless of their knowledge and capabilities (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004).
The legitimacy of authority is the credibility or status of the HRM system as
perceived by the employees (Bowen & Ostroff 2004). Based on social cognitive
theory the legitimacy concept refers to the social status of the employee working for
HR department and communicating the practices. It is observed that when messages
are received through credible source implies importance and high status. It means the
employees are also affected by the personal characteristics of the sender. The worth of
HR department in the organization and top management support to it reflects the high
legitimacy or authority.
Relevance refers to the perception of employee regarding the development and
implementation of HR practices that these practices are designed to help them for the
achievement of their personal and professional goals (Delmotte et al., 2012). The HR
system must be designed by considering the organizational and individual
development goals. For example, if the university is pursuing a differentiating
strategy through research and innovation but at same time the monetary gains are the
individual goals. Under this condition the HRM system must relate the deviating
goals by creating synergy. This can be made by the research productivity awards and
recognition to employees. This relevancy is required by the organization to effectively
operate in competitive environment.
The distinctiveness alone cannot explain the attribution of causation to create
strong situation. It explains the communicating the message by sender and encoding
of theses message uniformly among employees (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). For a
strong situation it is important that the messages sent by the HR practices are
consistent about the required behaviors and rewards. The consistency in these
messages is discussed next:
85
2.13.2 Consistency
It refers to the articulation of HR practices in such a way that it appears
reliable and coherent across different level of organizational hierarchy at different
time. Consistency is the establishment of constant relationship with individuals and
environment over time (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). It is the understanding of the cause
and effect over time and implies that when some event occurred the cause of that
object also exists (Eastman, 1994). The consistency in messages communicates the
employee about the specific behaviors that are expected and rewarded (Bowen &
Ostroff, 2004). The perception of HRM system as consistent requires that the
relationship is established through the instrumentality, validity and consistency in HR
messages.
Instrumentality is such design of HR practices that links these messages with
the expected behaviors (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). It is expected that employees decide
to perform a certain behavior based on their expectation of the outcome under
expectancy theory of Vroom (1964). The supervisor and HR manager should create a
visible and understandable cause-effect relationship when implementing HR
practices. It is expected that the employees’ empowerment, motivation and
competence is influenced by these programs and practices (Delery & Shaw, 2001).
The employees’ behavior or results are closely related to the application of consistent
HR practices over time (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004; Pereira & Gomes, 2012).
The validity is important element for making attribution of HR practices. It
refers to the employee perceptions of actual implementation of HR practices in
accordance to the plan or as intended (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). The difference
between the intended and implemented HR practices leads to different perceptions by
the employees (Bowen & Ostrof, 2004). There is a need to minimize the difference
between HR practices (planned and implemented) and it leads to different perception
about expected behaviors (Khilji & Wang, 2006). The professionals and HR policy
makers are responsible for design and implementation of HR policy by determining
the expected behaviors and outcomes (Wright & Nishii, 2007; Khilji & Wang, 2006).
The implementation of these practices is made by the line manager. The line manger
implements the policy as perceived by them and it depends on their competence,
desire and support provided by higher authorities (Bos-Nehles, 2010). The validity is
86
ensured when there is low ambiguity or difference lies between the intended and
implemented HR practices (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004; Khilji & Wang, 2006).
The consistent HR messages refer to the regularity in sending the signals by
HR department for expected behaviors and outcomes (Delmotte et al., 2011; Bowen
& Ostroff, 2004). Bowen and Ostroff (2004) suggested ensuring three types of
consistent messages. First, the messages communicated by the HR department or
policies must be similar to the messages endorsed by line managers. Second, there
should not be any inconsistency in messages of different HR practices means that the
HR practices should be internally consistent. Third, the messages in HR practices
should be stable over time or for longer period. The double-bind and constant change
in messages is disastrous and harmful to create a shared perception of consistent HR
messages (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004).
2.13.3 Consensus
Consensus refers to agreement or generalization of an incident or behavior
among all individuals (Delmotte et al., 2011; Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). It is important
that individual perceive the same effect and it can be viewed through the agreement
among decision makers and fairness in treatment (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004).
Agreement among decision makers or message senders refers to standing of
all involved parties at same wave length or degree of settlement at all levels of
organizational hierarchy. Agreement among message sender helps in fostering the
consensus (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). It is understood that the strategic plans and
policies are formulated at top level by the policy makers. The HR practices and
policies are formulated and designed by the HR managers and professionals. The
implementation of these policies and practices is the responsibility of line managers or
supervisors. There must be an agreement among the all levels of organizational
hierarchy in communicating the HR messages for desired behaviors, value and design
of HR practices (Delmotte et al., 2011; Sanders et al., 2014; Bowen & Ostroff, 2004).
The fairness refers to the impartiality of the practices. The fairness of HRM
system is judged by its adherence with the principles of justice i.e. “distributive,
procedural and interactional justice”. Distributive justice in HRM system examined
87
as the fairness in content and outcomes of HR practices. The results or performance
should be the criteria for recognition and reward. In addition, procedural justice
explained by the fairness in the practices likes promotions and rewards. The
interactional justice is recognized as the impartiality of the decisions by HR
department. The perceptions of fairness by employee in HRM system influence their
attitudes and behaviors (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004).
2.14 Conceptual Framework
The numerous scholars and practitioners have documented their research in
reputed journals on the relationship between HRM and performance (employee and
organizational). The consensus also found in literature that the proximal outcomes
(individual) contribute to distal outcomes (organizational). They identified that HRM
directly or indirectly affects employees’ job satisfaction (Messersmith et al., 2011),
turnover intention (Cennamo & Gardner, 2008; Gardner et al., 2001), organizational
commitment (Messersmith et al., 2011; Shahnawaz & Juyal, 2006), productivity
(Bloom & Reenen, 2010) and financial outcomes (Adnan et al., 2011). The
organizational performance can be measured in terms of cost reduction, quality
improvement, flexibility and time (Jayaram et al., 1999).
There is promising relationship between organizational performance and HRM.
However, there are some theoretical questions need to be answered. These questions
are about how the HRM system affects organizational performance which is referred
to as the ‘black box’. Answering this question was the focus of the researcher in the
past three decades. The aim of this research is to answer this question by developing
an agreed-upon theoretical model that reveals how HRM affects performance in terms
of ILAs.
This study is grounded on the HR system strength (HRSS) theory developed
by Bowen and Ostroff (2004). The theory of HR system strength depicts that the
individual level research is used to draw inference about the organizational level
performance and effectiveness. The theory hold the structural features of an
organization that should fit the environmental and technological demands.
Organizational effectiveness cannot be ensured through the organizational design only
but it requires support from the members of organizations i.e. employee to achieve
88
organizational goals. It is well known that the satisfied and committed employees are
more willing to work for the achievement of organizaitonal goals.
The HRSS theory focuses on HR practices. These practices are useful in
shaping the employees attitudes and beahvior in such a way that is supportive to
organizaitonal goals. The employees’ perceptions of these practices shape their
attitudes and behaviors. HR system influence organizational climate and normative
contracts that shape human capital devleopment and collective attitude and behaviors.
These in turn influence organizational performance.
Conceptual links are required to be established by keeping in view the
similarities among the construct used in the study (Akers & Sellers, 2004). The
developments of hypotheses are discussed under:
2.15 Hypothesis Development
2.15.1 Perceptions of Performance Appraisal Quality and
Psychological Empowerment
Human capital is the critical resource for competitive advantage (Huselid,
1995) and well-designed HRM system (Barney & Wright, 1998) is essential for
performance and sustainable development (Barney, 1991). The HR system is
comprising of different HR practices like; recruitment and selection, training and
development, compensation and performance appraisal (Boxall et al., 2011). HR
system strength theory (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004) states that HRM system as a
combination of HR content and process influence employees’ attitudes and behaviors
by creating a psychological climate. The concept of psychological climate and PE is
based on the social cognitive theory (Banduar, 1986).
HR practices like performance appraisal, compensation, and feedback (Denisi
et al., 2014; Aryee et al., 2012; Jiang et al., 2012b) influence employees’ skills,
motivation and opportunities to contribute (Lepak et al., 2006). This in turn
contributes to productivity, profitability, growth, innovation, customer service, at
organizational level (Youndt et al., 1996; Datta et al., 2005; Ichniowski & Shaw,
1999). The well aligned (horizontal and vertical fit) HR practices influence
89
employees’ attitudes and behaviors by developing skills, motivating employees and
providing greater opportunities to contribute (Bowen and Ostroff, 2004; Messerrsmith
et al., 2011; Ostroff & Bowen, 2000).
The accuracy in performance appraisal leads to retention of skilled workforce
(Lilly & Hinduja, 2007). Similarly, quality of performance appraisals generates strong
reactions (Thayer, 1987) and increases the perceived obligations of employee towards
organizations and employer which in turn affect their attitudes (Hetidrix et al., 1998).
Employees’ experience of quality in performance appraisal is expected to influence
employees feeling of attitudes. It generates the positive feelings and sense of
achievement in employees. Employees feel value and perceive constructive position
in their jobs (Lind & Tyler, 1988).
PE is an employee feeling of empowerment and this is manifested in four
cognitions. First, employees give meaning to their work. Second, they trust their
competence. Thrid, they are determined to achieve organizatioanl goals. Fourth, they
know that their actions and decision have impact on organzation (Spreitzer, 1995).
Employees can perform well if they are satisfied and feel the responsibility for the
work assigned to them, this can easily be done through performance appraisal.
Performance appraisal encourages the employees to engage themselves in achieving
the organizational goals and to create an environment that can lead to increase their
performance and productivity (DeNisi & Sonesh, 2010).
Previous literature demonstrates that the HR practices influence employees’
job attitudes. The focus of the studies was on affective commitment and job
satisfaction (Takeuchi et al., 2009). In addition, Messersmith et al., (2011) found that
the bundle of HR practices influences job satisfaction, PE and affective commitment
of employees. It is observed that rewards and job security enhance PE (Spreitzer,
1995). Carless (2004) found that appraisal and recognition influence the job attitudes
by creating a psychological climate.
Furthermore, Aryee et al., (2012) found a significant positive relationship
between high performance work systems (HPWS) and PE of employee. They studied
the performance appraisal as a part of HRM system. The study (i.e. Aryee et al., 2012)
lacks in explaining the relationship of individual HR practice with PE. The study by
90
Brown et al. (2010) sheds light on the relationship between performance appraisal
quality and job attitudes. They argue that high quality in the performance appraisal
experiences of employees’ leads to high level of job satisfaction and low-quality leads
to lower level of job satisfaction. Thus, quality in performance appraisal is critical to
create high levels of job attitudes like job satisfaction (Brown et al, 2010). In addition,
the employees’ self-worth and feeling of achievements are positively influenced by
the quality of performance appraisal (Campbell & Campbell, 2001).
However, it is observed that there is less evidence to support an association
between PPAQ and PE. The HR system strength theory (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004)
posed that HR practices create a psychological climate at organizational level. This
psychological climate is useful in crating the PE at individual level (Amenumey &
Lockwood, 2008). Therefore, following the notion HR system strength theory and
based on social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986), it is anticipated that the PPAQ as
content of HR, psychologically empower employees to act and work in progressive
manner. Thus, we hypothesize the following:
Hypothesis 1: There is direct, positive and significant relationship between
PPAQ and PE.
2.15.2 Psychological Empowerment and Informal learning
activities
PE as cognition of meaning, competence, self-determination and impact, is
recognized as an important element of workplace learning (Zimmerman, 1990; 1995;
2000). It promotes learning by creating social-political awareness and attachments
with organizations (Kanter, 1988; Koberg et al., 1999; Pfeffer & Villeneuve, 1994). It
enables employee to acquire, develop and share knowledge and skills. PE allows
employee to share resources across organization and participate in workplace learning
(Zimmerman, 1995; 2000).
The employee perception of meaning and usefulness of work may influence
the engagement in job and participation in learning (Spreitzer et al., 1997). Similarly,
the competence or intrinsic motivation positively influences the work performance,
learning and adaptability (Harackiewicz et al., 1985). In addition, self-determination
91
is also known as important factor to motivate employee to work and learn (Locke &
Schweiger, 1979). The employees feel capable of taking actions and responding to
unique situation or work-related problems encountered during the work (Linden et al.,
2000).
Impact creates belief among employees that they can affect organizational
outcome. They involve in learning at workplace by showing dedication to their work
(Ashforth, 1989). Empowering employees is a set of experiences in which individuals
have control on decision, resources and access to information (Zimmerman, 1995).
There is a noticeable interest of researchers and practitioners found in literature for
identifying the psychological drivers that promote individual behaviors. It is
anticipated that this influence the workplace learning. (Yu et al., 2007).
Those employees who give meaning to their work put more efforts because of
their level of commitment with organization (Linden et al., 2000). It has identified
that organizational climate (Balkar, 2015), Self-efficacy (Somech & Drach-Zahavy,
2000), organizational culture (Zhu, 2015), Leadership (Zhang & Kwan, 2018;
Moolenaar et al., 2010; Sagnak, 2012) and motivation to learn is an important driver
of individuals’ behaviors (Montani et al., 2014).
According to social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986) and psychological
empowerment theory (Spreitzer, 2008), the empowered employees take active
orientation towards their work which leads them is displaying organizational
citizenship behaviors (Choi, 2007; Messersmith et al., 2011), job satisfaction
(Laschinger et al., 2001), compassion (Ledoux et al., 2018), work satisfaction and job
performance (Linden et al., 2000), voice behavior (Yoo et al., 2017), and
organizational commitment ( Bogler & Somech, 2004). Therefore, it can be argued
that PE as a positive job attitude influences the employee’s behaviors. Employee
participation in ILAs is initiated by the learner at his/her own. These activities are
self-directed and non-institutionalized initiated by the employees at their workplaces
like RE, KS and IB. The detail on each activity is as under:
92
2.15.2.1 Psychological Empowerment and Reflection
PE refers to a perception that an employee holds. It engages the workforce in
the assigned job with commitment as they have been provided with a higher degree of
flexibility (Noe & Wilk, 1993) and more freedom regarding decision making (Walton,
1985). Investigating the effects of PE on IL of employees, while keeping in view the
service based organizations/institutions, the outcomes are intangible. As employees’
feels satisfied and perceive a significance role in the organization they will engage
themselves in more and more ILAs to nourish their abilities (Smylie, 1988). So, it can
be figured out from the existing researches that a positive relationship exists between
human resource empowerment and ILAs.
Previous research shows that the performance of psychologically empowered
employees is superior to those who are less empowered (Linden et al., 2000). They
consider themselves as more competent and capable to influence their work and job in
meaningful way (Spreitzer, 1995). They tend to show initiatives by displaying
positive behaviors and acting freely (Wang et al., 2014; Wallace et al., 2011; Thomas
& Velthouse, 1990). According to the social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986), the
human behaviors and functions are shaped by the cognitive processes in interaction
with their enviornment. Relfection on daily activities is a type of behavior that is
triggered through the enviornement and interaction with HR system.
However, there is less evidence to support an association between PE and RE
and has not been a subject of empirical research. Based on HR system strength theory
(Bowen & Ostroff, 2004), Bednall et al. (2014) studied the effect of HR system
(content and process) on ILAs including RE. Their study lacks in observing the
psychological perspective of HRSS theory. The creation of psychological climate and
empowerment among employees lead to the desired behaviors and attitudes (Ostroff
& Bowen, 2014). It is argued that PE is a motivational construct which deals with the
cognition of employees and stimulate desired behavior like RE. Therefore, we
hypothesize the following:
Hypothesis 2a: There is a direct, positive and significant relationship between
PE and RE.
93
2.15.2.2 Psychological Empowerment and Knowledge Sharing
KS is recognized vastly as a source of competitive advantage (Argote et al.,
2003). It improves the individual ability and efficiency in problem solving by creating
the organizational memory (Argote & Ingram, 2000; Feiz et al., 2017). PE is a
motivational aspect in which employees are inspired and motivated to share
knowledge at work. The psychologically empowered employees consider KS as a part
of their job (Spreitzer, 1995). So, it can be said that employees share knowledge with
others if they are psychologically empowered to share their experiences and
knowledge (Sadegh, 2015).
PE is the perceptions of employees and feeling of power to deal with events,
situations and problems (Thomas & Velthouse, 1990). It is a set of motivational
cognitions shaped by work environment (Spreitzer, 1995). Organizations should
involve their employee in work by empowering the willpower and degree of
sovereignty among them. Focusing on employees' empowerment, Conger and
Kanungo (1988); Quinn and Spreitzer (1997); and Siegall and Gardner (2000)
concluded that empowerment comes up with the two-way causal relationship between
employees’ personal control and organizational outcomes. It motivates employees and
makes them enthusiastic to take control of work opportunities in the best interest of
organization. The leaders’ role is also important for empowering employee to share
their knowledge (Han et al, 2016; Fong & Snape, 2015; Wallace, 2011).
Previous studies found that employees share knowledge with colleagues if
they are psychologiclly empwoerd to share (Seibert et al., 2011; Ozbebek &
Kiliçarslan 2011; Srivastava et al., 2006). The relationship between pscyhological
empowerment and knowledge shairng is empirically examined for employee working
is service business (Ozbebek & Kilicarslan 2011). Messersmith et al. (2011) found a
positive relationship of HR practices with PE. In addition, the empowered teachers
participate in critical decisions that directly affect learning and teaching (Dee et al.,
2003). Empowerment facilitates teachers by enhancing professionalism, improving
quality of work and heightening sense of conviction in terms of their own
effectiveness (Katzenmayer & Moller, 2009).
94
The PE has received less attention (Dee et al., 2003). The relationship between
PE and KS is yet to be re-examined for faculty members working in HEIs. Based on
HRSS (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004) and social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986) the PE is
a motivational construct and positive job attitude that influences employee’s
behaviors. So, we hypothesize the following:
Hypothesis 2b: There is a direct, positive and significant relationship between
PE and KS.
2.15.2.3 Psychological Empowerment and Innovative Behavior
The empowerment allow employees to improve their service delivery and
rectify mistakes by bringing change in the work processes (Fernandez &
Moldogaziev, 2012). PE foster the performance and behavioral change through social
learning (Wallace et al., 2011). Social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986), provided the
fremwork to link psychologicl empowement with innovative behaivor. The IB
requries extra effort on behalf of employee. Their cognitive state help and motivate
them to be innovative and creative in their work. Personal value of employee and their
competency influence their innovative behaivor. When employee perceive their work
is making differences in other life they find new ways of doing their work.
Spreitzer et al. (1999) examines the relationship between PE and leadership.
They proved that the empowered supervisor are more foucsed, inspirational and
influential. It is of worth studying the influnece of individual’s cognitive state, that is
psychological empowement (Thomas & Velthouse, 1990; Spreitzer, 1995) on the
individual behaivor. Empowered employees promote new ideas and bring enthusiasm
in the workplace (Sarkar & Singh, 2012). The PE allows employees in releasing their
potential, being innovative in their work, groups or organization (Palaniammal et al.,
2016).
It is also argued that PE of employees plays a vital role in developing the
employees and promoting learning through IB (Spreitzer, 1995; Bhatnagar, 2012).
According to Ayoub et al., (2018) the psychologically empowered employees display
creative mindset and it is linked with creative performance of employees. Studies like
(Knol & Linge, 2009) found that PE positively linked with IB. Recently Trust (2017)
95
found that motivation and empowerment facilitate teachers to improve, change and
adopt new practices. Thus, we hypothesize the following:
Hypothesis 2c: There is a direct, positive and significant relationship between
PE and IB.
2.15.3 Perceptions of Performance Appraisal Quality and Informal
Learning Activities
Employees participate in in ILAs when they have confident about their
abilities to complete their jobs successfully (Smylie, 1988). By having the
organizational support and sufficient time, the employees can actively participate in
those informal activities to improve their skills and abilities (Noe & Wilk, 1993). In
terms of organizational content, human resource practices can help organization in
conducting such learning activities and formulating performance appraisals which
provide an insight to the performance feedback to overcome the weaknesses, and to
enhance the effectiveness of the individuals and organization (DeNisi & Sonesh,
2010).
The effect of performance appraisal and praticularly PPAQ on IL is not well
studied in literature. The literature suggests that performance feedback can develop
interest towards auto didacticism and self-learning (Kamphorst & Swank, 2018). On
the basis of available research, it can be concluded that effectively delivered feedback
can improve employee performance, so the quality in performance appraisal would
increase the participation in ILAs (Bednall et al., 2014; Brown et al., 2010).
The argument that the employees tend to leave the organization when they
find their job boring and uninteresting is widely accepted (Boxall et al., 2003).
Employees’ perceptions of quality in performance appraisal motivates them to
perform well and remain committed to organizational goals. The objective of
performance appraisal is to improve employee performance (Brown et al., 2010). The
research recognizing performance appraisal as a control system argues that the
effectiveness of performance appraisal is depending on the quality and amount of
feedback (Roberts, 2003). A study by Brown et al., (2010) found that the low-quality
96
performance appraisal leads to dissatisfaction of employees with their job, less
committed and are more likely to quit their job.
The performance appraisal system is important because it helps the
organization for developing the employees’ capabilities (Smith, 1987). A notable
study of Ngari and Ndirangu (2014) in which they evaluated the impact of
performance appraisal quality on employee performance. Their study was carried out
in the context of investment management firms in Kenya. So, it can be said that high
quality performance appraisal system determines the organizational success or failure
as employees feel more determined and competent in fulfilling their duties that is
important to any organization.
The effects of HRM and specifically PPAQ on encouraging ILAs have been
less well-studied. The feedback provided by the supervisor can promote self-directed
learning. These feedbacks are considered as the only antecedent of self-monitoring
(Kwakman, 2003). Self-assessment is another criterion to promote learning (Kruger &
Dunning, 1999). With the exception of above mentioned studies, very little is known
about how HRM system affect employee performance in terms of ILAs. The feedback
on the content of HRM system (i.e. performance appraisal) provided by the supervisor
is important.
This perceptive feedback from supervisor or managers is useful in
encouraging employees to treat mistake as learning opportunities. The supervisors and
managers are the main interference between employee and a frim. The supervisors are
responsible for the implementation of HR practices in best interest of organization to
achieve organizational strategic objectives. (Nankervis et al; 2005). In addition, the
perceived HR practices for professional development motivate employees to increase
their performance through participation in ILAs.
Following HRSS theory it can be argue that the content of HRM (i.e. specific
HR practice) plsys a vital role in the development of desired behaviors among
employees. The developments of hyptheses for PPAQ on ILAs (RE, KS and IB) are
explained in sub-sequent sections:
97
2.15.3.1 Perceptions of Performance Appraisal Quality and Reflection
According to Kamphorst and Swank (2018) the objective of performance
appraisal is twofold. First, the purpose of performance appraisal system is to serve the
company for its performance objective. Second, is to serve the employees in their best
interest and to improve their performance. These system i.e. performance appraisal
are used to maintain the record the availabe human resources in the form of skills and
abilities of employees working in an organizaiton.
Additionally, these systems are helpful is designing the mechanism thorugh
which these skills and capabilites can be used to improve performance. The
performance appraisal feedback encourgages employees by compensating their
mistakes and strengthening them for setting valuable learning goals (Bednall et al.,
2014; Zimmerman & Schunk, 2013). It can be said that the effective feedback from
supervisors and managers provided support to employee. They perceive the feedback
when it is properly communicated i.e. clarity. When the feedback meetings and
disscusions are held regularly i.e. regualrity and when supervisor communicate the
feedback with any ambiguity i.e. openess.
The affect of PPAQ on the reflective behaviors of employees are less well-
studied (Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick, 2006). The feedback promotes self-regulation and
self-monitoring thus, it is considered as an antecedent to employee participation in
ILAs (Van den Boom et al., 2004; Kwakman, 2003). The review of litereatrue
suggests that employee performance and self-regulation can be enhanced by the
effectiveness and quality of feedback. It is anticipated that the quality feedback on
performance appraisal lead to stimulate employees in ILAs.
The previous literatrue demonstrate that the perception of performance
appraisal in terms of its quality, effectiveness and fairnessness tend to increase the
employees’ job satisfaction (Darehzereshki, 2013; Brown et al., 2010; Ahmad et al.,
2010; Fletcher & Williams, 1996), affective commitment (Bekele et al., 2014; Brown
et al., 2010), work performance (Bekele et al., 2014), and decrease turnover intention
(Bekele et al., 2014; Ahmed et al., 2014).
By following the social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986) and HR system
strength theory (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004) an assertion has been made that employee
98
behaivor like reflection is stimulated thorugh the percpitons of quality in performance
appraisal. In a study by Bednall et al. (2014) PPAQ is studied as a criterion for RE.
We continue with same line of argument and it is hypothesize that:
Hypothesis 3a: There is a direct, positive and significant relationship between
PPAQ and RE.
2.15.3.2 Perceptions of Performance Appraisal Quality and Knowledge
Sharing
It is the fact that people do not follow the instructions rather they perform for
what is measured for them i.e. performance appraisal. Similarly, they participate in
KS activities if it is linked with their performance appraisal (Jain, 2005). A study by
Liu and Liu (2011) found that performance appraisal system and incentive
compensation plan indirectly effect KS behavior of R&D professional through
perceived self-efficacy of KS.
In a view of Ling et al. (2009), employees are more willing to share
knowledge if it is linked with reward and performance appraisal. O’Dell and
Grayson’s, (1998) ‘if only we knew what we know’ narrative suggests that change in
the reward system is helpful in encouraging employees to share and transf the
knowledge among colleagues. Hansen and Avital (2005) determine that the incentive
structures, organizational culture and administration are the main driving elements of
KS at firm level. Rewards, benefits and other intrinsic factors influence KS at
individual level (Lin, 2007).
Similarly, KS is used as a performance evaluation criterion in American
Management System and recognized the contribution with ‘Knowledge in action’
award (Cabrera & Cabrera, 2005). Job design/characteristics that positively influence
the three psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness are likely to
have influence on KS (Gagne, 2009). In the proposed model based on HRSS, the
performance appraisal system including the contnet of HRM (PPAQ), is a criterion of
employees performance, positively influence KS behaviors. So, We hypothesize the
following:
99
Hypothesis 3b: There is a direct, positive and significant relationship between
PPAQ and KS.
2.15.3.3 Perceptions of Performance Appraisal Quality and Innovative
Behavior
The fairness in rewards positively influence the employees’ innovative
behavior of employee working in telecom sector of Pakistan (Haq et al., 2017).
Similarly, Fernandez and Moldogaziev (2012) conclude that the performance
appraisal practices which are linked with rewards are known to have a positive impact
on innovation. Although, the performance-based reward encourages’ to be innovative
at work and display IB, but the relationship can be reverse in case of low rewards
(Fernandez & Moldogaziev, 2012).
Previous studies suggest that Leadership (De Jong & Den Hartog, 2007;
Abbas et al., 2012; Zhang & Kwan, 2018; Zhang et al., 2018), procedural justice (Kim
& Park, 2017), supervisor support (Janssen, 2005) positively affect employees’ IB.
The HR practices like performance appraisals which are designed to exploit
employee’s knowledge play an active role in the promotion of innovation and IB
(Shipton et al., 2006). It is argued that the performance appraisal quality enhances the
employees’ feelings of achievements and their constructive position in the
organization (Lind & Tyler, 1988).
In addition, the perceived HR practices for professional development
motivates teacher. These practices influence the behaviors of teachers and helpful in
generating the positive outcomes like improved interaction and teaching. Following
HR system strength theory Bednall et al., (2014) found a positive relationship
between the PPAQ and IB of teachers working in vocational education training
institutes. It is anticipated that HRM in terms of content i.e. PPAQ positively affect
the employees’ behaviors like IB. Based on HRSS theory, we continue with this line
of argument and hypothesize the following:
Hypothesis 3c: There is a direct, positive and significant relationship between
PPAQ and IB.
100
2.15.4 Mediating Role of Psychological Empowerment
The PE is basically the employee’s feelings of their worth on job or in
organization. The employees are empowered by delegating the authority and
responsibility. The HRM system plays a vital role in developing such attitudes among
employees through their performance appraisal. It is a mechanism of explaining the
behavioral outcome in a mediated relationship with external contingencies (Baron &
Kenny, 1986). PE is vibrant in different contexts (Zimmerman, 1995).
The individual HR practice or its perception is not expected to have direct
effect on employees’ outcomes. These practices create a psychological climate at
individual level which mediates the relationship (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). Likewise,
Spreitzer (1995) argues that the work context encourage innovation by
psychologically empowering employee to be innovative at work.
Fairness in rewards and open communication triggers meaningful involvement
(Haq et al., 2017) and stimulates positive attitudes and behavior among employees
(Ariyani & Hidayanti, 2018; Amabile, 1996; Janssen, 2000). Carless (2004) made an
assertion that PE mediates the relationship between appraisal and recognition and job
satisfaction. In a meta-analysis (Seibert et al., 2011) found that high performance
managerial practices influence innovation and organizational citizenship behavior
through PE.
Aryee et al., (2012) found that individual experience with high performance
work system positively influence employee PE which in turn leads to service
performance. Similarly, Bonias et al. (2010) concluded that PE mediates the
relationship between high performance work systems and perception of the quality of
care among hospital employees. In addition, PE mediates the relationship between
high-performance work system and organizational citizenship behavior (Messersmith
et al., 2011). Previously different studies have found the mediating role of PE.
Recently a study by Han et al., (2016) found that PE mediates the relationship
between transformational leadership and KS intentions of public sector Koren
employees. The similar finding is evident in a study Seibert et al., (2011) in which
they empirically demonstrated that PE has a direct and positive affect on KS.
101
Previous research proves the mediating role of PE for different organizational
and individual level constructs like, leadership (Pieterse et al., 2010), KS (Phung et
al., 2017), work engagement (Ariyani & Hidayati, 2018) and work environment
(Choi, 2007). The ‘black box’ mystery in HRSS theory suggests having a mediating
link in relationship of HRM with performance. PE among employees crated through
HRM system is more suitable mechanism in predicting the employees’ behavior like
ILAs. Therefore, it is anticipated that employees’ PPAQ in terms of its clarity,
regularity and openness give authority and psychologically empower employee to
implement new ideas, practices and methods at work. So, we hypothesize that:
Hypothesis 4a: PE mediates the relationship between PPAQ and RE
Hypothesis 4b: PE mediates the relationship between PPAQ and KS.
Hypothesis 4c: PE mediates the relationship between PPAQ and IB.
2.15.5 Moderating Role of Perceptions of HRM System Strength
The ‘black box’ question that how an HRM system affect organizational
performance is better explained through the integration of content and process
approaches (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). The content approach consists of specific HR
practice or set of practices (Khilji & Wang, 2006). The process approach is
conceptualized through the strength of an HRM system. The emphasis has been
placed on the perceptions and interpretations of an HRM system. It includes the
policies and practices followed in an HRM system (Farnadale & Sanders, 2016;
Yousaf et al., 2016; Weiner, 1985).
It is argued that employees’ attitudes and behaviors are perceived to be
strongly influenced by an HRM system (Hewett et al., 2018). The emphasis of an
HRM system is on the delivery mechanism through which the HR messages has been
communicated and delivered to employees (Nishii et al., 2008). It is how the practice
is communicated and implemented (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). The HRSS theory set
basis for strong HRM system when it is distinctive, consistent and holds consensus.
The HRM-performance linkages have been acknowledged by numerous researchers
through the process approach. Previous research demonstrates that HRM system
positively influences employees’ affective commitment (Sanders et al., 2008). The
102
employees’ satisfaction with different HR practices (Delmotte et al., 2012) is
achieved through the proper implementation of an HRM system. The strong HRM
system has a negative effect on emotional exhaustion of employees and helps them to
improve performance (Frankel et al., 2012a). It ensures the procedural and distributive
justice in implementation of different policies and plans.
Similarly, strong HRM system ensures the effectiveness of HR policies and
practices (DE Winne et al., 2012). It promotes the job or work satisfaction among
employees’ and reduces the chances of quitting the job and vigor (Li et al., 2011). The
achievement of HR targets (Hauff et al., 2017) and high quality or improved
employees’ performance is ensured through an HRM system (Guest & Conway,
2011) alongside organizational performance (Perieira & Gomes, 2012). It creates the
perceptions of organizational support (Chen & Wang, 2014), reduce job starin (Van
De Voorde & Beijer, 2015) and helps in achieving the overall job satisfaction
(Tandung, 2016)
The major premise behind the HRSS theory (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004) is that
the HR practices influence individual level attitudes and behaviors where HRM
system strength moderates the relationship (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004; Ostroff &
Bowen, 2000). The relationship between PPAQ and ILAs (RE, KS, and IB) was
moderated by the PHSS in a study by Bednall et al. (2014). They argue that the
strength of HRM system varies by context and culture. So, by anticipating the
employees’ PE in the study as a positive job attitude that is influenced by an HRM
system and re-examining the effect on ILAs, we hypothesize the followings:
Hypothesis 5a: PHSS moderates the positive relationship between PPAQ and
PE.
Hypothesis 5b: PHSS moderates the positive relationship between PPAQ and
RE.
Hypothesis 5c: PHSS moderates the positive relationship between PPAQ and
KS.
Hypothesis 5d: PHSS moderates the positive relationship between PPAQ and
IB
103
2.16 Conceptual Model
The HR system strength theory (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004) depicts that
individual, socio-cultural, organizaitonal and psychological factors interact to develop
attitude and behaviors. The HR system strength theory (HRSS) has provided support
and guides the researchers to develop a conceptual model and hypotheses. The review
of the literature provided the conceptualization of different constructs of the study.
Employees’ performance can be measured through different attitudes and
behaviors. ILAs are the employees’ behaviors that are considered as a significant
contributor to OP. The role of HRM (content and process) and its link with ILAs is
presented in a conceptual model. The theoretical model of the current study and
hypotheses development are explained under:
The premise of the current study suggest that employees perceptions of quality
in performance appraisal (PPAQ) as a support from organizaiton helps in creating
psychological climate by empowering the employee. This assertion is well supported
by HRSS theory (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). The PE of employee influence employees’
behaviors and foucus has been made on their particiatiopn in ILAs.
The social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986) provides the partial support as the
foucs of HRSS thoery on the psychological climates that emerged thorugh HRM
system (content and process). The PE mediates the relationship and PHSS by
employees moderates the underlying relationships. Based on the discussion and the
arguments provided above, the theoretical model developed for the current study is
presented in Figure 2.9. It is proposed to study HRM (PPAQ, PHSS) and ILAs (RE,
KS and IB) relationships for the faculty members of HEIs.
104
Figure 2.9: Proposed Conceptual Model
The existing literature has focused less on PHSS and workplace learning in
context of employees’ outcomes, while the role of PE is not yet explored (based on
researchers’ knowledge). This study is an effort to examine the link between PPAQ
(HRM content) and employee participation in ILAs (RE, KS and IB) through
employee PE as mediator and perceptions of HRM system strenght (HRM process) as
moderator.
This study provides an insight to explore the relationship among performance
appraisal (i.e. content of HRM), PHSS (i.e. process of HRM), PE (psychological
perspective) and employee participation in ILAs (behavioral perspective) that will
lead to employee and organizational performance. This study is intended to establish a
link between HR content i.e. PPAQ (specific HR practice) and employees feeling of
PE i.e. psychological climate as posed by Bowen and Ostroff (2004). The PE further
linked with employee participation in ILAs.
The direct relationship between PPAQ and ILAs is mediated by PE as
proposed by HRSS theory (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). In HRSS theory it is also
augmented that the PHSS moderates the relationship of PPAQ with PE by creating a
strong HRM system. Further, the moderating role of PHSS on the direct relationship
H5c
H2a
H1
H5d
H5bH3a
H5a
Mediation: H4a, H4b, H4c
Perceptionsof HRMSystem
StrengthInformal Learning
Activities
Reflection
PsychologicalEmpowerment
H2b KnowledgeSharing
H2c
H3b
InnovativeBehaviorH3c
Perceptions ofPerformance
AppraisalQuality
105
of PPAQ with PE and ILAs (RE, KS, and IB is examined for faculty members
working in HEIs of Pakistan.
This study encourages the organizations working in the higher education
sector of Pakistan to develop and implement such HR policy that foster participation
in ILAs in their workplace to achieve organization’s targets. This study explains that
how HRM can perform better to enhance employee performance in most effective,
highly motivated and timely basis. It will also examine how specific HR practice
(PPAQ i.e. content of HRM) can contribute to make proficient and committed
workforce. It will also help employees to style their proficiencies according to the
work requirements that could facilitate them in appraising their performance.
This study will also contribute in the policy and decision making regarding the
future of higher education institutes as at present this education sector lack a
systematic and comprehensive viewpoint on HRM practice. This study is significant
in term of methodical approach adopted for this study. The result and inferences will
be made based on quantitative data and it will increase the generalizability of finding
after getting support from data. This study aims to provide integrated development
plan including ILAs that drives from every day working life and it will help the
practitioners to make better decisions about HRM system and performance appraisal
in support of participation in ILAs. The next sections explain the theoretical
relationship between the studied constructs.
2.17 Summary
This chapter was intended to provide a comprehensive and complete review
of the published literature on ILAs including RE, KS and IB. The constructs of HRM
content and process i.e. PPAQ and PHSS has been explained from theory and
literature. The nature and effect of PE are reviewed with support from multiple
theories. The development and advances in constructs, their definition and
conceptualization has been discussed in detail. A thorough discussion was provided to
address the development in the theory of HRM and organizational performance
relationship and how it is linked with ILAs. Secondly the theory development in
psychosocial empowerment literature is discussed and how it is linked with attitudes
106
and behaviors. In the review of the literature the two theoretical debates are prominent
in conceptualizing the HRM and system of HRM as summarized below:
1. The first issue was whether to consider HRM system as a bundle of
interconnected practices or investigate the influence of an individual HR
practice on ILAs i.e. RE, KS and IB. The literature demonstrated that both the
perspectives have their own benefits there is a need of synergy between the
content and process of HRM system.
2. The second issue is the make decision regarding the best-practice approach of
HRM and best-fit approach of HRM. From the recent literature it is evident
that the trend in HRM has changes and the focus has been made on best-fit
HRM.
An effort has been made to understand the value of studying indirect effect of
HRM (content and process) on ILAs. Such an indirect link is established by including
the mediating variable i.e. PE and moderating variable i.e. PHSS. The PHSS is the
understanding of strong HRM system by employees. The PPAQ and PHSS and an
HRM (content and process) further create a psychological climate. These climates are
basically the employees’ feeling of psychological empowerment which in turn affects
their behavior i.e. ILAs (RE, KS and IB).
Further, in this chapter the discussion has been made on theoretical framework
with the support of different theory in which HRSS is more prominent. The model is
conceptualized to address the research questions. The HRSS theory sets foundations
for the development of conceptual framework with the support from social cognitive
theory. The behavioral theory like HRSS was employed to address employee’s
behavior, for example ILAs. The social cognitive theory provided support for PE as
mediator in the HRM system and ILAs relationship. Based on these two theories and
arguments a set of five main hypotheses were outlined.
107
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
108
3.1 Introduction
The research design enables the researcher to logically and unambiguously
address the problem statement through evidences. It is the logical and coherent
integration of different components of study to ensure that the research problem is
addressed affectively. It is a snapshot of activities like collection, measurement,
analysis and reporting of data taken from respondents. The research problem is
basically the guiding premise for selecting your methodology. The research process
comprises of research design, research methodology and data analysis. Design phase
includes, the research aims, and objectives are stated clearly (Chapter 1), the review
of published literature i.e. literature review and establishing hypotheses based on
construct relationship i.e. conceptual or theoretical framework (Chapter 2). In second
phase i.e. research methodology (current chapter 3), it provides detail about
methodology, population, sample, instruments and data collection strategies. The third
phase is related to data analysis (Chapter 4), discussion, future recommendation and
limitation (Chapter 5).
Based on philosophical paradigms, research questions and approaches to
undertaking research the methodology the researcher provides a justification for
adopting a quantitative approach to the research. Research hypotheses are already
defined, and the design of the empirical research methods is then considered. This
includes the rationale for the design of the questionnaires which are used as
instruments to collect information and measure the relevant variables included in the
hypotheses (data collection). Factors which were important in administering the
survey are discussed and finally the chapter introduces the methods used to analyze
the data.
Criteria for determining the sample, i.e. selecting HEIs for inclusion in the
research sample and the appropriateness of the selected unit of analysis for the
purposes of this research is also discussed in this section of the chapter. The strategy
for data collection i.e. methods used to obtain data from respondents in the sampled
universities is also described.
The design of the questionnaires themselves is described and in particular this
is linked to a discussion on how the researcher ensured that items included in the
109
survey instruments were appropriate and aligned with the theoretical constructs
included in the research model.
Finally, the chapter gives an introductory account of how the analysis of the
quantitative data was conducted, (the analysis itself is provided in Chapter 4) and how
conclusions about linkage between variables will be determined in order to test the
research hypotheses. Ethical issues that had to be considered in the research are also
noted.
3.2 Research Methodology
This research is undertaken to investigate the relationship between PPAQ and
three ILAs i.e. KS, IB and RE on daily activities with mediating role of PE and
moderating role of HRM system strength. The emphasis was on how HRM (content
and process) empower employees of higher education sector of Pakistan to stimulate
ILAs. Based on the HRM process theory also known as HRSS theory of Bowen and
Ostroff (2004), the hypotheses have been developed after extensive literature review.
The relationships between the constructs are causal and the idea has been
conceived in a process model. The study is focused on testing the theory and
clarification rather than theory generation. So, this study is based on the objectivism
with positivistic epistemology and deductive approach. The research is mainly
focused on quantitative research methods by taking the positivistic stance. It is
obvious that the carefully designed methodology can address the research objectives
and research questions. The objectives of the research can be achieved if research
methodology provides answers and support for the questions posed. The details on
each methodological issue and justifications are as under;
3.2.1 Research Philosophy/Paradigm
The research paradigm is a set of beliefs and views that provide guidance to
researcher or an investigation (Guba & Lincoln, 1994). It is human construction or
principles that transact the researcher’s view about inquiry and results (Denzin &
Lincoln, 2000). It defines the research philosophical orientation regarding research
process, methods and methodology (Kivunja & Kuyini, 2017). Creswell (1998)
defines paradigm as a basic set of assumptions that guide researchers’ inquiries. It
110
comprises of four elements namely, epistemology, ontology, methodology and
axiology (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Candy (1989) is known as the leader in the
paradigm research and listed three main taxonomies like positivist, interpretivist (also
known as constructivist) and critical (also known as transformative) paradigms. In
later studies (e.g. Teddlie & Tashakkori, 2003; Saba, 2003) the fourth paradigm was
introduced and known as pragmatic paradigm.
Selection of paradigm is important, and it helps researcher to make
philosophical conventions in research and it also enable in choosing instruments and
methods. This study is perception based and follows the philosophy of positivism.
According to positivism the science is the basic for true knowledge. The positivism
includes the techniques, methods and procedures that are used in natural sciences. It
provides the best framework for investigating the social science or social world. The
paradigms are important because it defines the suitable methodology for a research
(Morgan, 2007). The methodological implications of paradigm choice guide and help
the researcher in many ways. First it helps to address the research questions. Second,
it helps and guide in the process of data collection. Third, it is useful for data analysis
techniques. The positivist paradigm means that the data, collection and analysis would
be quantitative in nature and procedures.
For current study the positivist paradigm was suitable as it believes that the
truth was out there and needs to be discovered. The context was import and
generalization across context was made for current study. The prime objective of the
current study was to examine the holistic viewpoint of the relationships between
PPAQ, PHSS, PE and ILAs (RE, KS and IB) in higher education institute of Pakistan
through mediated moderation with the belief that cause, and effect relationships was
distinguishable and analytically separable. The results are quantified, and theory is
used to control and predict outcomes. The research followed the scientific method of
investigation and relies on testing of hypothesis. There was objective search for facts
and observe knowledge.
3.2.2 Research Approach
An approach to research is conscious scientific reasoning and different
approaches are attached to different viewpoints/philosophies (Saunders et al., 2009).
111
There are two approaches namely; inductive and deductive are used in research for
acquisition of new knowledge (Hyde, 2000). The third approach neither follows the
pattern of pure deduction nor the pure induction and called abductive approach and
considered as great advancement in science (Taylor et al., 2002). The decision at this
level is strongly influenced by the decision made earlier while deciding objective, aim
and limitation.
According to Saunders et al. (2009) the positivist philosophical stance starts
with the development of hypothesis and uses deductive approach. The hypotheses in
deductive research are developed prior to testing and generalization of the results. The
argumentation based on prior knowledge, results and discussion generate/produce
new knowledge. The quantitative design starts with the theory and operationalization
of constructs. Further the hypotheses are developed for different relationships.
Afterwards, the data collection, analysis and the decisions for accepting or rejecting
the hypotheses are made (Cavana et al., 2001).
In the current study the theory was first adopted in support of current study.
The theoretical framework was developed and hypotheses were formed tested in
specific research context. This is what normally followed in deductive research so the
current stud is of the deductive orientation. In this approach the major concepts, ideas
and theories are selected through the review of literature. Another reason for selecting
the deductive approach is the support from other studies in the area of performance
appraisal used this approach under the umbrella of HRM.
3.2.3 Methodological Choices
The research choices include mono method, mixed method or multi-method.
When using the single method, the choices could be quantitative or qualitative. In
mixed method usually referred to the use of both qualitative and quantitative in
combination to create a single data set (Flick, 2011). In a multi-method wider
selection of method is used and research is separated into different segments, which
produces different data set (Bryman, 2012). In multi-method research the data is
analyzed by using the techniques of quantitative or qualitative methodologies (Feilzer,
2010).
112
Quantitative and qualitative researches have different orientation, and both are
different with respect to data collection methods, the analysis techniques and the
presentation of results. The numerical or statistical data is the core of quantitative
research in contrast to descriptive narrations used in qualitative research to understand
the natural phenomenon. Qualitative research allows for a design to evolve rather
having a complete design at the beginning of study and if not possible but difficult to
predict the outcome of interaction. In contrast quantitative research is based on
deductive approach and it requires a hypothesis before research can begin.
The review of literature shows that the existing research on performance
appraisal (Brown et al., 2010), HRM system strength (Sanders et al., 2008; Mihail &
Kloutsiniotis, 2016; Sanders & Yang, 2016), informal learning activities (Runhaar &
Sanders, 2016; Keith et al., 2016, Bednall et al., 2014) have been done by using the
quantitative methods of research.
The quantitative methods are best recognized for measuring attitudes and
opinions; this stem suits the aims of current research. Second, it is difficult to conduct
the qualitative study for large population like employees working in HEIs of Pakistan.
The current study was undertaken to ascertain employee’s perceptions and
considering interview would restrict the data from limited employees. The
quantitative research approaches to large amount of respondent in a faster way. Third,
the study intends to investigate the effect of already established models and theories
in HRM and OP relationship. Forth, it was adopted because of time constraints in
contrast to qualitative research which can be quite time consuming.
Fifth, it is known for its objectivity and quantitative methods ascertain
responses without researcher influence on it which enables the researcher to compare
respondent’s opinions and attitude. According to Burns et al., (1993), the researcher
must be objective and his/her values and perceptions should not influence the study.
Last, the quantitative research also minimizes the biasness which affects the validity
of study and produces valid answers.
113
3.2.4 Research Strategy
The research strategy is the researcher plans to conduct the research. The
researcher can select from different approaches while making strategy. The benefits
and limitations are attached with each choice, so the selection should carefully give a
thorough thought to each of it. The researcher can choose more than one choice, but it
must be justified well in work. For current study we followed the survey research.
According to Bryman and Bell (2011), the survey research involves sampling
a representative proportion of the population and often linked with deductive
approach. The survey research is used in quantitative research projects and produce
quantitative data for empirical analysis. It is mostly used to examine the causal
relationship with different type of data. It is known as finest and economical research
strategy to collect the rich and reliable data. We are using the survey research because
it allows collection of huge data to answer the, who, where, when and how of your
research.
3.2.5 Time Horizon
It is basically related to time for the research study in which the project is
intended to complete. In literature two types of time framework were specified; the
cross-sectional and the longitudinal study (Bryman, 2012). For current study we are
adapting the cross-sectional design. In cross-sectional study the data is collect at a
certain point and used when the research is undertaken to study the phenomenon at a
specific time. Majority of studies had undertaken cross-sectional studies to answer a
question or solve a problem at time (Flick, 2013). Normally in cross-sectional studies
grounded theory, case study, survey and limited experimental strategies are used
whereas; in longitudinal study the data is collected over a longer period or extended
over time. The doctoral degree research generally defines a time line and limited
resource so for current research cross-sectional framework was selected.
3.2.6 The purpose of the Research
The purpose of this research is explanatory and is undertaken to explore the
relationship between variable. The explanatory study is objective, normally uses
114
literature reviews, survey questionnaire and sometime interviews and focused group
studies to investigate the relationship between variables.
3.2.7 Data Collection and Data Analysis
The decision regarding best fit of data and analysis is critical for research.
Whatever approach is followed in data collection, it is categorized in two types;
primary and secondary data. In current study we have collected the primary data
through self-administered questionnaire.
Primary data is known as the data collected or derived from first hand-sources
either through survey questionnaire, interview or historical data (Bryman, 2012).
When it is historical data it means that it was not necessarily collected for research
being undertaken like statistical surveys, census, and data derived from other
researchers and stock records. Thus, “primary data is one which is being analyzed
itself rather than through the prism of another analysis” (Flick, 2013).
This section of research guides researcher to decide about the type and nature
of data required and decision regarding sample groups and content of questionnaire is
made. The researcher must ensure synchronization among philosophical assumption,
strategies, choices and time-horizon while deciding about data and tools. The
summary is presented in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1: Summary of Research Process
Purpose of research Explanatory
Research philosophy/paradigm Positivist
Research approach Deductive
Research Methodology Quantitative
Research Strategy Survey research
Time Horizon Cross-Sectional
Data collection Primary data
Data collection process Self-administered questionnaire
115
3.3 Industry Setting
The education system of a country set basis for growth and development. It
plays a critical role in its cultural, political, social and economic development. The
developed economies around the globe are supporting their education system by
developing consistent policies and through realistic plans (Majoka & Khan, 2017).
The Pakistani Higher Educational sector has grown rapidly over the past twenty years
and is now one of the most important sectors in Pakistan's economy.
Among the reasons for this is that not only there is a high level of demand
from Pakistani students who wish to achieve a higher education qualification but there
is also a large demand from international economies for skilled human capital. The
major reforms in Higher Education Sector of Pakistan can be traced back after 1999
when democratic government was overthrown by the military. The military led
regime was helpful in the development of higher education sector of Pakistan.
The Higher Education Commission of Pakistan (HEC) was established in 2002
and they initially introduced a five-year plan. The emphasis was given on the socio-
economic development and technological advancement through vibrant education
sector. The focus of the policies was on quality of higher education and improvement
of accessibility. The emphasis has been given to science and technology in addition to
increased enrolment. The public and private sector was very liberal in order to
enhance access to higher education.
Because of this liberty there is threefold increase in the number of degree
awarding institutes/universities in the country. The number of HEIs has increased
from 42 in 1980 to 175 in 2016 (Mahmood, 2016). Currently there are 115 public
sector HEIs in Pakistan in addition to 79 private sector universities/institutes. This
rapid increase in establishing HEIs was overwhelming and posed considerable
challenges for the HEC Pakistan which is responsible for overseeing the accreditation
and quality assurance of universities operating within the country.
The infrastructure development, quality enhancement and financial issues are
the problem faced by these newly developed universities/institutes. In this regard, the
initiatives like creation of endowment funds; faculty development; revision in service
116
structure; strengthening the libraries and laboratories; national (industry) and
international linkages were quite helpful in enhancing the quality education (Majoka
& Khan, 2017).
The HEC Pakistan, working in cooperation with the Quality Assurance
Agency (QAA), implemented a rigorous quality assurance system and established the
Quality Assurance Committee (QAC) to review all aspects of higher education in
Pakistan to safeguard public interest. QAC instituted a system of program reviews
(which focused on the quality and standard of the degrees provided by universities)
and institutional reviews (which have a broader remit to examine the overall quality
assurance arrangements and governance of universities).
Participation in the review process was compulsory for all universities and
those who failed to meet the standards required by external audit by QAC or put in
place suitable improvement plans could potentially have programs of study
discontinued or even lose their license to provide degrees in Pakistan. The system of
reviews posed considerable challenges to universities and most importantly, it
compelled them to examine very carefully how they could enhance their
organizational performance.
This background is very relevant to the research presented here. The system of
program reviews required universities to report on the systems which they had in
place to assure the quality of academic staff, demonstrate how staff were appraised
and also demonstrate that there was a robust system in place to deal with staff
development and promotion opportunities for academic staff. The system for
institutional reviews also had a very strong focus on institutional governance and of
standards which universities were required to demonstrate, one standard (which it was
compulsory to demonstrate had been achieved or the institution would be given a
judgement of ‘no confidence’) was devoted entirely to HRM.
Based on the above discussion, HEIs clearly had to re-examine the processes
and procedures they had in place for HRM and in particular, in order to comply with
the standards, had to demonstrate that their HRM practices were strategic. Their
interest in HRM practices arises from the desire to satisfy the requirements of the
QAA in order to keep their accreditations and to remain competitive or at least
117
survive in a highly competitive environment. HEIs that meet the QAA requirements
should be well positioned to enroll a high number of students which is the principal
revenue stream for HEIs operating in Pakistan.
HEIs in Pakistan are thus now fully aware of the need to have better HRM
practices to gain competitive advantage. This awareness has been translated into a
continuous search for methods of developing, training, retaining, selection, recruiting,
and performance appraisal and other practices to enhance their staff and faculty
members. In Pakistan, all HEIs are required to have a special (separate) department to
assure implementation of a quality system. All academic and administrative
departments must work with the Quality Enhancement Centre/Cell or department to
meet the requirements of quality assurance Agency (QAA) and the HEC (Mahmood,
2016).
Competitive advantage within HEIs in Pakistan requires high performance
employees, whether they are administrators or faculty staff. It is important not to
overstate the case that HEIs in Pakistan are being compelled to put in place better
HRM practices because of the requirement of external review. Some HEIs have
clearly accepted that, as this thesis proposes, there is a close relationship between
HRM practices and employee performance in term of their participation in ILAs and
thus organizational performance. In this study, this relationship will be tested
empirically in public sector HEIs operating in Pakistan.
There are many cases where clearly HRM practice should stimulate
participation in informal learning. For instance, a low turnover rate in personnel at the
university should reduce the need to acquire and integrate new workers into the
quality system. Another example is that the success in achieving and sustaining
competitive advantage in universities should clearly depend on training and
development of employees, performance assessments, procedures of selecting and
appointing employee, and other HRM practices. However, it is important that this is
not simply assumed to be the case and there is thus a need to demonstrate this clearly.
It is important in the context of this to examine how employee development through
their participation in ILAs is shaped and influenced by performance appraisal in
Pakistan.
118
3.4 Population
Specification of the scope of empirical studies in the HRM field should be
conducted according to the objectives and research model that the researcher has
designed and must be very careful to give a detailed description of the context in
which they were undertaken (Wright & Gardner, 2003). This is true of both
qualitative and quantitative studies (although arguably much more important in the
former). Hence, the current study, focused on Pakistani HEIs which shared a large
number of common characteristics. The selection was done after a brainstorming
session where research associates, lecturers, assistant professor, associate professor
and professors has provided their honest opinion of workplace learning and the role of
HRM system and HR practices in stimulating formal and more specifically informal
learning at workplace.
Moreover, these faculty members were asked about the relationship among
quality of performance appraisal and their feeling of empowerment to participate and
engage in ILAs. Almost all the faculty members from the selected organization
confirmed the role of informal learning in promoting quality in teaching and research
and also highlighted the organizational factors specifically the HR policies and
practices for facilitating such practices. The HEIs operating under Higher Education
Commission includes degree awarding institutes, universities and research centers.
This study is focused only on public sector Pakistani HEIs where HRD and
workplace learning programs have been developed and implemented for the faculty
members as compared to private sector HEIs. These development programs are useful
in transferring knowledge and skills. The world is changing rapidly and known as
knowledge-economy in which the development needs must be satisfied. The research
setting has been selected based on the following criteria:
1. The Pakistani HEI/Universities has been characterized as one of the
important sectors for the development and growth of economy in terms of
education and research. It means the developed and skilled workforce is the
requirement of this sector. For sustainable development of HEIs and
education sectors the employees are required to learn more by themselves.
2. The Pakistani HEIs and HEC have been providing assistance to employees
119
by offering different faculty development programs that include foreign and
indigenous scholarships as well. These programs are designed to meet a
specific set of learning objectives.
3. The faculty members of these HEIs participate in different formal and
informal learning programs and activities. The faculty members can judge
better their work and informal learning needs, based on their experience and
social demand.
4. The faculty members are required to develop their knowledge and skills in
dealing with daily challenges related to their job that they encounter at the
workplace.
5. The appraisal systems, HR practices, culture and employee development
programs are almost identical because of facing the cut throat competition in
education industry.
3.5 Sampling
The sampling part of methodology chapter is concerned with implementing
the quantitative approach principles. In terms of samples for HR research we agree
with the assertion of Pfeffer and Jeffrey (1998). They argue that, to obtain meaningful
results of the study on HRM practices selecting specific industry is more appropriate
than cross-industry studies. In addition, the economic conditions of all the firms in
same industry are almost constant. Further the HEIs in Pakistan are classified as
private and public sector. There are the chances of having different economic and
budgetary condition between the two sectors. Therefore, the current study focuses
only on public sector HEIs as they hold the same funding source i.e. government
funding.
Academic staff (faculty members) from twelve public sector HEIs operating in
Pakistan, have participated in the study. Collectively, these form the unit of analysis
which reflects university/institute level as the organizational unit of analysis for
several reasons. This is important for two reasons. First, the institution level survey
(i.e. HEIs in this case) is more reliable in HRM research than corporate level surveys
(Gerhart et al., 2000). The managers are well aware of HRM practices that are being
implemented at their organization unless it is extraordinary large (see also Takeuchi,
R. et al., 2007).
120
Second, while the ability of managers, employee and academic staff at a
university may certainly affect variation in performance at different levels (in this
case at university/institute or Departmental level). However, much university/institute
HRM activity occurs at the university/institute level. As subunits of a single
organization, these faculties follow a central HRM strategy and almost all follow
HRM procedures that are common across the university/institute.
To follow the quantitative approach in this study, it is important that the
sample represents the wider population (i.e. Pakistani HEIs). The generalizability of
the research depends upon the participation of people to a certain extent (number).
The selected individuals are the representative of a larger group or population, so
sampling is critical. Further, the data collection was a big challenge for researcher
because of the complete list of faculty members were not available with researcher so
random sampling was not possible.
The random sampling techniques is useful when complete list of participate
from population is available with researcher (Saunders & Thornhill, 2012). It is better
to use non-probability sampling technique for generalization when complete list of
participants is not available in a given context (Guo & Hussey; 2004). In catering
these constraints researcher used the personal references and convenience sampling
techniques was adopted for data collection. It was used as a technique to construct a
sample of employee as the survey asked for sensitive personal and organization
information (Saunders & Thornhill, 2012).
The self-administered questionnaire is used and data from the faculty members
of twelve public sector universities/institutes of Islamabad region is collected. The
Islamabad is a capital of Pakistan and almost the representation for all over country is
available in term of human capital. The questionnaires were distributed before the
prior approval from administration and consent from faculty members are also taken
in verbal along with covering note. A brief orientation of study and guidance are
explained by the researcher.
The selected institutes/universities are presented in Table 3.2.
121
Table 3.2: Summary of Responses
Name Faculty Q/Distributed Q-Filled
Air University 135 30 18
Allama Iqbal Open University 151 30 17
Bahria University (Islamabad, Karachiand Lahore Campus) 556 50 32
COMSATS University Islamabad(Islamabad, Abbottabad, Attock,Lahore, Wah, Vehari, Sahiwal andVirtual Campus)
2475 100 83
Federal Urdu University of Arts,Sciences & Technology (Islamabad andKarachi Campus)
497 50 29
Institute of Space Technology 138 40 18
International Islamic University 456 50 26
National Defense University 67 20 9
National University of ModernLanguages (Islamabad, Lahore,Faislamabad, Pershawar, Multan,Karachi, Hyderabad, Quetta, Campuses)
680 50 28
National University of Sciences &Technology 1135 100 71
Pakistan Institute of Engineering &Applied Sciences 140 40 28
Quaid-i-Azam University 256 40 18
Total 6809 600 377
The sample of this study consists of all Pakistani public HEIs that meet the
following criteria:
1. All the HEIs charted by the federal government of Pakistan and operate in the
territory of federal capital Islamabad.
2. The public sector HEIs that attained the degree awarding status before the year
2017-2018.
122
3. The number of academic staff (full time faculty members) is considered as an
indicator of university size, and only universities with more than 50 full time
faculty members were selected. It is believed that minimum firm size is
required to identify organizations with an explicit or formalized HRM.
4. Public sector HEIs that have Quality Enhancement Cell (QEC) or Quality
Assurance (QA) department functional to meet the criteria of HEC. This again
ensures that there is a degree of uniformity in the sample as this provides an
important indicator of quality of the universities and the adoption of robust
practices across the university to deliver that quality.
This study deals with organizational level construct (faculty PHSS & PPAQ)
and ILAs (RE, KS and IB) at the operational level. PPAQ affect all academic and
administrative staff. Since the faculty members are more engaged and involved in
ILAs, the study sample includes faculty members at all levels (designation wise &
program wise). Surveying academics will provide an opportunity to understand the
public sector HEIs comprehensively and as part of the competitive business
environment for higher education in Pakistan.
3.6 Measurement and Scales
The study used self-administered questionnaire to test the impact of PPAQ on
ILAs (RE, KS and IB) with the mediating role of PE and the moderating role of
PHSS. The questionnaire is used to collect the data because it is considered as less
expensive, invite quick responses, reduce bias, and provide objective view, stable and
dependable measure without variations in addition to time constraint and budgetary
issues. The study involves measuring employees’ perception and attitude towards
performance appraisal quality; surveys give us an option to collect responses from
large number of employees to get a broad view of their opinion.
The questionnaire consists of five sections with covering note from researcher.
The first section consists of the scales on three ILAs namely, RE, KS and IB. The
items to measure the HRM Distinctiveness, HRM Consistency and HRM Consensus
were listed in the second section to measure employees’ perception of HRM System
Strength. In third section items selected to measure PPAQ was listed. The fourth
section was consisting of scales on meaning, competence, self-determination and
123
impact to measure employees’ PE. In last section employees were asked to provide
the personal/demographic information.
We adopted the identical/existing scale from literature that had been shown
reliable in other studies. Use of standard questionnaires used in previous studies
should provide consistency and a strong basis for comparison of results with other
research. All items (other than personal characteristics) were measured using 5-point
Likert scale (1=Totally Disagree, 5=Totally Agree). The 5-point Likert scale is
considered as reasonable for measuring perceptions, ease in use, better reflection and
accuracy of participants’ objective evaluation.
The descriptive statistics such as mean (M), standard deviation (SD),
skewness, kurtosis and reliability (α) measures are presented and discussed in the
section of “Descriptive statistics and Reliability of Measures”. The standardized items
were used to measure the variable in present research. The brief overview of the
measures used is explained under.
3.6.1 Informal Learning Activities
The first section is to ascertain the response from employee about their
participation in ILAs. Three activities RE, KS and IB have been undertaken to
measure the employee participation in informal learning.
‘Reflection’ was accessed by using the RE scale developed by Van Woerkom
(2003). The scale consists of 4-item which measures the extent to which faculty
members believed that they could control the reinforcement of their actions to
increase their performance. A sample item is “I check if I move forward in reaching
my goals in my job”. The Composite Reliability (CR) was 0.921.
‘Knowledge sharing with colleagues’ was accessed by using the KS scale
developed by Van Woerkom (2003). The 4-item scale measures the degree to which
faculty members cooperate, share their knowledge and experiences, and ask advice
that could improve their performance. A sample item is “I discuss problems in my
classroom teaching with others in order to learn from them”. The CR was 0.947.
124
Innovative behavior was measured using the IB scale developed by De Jong
and Den Hartog (2005). The 5-item scale is selected to measure the degree to which
faculty members search for new idea, involved in promoting the idea within
workgroup or organization and implement it to improve performance. A sample item
is “I promote and defend my innovative ideas to others”. The CR was 0.924.
3.6.2 Perceptions of Performance Appraisal Quality
The PPAQ (HRM content) questions were taken from the work of Bednall et
al., (2014). They developed the questionnaire from high-commitment HRM scale of
Sanders et al. (2008). The 3-item scale was intended to assess the clarity (“In
performance appraisals I get clear feedback on my performance”), regularity (“My
supervisor regularly holds performance appraisal conversation with me”), and
openness (“Supervisors keep open communications with me in the job”) of feedback
from received from supervisor. The CR was 0.912.
3.6.3 Perceptions of HRM System Strength
The strength in HRM system considers that the messages communicated to
employees are clear, consistent and unambiguous. It communicates them about the
behaviors that are expected and rewarded (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). The PHSS was
measured using a composite of 3 subscales from Delmotte et al. (2012) measurement
study. The sub-scales assess distinctiveness, consistency and consensus.
Distinctiveness is about the degree to which the content of HRM is clear,
legitimate and understandable. The distinctiveness scale consists of 6-items. A sample
item is “The procedures and practices developed by HR are easy to understand”. The
CR was 0.939.
Consistency is about the extent to which the HR messages are aligned with HR
system. The consistency scale consists of 6-items. A sample item is “The suggestions,
procedures, and practices that HR comes up with actually contribute to the better
functioning of this organization”. The CR was 0.947.
Consensus refers to the fairness and agreement among decision makers at all
levels in communicating the need and purpose of different HR practices. The
125
consensus scale consists of 4-items. A sample item is “The people in our organization
responsible for HR have a mutual agreement about how to deal with employees”. The
CR was 0.957.
PHSS was also measured as a composite of distinctiveness, consistency and
consensus and the CR for composite scale was 0.965.
3.6.4 Psychological Empowerment
As a construct, PE has traditionally been assessed as a composite of four sub-
scales or cognitions. It includes meaning, competence, self-determination, and impact
as perceived by employees (Spreitzer, 1995). The 12-item scale developed by
Spreitzer (1995) is used to measure these four cognitions (3-items for each sub-scale).
Her work is very widely used in the literature and it has almost become a standard for
questionnaire on PE.
Meaning refers to the level of fit between person’s beliefs and the value of
work. The meaning scale consists of 3-items. A sample item is “My job activities are
personally meaningful to me”. The CR was 0.957.
The competence refers to the employees’ belief in their abilities to perform the
tasks. The competence scale consists of 3-items. A sample item is “I am self-assured
about my capabilities to perform my work activities”. The CR was 0.951.
The self-determination refers to the decision of employees regarding initiating
work-related activities. The self-determination scale consists of 3-items. A sample
item is “I have significant autonomy in determining how I do my job”. The CR was
0.955.
Finally, impact is an employees’ feeling of having control or influence on
work. The impact scale consists of 3-items. A sample item is “I have a large impact
on what happens in my section of this department”. The CR was 0.966.
PE was also measured as a composite of meaning, competence, self-
determination and impact. The CR for the composite scale was 0.965.
126
3.6.5 Demographics and Control Variables
In current study the information related to demographic such as age, gender,
educational level, marital status, current job position, personal income and work
experience were collected in the study. Participants were asked to provide their name
and name of the serving institute/university. Age was measured on a 6-point ordinal
scale, ranging from 1 (20–24 years) to 6 (45 years and above). The respondents were
asked to indicate their gender (1=male, 2=female), marital status (1=married,
2=unmarried and 3=other), education (1=masters, 2=PhD and 3=post-doctoral
degree), current job position (1=research associate/teaching assistant, 2= lecturer,
3=assistant professor, 4=associate professor, 5=professor and 6=other).
The participants were asked to provide their personal income with nine
income brackets of twenty thousand intervals starting from 20,000. To determine the
work experience in current organization respondents were asked to provide feedback
on four options (1=less than 1 year, 2=1-5 years, 3=6-10 years and 4=more than 10
years.
In studies control variables are used to increase the statistical strength,
decreases the terms of errors and possibility of alternative conclusions. The current
study used age and gender as control variable in structural model. These two variables
were assumed to effect employee’s RE, KS (Bendall et al., 2014) and IB (Janssen,
2000; 2005; Bendall et al., 2014).
3.7 Research ethics
Ethics in research is important (Sekaran, 2003) and it is more important when
interaction with respondent is made during the data collection (Polonsky & Waller,
2011). Polonsky and Waller (2011) suggested that the researcher should ensure the
voluntary participation of respondents, communicating informed consent, expected
benefits and major findings, privacy and secrecy of respondents and responses,
possibility of damage and there should not be any conflict of interest among the
respondents and researcher. Cooper and Emory (1995) have outlined the same
guidelines to address the ethical issue.
127
In current study ethics was on top during survey and followed the advices as
discussed above. The faculty members from selected universities/institutes have been
approached after taking permission from administration. The copy of questionnaire
had also been presented to administration and they were briefed on objectives of the
study. Other steps include the cover letter of questionnaire (Annex-A) with brief
objective and benefits expected from research. Moreover, the researcher showed
respect to participants’ rights of privacy regarding revealing or keeping confidential
their information and identities. Lastly, the survey has been conducted in a non-
contrived and natural working environment where the researcher interference was
minimal.
3.8 Pilot Study
To check the internal reliability of the scale, Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient
was calculated. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients of 0.7 or higher are considered
acceptable and this was the case for all the scales used. Then, correlation between the
factors was used to calculate whether these variables are interdependent or not. Again,
calculation of correlation indicated that those variables were consistent and that they
do not contradict each other. Face validity of the questionnaire was checked using the
view of specialists i.e. subject matter experts (SME) in this field and taking notes of
respondent’s comments in the pilot questionnaire to clarify the questionnaire before it
was widely distributed. Note that as part of the pilot the researcher made a minor
modification to the way the scale was phrased and replaced the words ‘our VET
school’ with ‘our organization’ (which could have suited the study context).
Similarly, the PE scale which used the anchors (1= Strongly Disagree, 5= Strongly
Agree), as shown in Appendix I. The instrument was pilot tested through distributing
the questionnaire among fifty faculty members from the sample. Results of the pilot
study reflected the fact that the questionnaire was clear and appropriate for gathering
the data which the researcher required.
128
3.9 Evaluation of Underlying Assumptions of Multivariate
Data
For the estimation of multivariate structural model, the data should be
accurate, reliable (consistent) and normally distributed. The researcher should assess
the data characteristics in terms of missing values, outliers, and normality of data. The
variables in structural equation models are correlated with each other and their
statistical dependence must be considered while analyzing such data. If the underlying
assumption of missing value, normality and multivariate outlier are addressed in
preliminary analysis than further analysis estimates would be more accurate.
3.9.1 Missing Values Analysis
When survey research is used for data collection in social sciences, the
problem of missing data is obvious. It arises because the respondent fails to answer
one or more question. To meet the assumption of multivariate data analysis the
researcher should check for any missing values in the data. The analysis should
determine the percentage of missing value for a construct or case. The data with less
than 5% missing value per indicator or per case (respondent) should be considered for
analysis in PLS structural equation modeling.
The missing values can be replaced with the mean value; expectation
maximization algorithm can be generated or replaced with nearest neighbor (Hair et
al., 2010). These replacements bring little change in the estimates of PLS-SEM. The
second option is the case wise deletion of missing value. The latter option was opted
for current study and 17 cases with missing value were systematically deleted form
data set. It was ensured that the deleted cases are not from same group i.e. same
institute/university and secondly do not diminish the observations at large which
cannot bias the results.
3.9.2 Multivariate Outliers
The next step in multivariate data analysis is the determination of suspicious
response patterns or inconsistent answers known as outliers. The outliers influence the
ordinary least squares (OLS) regression in PLS-SEM, so the researcher should
129
evaluate the data for such issues (Hair et al., 2010). For current study Mahalanobis D2
statistics was used to detect the multivariate outliers in the data. The chi-square
distribution with degree of freedom process is followed to determine the value of D2.
The total number of independent variables is used as degree of freedom for chi-square
distribution. The D2 value of 0.005 or less is used for the determination of multivariate
outlier. The D2 value of the all cases in current study was examined and no case was
detected as a multivariate outlier.
3.9.3 Normality Test
When questionnaire is used to collect the data than the researcher should
address the issue of data distribution in multivariate data analysis. The data must be
examined for the assumption of normal distribution (Hair et al., 2010). The PLS-SEM
do not require the data to be normally distributed however it is important to verify the
normality of data because non-normal data can be problematic is the assessment of
parameter’s significance (Hair et al., 2017). Hair et al. (2013) provide guidelines to
access the normality by screening the skewness and kurtosis value in absence of
complete test for multivariate normality. The value of skewness and kurtosis between
-1 and +1 is considered excellent and the value between -2 and +2 is acceptable. In
current study the calculated values of skewness and kurtosis are within the acceptable
range of -2 and +2 so the data is considered normal for further analysis.
3.10 Data Analysis
In analysis phase the causal relationship among the studied variables were
examined. The data was collected through self-administered questionnaire from the
faculty members of twelve public sector universities/institute of Islamabad region.
Structural equation modeling (SEM) has been used to study the relationship among
the studied variables. To test the relationship in structural model and estimating the
measurement model we used Partial Least Squares (PLS) or more specifically
SmartPLS v. 3.2.7 (Ringle et al., 2017) in current study.
PLS was selected because it is suitable and recommended where the model is
complex, and relationships are many like; direct, indirect, interaction term etc. (Chin,
2010a; 2010b; Hair et al., 2011; Henseler et al., 2009). It provides the variance-based
130
analysis and allows freedom in distribution of variables. PLS has various strengths
that made it suitable for data analysis, including its soft distributional assumptions, its
flexibility in modeling higher-order constructs, and its ability to handle complex
research models such as the combination of mediating and moderating effects The
current study was aiming to find the variation in multiple dependent variables with the
effects of independent, mediating and moderating variable so PLS-SEM was selected
for data analysis.
3.10.1 Structural Equation Modelling (SEM)
Hair et al. (2011) are of the opinion that Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)
is the latest technique that has been used by researcher for data analysis. It facilitates
in testing the difficult and complex relationships among the variables. Structural
equation modeling facilitates the inclusion of latent constructs of variable. SEM
acquired the attention of researcher in the last two decades and remarkable rise is
observed in the interest and utilization of structural equation modelling.
SEM is a multivariate analytical technique (MAV) that is used to test and
estimate the difficult and complex relationship concurrently (Hair et al., 2016). SEM
allows researcher to test the multi-level dependent relationship in which a dependent
variable (DV) become an independent variable (IV) at same time in a model. SEM
enables the researchers to evaluate measurement models and structural model more
effectively. In structural model of SEM, it allows multiple dependent variables, multi-
dimensional latent variables with indicators in a model. It is effective tool to assess
the direct, indirect, total and interaction effect in a model (Hair et al., 2011).
There are two types of methods used in structural equation modeling:
covariance-based techniques known as CB-SEM (Hair et al., 2014; Joreskog, 1993)
and variance-based PLS-SEM (Hair et al., 2014; Lohmoller, 2013). The both
techniques share the same roots. CB-SEM develops covariance matrix on structural
equation and focused on decreasing the differences between the theoretical and
estimated covariance matrix. To apply CB-SEM, the data should be normal with
minimum sample size.
131
Hair et al. (2011) suggested using PLS-SEM when strict assumption of CB-
SEM cannot be fulfilled, and researchers are interested to study the complex models
without the rigid assumption of normality of data. The partial least squares (PLS)
approach used in structural equation modeling (SEM) is considered adequate for
prediction of causal modeling or theory building. It can also useful in theory
confirmation and it enables the researcher to explain variance in applications (Sarkar
et al., 2001).
PLS-SEM is an alternative of CB-SEM with relaxing the demands on data and
specification of relationship (Dijkstra, 2010; Jöreskog & Wold, 1982). While
examining the structural equation models (SEM) or complex models, PLS (Partial
Least Squares) is considered as a valuable technique and increasingly applied in
testing of such models. The variance-based modeling is used in PLS-SEM estimation
(Hair et al., 2014).
CB-SEM is like multiple regression (MR) when analyzing the relationships
whereas PLS-SEM uses ordinary least squares (OLS) technique of regression and
minimize the errors and increases R2 (Hair et al., 2011). PLS-SEM is useful for
moderated-mediation or mediated-moderation in which both mediating and
moderating variables are examined together (Hair et al., 2016). The model in present
study constitutes of independent, dependent, mediating, moderating and control
variables at the same time so PLS-SEM is selected to test the complex model. PLS-
SEM defines model as structural model and measurement model. Measurement model
is known as outer model contains information about latent variables and manifest
variables (Henseler et al., 2009). Structural Model is also known as inner model and it
provides information about the relationship between latent variables (Hair et al.,
2016).
The combination of both structural model and measurement model is called
structural equation modeling. The structural equation modeling (SEM) in PLS follows
the two-step process. In the first step the assessment has been made for measurement
model. In this the reliability and validity of data and measures are assessed using
different techniques. It may be noted that the criteria for assessing the reflective and
formative measurement models are different. The results of measurement model offer
logic and build confidence in testing the theoretical model or structural model.
132
Measurement model provide adequate support for the validity, so the results of
structural portion are presented in second stage (Chin, 2010b).
3.11 Measurement Model
In structural equation modeling (SEM) there are latent variables with multiple
indicators. Measurement model is also known as outer model and it specifies the
direction and causality of relationship between indicators and latent variables. In
measurement model using SEM; it is important to differentiate between reflective and
formative measurement model (Hair et al., 2011; Hair et al., 2013).
In reflective measurement model the direction of causality is from the
construct to the indicators. The observed measures reflect the variation in latent
variable or constructs are expected to display changes in all of its indicators. In
formative measurement model the direction of causality is from indicators to
constructs or construct is defined as a combination of its indicators (Henseler et al.,
2009; Henseler et al., 2016). The PLS-SEM can handle both reflective and formative
outer model without any restriction, but CB-SEM can use the formative models under
certain conditions (Diamantopoulos & Riefler, 2011). Furthermore, PLS-SEM is not
controlled by identification concerns, even if models become complex. This is a
situation where CB-SEM is not preferred. (Hair et al. 2011). This study utilizes
reflective measurement model and its characteristics are given in Table 3.3.
Table 3.3: Features of reflective measurement models (Petter, Straub, & Rai, 2007)
Direction of causality is from construct to its measures.
Indicators are lexes/expressions of the variable/construct.
All indicators are used commonly and reducing of an indicator willnot change the conceptual scope of construct.
In reflective model indicators and constructs have the relatednomological net.
Hulland (1999) presented three sets of methodological consideration while
applying PLS in the context of management research; first set includes the assessment
133
of reliability and validity of measures; second set is the determination of relationship
between measures and constructs and third set is determination of path coefficient for
model adequacy. These sets are followed in two stage sequential analysis of
measurement model and structural model. Reflective measurement models were
evaluated for reliability, validity (convergent and discriminate) (Hair et al., 2011).
The rules of thumb are presented in Table 3.3.
3.11.1 Internal Consistency Reliability
Coefficient alpha (α) by Cronbach (1951) was widely used as a measure of
reliability (Bollen, 1989) but it is an old way to measure internal consistency (Chin,
1998). Cronbach alpha (α) provides inter-correlations-based estimates of reliability. It
assumes that all indicators are equally reliable (Hair et al., 2011) or equally weighted
(Chin, 1998). Whereas, PLS give priority to indicators in terms of their reliability and
generates a more reliable composite. Hair et al. (2011) suggested to use composite
reliability (CR) in measuring internal consistency and it is more appropriate than
alpha (α). The Cronbach’s alpha is sensitive about number of items, so it provides
underestimated internal consistency in PLS path models. Whereas composite
reliability (CR) takes into account the indicators that have different loading and
interpret the result in the same way as Cronbach’s alpha (α). The composite reliability
(CR) value of 0.70 or greater is considered satisfactory (Werts et al., 1974; Bagozzi
Yi, 1988).
3.11.2 Indicators Reliability
Indicators reliability is the standardized outer loadings of all indicators in
structural equation modeling. Loadings are basically the variances extracted from the
items in PLS-SEM (Hair et al., 2011). The rule of thumb for indicators reliability is
that the latent variable should explain at least 50% of variance in each indicator. It
means the absolute correlation between a latent variable and its construct should be
0.70. In other words, the absolute standardized outer loadings of all indicators should
be 0.70 or above. If the standardized outer loadings are smaller than 0.4 then the
indicators should be eliminated from reflective measurement models. The validity is
assessed by examining the convergent validity and discriminant validity.
134
3.11.3 Convergent Validity
Convergent validity proves the uni-dimensionality of constructs. It signifies
that a set of indicators are the true representation of their construct. The inter-
correlation among the indicators of a construct is assessed to determinate the
convergent validity (Hair et al., 2011). The high inter-correlation among the indicators
shows that they are related to the same construct. It is suggested to use average
variance extracted (AVE) as a criterion to check convergent validity and the value of
AVE should be greater than 0.50 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). The AVE value of 0.50
assumes sufficient in explaining half of variance of its indicators on average.
3.11.4 Discriminant Validity
It shows that the constructs are different from each other (Hair et al., 2016).
The joint set of indicators of different constructs is expected not to be uni-
dimensional. The inter-correlations among the indicators of different constructs have
been analyzed to assess the discriminant validity. The low correlation among the
indicators of different construct shows that the constructs are different.
The guidelines and rules of thumb for assessing the measurement model are
presented in Table 3.4.
In PLS path modeling, three approaches were used to access the discriminant
validity; The Hetrotrait-Monotrait (HTMT) criterion, Fornell and Larcker (1981)
criterion and Cross Loadings. The cross-loading criterion is more liberal in which the
loading of an indicator should be greater than its cross-loadings (Chin, 1998). In
HTMT criterion the value of HTMT should be significantly smaller than 1.0 (Henseler
et al., 2009). In Fornell-Larcker criterion the latent variable shares more variance
with its assigned indicators than with any other latent variable. The square root value
of AVE of a construct should be greater than the squared correlations with other
constructs (Henseler et al., 2009).
135
Table 3.4: Main guidelines/rules of thumb for assessing reflective measurement
models
Criterion Recommendations / Rules of Thumb Reference
Indicator reliability
Standardized indicator loadings of
0.70 or higher is acceptable;
Standardized indicator loadings of
0.40 is acceptable in exploratory
studies
(Hulland, 1999)
Internal-
consistency
reliability (ICR)
Do not use Cronbach’s alpha;
Composite Reliability (CR) value of
0.70 or higher is acceptable;
Composite Reliability (CR) value of
0.60 is acceptable in exploratory
studies
(Werts, Linn &
Joreskog, 1974);
(Bagozzi & Yi,
1988)
Indicator reliability
(IR)
Indicator loadings of 0.70 and higher
is acceptable
(Hair, Ringle, &
Sarstedt, 2011)
Convergent validity
(CV)
Average Variance Extracted (AVE)
value of 0.50 or higher is acceptable
(Hair, Ringle, &
Sarstedt, 2011)
Discriminant
validity (DV)
The squared AVE of a construct
should be higher than its correlation
with any other construct
An indicator’s loadings should be
higher than all of its cross loadings
(Fornell &
Larcker, 1981)
Chin, 1998
136
3.12 Structural Model
When the outer model provides you with reliable and valid estimates than the
next step is to provide evidences in support of inner path model or theoretical model
as exemplified by the structural portion of model (Henseler & Chin, 2010). The
estimates are calculated, and PLS-SEM considers the variance without comparing it
with covariance as in CB-SEM. It applies the non-parametric evaluation criteria to
access the quality of inner model (Chin 1998, 2010; Henseler et al. 2009). Structural
model is PLS-SEM are assessed by; coefficient of determination (R²), Effect size (f 2
and q2), path coefficient (β) with level of significance (t-statistics & p-value), and
predictive relevance (Q2) (Hair et al., 2011).
3.12.1 Coefficient of Determination (R2)
The predictive power of the structural model is assessed by the value of R2.
The coefficient of determination or Goodness of fit (R2) is the primary criterion for
inner model evaluation, calculated for endogenous latent variables. R2 explain the
variance in each endogenous (dependent) variable due to exogenous (independent)
variables, like ordinary least squares (OLS) regression. This is obtained because the
case value of the latent variables is determined by the weight relations (Chin, 2010).
The R2 value closer to 1.0 is considered as a good model (Hair at el., 2016). The R2
value of 0.19, 0.33 and 0.67 in PLS models are assumed as weak, moderate and
substantial model. The moderate R2 is accepted when an endogenous latent variable
has one or two exogenous latent variables in the inner path model structure (Chin,
1988).
3.12.2 Effect Size (f 2)
The change in R2 is explored to see the size of impact that the exogenous
latent variable (independent) has on endogenous latent variable (dependent). The
change (f 2) is calculated by using the Cohen’s (1992) method and it is similar to the
operational definition of multiple regressions. The R2included and R2
excluded are
calculated when the predictor latent variable is used and omitted in the structural
equation respectively (Henseler & Chin, 2010). The effect size (f 2) is explored to
determine the unexplained variation in endogenous (dependent) variables. The effect
137
size (f 2) of 0.02, 0.15, and 0.35 represents small, medium and large effect at the
structural level (Cohen, 1992).
When there is a set of predictors for dependent construct and you want to
compare the baseline model with superset model with the inclusion of additional
latent variable, researchers are suggested to perform F test with bootstrapping.
3.12.3 Path Coefficient Estimates
The path coefficient estimates of the PLS is basically the standardized beta
coefficient (β) of the OLS regressions (Hair et al., 2011). It determines the magnitude
of the relationship between the variables. The path coefficient in structural model is
evaluated in terms of sign, magnitude, significance and via bootstrapping (Chin,
2010a). The significance of path coefficient is inferred after examining the t-value,
confidence intervals through bootstrapping and p-value (Henseler et al., 2009; Hair et
al., 2011).
3.12.4 Predictive Relevance Q2 and q2
The predictive relevance is known as the model’s capability to predict
(Henseler et al., 2009) which is largely ignored by CB-SEM (Hair et al., 2011). PLS-
SEM provides an added estimation of structural model by establishing its competency
in forecasting and it is preferred by researcher when the objective of the research is
theory development and prediction. Stone-Geisser’s Q2 (Stone, 1974; Geisser, 1974),
by using blindfolding procedures (Tenenhaus et al., 2005) is the principal measure of
predictive relevance (Hair et al., 2011). According to Stone-Geisser (Stone, 1974;
Geisser, 1974) criterion the model must provide prediction for the indicators of the
endogenous latent variables.
The cross validated redundancy obtained from blindfolding procedure fits the
PLS path modeling approach like “hand in glove” (Jöreskog & Wold, 1982). The
blindfolding procedure is useful for the dependent latent variable with reflective
measurement model operationalization. If the Q2 value for endogenous variable is
larger than zero than its exogenous variable has predictive relevance. The relative
effect of Q2 (q2) is assessed similar to f2 by inclusion and omission process. The q2
value of 0.02, 0.15, and 0.35 represents small, medium and large predictive relevance
138
of independent variable in explaining the dependent variable (Hair et al., 2011). The
guidelines and rules of thumb for assessing the structural model are presented in
Table 3.5.
Table 3.5: Guiding principles for structural model evaluation
CriterionRecommendations / Rules of
ThumbReference
R2 value
R2 values of 0.19, 0.33 and 0.67 are
described as low, moderate and high
respectively in the inner model.(Chin, 1998)
Effect size f 2
f 2 value of 0.35, 0.15 and 0.02 show
large, medium and weak effect at
the structural level.
(Cohen, 1992)
Estimate for Path
coefficient
The sign, magnitude and
significance (bootstrapping) of the
relationship should be evaluated for
structural model.
(Hair et al., 2011)
Predictive relevance
Q2 and q2
Use blindfolding; Q2 > 0 is evidence
of predictive relevance and Q2 < 0 is
lack of predictive relevance; q 2
value of 0.35, 0.15 and 0.02 show
large, medium and weak degree of
predictive relevance.
(Hair et al., 2011)
139
3.13 Summary
Chapter 3 explained and discussed the methodological issues in detail. The
explanation and justification for the selection of positivist research philosophy with
deductive research approach, quantitative study with survey research, cross-sectional
with explanatory purpose and primary data collection from higher education
institutes/universities are explained. The use of non-probability sampling technique to
collect the data from sample is explained.
The selection of structural equation modeling SEM for path model and PLS
for analysis are discussed. The issues of missing value, outliers and normality for
multivariate data analysis are addressed. The procedure which followed for reflective
measurement model and reliability tests (indicators reliability; internal consistency
reliability) and validity tests (convergent validity; discriminant validity) with rule of
thumb are discussed. For the measurement of structural model and testing of
hypothesis in inner model are discussed.
The importance of coefficient of determination, effect size, path coefficient
and predictive relevance for structural models are discussed and explained in detail.
Measurement and scale of, PPAQ (independent variable), PE (mediator), perception
of HRM system strength (moderator), RE, KS, and IB are explained. The data
analysis is discussed in chapter 4. It starts with the analysis and reporting of
demographics characteristics of the respondents. The descriptive statistics, results of
reliability and validity tests, finding of measurement model and structural model are
analyzed and reported.
140
CHAPTER 4
DATA ANALYSIS
141
4.1 Introduction
The objective of the current study was to explore the relationship between
PPAQ and three ILAs (RE, KS and IB) of faculty members working in HEIs of
Islamabad, Pakistan. This relationship was examined with the inclusion of PE as
mediator and PHSS as possible moderator in a quantitative study. This chapter will
report the results of data analysis.
The underlying assumptions of multivariate data analysis including missing
values, outliers and normality are assessed. The demographic characteristics of the
sample are reported through frequencies and percentages. The descriptive of measures
are reported through Cronbach’s alpha value. The constructs and measures were
analyzed for mean value and standard deviation. The skewness and kurtosis were also
calculated to address the assumptions of multivariate data analysis. PLS-SEM was
used to estimate the measurement model and structural model.
In reflective measurement model the internal consistency reliability of the
constructs were measured through composite reliability (CR). The confirmatory factor
analysis was performed to analyze the indicators reliability. Similarly, the convergent
and discriminant validity were assessed to determine the reliability and validity of
data and measures. The main effects and mediating effect have been measured in
reflective measurement model. Structural model and the relationship have been
measured by determining the, coefficient of determination, path coefficient estimates,
effect size and predictive relevance.
4.2 Evaluation of Underlying Assumptions of Multivariate
Data
This section will explain the scrutiny of data with respect to missing value,
collinearity, heteroscedasticity and common method variance.
4.2.1 Missing Value
Total 600 questionnaires were distributed among the faculty members of
twelve public sector HEIs of Islamabad region. 377 questionnaires were filled and
returned. The response rate was sixty three percent. Out of these 17 questionnaires
142
were excluded from subsequent data analysis because respondents did not fill the
questionnaire properly and information was missing on important questions.
4.2.2 Collinearity
The structural model was assessed for collinearity issues and before
interpreting the results the latent variable scores are used to assess collinearity.
According to Hair et al. (2011), if the predictor constructs tolerance value is greater
than 0.20 and VIF is lower than 5 than there is no issue of collinearity. The VIF
values extracted on different relationship are clearly below the threshold of 5.0 so it is
inferred that there is no issue of collinearity persist in the structural model. Once the
collinearity issue is addressed than the path coefficient can be examined to determine
the degree of association among studied variables. The VIF values and tolerance
values are presented in Table 4.1. The PLS-SEM algorithm for maximization of
variance explained, are effective at reducing the collinearity (Kock & Lynn, 2012).
4.2.3 Heteroscedasticity
The issue of heteroscedasticity is a problem when inconsistency of a variable
is not equal to the range of value of predictor variable. The scatter diagram for error
terms was observed to ensure that there is no issue of heteroscedasticity and the
variance was constant.
4.2.4 Common Method Variance
Common method variance can be a problem when single-source data is used
to measure latent variables. To address this problem, we performed Harman single-
factor test (Podsakoff et al., 2003) on eleven first-order latent variables in our research
model. The result shows the emergence of more than one factor. The common method
factor accounted for well below the 50% threshold variance. This indicated that the
common method bias does not pose a significant problem with respect to collected
data.
143
Table 4.1: Collinearity Assessment (Reflection, Knowledge Sharing, Innovative
Behavior: Dependent Variable)
Reflection Knowledge
Sharing
Innovative
Behavior
Constructs VIF Tolerance VIF Tolerance VIF Tolerance
Perceptions of
Performance
Appraisal Quality
1.280 0.781 1.280 0.781 1.280 0.781
Perception of HRM
System Strength1.087 0.920 1.090 0.917 1.091 0.917
Psychological
Empowerment1.321 0.757 1.322 0.756 1.322 0.756
4.3 Respondents profile
This section explains the demographics of the respondents. The demographic
information was collected on the respondent’s age, gender, education level, current
job position, salary and tenure. In a sample of 360, 59.7% participants were male and
40.3% were female. In terms of job position the sample of faculty members was
established from 25 research associates (7%), 183 lecturers (51%), 132 assistant
professors (37%), 16 associate professors (4%) and 4 professors (1%).
From respondent’s qualification, the 211 were having master’s degree
(58.6%), 102 were holding doctoral degree (28.3) and 47 were having post-doctoral
qualification (13.1%). In term of age 53.6% are in the age bracket of 30-40 years. The
tenure shows 55% are in 1-5 years and 33% are in 6-10 years of service in current
organization. Demographics of quantitative phase are reported in Table 4.2.
144
Table 4.2. The Descriptive of the Sample (N = 360)
Title Characteristics Frequency Percent
Gender (Male)
(Female)
215
145
59.7%
40.3%
Age
20-24 Years
25-29 Years
30-34 Years
35-39 Years
40-44 Years
45 and Above
16
92
124
69
41
18
4.4%
25.6%
34.4%
19.2%
11.4%
5.0%
Educational
Level
Master's Degree
PhD
Post-Doctoral Degree
211
102
47
58.6%
28.3%
13.1%
Marital Status Single
Married
91
269
25.3%
74.7%
Current Job
Position
(Designation)
RA/TA
Lecturer
Assistant Professor
Associate Professor
Professor
25
183
132
16
4
6.9%
50.8%
36.7%
4.4%
1.1%
Estimated
Salary/Income
Rs.20001-40000
Rs.40001-60000
Rs.60001-80000
Rs.80001-100000
Rs.100001-120000
Rs.120001-140000
Rs.140001-160000
Above Rs.160000
18
30
66
49
30
48
40
79
5.0%
8.3%
18.3%
13.6%
8.3%
13.3%
11.1%
21.9%
Tenure
Less than 1 year
1-5 years
6-10 years
More than 10 years
16
199
119
26
4.4%
55.3%
33.1%
7.2%
145
4.4 Descriptive Statistics and Reliability of Measures
Table 4.3 exhibits the descriptive statistics of the studied variables. The results
for Mean (M), Standard Deviation (SD), Skewness, Kurtosis and Reliability measures
(α) are reported.
The PPAQ showed the consistency among the items (α = 0.856), RE (α =
0.885), KS (α = 0.925) and IB (α = 0.898). PE (α = 0.960) was measured as a
composite of meaning (α = 0.932), competence (α = 0.923), self-determination (α =
0.929) and impact (α = 0.947) having the coefficient alphas for all the scale are in
acceptable range. PHSS (α = 0.962) was measure as a composite of distinctiveness (α
= 0.914), consistency (α = 0.914) and consensus (α = 0.914) with acceptable
coefficient alpha value.
Table 4.3. Mean, Standard deviation, Skewness, Kurtosis, Cronbach, Items
Description
Latent
VariablesIndicators Mean
Std.
DeviationSkewness Kurtosis
Cronbach’s
Alpha
Perceptions of
Performance
Appraisal Quality
PPAQ1 4.1111 0.73805 -0.848 1.323
0.856PPAQ2 4.0889 0.74107 -0.804 1.184
PPAQ3 4.1000 0.72057 -0.871 1.611
Psychological Empowerment 0.960
Meaning
ME1 4.1139 0.85156 -1.145 1.627
0.932ME2 4.1111 0.85356 -1.134 1.577
ME3 4.1000 0.84840 -1.128 1.615
Competence
CO1 4.1167 0.85282 -1.066 1.380
0.923CO2 4.0639 0.82024 -1.063 1.722
CO3 4.0944 0.83913 -1.062 1.517
Self-
Determination
SD1 4.0000 0.86401 -0.964 1.203
0.929SD2 4.0472 0.87713 -1.013 1.202
SD3 4.0444 0.87250 -1.023 1.266
Impact
IM1 3.9917 0.97743 -1.099 0.906
0.947IM2 3.9944 0.97887 -1.100 0.898
IM3 3.9806 0.97155 -1.097 0.937
146
Perceptions of HRM System Strength 0.962
Distinctiveness
DI1 4.3972 0.72018 -1.076 0.867
0.923
DI2 4.3250 0.69414 -0.888 0.869
DI3 4.3278 0.69883 -0.895 0.821
DI4 4.3667 0.70730 -0.992 0.872
DI5 4.3944 0.70016 -1.064 1.084
DI6 4.4278 0.69242 -1.106 1.081
Consistency
CT1 4.2222 0.74307 -0.670 0.018
0.932
CT2 4.1333 0.74190 -0.507 -0.162
CT3 4.1500 0.73870 -0.538 -0.097
CT4 4.1278 0.73534 -0.501 -0.107
CT5 4.1972 0.73321 -0.625 0.060
CT6 4.2583 0.74448 -0.661 -0.016
Consensus
CS1 4.2556 0.72460 -0.740 0.297
0.940CS2 4.2889 0.73503 -0.810 0.284
CS3 4.2556 0.73224 -0.739 0.215
CS4 4.2528 0.72749 -0.734 0.258
Reflection
RE1 4.1167 0.66989 -0.587 0.887
0.885RE2 4.1111 0.70722 -0.541 0.338
RE3 4.0778 0.67552 -0.531 0.705
RE4 4.0611 0.67724 -0.562 0.819
Knowledge
Sharing
KS1 4.1278 0.76868 -0.814 0.874
0.925KS2 4.1500 0.78265 -0.831 0.745
KS3 4.1278 0.76868 -0.814 0.874
KS4 4.2389 0.79947 -0.917 0.595
Innovative
Behavior
IB1 4.3167 0.68794 -0.868 0.919
0.898
IB2 4.3194 0.69271 -0.925 1.109
IB3 4.3556 0.70511 -1.011 1.087
IB4 4.4417 0.70172 -1.007 1.670
IB5 4.4944 0.69617 -1.375 1.760
147
The value of Skewness and Kurtosis were examined to test the normality
(individual and multivariate). The value of skewness and kurtosis of all the indicators
are in acceptable range and lies between -2 and +2. However, the item having value in
between -1 and +1 is considered excellent when addressing the normality issue.
4.5 Graphical Representation of Descriptive Statistics
The graphical representations of the constructs are shown in Annexure-II. The
histogram and normal q-q plot is presented.
4.6 Structural Equation Modeling
For the analysis purpose SmartPLS v.3.2.7 (Ringle et al., 2017) was used in
estimation. Two steps approached is followed in current study for the data analysis
and estimation by using SmartPLS. In the first step, the measurement model or outer
model with reflective measures is assessed for indicator’s reliability and validity. The
SmartPLS provides several metrics like standardized indicators loadings, cross-
loadings, composite reliability (CR), Cronbach’s alpha, average variance extracted
(AVE) for the assessment of measurement model.
The adequate support of measurement model allows the assessment of the
structural model or inner model. The results for coefficient of determination, effect
size, path coefficient estimates, inter-construct correlation and predictive relevance
are obtained, to test the main effect, mediating effect and moderating effect. In PLS-
SEM model, first we examined the outer model in an effort to validate the
measurement model (Hair at al., 2013).
4.7 Measurement Model
4.7.1 Internal Consistency Reliability
In a reflective measurement model of present study there were thirteen latent
variables (PPAQ, PE, meaning, competence, self-determination, impact, PHSS,
distinctiveness, consistency, consensus, RE, KS and IB). The PE and PHSS were
measured as composite variables and duplicate items were used for measurement
148
purpose. The final model was same as to reflective model because all items were
loaded (factor loadings) well above the threshold value of 0.70 and the internal
consistency reliability of all the scales were good. The coefficient alpha (α) based on
inter-correlations estimates is widely accepted to measure the internal consistency but
PLS-SEM provides the composite reliability (CR) which is more reliable than alpha
(α). However, the alpha (α) value is also reported along with CR value in Table 4.4.
4.7.2 Composite Reliability
The composite reliability (CR) value is calculated to measure the internal
consistency reliability. It interprets the results in the same way as to Cronbach’s
alpha. The composite reliability (CR) value of all the latent variables demonstrated
high level of internal consistency reliability. The composite reliability value for PPAQ
(0.912), meaning (0.957), competence (0.951), self-determination (0.955), impact
(0.855), PE (0.965), distinctiveness (0.939), consistency (0.947), consensus (0.957),
PHSS (0.965), RE (0.921), KS (0.947) and IB (0.924) are well above the threshold
level. The CR results are presented in table 4.4.
4.7.3 Convergent Validity
The convergent validity is determined by assessing the inter-correlation
among the indicators of a construct. It proves that the constructs are unidimensional.
The average variance extracted (AVE) value is used to assess the convergent validity
of all the constructs. In present study the AVE value of PPAQ (0.776), meaning
(0.880), competence (0.867), self-determination (0.876), impact (0.664), PE (0.694),
distinctiveness (0.721), consistency (0.748), consensus (0.848), PHSS (0.636), RE
(0.744), KS (0.816) and IB (0.710) are well above the threshold level of 0.50 (Hair et
al., 2013). The AVE results are presented in Table 4.4.
149
Table 4.4. Results summary for reflective measurement model
First-Order
Constructs
Second-Order
Constructs Indicator’s FL CR AVE CV
Perceptions of
Performance
Appraisal Quality
PPAQ1
PPAQ2
PPAQ3
0.883
0.869
0.891
0.912 0.776 Yes
Meaning
ME1
ME2
ME3
0.940
0.937
0.938
0.957 0.880 Yes
Competence
CO1
CO2
CO3
0.927
0.929
0.937
0.951 0.867 Yes
Self-
Determination
SD1
SD2
SD3
0.936
0.938
0.934
0.955 0.876 Yes
Impact
IM1
IM2
IM3
0.950
0.956
0.948
0.855 0.664 Yes
Psychological
Empowerment
Meaning
Competence
Self-Determination
Impact
0.894
0.898
0.881
0.877
0.937 0.788 Yes
Distinctiveness
DI1
DI2
DI3
DI4
DI5
DI6
0.853
0.845
0.841
0.880
0.823
0.852
0.939 0.721 Yes
150
First-Order
Constructs
Second-Order
Constructs Indicator’s FL CR AVE CV
Consistency
CT1
CT2
CT3
CT4
CT5
CT6
0.840
0.872
0.907
0.914
0.815
0.836
0.947 0.748 Yes
ConsensusCS1
CS2
CS3
CS4
0.922
0.921
0.922
0.920
0.957 0.848 Yes
Perceptions of
HRM System
Strength
Distinctiveness
Consistency
Consensus
0.915
0.916
0.908
0.938 0.834 Yes
Reflection
RE1
RE2
RE3
RE4
0.841
0.883
0.883
0.842
0.921 0.744 Yes
Knowledge
Sharing
KS1
KS2
KS3
KS4
0.892
0.896
0.891
0.934
0.947 0.816 Yes
Innovative
Behavior
IB1
IB2
IB3
IB4
IB5
0.838
0.856
0.889
0.822
0.805
0.924 0.710 Yes
Note: CR=Composite Reliability; FL=Factor Loadings; AVE=Average Variance Extracted;CV=Convergent Validity
151
4.7.3.1 Hetrotrait-Monotrait (HTMT) Test
The study first used the HTMT (Hetrotrait-Monotrait) criteria to test the
discriminant validity. The HTMT is an upper boundary estimate for the factor
correlation. If the HTMT value is significantly less than 1.00 than it is considered that
the factor is discriminant from others. The value calculated for HTMT in Table 4.5
shows that all variables achieved discriminant validity.
4.7.3.2 Fornell-Larcker
Secondly, the study also followed the Fornell-Larcker guidelines to test the
discriminant validity. According to Fornell-Larcker criterion the square root of the
average variance extracted (AVE) for a variable should be greater than the correlation
with other variables in the model. In current study the square roots of the AVEs for all
constructs are higher than the correlation of these constructs with other variables in
the path model. Table 4.6 shows the results and the square roots of the AVE’s for
PPAQ is (0.881), PE (0.833), meaning (0.938), competence (0.931), self-
determination (0.936), PHSS (0.798), distinctiveness (0.849), consistency (0.865),
consensus (0.921), RE (0.863), IB (0.843) and for KS is (0.903). The square root of
the AVEs for PHSS (0.849) is lower than its correction with distinctiveness (r =
0.915), consistency (r=0.916) and consensus (r=0.908). The square root of AVEs for
PE (0.833) is also lower than its correlation with meaning (r = 0.894), competence (r
= 0.898), self-determination (r = 0.881) and impact (r = 0.877). Both variables were
multidimensional construct and selected items were measuring the dimensions as well
as main variable in the path model.
4.7.3.3 Cross Loadings
Thirdly, the cross loadings of items were also used to ascertain the
discriminant validity (Chin, 1998). When the indicator’s loading on a construct is
higher than its cross loadings on other constructs than discriminant validity is
evidenced (Hair et al., 2011). Table 4.7 shows the loadings and cross loadings of all
the indictors used in the study. All indictor’s loading on the main construct were
higher than the cross loadings on other constructs which further justifies the
152
discriminant validity. By adopting the three approaches the overall discriminant
validity was achieved with the PLS-SEM analysis in present study.
PE and PHSS were studied as multidimensional constructs and the same items
were used to measure the main variable and its dimension. The items loaded on these
constructs also shows loadings with its corresponding dimensions as well. The
indicator of CO1 has the highest value for the loading with its corresponding
construct competence (0.927) and PE (0.841), while all cross loadings are
considerably lower. The same findings hold for all the indicators measuring different
constructs. Overall, HTMT, cross loadings as well as the Fornell-Larcker criterion
provided evidence for the construct’s discriminant validity.
4.7.3.4 Correlation
Table 4.6 shows the correlation matrix among all the constructs in the study.
The analysis shows that the PPAQ is positively related to PE (r = 0.460***, p<0.001),
RE (r = 0.456***, p<0.001), KS (r = 0.358*, p<0.05) and IB (r = 0.399**, p<0.01).
PE also shows positive relationship with RE (r = 0.393**, p<0.01), KS (r = 0.461***,
p<0.001) and IB (r = 0.468***, p<0.001). According to Tian and Wilding (2008), the
correlation value of 0.10 - 0.30, 0.40 – 0.60 and 0.70 – above, are considered as week,
moderate and high relationship respectively. The arithmetic sign with the value
determines the nature of relationship as negative or positive.
153
Table 4.5. Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT)
Constructs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
1. Perceptions of performance Appraisal Quality
2. Meaning 0.486
3. Competence 0.476 0.849
4. Self-Determination 0.421 0.747 0.774
5. Impact 0.442 0.734 0.734 0.768
6. Distinctiveness 0.085 0.054 0.041 0.049 0.071
7. Consistency 0.036 0.029 0.045 0.027 0.105 0.786
8. Consensus 0.058 0.032 0.034 0.028 0.068 0.821 0.808
9. Reflection 0.523 0.359 0.357 0.371 0.441 0.075 0.051 0.076
10. Knowledge Sharing 0.402 0.389 0.359 0.393 0.606 0.106 0.065 0.048 0.550
11. Innovative Behavior 0.446 0.448 0.429 0.429 0.486 0.100 0.076 0.061 0.721 0.646
12. Perceptions of HRM System Strength 0.064 0.042 0.044 0.038 0.089 0.974 0.968 0.949 0.072 0.081 0.087
13. Psychological Empowerment 0.507 0.945 0.954 0.934 0.916 0.060 0.058 0.045 0.425 0.487 0.498 0.059
154
Table 4.6. Fornell–Larcker test for discriminant validity
Constructs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1. Perceptions of Performance Appraisal Quality 0.881
2. Meaning 0.433 0.938
3. Competence 0.424 0.788 0.931
4. Self-Determination 0.376 0.695 0.717 0.936
5. Impact 0.398 0.690 0.686 0.720 0.951
6. Distinctiveness 0.065 0.047 0.010 0.036 -0.066 0.849
7. Consistency 0.023 0.002 -0.032 0.009 -0.099 0.731 0.865
8. Consensus 0.044 0.026 -0.027 0.001 -0.062 0.767 0.758 0.921
9. Reflection 0.456*** 0.326 0.323 0.336 0.404 -0.064 -0.030 -0.068 0.863
10. Knowledge Sharing 0.358* 0.361 0.332 0.364 0.568 -0.098 -0.058 -0.042 0.496 0.903
11. Innovative Behavior 0.399** 0.414 0.395 0.396 0.451 -0.083 -0.057 -0.051 0.642 0.589 0.843
The square roots of the AVEs are mentioned diagonally and correlations between the constructs are mentioned off-diagonally.
*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p<.001
155
Table 4.7. Cross Loadings
PPAQ ME CO SD IM DI CT CS RE KS IB PHSS PE
PPAQ1 0.883 0.384 0.367 0.332 0.343 0.048 0.019 0.055 0.390 0.303 0.337 0.043 0.402
PPAQ2 0.869 0.380 0.364 0.314 0.362 0.012 -0.002 -0.005 0.385 0.306 0.342 0.002 0.400
PPAQ3 0.891 0.381 0.389 0.347 0.346 0.107 0.042 0.065 0.428 0.334 0.372 0.078 0.412
ME1 0.387 0.940 0.757 0.658 0.671 0.041 -0.014 0.034 0.267 0.371 0.375 0.021 0.853
ME2 0.431 0.937 0.744 0.648 0.642 0.029 -0.013 0.004 0.333 0.341 0.386 0.007 0.836
ME3 0.403 0.938 0.716 0.651 0.630 0.061 0.032 0.035 0.319 0.304 0.406 0.047 0.827
CO1 0.398 0.733 0.927 0.669 0.658 0.016 -0.023 -0.023 0.314 0.346 0.348 -0.010 0.841
CO2 0.402 0.725 0.929 0.673 0.660 -0.022 -0.057 -0.037 0.285 0.312 0.373 -0.043 0.840
CO3 0.384 0.743 0.937 0.659 0.599 0.034 -0.009 -0.014 0.302 0.269 0.383 0.005 0.826
SD1 0.330 0.638 0.662 0.936 0.661 0.018 -0.016 -0.022 0.301 0.319 0.355 -0.006 0.814
SD2 0.348 0.659 0.671 0.938 0.688 0.034 0.016 0.004 0.301 0.357 0.382 0.021 0.832
SD3 0.378 0.654 0.679 0.934 0.673 0.048 0.024 0.020 0.342 0.346 0.376 0.035 0.827
IM1 0.387 0.663 0.657 0.683 0.950 -0.061 -0.092 -0.034 0.387 0.559 0.440 -0.071 0.836
IM2 0.374 0.666 0.645 0.704 0.956 -0.058 -0.083 -0.052 0.385 0.551 0.428 -0.072 0.841
IM3 0.373 0.641 0.657 0.668 0.948 -0.070 -0.107 -0.092 0.380 0.509 0.418 -0.098 0.824
156
DI1 0.043 0.049 0.012 0.019 -0.025 0.853 0.656 0.711 -0.035 -0.061 -0.053 0.812 0.015
DI2 0.062 0.028 -0.001 0.030 -0.052 0.845 0.628 0.645 -0.070 -0.065 -0.081 0.777 0.001
DI3 0.003 0.013 -0.008 0.046 -0.085 0.841 0.644 0.691 -0.071 -0.095 -0.091 0.796 -0.011
DI4 0.065 0.041 -0.013 0.039 -0.070 0.880 0.632 0.650 -0.042 -0.088 -0.063 0.794 -0.002
DI5 0.108 0.099 0.069 0.075 -0.009 0.823 0.565 0.579 -0.048 -0.058 -0.058 0.723 0.065
DI6 0.054 0.010 -0.005 -0.023 -0.095 0.852 0.594 0.622 -0.059 -0.132 -0.080 0.759 -0.033
CT1 0.014 0.016 0.015 0.027 -0.085 0.638 0.840 0.616 -0.026 -0.079 -0.077 0.772 -0.009
CT2 0.043 -0.021 -0.065 -0.028 -0.098 0.666 0.872 0.694 0.009 -0.009 -0.042 0.820 -0.060
CT3 -0.001 0.000 -0.021 0.011 -0.106 0.640 0.907 0.702 -0.083 -0.084 -0.092 0.827 -0.034
CT4 0.001 -0.003 -0.029 0.017 -0.073 0.674 0.914 0.703 -0.037 -0.032 -0.077 0.843 -0.026
CT5 0.014 -0.013 -0.037 0.026 -0.055 0.574 0.815 0.600 0.007 -0.038 0.003 0.733 -0.023
CT6 0.050 0.032 -0.030 -0.004 -0.094 0.595 0.836 0.611 -0.022 -0.058 -0.005 0.753 -0.028
CS1 0.067 0.024 0.008 -0.002 -0.059 0.699 0.723 0.922 -0.029 -0.022 -0.022 0.843 -0.009
CS2 0.054 0.054 -0.014 0.026 -0.047 0.697 0.680 0.921 -0.047 -0.045 -0.052 0.825 0.005
CS3 0.022 0.022 -0.041 0.010 -0.023 0.704 0.674 0.922 -0.080 -0.015 -0.047 0.825 -0.009
CS4 0.019 -0.004 -0.051 -0.029 -0.099 0.725 0.716 0.920 -0.095 -0.070 -0.069 0.850 -0.052
RE1 0.392 0.257 0.250 0.269 0.308 -0.115 -0.046 -0.089 0.841 0.422 0.543 -0.090 0.306
157
RE2 0.399 0.297 0.288 0.318 0.353 -0.012 0.000 -0.031 0.883 0.397 0.536 -0.014 0.354
RE3 0.406 0.304 0.298 0.302 0.345 -0.039 -0.008 -0.041 0.883 0.427 0.545 -0.031 0.353
RE4 0.376 0.266 0.278 0.271 0.388 -0.057 -0.052 -0.077 0.842 0.468 0.593 -0.066 0.340
KS1 0.314 0.324 0.316 0.308 0.498 -0.114 -0.072 -0.079 0.459 0.892 0.538 -0.097 0.410
KS2 0.336 0.316 0.258 0.325 0.516 -0.091 -0.057 -0.029 0.449 0.896 0.526 -0.067 0.401
KS3 0.322 0.344 0.304 0.321 0.512 -0.098 -0.051 -0.021 0.436 0.891 0.540 -0.065 0.420
KS4 0.319 0.322 0.321 0.362 0.524 -0.051 -0.028 -0.022 0.450 0.934 0.525 -0.038 0.433
IB1 0.350 0.343 0.344 0.312 0.366 0.000 0.004 -0.016 0.581 0.511 0.838 -0.004 0.385
IB2 0.365 0.387 0.341 0.353 0.385 -0.092 -0.047 -0.069 0.537 0.511 0.856 -0.076 0.414
IB3 0.407 0.401 0.393 0.393 0.436 -0.056 -0.040 -0.032 0.560 0.511 0.889 -0.047 0.458
IB4 0.267 0.319 0.303 0.314 0.358 -0.088 -0.058 -0.023 0.509 0.487 0.822 -0.064 0.365
IB5 0.262 0.276 0.265 0.281 0.342 -0.128 -0.113 -0.081 0.519 0.462 0.805 -0.120 0.329
Note: CO = Competence; CS = Consensus; CT=Consistency; DI=Distinctiveness; IB=Innovative Behavior; IM=Impact;
KS=Knowledge Sharing; ME=Meaning; PPAQ=Perceptions of Performance Appraisal Quality; RE=Reflection; SD=Self-
Determination, PE=Psychological Empowerment; PHSS=Perceptions of HRM System Strength
158
4.8 Structural Model
The study used a data set with 360 observations for our empirical PLS-SEM
analysis. The path model in the current study tested the paths from PPAQ to PE, RE,
KS and IB. Moreover, it is tested the moderating effect of PHSS upon the
relationship between PPAQ and PE, RE, KS and IB. Structuring the equation model
explained in the study of six latent variables (i.e. PPAQ, PE, PPHS, RE, KS and IB)
has been tested. PPAQ was put as an independent variable. PHSS was loaded as
moderating latent variable loaded on three observed variables i.e. distinctiveness,
consistency and consensus. PE was loaded as a dependent latent variable loaded on
four observed variables i.e. meaning, competence, self-determination and impact.
Moreover RE, KS and IB were loaded as dependent variables.
4.8.1 Main Effect
The path model’s coefficient is used to understand the relationships among the
variables in the model and PLS-SEM estimation for path coefficient are analyzed. The
results are analyzed by extracting the coefficient’s value, t-value and level of
significance i.e. p-value. As a rule of thumb, the path coefficient’s standardized value
of 0.10 or above is considered significance and less than 0.10 are considered
insignificant (Hair et al., 2013). T-value is calculated with the process of
bootstrapping and 1000 bootstrap sample were used in estimation. Bootstrapping is
recognized as the latest techniques to determine the significance of path coefficient
with estimate of t-value. The critical t-value of 1.96 with 5% significance level
(α=0.05) as probability of error, is considered for analysis of results.
In Figure 4.1 the path coefficient with p-values are shown. The examination of
path coefficient’s results shows that, PPAQ has a direct and positive relationship with
the mediating variable i.e. PE (β = 0.468, p value < 0.001) hence accepted H1. PE has
direct and positive impact on RE (β = 0.222, p value < 0.01), KS (β = 0.375, p value <
0.001) and IB (β = 0.329, p value < 0.001) hence H2a, H2b and H2c are accepted.
PPAQ also has direct and positive impact on all three-dependent variable i.e. RE (β =
159
0.358, p value < 0.001), KS (β = 0.222, p value < 0.01) and IB (β = 0.265, p value <
0.01). The results provided support for the acceptance of Hypothesis 3a, 3b and
3c.The results are presented in Table 4.8 and Figure 4.1.
Table: 4.8 Results of Main effect model
Hypothesis Hypothesis Paths PathCoefficient’s T-values Accept/reject
significanceH1 PPAQ PE 0.468 5.978 Accept***
H2a PE RE 0.222 2.824 Accept**
H2b PE KS 0.375 5.283 Accept***
H2c PE IB 0.329 4.668 Accept***
H3a PPAQ RE 0.358 4.270 Accept***
H3b PPAQ KS 0.222 3.028 Accept**
H3c PPAQ IB 0.265 3.108 Accept**
PHSS RE -0.073 1.490 Insignificant
PHSS KS -0.072 1.576 Insignificant
PHSS IB -0.080 1.802 Insignificant
PHSS PE 0.034 0.679 Insignificant
Age RE 0.053 1.191 Insignificant
Gener RE 0.019 0.404 Insignificant
Age KS -0.012 0.256 Insignificant
Gener KS -0.003 0.064 Insignificant
Age IB 0.036 0.048 Insignificant
Gener IB -0.031 0.663 Insignificant
Note: IB=Innovative Behavior; KS=Knowledge Sharing; PPAQ=Perceptions ofPerformance Appraisal Quality; RE=Reflection; PE=Psychological Empowerment;PHSS=Perceptions HRM System Strength*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p<.001
160
Note: t-values in parenthesisDirect Effect
Perceptions ofPerformance
Appraisal Quality
PsychologicalEmpowerment
R2 = 0.218
ReflectionR2 = 0.258
KnowledgeSharing
R2 = 0.272
InnovativeBehaviorR2 = 0.266
Perceptions ofHRM System
Strength
Age
Gender
0.375 (5.283)0.468 (5.978)
-0.034 (0.679)
0.222 (3.028)
0.358 (4.270)
0.036 (0.848)
0.019 (0.404)
0.053 (1.191)
-0.031 (0.663)
-0.012 (0.256)
-0.003 (0.064)
0.265 (3.108)
Figure 4.1: A Main Effect Model
-0.073(1.490)
161
R2 value shows the predictive power or variance in dependent variable. The R2
value of 0.19, 0.33 and 0.67 in PLS models are assumed as weak, moderate and
substantial. As shown in Figure 4.1, the R2 value estimated for PE (mediating
variable) is 0.218. The R2 value for RE, KS and IB is 0.258, 0.272 and 0.266
respectively. Together, the results implied a satisfactory and substantial model.
4.8.2 Mediating Effect
The results are also analyzed for mediating relationship, whether PE mediates
the relationship between PPAQ and RE, KS and IB. The significance of the direct
relationships among construct is preliminary condition to test the mediation. This was
ensured by the evaluation of structural model results. The relationship between PPAQ
and PE was evident (β = 0.468, p value < 0.001). The relationship between PE and RE
(β = 0.222, p value < 0.01), KS (β = 0.375, p value < 0.001) and IB (β = 0.329, p
value < 0.001) also provided support for mediation analysis.
Indirect effect was examined using bootstrapping and 1000 bootstrap re-
sampling was used to calculate the significance of the indirect effect (Preacher &
Hayes, 2004; 2008). The point estimate of 0.104 (RE), 0.176 (KS) and 0.164 (IB) for
the indirect effect at 95% bias-corrected confidence interval for RE (0.030; 0.199),
KS (0.097; 0.284) and IB (0.079; 0.260) indicated that PE mediates the relationship of
between PPAQ and; RE, KS and IB. Because zero was not included in the confidence
interval, thus it can be said the indirect effects is significantly different from zero at
p<0.05, supporting Hypothesis 4a, 4b and 4c.
In next step the strength of indirect effects was analyzed which is the actual
strength of mediating effects. Indirect effects are the product of the direct effects
between independent and mediating variable and between mediating and dependent
variables. The path coefficient, t-value for direct effects (IV-DV, Mediator-DV) and
indirect effects (IV-Mediator-DV) are presented in Table 4.9 with level of
significance. The total effects were calculated by adding the direct effects (IV-DVs)
and indirect effects (IV-Mediator-DVs). The VAF was calculated by dividing the
indirect effect by total effect. The VAF provided the ratio (percentage) to determine
the strength of indirect effect.
162
The VAF value of lower than 0.20 (20%) is considered as no mediation, as
and higher than 0.80 (80%) is considered as full mediation. In between 0.20 (20%)
and 0.80 (80%) is considered as partial mediation. The VAF calculated for indirect
effects of RE, KS, and IB are 0.23 (23%), 0.44 (44%), and 0.37 (37%) respectively.
Since the VAF is greater than 20% but less than 80%, so affect is considered
as partial mediation. The estimation of mediation analysis including path coefficient
for direct and indirect effects with path coefficients, level of significance and VAF
ratio are presented in Table 4.9. The highlight of bootstrap results for RE, KS and IB
are presented in Table 4.10, Table 4.11 and Table 4.12 respectively.
Table 4.9: The mediating effect of Psychological Empowerment (IV = PPAQ)
Dependent
VariableObserved Path
Path
coefficientt-value Hypotheses VAF
Reflection
PPAQ RE 0.358 4.270***
H4a
(accepted)
0.23
(23%)PE RE 0.222 2.824*
PPAQ PERE 0.104 2.386**
Knowledge
Sharing
PPAQ KS 0.222 3.028**
H4b
(accepted)
0.44
(44%)PE KS 0.375 5.283***
PPAQ PEKS 0.176 3.598***
Innovative
Behavior
PPAQ IB 0.265 3.108**
H4c
(accepted)
0.37
(37%)PE IB 0.329 4.668***
PPAQ PEIB 0.154 3.332**
Note: IB=Innovative Behavior; KS=Knowledge Sharing; PPAQ=Perceptions of
Performance Appraisal Quality; RE=Reflection; PE=Psychological Empowerment;
*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p<.001
163
Table 4.10: Bootstrapping Results of the indirect effect (DV = Reflection)
PPAQ PEPath ‘a’
PE REPtah ‘b’
PPAQ PERE
Path ‘ab’
Sample 0 0.557 0.161 0.090
Sample 1 0.552 0.182 0.101
Sample 2 0.449 0.201 0.090
Sample 3 0.427 0.182 0.078
Sample 4 0.453 0.240 0.109
Sample 5 0.443 0.229 0.102
Sample 6 0.443 0.280 0.124
Sample 7 0.507 0.357 0.181
Sample 8 0.561 0.216 0.121
Sample 9 0.548 0.264 0.145
Sample 10 0.436 0.257 0.112
…………. ……….. ……….. ………..
Sample 999 0.429 0.231 0.099
Note: PPAQ = Perceptions of performance appraisal quality; PE = PsychologicalEmpowerment; RE=Reflection
Table 4.11: Bootstrapping Results of the indirect effect (DV = Knowledge Sharing)
PPAQPEPath ‘a’
PE KSPtah ‘b’
PPAQ PEKS
Path ‘ab’Sample 0 0.557 0.389 0.216
Sample 1 0.552 0.241 0.133
Sample 2 0.449 0.347 0.156
Sample 3 0.427 0.348 0.148
Sample 4 0.453 0.354 0.160
164
Sample 5 0.443 0.433 0.192
Sample 6 0.443 0.330 0.146
Sample 7 0.507 0.404 0.205
Sample 8 0.561 0.464 0.260
Sample 9 0.548 0.404 0.221
Sample 10 0.436 0.406 0.177
…………. ……….. ……….. ………..
Sample 999 0.429 0.412 0.177
Note: PPAQ = Perceptions of performance appraisal quality; PE = PsychologicalEmpowerment; KS= Knowledge Sharing
Table 4.12: Bootstrapping Results of the indirect effect (DV = Innovative Behavior)
PPAQ PE
Path ‘a’
PE IB
Ptah ‘b’
PPAQ PE IB
Path ‘ab’
Sample 0 0.557 0.269 0.150
Sample 1 0.552 0.318 0.175
Sample 2 0.449 0.329 0.148
Sample 3 0.427 0.265 0.113
Sample 4 0.453 0.350 0.158
Sample 5 0.443 0.308 0.136
Sample 6 0.443 0.370 0.163
Sample 7 0.507 0.427 0.216
Sample 8 0.561 0.389 0.218
Sample 9 0.548 0.370 0.207
Sample 10 0.436 0.395 0.172
…………. ……….. ……….. ………..
Sample 999 0.429 0.304 0.130
Note: PPAQ = Perceptions of performance appraisal quality; PE = PsychologicalEmpowerment; IB=Innovative Behavior
165
4.8.3 Moderating Effect
The moderating role of PHSS in the relationship between PPAQ and PE
(H5a), RE (H5b), KS (H5c), and IB (H5d) were analyzed in next step. It was
hypothesized that perceived HRM system strength positively influence these
relationships. The higher the PHSS higher the relationship between the two constructs
and vice versa. For this purpose, interaction effects have been calculated.
Consequently, bootstrapping procedure with 1000 bootstrap samples, no sign change
option, mean replacement for missing value, 300 iterations, Bias-Corrected and
Accelerated (BCa) Bootstrap for confidence interval were used to conduct the two-
tailed significance test with 0.05 significance level. The results for moderation
analysis i.e. path coefficient, t-value and significance level are presented in Table 4.13
and Figure 4.2.
Table 4.13. Results of PLS-SEM Moderation Model
Hypothesis Hypothesis PathPath
coefficientT-value
Accept/reject
significance
H5aInteraction 4
PE0.325 2.813 Accept**
H5bInteraction 1
RE0.251 2.153 Accept*
H5c Interaction 3
KS0.235 2.162 Accept*
H5b Interaction 2
IB0.283 2.707 Accept**
Note: RE = Reflection; IB = Innovative Behavior; KS = Knowledge Sharing; PE =
Psychological Empowerment; PHSS=Perceptions of HRM System Strength;
Interaction 1 = Interaction between RE and PHSS; Interaction 2 = Interaction
between IB and PHSS; Interaction 3 = Interaction between KS and PHSS; Interaction
4 = Interaction between PE and PHSS
*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p<.001
166
Note: t-values in parenthesisDirect EffectModerating Effect
Perceptions ofPerformance
Appraisal Quality
PsychologicalEmpowerment
R2 = 0.248
ReflectionR2 = 0.274
KnowledgeSharingR2 = 0.287
InnovativeBehaviorR2 = 0.286
Perceptions ofHRM System
Strength
Age
Gender
0.349 (4.762)0.456 (6.387)
0.015 (0.281)
0.228 (3.062)
0.364 (4.233)
0.045 (1.068)
0.019 (0.422)
0.061 (1.379)
-0.031(0.657)
0.005 (0.098)
-0.002(0.053)
0.271 (3.180)
Figure 4.2: Interaction Effect Model: Perceptions of HRM System Strength as a Moderator
0.325 (2.813)
0.235 (2.162)
0.283 (2.707)
0.251 (2.153)
167
4.8.4 Interaction
The Figure 4.2 and Table 4.13 show that the effects of PPAQ on PE (β =
0.456, p value < 0.001), RE (β = 0.364, p value < 0.001), KS (β = 0.228, p value <
0.01), and IB (β = 0.271, p value < 0.01) are significant with t- value of 6.387, 4.233,
3.062 and 3.180 respectively. The interaction of PHSS and PPAQ has also significant
and positive effect on PE (β = 0.325, p value < 0.01), RE (β = 0.251, p value < 0.05),
KS (β = 0.235, p value < 0.05), and IB (β = 0.283, p value < 0.01) are significant with
t- value of 2.813, 2.153, 2.162, and 2.707 respectively. Hence the hypotheses 5a, 5b,
5c and 5d for moderating role of PHSS were accepted. If the PHSS become higher
(i.e. PHSS is increased by one standard deviation point), this would imply that the
relationship between PPAQ and PE, RE, KS and IB would increase by the size of
interaction i.e. 0.781, 0.615, 0.463 and 0.554 respectively. The same kind of
interpretation holds for situation of lower PHSS (i.e. PHSS is decreased by one
standard deviation point). Hence, the positive effect of PPAQ on PE, RE, KS and IB
were stronger when PHSS was high. Similarly, when PHSS gets higher, PPAQ
became more important for explanation PE, RE, KS and IB. To determine the nature
of moderating effects, the slopes above and below the mean of PHSS has computed to
plot the interaction. Figure 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, and 4.6 shows the moderating effects of
PPAQ on other variables.
Figure 4.3: Interaction effect of PPHS on PPAQ and PE.
11.5
22.5
33.5
44.5
5
Low Performance AppraisalQuality
High Performance AppraisalQuality
Psyc
holo
gica
l Em
pow
erm
ent
Low HRM System Strength High HRM System Strength
168
Figure 4.4: Interaction effect of PPHS on PPAQ and RE.
Figure 4.5: Interaction effect of PPHS on PPAQ and KS.
11.5
22.5
33.5
44.5
5
Low Performance AppraisalQuality
High Performance AppraisalQuality
Ref
lect
ion
on D
aily
Act
iviti
es
Low HRM System Strength High HRM System Strength
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
Low Performance AppraisalQuality
High Performance AppraisalQuality
Kno
wle
dge
Shar
ing
Low HRM System Strength High HRM System Strength
169
Figure 4.6: Interaction effect of PPHS on PPAQ and IB
4.9 Effect Size (f 2) and Predictive Relevance (q2)
The change is R2 is explored to obtain the effect size f2. It allows evaluating
the size of impact that an exogenous variable have on endogenous variable. The
R2included and R2
excluded are calculated for main effect model as well as moderating
effect model. This was done by omitting the mediating variable (PE) from main effect
model and moderating variable (PHSS) from interaction effect model. The effect size
(f 2) of 0.02, 0.15, and 0.35 represents small, medium and large effect an exogenous
variable has on endogenous variable.
Similarly, the change is Q2 is explored to obtain the predictive relevance q2.
Predictive relevance is the model’s capability to predict the effect. Blindfolding
procedures is used to determine the cross-validated measure (Q2) for mediating and
moderating variables.
We adopted the same procedure and Q2included and Q2
excluded are calculated for
main effect model as well as moderating effect model by omitting the mediating (PE)
and moderating (PHSS) variable form models respectively. The q2 value of 0.02, 0.15,
11.5
22.5
33.5
44.5
5
Low Performance AppraisalQuality
High Performance AppraisalQuality
Inno
vativ
e B
ehav
ior
Low HRM System Strength High HRM System Strength
170
and 0.35 represents small, medium and large predictive relevance of independent
variable in explaining the dependent variable (Hair et al., 2011).
4.9.1 f 2 and q2 for Main Effect Model
Firstly, the f 2 and q2 are calculated for main effect model to determine the effect size
and predictive relevance that PE have on RE, KS and IB. The values of effect size (f2) calculated for PE on RE (0.051), KS (0.150), and IB (0.113). The result shows PE
has small effect for RE and medium effects are evident for KS and IB.
Similarly, the predictive relevance (q2) value calculated for PE on RE (0.030), KS
(0.103), and IB (0.064) are all supporting. The result shows small predictive relevance
for RE and IB whereas KS has medium predictive relevance. The results for effect
size (f2) and predictive relevance (q2) are presented in Table 4.14 (RE), Table 4.15
(KS), and Table 4.16 (IB).
Table 4.14. Effect size and predictive relevance for mediating variable (DV =
Reflection)
Summary of
Results
R2
value
Q2
value
Path co-
efficient
f2 effect
size
q2 predictive
relevance
PPAQ PE
RE0.258 0.176 0.358,0.222
0.051 0.030
PB RE 0.220 0.151 0.462
Note: PPAQ = Perceptions of performance appraisal quality; PE = Psychological
Empowerment; RE=Reflection
f2 = R2incl - R2
excl / 1 - R2incl q2 = Q2
incl - Q2excl / 1 - Q2
incl
= 0.258 – 0.220 / 1- 0.258 = 0.176 – 0.151/1- 0.176
= 0.038 / 0.742 = 0.025 / 0.824
= 0.051 = 0.030
171
Table 4.15. Effect size and predictive relevance for mediating variable (DV =
Knowledge Sharing)
Summary of ResultsR2
valueQ2 value
Path co-
efficient
f2 effect
size
q2
predictive
relevance
PPAQ PE KS 0.272 0.201 0.358,0.3750.150 0.103
PB KS 0.163 0.119 0.399
Note: PPAQ = Perceptions of performance appraisal quality; PE = Psychological
Empowerment; KS=Knowledge Sharing
f2 = R2incl - R2
excl / 1 - R2incl q2 = Q2
incl - Q2excl / 1 - Q2
incl
= 0.272 – 0.163 / 1- 0.272 = 0.201 – 0.119/1- 0.201
= 0.109 / 0.728 = 0.082 / 0.799
= 0.150 = 0.103
Table 4.16. Effect size and predictive relevance for mediating variable (DV =
Innovative Behavior)
Summary of
Results
R2
valueQ2 value
Path co-
efficient
f2 effect
size
q2
predictive
relevance
PPAQ PE IB 0.266 0.168 0.358,0.3290.113 0.064
PB IB 0.183 0.115 0.329
Note: PPAQ = Perceptions of performance appraisal quality; PE = Psychological
Empowerment; IB=Innovative Behavior
f2 = R2incl - R2
excl / 1 - R2incl q2 = Q2
incl - Q2excl / 1 - Q2
incl
= 0.266 – 0.183 / 1- 0.266 = 0.168 – 0.115/1- 0.168
= 0.083 / 0.734 = 0.053 / 0.832
= 0.113 = 0.064
172
4.9.2 f 2 and q2 for Moderating Effect Model
Secondly, the f 2 and q2 are also calculated for moderating effect model to
determine the effect size and predictive relevance that PHSS have on PE, RE, KS and
IB. The values of effect size (f2) calculated for PHSS are, PE (0.041), RE (0.030), KS
(0.028), and IB (0.113). The result shows that PHSS has small effect for all variables.
The predictive relevance (q2) value calculated for PHSS on PE (0.023) RE (0.017),
KS (0.018), and IB (0.020). The q2 result shows small predictive relevance for PE and
IB. The q2 value of 0.17 for RE and 0.18 for KS is not substantially low therefore it
also implies small predictive relevance. The results for effect size (f 2) and predictive
relevance (q2) are presented in Table 4.17 (PE), Table 4.18 (RE), Table 4.19 (KS),
and Table 4.20 (IB).
Table 4.17. Effect size and predictive relevance for moderating variable HRM System
Strength (DV=Psychological Empowerment)
Summary of ResultsR2
value
Q2
value
Path
co-efficient
f2
effect
size
q2
predictive
relevance
PPAQ, Interaction PE 0.248 0.158 0.456, 0.3250.041 0.023
PPAQ PE 0.217 0.139 0.466
Note: PPAQ = Perceptions of performance appraisal quality; PE = Psychological
Empowerment; Interaction = PPAQ*HR
f2 = R2incl - R2
excl / 1 - R2incl q2 = Q2
incl - Q2excl / 1 - Q2
incl
= 0.248 – 0.217 / 1- 0.248 = 0.158 – 0.139/1- 0.158
= 0.031 / 0.752 = 0.019 / 0.842
= 0.041 = 0.023
173
Table 4.18. Effect size and predictive relevance for moderating variable HRM System
Strength (DV = Reflection)
Summary of ResultsR2
value
Q2
value
Path
co-efficient
f2
effect
size
q2
predictive
relevance
PPAQ, PE, Interaction
RE0.274 0.187
0.364, 0.193,
0.251 0.030 0.017
PPAQ, PE RE 0.252 0.173 0.353, 0.225
Note: PPAQ = Perceptions of performance appraisal quality; PE = Psychological
Empowerment; Interaction = PPAQ*HR; RE = Reflection
f2 = R2incl - R2
excl / 1 - R2incl q2 = Q2
incl - Q2excl / 1 - Q2
incl
= 0.274 – 0.252 / 1- 0.274 = 0.187 – 0.173/1- 0.187
= 0.022 / 0.726 = 0.014 / 0.813
= 0.030 = 0.017
Table 4.19. Effect size and predictive relevance for moderating variable HRM System
Strength (DV = Knowledge Sharing)
Summary of ResultsR2
value
Q2
value
Path
co-efficient
f2
effect
size
q2
predictive
relevance
PPAQ PE, Interaction
KS0.287 0.212
0.228,
0.349, 0.235 0.028 0.018
PPAQ PE KS 0.267 0.198 0.217, 0.379
Note: PPAQ = Perceptions of performance appraisal quality; PE = Psychological
Empowerment; Interaction = PPAQ*HR; KS = Knowledge Sharing
f2 = R2incl - R2
excl / 1 - R2incl q2 = Q2
incl - Q2excl / 1 - Q2
incl
= 0.287 – 0.267 / 1- 0.287 = 0.212 – 0.198/1- 0.212
= 0.020 / 0.713 = 0.014 / 0.788
= 0.028 = 0.018
174
Table 4.20. Effect size and predictive relevance for moderating variable HRM System
Strength (DV = Innovative Behavior)
Summary of ResultsR2
value
Q2
value
Path
co-efficient
f2
effect
size
q2
predictive
relevance
PPAQ PE, Interaction
IB0.286 0.181
0.271, 0.297,
0.283 0.113 0.020
PPAQ PE IB 0.260 0.165 0.260, 0.333
Note: PPAQ = Perceptions of performance appraisal quality; PE = Psychological
Empowerment; Interaction = PPAQ*HR; IB = Innovative Behavior
f2 = R2incl - R2
excl / 1 - R2incl q2 = Q2
incl - Q2excl / 1 - Q2
incl
= 0. 286 – 0.260 / 1- 0.286 = 0.181 – 0.165/1- 0.181
= 0.026 / 0.714 = 0.016 / 0.819
= 0.036 = 0.020
Table 4.21. Decision about Hypotheses
S.No Hypothesis Decision
Hypothesis 1There is direct, positive and significant relationship
between PPAQ and PE.Accepted
Hypothesis 2There is a direct, positive and significant relationship
between PE and RE (2a), KS (2b), and IB (2c).Accepted
Hypothesis 3There is a direct, positive and significant relationship
between PPAQ and RE (3a), KS (3b), and IB (3c).Accepted
Hypothesis 4PE mediates the relationship between PPAQ and RE
(4a), KS (4b), and IB (4c).Accepted
Hypothesis 5PHSS moderates the positive relationship between
PPAQ and PE (5a), RE (5b), KS (5c), and IB (5d).Accepted
175
4.10 Control Variables
Two demographic (control) variables, age and gender were also included in
analysis of main effect model and interaction effect model. The results of both models
show that the relationships among the control variables and outcome variables (RE,
KS and IB) were small, unsystematic and nonsignificant (all p-value <.10). All
control variables failed to predict the outcome variables.
4.11 Summary
In the current chapter the data were analyzed, and results are reported. A total
of 377 questionnaires were filled and received. After the initial test for missing
values, outliers and collinearity test, 17 cases were omitted from further analysis. The
demographics are explained in terms of frequency, mean, standard deviation,
skewness and kurtosis. Two steps approach is used to test the reflective measurement
model and structural model. In reflective measurement model the internal consistency
reliability, composite reliability measures were established to ensure that the
indicators used in study are reliable. For convergent validity, value of average
variance extracted (AVE) for all constructs was well above the threshold level. The
tests like; Hetrotrait-Monotrait (HTMT), Fornell-Larker and cross-loadings was
calculated and provided support for discriminant validity.
In next stage the main effect of structural model was examined. The results of
present study validate the quantitative finding that there is a direct and positive
relationship between PPAQ and PE, RE, KS and IB. It was also verified that PE has
direct and positive relationship with RE, KS and IB and the results were affirmative.
PE also received support from results for its mediating role in the relationship
between PPAQ and RE, KS and IB.
Further in interaction effect model, the moderating roles of PHSS was also
supported for PE, RE, KS and IB. The results of main effect model and interaction
effect model was examined in terms of their coefficient of determination (R2), path
coefficient (β), level of significance (t-value and p-value), effect size (f2) and
176
predictive relevance (q2). The results of the present study supported the study
hypothesis, and all were accepted.
In next chapter the results calculated here are discussed in more detail with
respect to objective of study, adopted methodology and literature. The discussion on
the results is much needed because the present study is of its first kind to link HRM
(content and process) with ILAs (RE, KS and IB) through PE.
177
CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION
178
5.1 Summary
Informal learning is an important workplace learning approach used by
workers to acquire tacit, or implicit, job knowledge and skills in the workplace
(Marsick, 2009). Informal and formal workplace modes of learning are described as
dichotomous anchors located on opposing ends of a workplace learning continuum
(Eraut, 2004, Noe, et al., 2013). Informal learning is characterized by the autonomous
actions of the learner who activates and engages workplace learning processes and
activities under terms and conditions of their choosing (Marsick & Watkins, 1990).
Reflecting on one’s actions or the actions of others, sharing knowledge and
experimenting with new techniques are examples of ILAs (Lohman, 2005; Jeon &
Kim, 2012).
Literature has identified different types of ILAs in which employees are
engaged and consensus has been found for three representative ILAs including; RE,
KS and IB (Jeong et al., 2018). Previous research demonstrated that different
individual, group and organizational level factors can inhibit or incite trigger for
individual learner to engage in ILAs (Noe et al., 2013; Cuyvers et al., 2016; Holly et
al., 2016; Hoekstra et al., 2009). The HRM in term of content (specific HR practice)
and process (HRM system) influence employees’ participation in ILAs; including RE,
KS and IB (Bednall et al., 2014). This study examined the influence of PPAQ as
content of HRM on three ILAs (RE, KS and IB) with mediating (PE) and moderating
(PHSS) variables.
A comprehensive informal learning model combining HRM content (PPAQ)
and HRM process (PHSS), are linked to three ILAs (RE, KS and IB) in which faculty
members of HEIs are engaged through PE (psychological perspective). The key
empirical findings from this study support previous research (Bednall et al., 2014) that
reported the influence of HRM on ILAs. This chapter summarizes the research,
presents findings and discussion, theoretical contribution and practical implication are
discussed.
179
5.1.1 Research Design
A correlational research design, using partial least squares, structural equation
modeling was used to analyze the data in this study. A single instrument, measuring
eleven constructs, comprised of 51 items including 7 demographic questions, was
administered personally to collect responses from the participants. The principle
research question examined the extent to which the participation in ILAs is better
explained through HRM content and process and PE. The purpose was to examine the
influence that this combination of factors promotes participation in ILAs.
The dependent variable, informal learning in this study was defined as the
activities like; RE, KS and IB activities in which employees are engaged. Independent
variable included employee PPAQ. PE and PHSS was studied as mediating and
moderating variables respectively. The RE (four-item) and KS (four-item) scales were
adapted from Van Woerkom (2003) in this study. A five-item scale was adapted from
De Jong and Den Hartog (2005) to measure IB. A three-item scale was adapted from
Bednall et al. (2014) to measure the PPAQ. A twelve-item scale was adapted from
Spreitzer (1995) to measure the PE.
The research questions in this study included:
1. Does PPAQ impact PE?
2. Does PE impact ILAs including; RE (2a), KS (2b) and IB (2c)?
3. Does PPAQ impact ILAs including; RE (3a), KS (3b) and IB (3c)?
4. Does PE mediate the relationship between PPAQ and ILAs including; RE
(4a), KS (4b) and IB (4c)?
5. Does PHSS moderate the relationship PPAQ and PE (5a) and ILAs including;
RE (5b), KS (5c) and IB (5d)?
5.1.2 Population and Sample
Pakistani higher education institutes/universities were selected for current
study. The self-administered questionnaire and data from 12 public sector
universities/institutes of Islamabad region was collected. A total of 600 questionnaires
were distributed among the faculty members of selected DAIs and 377 questionnaires
180
were filled and returned. The final response rate, after excluding the 17 responses in
preliminary analysis, was 60% (360). In a sample of 360, 59.3% participants were
male and 40.7% were female. In terms of job position the sample of faculty members
was established from 25 research associates (7%), 183 lecturers (51%), 132 assistant
professors (37%), 16 associate professors (4%) and 4 professors (1%). From
respondent’s qualification, the 211 were having master’s degree (58.6%), 102 were
holding doctoral degree (28.3) and 47 were having post-doctoral qualification
(13.1%). In term of age 53.6% are in the age bracket of 30-40 years. The tenure shows
55% are in 1-5 years and 33% are in 6-10 years of service in current organization.
5.1.3 Instrumentation
The faculty members completed a five-part questionnaire. The first part
included scales of ILAs i.e. RE, KS and IB. The second part of the questionnaire
measured PPAQ. The PE and PHSS were measured in third and fourth part of the
questionnaire. Participants responded using a five-point frequency scale, ranging from
1= “Strongly Disagree” to 5 = “Strongly Agree”. The fifth part of the questionnaire
contains the 7 items measuring demographics of the sample.
5.1.4 Scale Reliability
Scale reliability for the current study was examined by calculating the
composite reliability for each construct. The composite reliability value for PPAQ
(0.912), meaning (0.957), competence (0.951), self-determination (0.955), impact
(0.855), PE (0.965), distinctiveness (0.939), consistency (0.947), consensus (0.957),
PHSS (0.965), RE (0.921), KS (0.947) and IB (0.924) are well above the threshold
level.
5.2 Findings
This section presents research findings organized by the five principal research
questions. The overall objective of the research was to present a comprehensive
model to study the effect of HRM on ILAs. The findings are generalizable to faculty
181
members of the HEIs and other employee working in different sectors where learning
is considered obligatory.
Research Question 1: Does PPAQ impact PE?
We demonstrated that PPAQ have a direct, positive and significant
relationship with PE. This finding is consistent with previous research having same
nature of relationship between HR practices and different individual level attitudes
(Takeuchi et al., 2009) and specifically PE (Messersmith et al., 2011; Aryee et al.,
2012). HR practices psychologically empower and motivate employees (Lepak et al.,
2006; Liao et al., 2009) to effectively contribute towards organizations (Datta et al.,
2005; Ichniowski & Shaw, 1999). Performance appraisal quality does the same by
creating a sense of empowerment and self-efficacy beliefs among employees (Conger
& Kanungo, 1988). The organizations should design and implement such HR
practices that provide autonomy to employee in their work and decisions.
Research Question 2: Does PE impact ILAs including; RE (2a), KS (2b)
and IB (2c)?
First, we demonstrated that PE positively influences RE. This relationship
confirms the proposition of HR system strength theory (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004) and
social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986). The underlying premise of these theories
postulate that an individual’s behavior is the result of psychological mechanism and
psychological climate. Reflection is an intuitive mode of cognitions (Eraut, 2004). It
refers to the recognition of strength by the employee and defining the development
areas, monitoring the progress and bringing change in personal behavior to eliminate
the perceived challenges (Parsons & Stephenson, 2005). Psychologically empowered
individuals build competency in employee to affect their job by showing reflection on
their daily activities.
Second, we demonstrated that PE positively influences KS. It is proven that
PE has a positive relationship with organizational citizenship behavior that leads to
organizational performance (Messersmith et al., 2011). The results are consistent with
previous studies (Seibert et al., 2011; Ozbebek & Kilicarslan 2011; Srivastava et al.,
182
2006) and concluded that employee share the knowledge if they are psychologically
empowered. This finding is also consistent with study conducted in service business
(Ozbebek & Kilicarslan 2011) where employees frequesntly share their tacit
knowledge among colleague.
In addition, we established the link between PE and IB. This judgment
supports the premise of empowerment theory (Spreitzer, 2008) that PE plays an active
role in shaping employees’ behaviors (Choi, 2007; Yoo et al., 2017; Laschinger et al.,
2001) This result is consistent with previous research (Spretizer, 1995; Knol &
Linger, 2009; Ayoub et al., 2018). The PE influences individual behavior in
meaningful way (Thomas & Velthouse, 1990; Wang et al., 2014) and enhances
performance (Linden et al., 2000). The organizations should empower employee for
adopting new knowledge, techniques and process in their work for improvement and
innovation.
Research Question 3: Does PPAQ impact ILAs including; RE (3a), KS (3b)
and IB (3c)?
The study established the empirical link between PPAQ and ILAs including;
RE, KS and IB. These findings support the claim that HR practices plays active role
in shaping individual attitudes and behaviors (Fernandez & Moldogaziev, 2012;
Shipton et al., 2006; Brown et al., 2010). The results are consistent with previous
research (Bednall et al., 2014) by demonstrating the positive relationship between
PPAQ and ILAs including; RE, KS and IB. When employees perceive the quality in
performance appraisal they tend to be more innovative at work by adopting the new
skills, techniques and practices (Bednall et al., 2014). The supervisors should
regularly hold the performance appraisal meeting with their subordinates and openly
communicate the feedback to them will ensure quality and stimulate IL in employees.
Research Question 4: Does PE mediate the relationship between PPAQ
and ILAs including; RE (4a), KS (4b) and IB (4c)?
We also demonstrated that PE mediates the relationship between PPAQ and
ILAs; RE, KS and IB. As per our knowledge this is first of its kind to investigate the
183
mediating role of PE in underlying relationships. These results found consistency with
previous studies (Messersmith et al., 2011; Seibert et al., 2011; Phung et al., 2017;
Aryee et al., 2012) that examined the mediating role of PE in similar type of
relationship between different HR practices and employees’ behaviors.
The judgment also finds support from the assertion of Barron & Kenny (1986)
that PE can be studied as a psychological mechanism for explaining behavioral
outcomes. This shows that the individual task is important with respect to its impact
on other employees and organization. They feel themselves competent for assigned
tasks and empowered to make decisions. The employees take active part in innovation
by depicting IB when they are psychologically empowered through the quality of
performance appraisal and feedback process.
Research Question 5: Does PHSS moderate the relationship PPAQ and PE
(5a) and ILAs including; RE (5b), KS (5c) and IB (5d)?
Furthermore, the study established the moderating role of PHSS. First, we
demonstrated that PHSS strengthening the relationship between PPAQ and PE. As per
our understanding and knowledge this study is first of its type to empirically
investigate such affect. The only theoretical support is the multilevel framework of
Ostroff and Bowen (2000) in which they posed that strength of HR system can be the
moderator on psychological climate at individual level. Second, we also demonstrated
that the relationships between PPAQ and ILAs including; RE, KS and IB are
strengthened by PHSS. This is consistent with previous research (Bednall et al.,
2014). The results find an incremental effect of PHSS on PE and ILAs.
5.3 Discussion
A detailed discussion is provided on the main objective of this research under
this Section. The main objective of this research was to propose a comprehensive
model linking HRM with performance. The missing links are known as ‘black box’ in
the literature. To understand the relationship between HRM and performance the
theory about HRM and performance is first summarized in literature review. The links
between HRM and performance has created by taking the proxies i.e. PPAQ and
184
PHSS as an abstract level HRM and ILAs (RE, KS and IB) as the performance
indicators (Bednall et al., 2014; Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009). This Section also provides
the in-depth discussion on the mediating role of PE and the moderating role of PHSS
in strengthening the relationship. This is in reply to Guest (1997) call for theory
refinement.
The area of HRM has researched from different perspectives which generated
different theoretical debates. The literature shows that the best-fit and best-practice
approaches have their advantages and disadvantages. The best-fit approach has the
advantage of internal and external fit which is considered as a source of competitive
advantage. However, there is a lack of consensus among the researcher on the
practices that constitutes HRM system under best-fit approach. Additionally, this
approach lacks in its empirical validation as well (Wright & Gardner, 2000).
Conversely, the best-practice approach is supported by empirical research and
proposes that a set of HRM practices produce the same results regardless of other
factors i.e. context (Pfeffer, 1994). The best-practice approach also criticized for
having the same effect on different organizational performance. The both best-fit and
best-practice approaches have disadvantages and lack the consensus among
researcher. This created the space for third theoretical approach in conceptualizing
HRM. The abstract-level HRM is proposed by Becker and Gerhart (1996). Under this
approach the HR practices are classified into four main groups (Boselie et al., 2015).
The abstract-level HRM eliminates the differences between the other two approaches.
So, the current study was designed to research the HRM at abstract level rather than
best-fit or best-practice.
Additionally, the other debate in HRM literature is to study the individual
HRM practices or study the system of HRM. The individual HRM practices were the
focus of research in 1990 (e.g. Gerhart & Milkovich, 1990) which was later
challenged for its validity (Katou, 2012). The main argument developed was that the
individual HRM practice cannot operate is isolation. It is suggested that these
practices operate in combination or interaction with other practices. Employees
experience the different HR practice at same time. The more value is given to synergy
between these two approaches.
185
Moreover, the direct relationship between HRM and organizational
performance is criticized by many studies due to the ignorance of other contributing
variable (Wright & Gardner, 2000). The more clarity is needed to better understand
the HRM and performance relationship. The ‘black box’ issues are dealt through the
inclusion of possible intervening variables (mediating and moderating). In addition,
the more emphasis has been placed on the study of proximal variables or individual
level outcomes that affects the distal variable or organizational level outcomes
(Paauwe, 2009). These proximal variables are employees’ attitudes and behaviors. It
was found that the PE is more suitable positive attitude that studied as a mediating
variable.
Furthermore, the study of HRM performance relationship through the content
of HRM and mediating link is only half the solution to ‘black box’ mystery. The
process approach of HRM system is equally important. There are different
conceptualizations of HRM system strength in the literature. Under the process
approach the HRM system and its implementation plays a vital role in shaping the
human attitudes and behavior which ultimately leads to organizational performance
(Bednall et al., 2014; Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). The literature suggests that a well-
designed HRM system cannot produce the desired results if it is poorly implemented.
The employees’ perceptions of an HRM system in terms of its distinctiveness,
consistency and consensus are crucial. The system sends signals to employee about
the expected behaviors.
This study provides the empirical evidences on how abstract level HRM in
terms of content and process affect ILAs. The results of this study are important for
several reasons. First, the results indicated a statistically significant relationship
among PPAQ and ILAs including; RE, KS and IB. This supports that ILAs are
influenced by organizational level contextual factors like PPAQ. This is in reply to
Bednall et al. (2014) for replicating the study in another context. Contextual factors
have been previously predicted to influence employees’ informal learning
engagement either positively or negatively (Ellinger, 2005).
Second, results indicate that PE is positively correlated to ILAs including RE,
KS and IB. These findings are important and extend our general understanding of how
186
HRM in terms of content and process influence informal workplace learning. In
addition, this is in line with the Dyer and Reeves (1995) suggestion that an HRM
system affect the organizational performance after affecting the proximal variables.
Unlike previous studies the current research is focused on only PE as the most
suitable under HRSS theory for HRM-organizational performance linkages (Bowen &
Ostroff, 2004).
Lastly, results indicate that PHSS moderates the positive relationship of HRM
with PE and ILAs including; RE, KS and IB. This also addresses the issue of
integrating content and process approaches for better understanding of the HRM-
performance relationship. The employees’ perception of HRM system in terms of its
distinctiveness in presence, consistency in messages and consensus among the policy
maker, creates a strong climate. There was a main question that how strong HRM
system influences employees’ attitude and behaviors is addressed. It shows that HRM
system strength psychologically empower employees to display the required
behaviors i.e. ILAs for better performance (individual and organizational level).
The findings of this study account for 25, 27 and 26 percent variance in RE,
KS, and IB is explained by the relationship along with 22 percent variance is
explained by PPAQ in direct effect model. In interaction effect model the variance
reached to 27, 28, 28 and 24 percent for RE, KS, IB and PE respectively. These
results are concurrent with previous studies (e.g. Bednall et al., 2014; Messersmith et
al., 2011). Faculty members of HEIs are engage in ILAs to solve personal learning
needs while at work. The findings of this study confirm that organizational contextual
factors like PPAQ and PHSS interact with employee attitudes and behavior as
proposed by Bowen & Ostroff (2004).
The work conditions, social-relational and hierarchical are the contextual
factors that are related to informal and incidental learning process (Marsick &
Watkins, 1990). In addition, the findings also support the assertion of HR system
strength theory (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004) for psychological factors influencing
attitudes and behavior. PE as an antecedent of ILAs has positive impact. The findings
of the study also specify the causal relationship of HR system strength theory that
187
HRM (content and process) do not directly influence the ILAs rather through the
psychological climate by psychologically empowering employee.
Among the examined variables, the predictive relationship of perceptions of
ILAs and PE was found to be statistically significant. This finding suggests that ILAs
like RE, KS and IB are influenced by psychological factors within organizational
context. This finding is consistent with relevant studies examining the relationships
between informal learning processes and organizational factors (Jeon & Kim, 2012;
Hoekstra et al., 2011; Doornbos, et al., 2008; Ellinger, 2005). The results of this study
also support previous research findings on informal learning for teachers (Lohman,
2005), public sector managers and supervisors (Cunningham & Hillier, 2013), HRD
professionals (Lohman, 2009), nurses (Bjørk et al., 2013) and police officers
(Doornbos et al., 2008).
Faculty members have asked to report their participation in three ILAs i.e. RE,
KS and IB. They reveal equal preference towards these activities. ILAs found equally
important for the profession of teaching and preferred collaborating with others
directly (Doornbos, et al., 2008). These three ILAs were adapted from the work of
Bednall et al. (2014) and were empirically validated for teachers in vocational training
schools. The faculty members operate independently in the classroom and it allows
more flexibility in term of time and choosing an informal learning path. Their role is
based on social interaction so there is no surprise of their engagement in ILAs.
5.4 Theoretical contributions
The study intends to examine the employee participation of ILAs from the
perspective of HR system strength theory and a conceptual model was developed. The
study succeeded in determining the relationships under HR system strength theory
which suggests that the employee attitudes and behavior are not directly shaped by the
HR practices. The role of HRM system strength and the role of psychological climate
are critical as they trigger such attitudes and behaviors. The study confirmed the
positive influence of PPAQ in determining employee participation in RE, KS and IB.
This study thus responds to the call of Bednall et al. (2014) for replicating the study in
another context and setting.
188
The current study makes several theoretical contributions. First, the study is
succeeded in establishing the theoretical and empirical link between HRM and
performance specifically, the content of HRM (i.e. PPAQ) and the process of HRM
(i.e. PHSS). The effect of psychological perspective i.e. PE is also established.
Previous studies (Aryee et al., 2012; Messersmith et al., 2011) studied the relationship
of HR practices and different employees’ attitudes and behavior. These studies were
conducted by taking the bundle or set of HR practices in which the impact of
individual practice cannot be determined. Performance appraisal was studied as a prat
of HR system. The other (e.g., Carless, 2004) studied performance appraisal in
combination or in isolation as a whole system where no distinction has been made
between different elements of performance appraisal like; satisfaction with
performance appraisal, accuracy in performance appraisal, reactions to performance
appraisal, effectiveness of performance appraisal and quality of performance
appraisal. The current study contributed in the literature by establishing the theoretical
and empirical link of employees’ PPAQ with PE which was focused less in literature.
In addition to this the current study succeeded in examining the mediating role
of PE in relationship between PPAQ (HRM) and ILAs (Performance) including; RE,
Ks and IB. To the best of our knowledge the relationship between PPAQ and PE is
emerging in literature but studies (Bednall et al., 2014) have been conducted on the
relationship between PPAQ and ILAs (RE, KS and IB). The mediating role of PE
underlying these relationships brings new insight by making additions in the
literature. The empowered employees participate in ILAs (RE, KS and IB). The
quality of performance appraisal plays an active role in promoting employees feeling
of PE at work.
Lastly, this study also contributed in theory by establishing the intervening
role of PHSS in relationship with PE. The moderating role of PHSS for ILAs (RE, KS
and IB) is evident (Bednall et al., 2014). The current study established the moderating
role of PHSS in relationship between PPAQ and PE. As per researcher knowledge this
study is the first of its kind to establish such relationship. The PHSS play active role
in empowering employee and consequently stimulating desired behaviors. This stems
189
the new directions of research in organizational behavior, HRM, HR practices and
performance appraisal.
5.5 Practical Implications
The results of the study also have some practical implications for multiple
stakeholders including, employees, managers, policy makers and researchers. The
employees’ participation in ILAs is imperative for sustainability of organizations. The
study is conducted in educational context and the faculty members are involved in
teaching and research.
First the positive affect of PPAQ on ILAs (RE, KS and IB) directly and
indirectly through PE calls for special attention. Given that PPAQ facilitate employee
in RE on daily activities, encourage KS and promote IB among faculty members,
organizations should develop such appraisal practices that ensure quality. It implies
that open communication policy must prevail and ensured through feedback.
The supervisor/head of the department is held responsible for improvement in
teaching and research. The performance appraisal needs to be supportive for
employee and it gives voice to the problems faced by the faculty members rather
practicing it as a monitoring mechanism. The supervisors are required to regularly
highlight the areas for improvement and change. This will change the employees’
perceptions of their performance appraisal and they consider quality in that. The
quality of performance appraisal implies that employee will respond positively by
adapting and engaging themselves in learning informally.
Secondly the HEIs and other organization need to psychologically empower
their employee in their work. It implies that they are empowered to bring innovation
in teaching and practice by adopting the new methods, techniques and technology;
sharing knowledge among colleagues and through reflection on their daily activities.
It will ultimately lead to better performance of faculty members in term of teaching
and research. RE, KS and IB in teaching generate new ideas and insights which
improve the performance of students and finally organizational performance is
improved.
190
Thirdly, the higher authorities or policy makers should device policies to
promote ILAs. The organization should provide assistance to employee with respect
to technological change. Training and continuous learning must be the focus of
policies in the field of education. The faculty members should be empowered to bring
positive change in their work, and organizations must recognize and reward them. It
will affect the performance of colleagues, groups and unit as well.
Lastly, the policies should be same at all levels or organizational hierarchy.
Especially with respect to HR policy the HRM system should send distinct and
consistent messages to employees. It will eradicate the biasness and favoritism. The
consensus regarding HR policies should be present at all levels of organization.
5.6 Limitations and Future Directions
The current studies carried out by having some limitations that offer
opportunities for future research. Firstly, the propose model and the results of the
study implies positive assertions however, it implied the cross-sectional design. The
longitudinal design will help to understand the changes in behavior over time can be
of interest. We followed the explanatory approach whereas mixed methods especially
sequential explanatory design in future is recommended to strengthen the current
findings.
Secondly, in current study the RE, KS and IB were assessed as unidimensional
construct. The exploration of different dimensions of these behaviors is interesting for
future research. It is suggested that the separate assessment for creation, promotion
and implementation of new idea should be made in future research. Similarly, current
study is only focused on single element of performance appraisal i.e. PPAQ. The
future study including other elements and HR practices in the model can be fruitful
for determining the role of HRM in ILAs.
Thirdly, we demonstrated preliminary investigation in which psychologically
empowerment partially mediates the relationship between PPAQ and ILAs. There is a
possibility of other factors that also mediate the relationship between the studied
constructs. The study focusing other behavioral/cognitive factors would be interesting
191
for future research like; job satisfaction, organizational commitment and turnover
intention. Similarly, the role of other moderating variables like organizational culture
and structural empowerment can be explored in future studies.
Lastly, the current study was conducted in a specific sector and the data was
collected from the specific group. The sample was the faculty members working in
twelve public sector universities of Islamabad, Pakistan. The same was not
highlighted in the title of this dissertation and we are unable to entertain the
suggestions of foreign examiner due to certain administrative constraints.
Additionally, trusting on one sector with similar firms/institutes/universities calls the
generalizability into question. The replication in future is invited to test the robustness
of the current model on different samples by involving more sectors and industries.
The future studies to undertake the comparative studies among public and private
sectors institutions/universities might be fruitful, as there might be different
orientation exists for ILAs.
5.7 Concluding Remarks
There are a countless number of opportunities for an employee to learn in the
workplace. Beyond the formal training that organizations provide to their employees
there are ILAs that can give an employee the chance to gain valuable knowledge. It is
an important means of acquiring tacit knowledge by the faculty members. ILAs can
be independent or collaborative, and include activities like; RE, KS and IB. Scholars
generally agree that worker dependence on self-directed and autonomous learning
may not occur without the support from HRM system (content and process) within the
organization. The administrators and HR professional must ensure that their
supervisors understand their impact on the informal learning practices of their
employees.
The focus of this study was based on a conceptual framework developed by
Bowen & Ostroff (2004) and Ostroff and Bowen (2000). The current study
empirically demonstrated that the PPAQ have positive impact on employee
participation in ILAs including; RE, KS and IB in educational context. The feedback
and performance appraisal influences faculty members’ participation in ILAs. The
192
feedbacks encourage the teaching staff to take initiative and place value on knowledge
and skills acquisition. The PPAQ create supportive learning climate in which faculty
members are engaged in ILAs.
These relationships between PPAQ and ILAs are mediated by PE. The
combination of socio-cultural and psychological factors is useful in predicting
participation in ILAs. The psychological climates where employees are empowered to
take decisions at their own facilitate participation.
Further we found that the PHSS moderate the relationship between PPAQ and;
PE, RE, KS and IB. The institutes/universities and supervisor/manager of different
department are advised to stimulate ILAs by bringing quality in performance
appraisal and by empowering employees. It implies that the HEIs should development
such policies and practices that forester RE, KS and IB. It is meant compulsory for
organizational growth, development and sustainability. This will lead to improved
performance at individual, unit and organizational level.
193
REFERENCES
194
Aalbers, R., Dolfsma, W., & Koppius, O. (2014). Rich Ties and Innovative Knowledge Transfer withina Firm. British Journal of Management, 25(4), 833-848.
Abzari, M., Labbaf, H., Atafar, A., Talebi, H., Moazami, M., & Teimouri, H. (2011). Comparativeanalysis of challenges of organizational culture scope in two private and public sectors of Iran’spetrochemical industry and its impact on effectiveness of human resource managementpractices’. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 3(3), 1480-1490.
Adnan, Z., Abdullah, H. S., & Ahmad, J. (2011). Direct influence of human resource managementpractices on financial performance in Malaysian R&D companies. World Review of BusinessResearch, 1(3), 61-77.
Aguinis, H., & Kraiger, K. (2009). Benefits of Training and Development for Individuals and Teams,Organizations, and Society. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 451–474.
Aguinis, H., & Pierce, C. A. (2008). Enhancing the relevance of organizational behavior by embracingperformance management research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29(1), 139–145.
Ahmad, S., & Schroeder, R. G. (2003). The impact of human resource management practices onoperational performance: recognizing country and industry differences. Journal of operationsManagement, 21(1), 19-43.
Ahmed, A., Hussain, I., Ahmed, S., & Akbar, M. F. (2010). Performance appraisals impact onattitudinal outcomes and organisational performance. International Journal of Business andManagement, 5(10), 62.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior.
Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Knowledge management and knowledge management systems:Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 107-136.
Alola, U., Avci, T., & Ozturen, A. (2018). Organization Sustainability through Human ResourceCapital: The Impacts of Supervisor Incivility and Self-Efficacy. Sustainability, 10(8), 2610.
Amabile, T. M. (1988). A Model of Creativity and Innovation in Organizations. Research inOrganizational Behavior, 10(1), 123-167.
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in Context: Update to the Social Psychology of Creativity. HachetteUK.
Amenumey, E. K., & Lockwood, A. (2008). Psychological climate and psychological empowerment:an exploration in a luxury UK hotel group. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 8(4), 265-281.
Anderson, D., Lucas, K. B., & Ginns, I. S. (2003). Theoretical Perspectives on Learning in an InformalSetting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(2), 177-199.
Argote, L., & Ingram, P. (2000). Knowledge Transfer: A Basis for Competitive Advantage in Firms.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 150-169.
Argote, L., McEvily, B., & Reagans, R. (2003). Introduction to the special issue on managingknowledge in organizations: Creating, retaining, and transferring knowledge. ManagementScience, 49(4), v-viii.
Argyris, C. (1957A). Personality and organization; the conflict between system and the individual.
Argyris, C. (1957B). The individual and organization: Some problems of mutualadjustment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1-24.
195
Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1978). Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Approach. Reading,MA: Addision Wesley.
Ariyani, N., & Hidayati, S. (2018). Influence of Transformational Leadership and Work Engagementon Innovative Behaviour. Etikonomi, 17(2), 275-284.
Aryee, S., Walumbwa, F. O., Seidu, E. Y. M., & Otaye, L. E. (2012). Impact of High-PerformanceWork Systems on Individual- and Branch Level Performance: Test of a Multilevel Model ofIntermediate Linkages. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(2), 287-300.
Ashforth, B. E. (1989). The Experience of Powerlessness in Organizations. Organizational Behaviorand Human Decision Processes, 43(2), 207-242.
Axtell, C. M., Holman, D. J., Unsworth, K. L., Wall, T. D., & Waterson, P. E. (2000). Shop FloorInnovation: Facilitating the Suggestion and Implementation of Ideas. Journal of Occupationaland Organizational Psychology, 73, 265–285.
Ayoub, D., Al-Akhras, D., Na’anah, G., & Al-Madadha, A. (2018). The Relationship BetweenPsychological Empowerment and Creative Performance of Employees: Mediating Effect of JobSatisfaction in International Non-Governmental Organizations European Scientific Journal,14(20), 217-239.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models. Journal of theAcademy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74-94.
Bakkenes, I., Vermunt, J. D., & Wubbels, T. (2010). Teacher Learning in the Context of EducationalInnovation: Learning Activities and Learning Outcomes of Experienced Teachers. Learning andInstruction, 20, 533-548.
Balkar, B. (2015). The Relationships between Organizational Climate, Innovative Behavior and JobPerformance of Teachers. International online Journal of Educational Sciences, 7(2).
Baluch, A. M. (2017). Employee perceptions of HRM and well-being in nonprofit organizations:unpacking the unintended. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 28(14),1912-1937.
Bandura, A. (1974). Behavior Theory and the Models of Man. American psychologist, 29(12), 859.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1986.
Bandura, A. (1989). Regulation of Cognitive Processes through Perceived Self-efficacy. Developmental Psychology, 25(5), 729.
Bandura, A. (1991). Social Cognitive Theory of Self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and HumanDecision Processes, 50(2), 248-287.
Bandura, A. (1992). Exercise of Personal Agency through the Self-efficacy Mechanism. Self-efficacy:Thought Control of Action, 1, 3-37.
Bandura, A. (1999). Social Cognitive Theory: An Agentic Perspective. Asian Journal of SocialPsychology, 2(1), 21-41.
Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (2001). Self‐efficacy Beliefs as Shapersof Children's Aspirations and Career Trajectories. Child Development, 72(1), 187-206.
Barney, J. (1991). Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management,17(1), 99-120.
196
Barney, J. B., & Wright, P. M. (1998). On Becoming a Strategic Partner: The Role of HumanResources in Gaining Competitive Advantage. Human Resource Management, 37(1), 31-46.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The Moderator–Mediator Variable Distinction in SocialPsychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173.
Bartel, A. P. (1994). Productivity Gains from the Implementation of Employee TrainingPrograms. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 33(4), 411-425.
Bartel, A. P. (2004). Human Resource Management and Organizational Performance: Evidence fromRetail Banking. Industrial and Labor Relation Review, 57(2), 181-203.
Batt, R. (2002). Managing Customer Services: Human Resource Practices, Quit Rates, and SalesGrowth. Academy of Management Journal, 45(3), 587-597.
Becker, B. E., & Huselid, M. A. (2006). Strategic Human Resources Management: Where do We gofrom Here?. Journal of Management, 32(6), 898-925.
Becker, B. E., Huselid, M. A., Pickus, P. S., & Spratt, M. F. (1997). HR as a Source of ShareholderValue: Research and Recommendations. Human Resource Management: Published inCooperation with the School of Business Administration, The University of Michigan and inalliance with the Society of Human Resources Management, 36(1), 39-47.
Becker, B., & Gerhart, B. (1996). The Impact of Human Resource Management on OrganizationalPerformance: Progress and Prospects. Academy of Management Journal, 39(4), 779-801.
Beckett, D., & Hager, P. (2005). Life, Work and Learning. Routledge.
Bednall, T. C., & Sanders, K. (2017). Do Opportunities for Formal Learning Stimulate Follow‐UpParticipation in Informal Learning? A Three‐Wave Study. Human ResourceManagement, 56(5), 803-820.
Bednall, T. C., Sanders, K., & Runhaar, P. (2014). Stimulating Informal Learning Activities throughPerceptions of Performance Appraisal Quality and Human Resource Management SystemStrength: A Two-Wave Study. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 13(1), 45-61.
Bekele, A. Z., Shigutu, A. D., & Tensay, A. T. (2014). The Effect of Employees’ Perception ofPerformance Appraisal on their Work Outcomes. International Journal of Management andCommerce Innovations, 2(1), 136-173.
Bell, S. T., & Arthur Jr, W. (2008). Feedback acceptance in developmental assessment centers: the roleof feedback message, participant personality, and affective response to the feedbacksession. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29(5), 681-703.
Benkhoff, B. (1997). A test of the HRM model: Good for employers and employees. Human ResourceManagement Journal, 7(4), 44-60.
Bennett, E. E. (2012). A four-part model of informal learning: Extending Schugurensky's conceptualmodel. Adult Education Research Conference Proceedings (Saratoga Springs, NY).
Berg, S. A., & Chyung, S. Y. Y. (2008). Factors that influence informal learning in the workplace.Journal of Workplace Learning, 20(4), 229-244.
Bhatnagar, J. (2012). Management of innovation: role of psychological empowerment, workengagement and turnover intention in the Indian context. The International Journal of HumanResource Management, 23(5), 928-951.
197
Blau, P. M. (1968). Social exchange. International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, 7, 452-457.
Bloom, N., & Van Reenen, J. (2010). Why do Management Practices Differ Across Firms andCountries?. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 24(1), 203-24.
Bogler, R., & Somech, A. (2004). Influence of Teacher Empowerment on Teachers’ OrganizationalCommitment, Professional Commitment and Organizational Citizenship Behavior inSchools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(3), 277-289.
Bollen, K. A. (1989). A New Incremental Fit Index for General Structural EquationModels. Sociological Methods & Research, 17(3), 303-316.
Bolton, G. (2014). Reflective practice: Writing and Professional Development. (4th edn). London, SagePublications.
Bonias, D., Bartram, T., Leggat, S. G., & Stanton, P. (2010). Does Psychological EmpowermentMediate the Relationship Between High Performance Work Systems and Patient Care Quality inHospitals? Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 48(3), 319-337.
Boselie, P., Dietz, G., & Boon, C. (2005). Commonalities and Contradictions in HRM and PerformanceResearch. Human Resource Management Journal, 15(3), 67-94.
Bos-Nehles, A. (2010). The line makes the difference: Line managers as effective HRpartners. Zutphen, The Netherlands: CPI Wöhrmann Print Service.
Boswell, W. R., & Boudreau, J. W. (2002). Separating the Developmental and Evaluative PerformanceAppraisal Uses. Journal of Business and Psychology, 16(3), 391-412.
Bowen, D. E., & Lawler III, E. E. (1992). The Empowerment of Service Workers: What, Why, How,and When. MIT Sloan Management Review, 33(3), 31.
Bowen, D. E., & Lawler III, E. E. (1995). Empowering Service Employees. MIT Sloan ManagementReview, 36(4), 73-85.
Bowen, D. E., & Ostroff, C. (2004). Understanding HRM–Firm Performance Linkages: The Role ofthe “Strength” of The HRM System. Academy of Management Review, 29(2), 203-221.
Boxall, P., & Macky, K. (2007). High‐performance work systems and organisational performance:Bridging theory and practice. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 45(3), 261-270.
Boxall, P., & Macky, K. (2009). Research and theory on high-performance work systems: progressingthe high involvement stream. Human Resource Management Journal, 19(1), pp. 03-23.
Boxall, P., & Purcell, J. (2008). Strategy and Human Resource Management (2nd Edition). New York:Palgrave MacMillan.
Boxall, P., Ang, S. H., & Bartram, T. (2011). Analysing the ‘black box’ of HRM: Uncovering HRgoals, mediators, and outcomes in a standardized service environment. Journal of ManagementStudies, 48(7), 1504-1532.
Boxall, P., Macky, K., & Rasmussen, E. (2003). Labour turnover and retention in New Zealand: Thecauses and consequences of leaving and staying with employers. Asia Pacific Journal of HumanResources, 41(2), 196-214.
Brown, M., Hyatt, D., & Benson, J. (2010). Consequences of the Performance Appraisal Experience.Personnel Review, 39(3), 375-396.
198
Bryman, A. (2012). Sampling in Qualitative Research. Social Research Methods, 4, 415-429.
Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2011). Ethics in Business Research. Business Research Methods.
Bukowitz, W. R., & Williams, R. L. (1999). Looking Though the Knowledge Glass. CIO-FRAMINGHAM MA-, 13, 76-85.
Burns & Grove (1993) The Practice of Nursing Research, 2nd Edition, Philadelphia: Saunders.
Burns, M. K., & VanDerHeyden, A. M. (2006). Using response to intervention to assess learningdisabilities: Introduction to the special series. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 32(1), 3-5.
Butts, M. M., Casper, W. J., & Wang, T. S. (2013). How important are work–family support policies?A meta-analytic investigation of their effects on employee outcomes. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 98(1), 1-25.
Cabrera, E. F., & Cabrera, A. (2005). Fostering knowledge sharing through people managementpractices. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(5), 720-735.
Campbell, D. J., & Campbell, K. M. (2001). Why individuals voluntarily leave: perceptions of humanresource managers versus employees. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 39(1), 23-41.
Candy, P. C. (1989). Alternative paradigms in educational research. The Australian EducationalResearcher, 16(3), 1-11.
Carless, S. A. (2004). Does psychological empowerment mediate the relationship betweenpsychological climate and job satisfaction?. Journal of Business and Psychology, 18(4), 405-425.
Cavana, R. Y., Delahaye, B. L., & Sekaran, U. (2001). Applied business research: Qualitative andquantitative methods. John Wiley & Sons, Australia.
Cennamo, L., & Gardner, D. (2008). Generational differences in work values, outcomes and person-organisation values fit. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23(8), 891-906.
Cerasoli, C. P., Alliger, G. M., Donsbach, J. S., Mathieu, J. E., Tannenbaum, S. I., & Orvis, K. A.(2018). Antecedents and outcomes of informal learning behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal ofBusiness and Psychology, 33(2), 203-230.
Cerasoli, C. P., Alliger, G. M., Donsbach, J. S., Mathieu, J. E., Tannenbaum, S. I., & Orvis, K. A.(2017). Antecedents and Outcomes of Informal Learning Behaviors: A Meta-Analysis. Journalof Business Psychology.
Cesário, F., & Chambel, M. J. (2017). Linking organizational commitment and work engagement toemployee performance. Knowledge and Process Management, 24(2), 152-158.
Chan, D. C., & Austerb, E. (2003). Factors contributing to the professional development of referencelibrarians. Library & Information Science Research, 25(3), 265-286.
Chaudary, I. A., & Imran, S. (2012). Listening to Unheard Voices: Professional Development Reformsfor Pakistani Tertiary Teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(2), 88-98.
Chen, D., & Wang, Z. (2014). The effects of human resource attributions on employee outcomesduring organizational change. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 42(9),1431-1443.
199
Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modernmethods for business research, 295(2), 295-336.
Chin, W. W. (2010A). Bootstrap cross-validation indices for PLS path model assessment. In Handbookof partial least squares (pp. 83-97). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Chin, W. W. (2010B). How to write up and report PLS analyses. In Handbook of partial least squares(pp. 655-690). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Chini, T. (2004). Effective knowledge transfer in multinational corporations. Springer.
Choi, J. N. (2007). Change‐oriented organizational citizenship behavior: effects of work environmentcharacteristics and intervening psychological processes. Journal of Organizational Behavior,28(4), 467-484.
Choi, W., & Jacobs, R. L. (2011). Influences of Formal Learning, Personal Learning Orientation, andSupportive Learning Environment on Informal Learning. Human Resource DevelopmentQuarterly, 22(3), 239-257.
Chow, W. S., & Chan, L. S. (2008). Social network, social trust and shared goals in organizationalknowledge sharing. Information & Management, 45(7), 458–465.
Chuang, C. H., & Liao, H. U. I. (2010). Strategic human resource management in service context:Taking care of business by taking care of employees and customers. PersonnelPsychology, 63(1), 153-196.
Clarke, N. (2004). HRD and the challenges of assessing learning in the workplace. InternationalJournal of Training and Development, 8(2), 140-156.
Clus, M. A. L. (2011). Informal learning in the workplace: A review of the literature. AustralianJournal of Adult Learning, 51(2), 355-373.
Cohen, J. (1992). A Power Primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155.
Colley, H., Hodkinson, P., & Malcolm, J. (2002). Non-Formal Learning: Mapping the ConceptualTerrain. A Consultation Report, 387-415.
Colvin, A. J., & Boswell, W. R. (2007). The problem of action and interest alignment: Beyond jobrequirements and incentive compensation. Human Resource Management Review, 17(1), 38-51.
Combs, J., Liu, Y., Hall, A., & Ketchen, D. (2006). How much do high‐performance work practicesmatter? A meta‐analysis of their effects on organizational performance. PersonnelPsychology, 59(3), 501-528.
CONGER, J. A., & KANUNGO, R. N. (1988). The Empowerment Process: Integrating Theory andPractice. Academy of Management Review, 13(3), 471-482.
Cooper, D. R., & Emory, C. W. (1995). Business Research Methods, USA: Richard D. Irwin.
Cormier-MacBurnie, P., Doyle, W., Mombourquette, P., & Young, J. D. (2015). Canadian Chefs’Workplace Learning. European Journal of Training and Development, 39(6), 522-537.
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions.
Crick, R. D., Haigney, D., Huang, S., Coburn, T., & Goldspink, C. (2013). Learning power in theworkplace: the effective lifelong learning inventory and its reliability and validity and
200
implications for learning and development. The International Journal of Human ResourceManagement, 24(11), 2255-2272.
Cross, J. (2011). Informal learning: Rediscovering the natural pathways that inspire innovation andperformance. John Wiley & Sons.
Crouse, P., Doyle, W., & Young, J. D. (2011). Workplace learning strategies, barriers, facilitators andoutcomes: a qualitative study among human resource management practitioners. HumanResource Development International, 14(1), 39-55.
Crouse, P., Doyle, W., & Young, J. D. (2011). Workplace learning strategies, barriers, facilitators andoutcomes: a qualitative study among human resource management practitioners. HumanResource Development International, 14(1), 39-55.
Cseh, M. Managerial Learning in the Transition to a Free Market Economy in Romanian PrivateCompanies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Georgia, Athens, 1998.
Cseh, M., Watkins, K. E., & Marsick, V. J. (1999). Informal and incidental learning in the work-place.In G. A. Straka (Ed.), Conceptions of self-directed learning: Theoretical and conceptualconsiderations (pp. 59–74). MuNster, Germany: Waxman.
Cunningham, J., & Hillier, E. (2013). Informal Learning in The Workplace: Key Activities andProcesses. Education+ Training, 55(1), 37-51.
Cuyvers, K., Donche, V., & Van den Bossche, P. (2016). Learning beyond graduation: exploring newlyqualified specialists’ entrance into daily practice from a learning perspective. Advances inHealth Sciences Education, 21(2), 439-453.
Daileyl, R. C., & Kirk, D. J. (1992). Distributive and procedural justice as antecedents of jobdissatisfaction and intent to turnover. Human Relations, 45(3), 305-317.
Darehzereshki, M. (2013). Effects of Performance Appraisal Quality on Job Satisfaction inMultinational Companies in Malaysia. International Journal of Enterprise Computing andBusiness Systems, 2(1).
Datta, D. K., Guthrie, J. P., & Wright, P. M. (2005). Human Resource Management and LaborProductivity: Does Industry Matter? Academy of Management Journal, 48(1), pp. 135–145.
Davenport, T. H., & Prusak, L. (1998). Working knowledge: How organizations manage what theyknow. Harvard Business Press.
De Jong, J. P. J., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2005). Determinanten van innovatief gedrag: een onderzoekonder kenniswerkers in het MKB. Gedrag & Organisatie, 18(5), 235-259.
De Jong, J., & Den Hartog, D. (2010). Measuring Innovative Work Behaviour. Creativity andInnovation Management, 19(1), 23-36.
De Winne, S., Delmotte, J., Gilbert, C., & Sels, L. (2013). Comparing and explaining HR departmenteffectiveness assessments: Evidence from line managers and trade union representatives. TheInternational Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(8), 1708-1735.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The" what" and" why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.
Dee, J. R., Henkin, A. B., & Duemer, L. (2003). Structural antecedents and psychological correlates ofteacher empowerment. Journal of Educational Administration, 41(3), 257-277.
201
Deepa, M. E., Palaniswamy, D. R., & Kuppusamy, D. S. (2014). Effect of Performance AppraisalSystem in Organizational Commitment, Job Satisfaction and Productivity. ContemporaryManagement Research, 8(1), 72 - 82.
Delery, J. E., & Doty, D. H. (1996). Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource management:Tests of universalistic, contingency, and configurational performance predictions. Academy ofmanagement Journal, 39(4), 802-835.
Delery, J. E., & Doty, D. H. (1996). Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource management:Tests of universalistic, contingency, and configurational performance predictions. Academy ofManagement Journal, 39(4), 802-835.
Delery, J. E., & Shaw, J. D. (2001). The strategic management of people in work organizations:Review, synthesis, and extension. In Research in Personnel and Human ResourcesManagement (pp. 165-197). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Delmotte, J., Winne, S. D., & Sels, L. (2012). Toward an assessment of perceived HRM systemstrength: scale development and validation. The International Journal of Human ResourceManagement, 23(7), 1481-1506.
Denisi, A. S., & Griffin, R. W. (2005). HRM: An Introduction. Cengage Learning India PrivateLimited, New Delhi, 246.
DeNisi, A. S., & Pritchard, R. D. (2006). Performance Appraisal, Performance Management andImproving Individual Performance: A Motivational Framework. Management and OrganizationReview, 2(2), 253-277.
DeNisi, A. S., & Sonesh, S. (2011). The appraisal and management of performance at work. In S.Zedeck (Ed.), APA Handbooks in Psychology. APA handbook of industrial and organizationalpsychology, Vol. 2. Selecting and developing members for the organization (pp. 255-279).Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.
DeNisi, A. S., Wilson, M. S., & Biteman, J. (2014). Research and practice in HRM: A historicalperspective. Human Resource Management Review, 24(3), 219-231.
Denison, D. R. (1984). Bringing corporate culture to the bottom line. Organizational Dynamics, 13(2),5-22.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2000). Paradigms and perspectives in transition. Handbook ofQualitative Research, 2, 157-162.
Dessler, G. (2006). A Framework for Human Resource Management. Pearson Education India.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educationalprocess. Lexington, MA: Heath, 35(64), 690-698.
Dewey, J. (1938). 1963. 2007. Experience and education.
Di Milia, L., & Birdi, K. (2010). The relationship between multiple levels of learning practices andobjective and subjective organizational financial performance. Journal of OrganizationalBehavior, 31(4), 481-498.
Diamantopoulos, A., & Riefler, P. (2011). Using formative measures in international marketingmodels: a cautionary tale using consumer animosity as an example. In Measurement andResearch Methods in International Marketing (pp. 11-30). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
202
Dijkstra, Theo (2010), “Latent Variables and Indices: Herman Wold’s Basic Design and Partial LeastSquares,” in Handbook of Partial Least Squares: Concepts, Methods and Applications inMarketing and Related Fields, Vincenzo Esposito Vinzi, Wynne W. Chin, Jörg Henseler, andHuiwen Wang, eds., Berlin: Springer, 23–46.
Dixon, N. M. (2000). Common Knowledge: How Companies Thrive by Sharing What They Know.Harvard Business School Press.
Doornbos, A. J., Simons, R. J., & Denessen, E. (2008). Relations between characteristics of workplacepractices and types of informal work‐related learning: A survey study among DutchPolice. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 19(2), 129-151.
Dorenbosch, L., Engen, M. L. V., & Verhagen, M. (2005). On‐the‐job innovation: the impact of jobdesign and human resource management through production ownership. Creativity andInnovation Management, 14(2), 129-141.
Dorenbosch, L., Reuver, R. d., & Sanders, K. (2006). Getting the HR Message Across: The Linkagebetween Line – HR Consensus and "Commitment Strength" among Hospital Employees.Management Revue, 17(3), 274-291.
Drucker, P. F. (1995). The New Productivity Challenge. Quality in Higher Education, 37, 45-53.
Dust, S. B., Resick, C. J., & Mawritz, M. B. (2014). Transformational leadership, psychologicalempowerment, and the moderating role of mechanistic–organic contexts. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 35(3), 413-433.
Dyer, J. H., & Nobeoka, K. (2000). Creating and Managing A High‐Performance Knowledge‐SharingNetwork: The Toyota Case. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 345-367.
Dyer, L., & Reeves, T. (1995). Human Resource Strategies and Firm Performance: What Do We Knowand Where Do We Need To Go?. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 6(3),656-670.
Eastman, K. K. (1994). In the eyes of the beholder: An attributional approach to ingratiation andorganizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 37(5), 1379-1391.
Edgar, F., & Geare, A. (2009). Inside the “black box” and “HRM”. International Journal ofManpower, 30(3), 220-236.
Ellinger, A. D. (2005). Contextual Factors Influencing Informal Learning in a Workplace Setting: TheCase of “Reinventing Itself Company”. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 16(3), 389-415.
Else Ouweneel, A. P., Taris, T. W., van Zolingen, S. J., & Schreurs, P. J. (2009). How taskcharacteristics and social support relate to managerial learning: Empirical evidence from Dutchhome care. The Journal of psychology, 143(1), 28-44.
Enos, M. D., Kehrhahn, M. T., & Bell, A. (2003). Informal Learning and the Transfer of Learning:How Managers Develop Proficiency. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 14(4), 369-387.
Eraut*, M. (2004). Informal learning in the workplace. Studies in Continuing Education, 26(2), 247-273.
Eraut, M. (2000). Non‐formal learning and tacit knowledge in professional work. British Journal ofEducational Psychology, 70(1), 113-136.
Eraut, M. (2002). Developing Professional Knowledge and Competence. Routledge.
203
F. Hair Jr, J., Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L., & G. Kuppelwieser, V. (2014). Partial least squares structuralequation modeling (PLS-SEM) An emerging tool in business research. European BusinessReview, 26(2), 106-121.
Farndale, E., & Sanders, K. (2017). Conceptualizing HRM system strength through a cross-culturallens. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 28(1), 132-148.
Farr, J. L., & Ford, C. M. (1990). Individual innovation.
Feiz, D., Dehghani Soltani, M., & Farsizadeh, H. (2017). The effect of knowledge sharing on thepsychological empowerment in higher education mediated by organizational memory. Studies inHigher Education, 44(1), 3-19.
Ferguson, K. L., & Reio Jr, T. G. (2010). Human resource management systems and firmperformance. Journal of Management Development, 29(5), 471-494.
Fernandez, S., & Moldogaziev, T. (2012). Using employee empowerment to encourage innovativebehavior in the public sector. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23(1),155-187.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory andresearch.
Fletcher, C., & Williams, R. (1996). Performance management, job satisfaction and organizationalcommitment1. British Journal of Management, 7(2), 169-179.
Flick, U. (2011). Mixing methods, triangulation, and integrated research. Qualitative inquiry andglobal crises, 132.
Flick, U. (Ed.). (2013). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Data Analysis. Sage.
Fong, K. H., & Snape, E. (2015). Empowering leadership, psychological empowerment and employeeOutcomes: Testing a multi‐level mediating model. British Journal of Management, 26(1), 126-138.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservablevariables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 39-50.
Foss, N. J., Husted, K., & Michailova, S. (2010). Governing knowledge sharing in organizations:Levels of analysis, governance mechanisms, and research directions. Journal of Managementstudies, 47(3), 455-482.
French Jr, J. R. (1956). A formal theory of social power. Psychological Review, 63(3), 181.
Frenkel, S. J., Li, M., & Restubog, S. L. D. (2012A). Management, organizational justice andemotional exhaustion among Chinese migrant workers: Evidence from two manufacturingfirms. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 50(1), 121-147.
Frenkel, S., Restubog, S. L. D., & Bednall, T. (2012B). How employee perceptions of HR policy andpractice influence discretionary work effort and co-worker assistance: evidence from twoorganizations. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(20), 4193-4210.
Fugate, M., Kinicki, A. J., & Prussia, G. E. (2008). Employee coping with organizational change: Anexamination of alternative theoretical perspectives and models. Personnel Psychology, 61(1), 1-36.
204
Gagné, M. (2009). A model of knowledge‐sharing motivation. Human Resource Management, 48(4),571-589.
Gardner, T. M., Moynihan, L. M., Park, H. J., & Wright, P. M. (2001). Beginning to unlock the blackbox in the HR firm performance relationship: the impact of HR practices on employee attitudesand employee outcomes. CAHRS Working Paper Series, 75. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University,School of Industrial and Labor Relations.
Geijsel, Femke P., Sleegers, Peter J. C., Stoel, Reinoud D., & Krüger, Meta L. (2009). The Effect ofTeacher Psychological and School Organizational and Leadership Factors on Teachers'Professional Learning in Dutch Schools. The Elementary School Journal, 109(4), 406-427.
Geisser, S. (1974). A Predictive Approach to the Random Effect Model. Biometrika, 61(1), 101-107.
Gerhart, B., & Milkovich, G. T. (1990). Organizational differences in managerial compensation andfinancial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 663-691.
Gerhart, B., Wright, P. M., & McMahan, G. C. (2000). Measurement error in research on the humanresources and firm performance relationship: Further evidence and analysis. PersonnelPsychology, 53(4), 855-872.
Gibbs, G. (1988). Learning by doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods. Further EducationUnit.
Gijbels, D., Raemdonck, I., & Vervecken, D. (2010). Influencing work-related learning: The role of jobcharacteristics and self-directed learning orientation in part-time vocational education. Vocationsand Learning, 3(3), 239-255.
Gilbert, C., Winne, S. D., & Sels, L. (2015). Strong HRM processes and line managers’ effective HRMimplementation: a balanced view. Human Resource Management Journal, 25(4), 600-616.
Grant, R. M. (1996A). Prospering in dynamically-competitive environments: Organizational capabilityas knowledge integration. Organization Science, 7(4), 375-387.
Grant, R. M. (1996B). Toward a knowledge‐based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal,17(S2), 109-122.
GROOT, E. D., JAARSMA, D., ENDEDIJK, M., MAINHARD, T., LAM, I., SIMONS, R.-J., &BEUKELEN, P. V. (2012). Critically Reflective Work Behavior of Health Care Professionals.Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 31(1), 48-57.
Gruman, J. A., & Saks, A. M. (2011). Performance management and employee engagement. HumanResource Management Review, 21(2), 123-136.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. Handbook ofQualitative Research, 2(163-194), 105.
Guest, D. E. (1997). Human resource management and performance: a review and researchagenda. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 8(3), 263-276.
Guest, D. E. (2011). Human resource management and performance: still searching for someanswers. Human Resource Management Journal, 21(1), 3-13.
Guest, D., & Conway, N. (2011). The impact of HR practices, HR effectiveness and a ‘strong HRsystem’on organisational outcomes: a stakeholder perspective. The International Journal ofHuman Resource Management, 22(8), 1686-1702.
205
Guo, S., & Hussey, D. L. (2004). Nonprobability sampling in social work research: Dilemmas,consequences, and strategies. Journal of Social Service Research, 30(3), 1-18.
Guthrie, J. P. (2001). High-involvement work practices, turnover, and productivity: Evidence fromNew Zealand. Academy of Management Journal, 44(1), 180-190.
Habermas, J. (1981). Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Beacon Press.
Hair Jr, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2016). A primer on partial least squaresstructural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publications.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. Y. A., Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2010). RE [2010]: MultivariateData Analysis. A Global Perspective.
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A Primer on Partial Least SquaresStructural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) (2nd ed.). London, United Kingdom: SAGEPublications Ltd.
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal ofMarketing theory and Practice, 19(2), 139-152.
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2013). Partial least squares structural equation modeling:Rigorous applications, better results and higher acceptance. Long Range Planning, 46(1-2), 1-12.
Hall, D. T. (1996). Protean Careers of the 21st Century. Academy of Management Executive, 10(4), 8-16.
Hall, R., & Stevens, R. (1996). Teaching/Learning Events in the Workplace: A Comparative Analysisof their organizational and Interactional Structure. In Proceedings of the Eighteenth AnnualConference of the Cognitive Science Society: July 12-15, 1996, University of California, SanDiego (Vol. 18, p. 160). Psychology Press.
Han, S. H., Seo, G., Yoon, S. W., & Yoon, D. Y. (2016). Transformational leadership and knowledgesharing: Mediating roles of employee’s empowerment, commitment, and citizenshipbehaviors. Journal of Workplace Learning, 28(3), 130-149.
Hancer, M., & George, R. T. (2003). Psychological empowerment of non-supervisory employeesworking in full-service restaurants. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 22(1), 3-16.
Hancer, M., George, R. T., & Kim, P. B. (2005). An Examination of Dimensions of PsychologicalEmpowerment Scale for Service Employees. Psychological Reports, 97, 667-672.
Hansen, S., & Avital, M. (2005). Contributing your" wisdom" or showing your cards: A quantitativeinquiry of knowledge sharing behavior. AMCIS 2005 Proceedings, 342.
Haq, M. A. u., Usman, M., & Hussain, J. (2017). Enhancing Employee Innovative Behavior: TheModerating Effects of Organizational Tenure. Pakistan Journal of Commerce and SocialSciences, 11(3).
Harackiewicz, J. M., Sansone, C., & Manderlink, G. (1985). Competence, achievement orientation, andintrinsic motivation: A process analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(2),493.
206
Harley, B., Allen, B. C., & Sargent, L. D. (2007). High performance work systems and employeeexperience of work in the service sector: The case of aged care. British Journal of IndustrialRelations, 45(3), 607-633.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.
Hau, Y. S., Kim, B., Lee, H., & Kim, Y. G. (2013). The effects of individual motivations and socialcapital on employees’ tacit and explicit knowledge sharing intentions. International Journal ofInformation Management, 33(2), 356-366.
Hauff, S., Alewell, D., & Hansen, N. K. (2017). HRM System Strength and HRM TargetAchievement—Toward A Broader Understanding of HRM Processes Human ResourceManagement, 56(5), 715-729.
Heathfield, S. (2007). Performance Appraisals Don't Work-What Does?. The Journal for Quality andParticipation, 30(1), 6.
Heider, F. The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley, 1958.
Helyer, R. (2015). Learning through reflection: the critical role of reflection in work-based learning(WBL). Journal of Work-Applied Management, 7(1), 15-27.
Henseler, J., & Chin, W. W. (2010). A comparison of approaches for the analysis of interaction effectsbetween latent variables using partial least squares path modeling. Structural EquationModeling, 17(1), 82-109.
Henseler, J., Hubona, G., & Ray, P. A. (2016). Using PLS path modeling in new technology research:updated guidelines. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 116(1), 2-20.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling ininternational marketing. In New Challenges to International Marketing (pp. 277-319). EmeraldGroup Publishing Limited.
Herciu, L. (2015). Pakistan: Another BRICK in the wall. New York, NY: Thomson & Reuters.
Hetidrix, W. H., Robbins, T., Miller, J., & Summers, T. P. (1998). Effects of Procedural andDistributive Justice on Factors Predictive of Turnover. Journal of Social Behavior andPersonality, 13(4), 611-632.
Hewett, R., Shantz, A., Mundy, J., & Alfes, K. (2018). Attribution theories in Human ResourceManagement research: a review and research agenda. The International Journal of HumanResource Management, 29(1), 87-126.
Hicks, E., Bagg, R., Doyle, W., & Young, J. D. (2007). Canadian accountants: Examining workplacelearning. Journal of Workplace Learning, 19(2), 61-77.
Hj Ramli, N. H., Alavi, M., Mehrinezhad, S. A., & Ahmadi, A. (2018). Academic Stress and Self-Regulation among University Students in Malaysia: Mediator Role of Mindfulness. BehavioralSciences, 8(1), 12.
Ho, H. (2010). Theorizing HRM and (Firm) Performance Relationship from the Human NaturePerspective'. International Journal of Arts and Science, 3(7), 327-41.
Hoekstra, A., & Korthagen, F. (2011). Teacher Learning in a Context of Educational Change: InformalLearning Versus Systematically Supported Learning. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(1), 76-92.
207
Hoekstra, A., Korthagen, F., Brekelmans, M., Beijaard, D., & Imants, J. (2009). Experienced teachers’informal workplace learning and perceptions of workplace conditions. Journal of WorkplaceLearning, 21(4), 276-298.
Holley, D., Santos, P., Cook, J., & Kerr, M. (2016). “Cascades, torrents & drowning” in information:seeking help in the contemporary general practitioner practice in the UK. Interactive LearningEnvironments, 24(5), 954-967.
Honey, P., & Mumford, A. (2000). The learning styles helper's guide. Maidenhead: Peter HoneyPublications.
Hooff, B. V. d., Schouten, A. P., & Simonovski, S. (2012). What one feels and what one knows: Theinfluence of emotions on attitudes and intentions towards knowledge sharing. Journal ofKnowledge Management, 16, 148-158.
Hulland, J. (1999). Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review offour recent studies. Strategic Management Journal, 20(2), 195-204.
Huselid, M. A. (1995). The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity,and corporate financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 38(3), 635-672.
Huselid, M. A., & Becker, B. E. (2000). Comment on “Measurement error in research on humanresources and firm performance: How much error is there and how does it influence effectsizeestimates?” by Gerhart, Wright, Mc Mahan, and Snell. Personnel Psychology, 53(4), 835-854.
Huselid, M. A., Jackson, S. E., & Schuler, R. S. (1997). Technical and strategic human resourcesmanagement effectiveness as determinants of firm performance. Academy of ManagementJournal, 40(1), 171-188.
Hyde, K. F. (2000). Recognising deductive processes in qualitative research. Qualitative marketresearch: An international journal, 3(2), 82-90.
Ichniowski, C., & Shaw, K. (1999). The effects of human resource management systems on economicperformance: An international comparison of US and Japanese plants. ManagementScience, 45(5), 704-721.
Ichniowski, C., Shaw, K., & Prennushi, G. (1997). The effects of human resource managementpractices on productivity: A study of steel finishing lines. The American Economic Review, 291-313.
Inkpen, A. C. (1998). Learning and knowledge acquisition through international strategicalliances. Academy of Management Perspectives, 12(4), 69-80.
Iorga, M., Dondas, C., & Zugun-Eloae, C. (2018). Depressed as Freshmen, Stressed as Seniors: TheRelationship between Depression, Perceived Stress and Academic Results among MedicalStudents. Behavioral Sciences, 8(8), 70.
Jacobs, R. (2003). Structured on-the-job training: Unleashing employee expertise in the workplace.Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Jacobs, R. L., & Park, Y. (2009). A Proposed Conceptual Framework of Workplace Learning:Implications Development for Theory Development and Research in Human Resource. HumanResource Development Review, 8(2), 133-150.
Jain, K. K. (2005). Knowledge sharing–role of human resource management. Indian Journal ofTraining and Development, 35(4).
208
Janssen, O. (2000). Job demands, perceptions of effort‐reward fairness and innovative workbehaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73, 287–302.
Janssen, O. (2005). The joint impact of perceived influence and supervisor supportiveness on employeeinnovative behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 78, 573–579.
Janssen, O., Van de Vliert, E., & West, M. (2004). The bright and dark sides of individual and groupinnovation: A special issue introduction. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(2), 129-145.
Javed, B., Khan, A. A., Bashir, S., & Arjoon, S. (2017). Impact of ethical leadership on creativity: therole of psychological empowerment. Current Issues in Tourism, 20(8), 839-851.
Jayaram, J., Droge, C., & Vickery, S. K. (1999). The impact of human resource management practiceson manufacturing performance. Journal of Operations Management, 18(1), 1-20.
Jeon, K. S., & Kim, K. N. (2012). How do organizational and task factors influence informal learningin the workplace?. Human Resource Development International, 15(2), 209-226.
Jeon, K. S., & Kim, K.-N. (2012). How do organizational and task factors influence informal learningin the workplace? Human Resource Development International, 15(2), 209-226.
Jeon, S., Kim, Y. G., & Koh, J. (2011). An integrative model for knowledge sharing in communities-of-practice. Journal of Knowledge Management, 15(2), 251-269.
Jeong, S., Han, S. J., Lee, J., Sunalai, S., & Yoon, S. W. (2018). Integrative Literature Review onInformal Learning: Antecedents, Conceptualizations, and Future Directions. Human ResourceDevelopment Review, 1-25. doi:10.1177/1534484318772242
Jiang, K., Lepak, D. P., Han, K., Hong, Y., Kim, A., & Winkler, A. L. (2012A). Clarifying theconstruct of human resource systems: Relating human resource management to employeeperformance. Human Resource Management Review, 22(2), 73-85.
Jiang, K., Lepak, D. P., Hu, J., & Baer, J. C. (2012B). How does human resource managementinfluence organizational outcomes? A meta-analytic investigation of mediatingmechanisms. Academy of Management Journal, 55(6), 1264-1294.
Johns, C. (2000). Becoming a reflective practitioner: A reflective and holistic approach to clinicalnursing, practice development and clinical supervision. Oxford: Blackwell Science.
Jong, J. d., & Hartog, D. d. (2010). Measuring Innovative Work Behaviour. Creativity and InnovationManagement, 19(1), 23-36.
Jong, J. P. J. d., & Hartog, D. N. D. (2007). How leaders influence employees’ innovative behaviour.European Journal of Innovation Management, 10(1), 41-64.
Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIScommand language. Scientific Software International.
Jöreskog, K. G., & Wold, H. (1982). Systems under indirect observation, Part II. North-HollandPublishing Company, Amsterdam, 68, 108.
Kamphorst, J. J., & Swank, O. H. (2018). The role of performance appraisals in motivatingemployees. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 27(2), 251-269.
Kanfer, R. (1992). Work motivation: New directions in theory and research. International Review ofIndustrial and Organizational Psychology, 7, 1-53.
209
Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and Women of the Corporation. New York: Basic Kanter Men and Womenof the Corporation1977.
Kanter, R. M. (1988). When a thousand flowers bloom: Structural, collective, and social conditions forinnovation in organizations: Elsevier Science.
Katou, A. A. (2012). Investigating reverse causality between human resource management policies andorganizational performance in small firms. Management Research Review, 35(2), 134-156.
Katou, A. A., & Budhwar, P. S. (2010). Causal relationship between HRM policies and organisationalperformance: Evidence from the Greek manufacturing sector. European ManagementJournal, 28(1), 25-39.
Katou, A. A., Budhwar, P. S., & Patel, C. (2014). Content Vs. Process In The HRM-PerformanceRelationship: An Empirical Examination. Human Resource Management, 53(4), 527-544.
Katz, D. (1964). The motivational basis of organizational behavior. Behavioral Science, 9, pp. 131-143.
Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1966). The Social Psychology of Organizations. New York: John Wiley &Sons.
Katzenmeyer, M., & Moller, G. (2009). Awakening the sleeping giant: Helping teachers develop asleaders. Corwin Press.
Kaufman, B. E. (2010). SHRM theory in the post‐Huselid era: why it is fundamentallymisspecified. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 49(2), 286-313.
Kaufman, B. E. (2015). The RBV theory foundation of strategic HRM: critical flaws, problems forresearch and practice, and an alternative economics paradigm. Human Resource ManagementJournal, 25(4), 516-540.
Keith, N., Unger, J. M., Rauch, A., & Frese, M. (2016). Informal Learning and EntrepreneurialSuccess: A Longitudinal Study of Deliberate Practice among Small Business Owners. AppliedPsychology: An International Review, 65(3), 515-540.
Kelley, H. H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. In Nebraska Symposium on Motivation.University of Nebraska Press.
Kelley, H. H. (1973). The processes of causal attribution. American Psychologist, 28(2), 107.
Kelley, H. H., & Michela, J. L. (1980). Attribution theory and research. Annual Review ofPsychology, 31(1), 457-501.
Kepes, S., & Delery, J. E. (2006). Designing effective HRM systems: The issue of HRM strategy. TheHuman Resources Revolution: Why Putting People First Matters, 55-76.
Khalid, M. M., Rehman, C. A., & Ashraf, M. (2011). Exploring the link between Kirkpatrick (KP) andcontext, input, process and product (CIPP) training evaluation models, and its effect on trainingevaluation in public organizations of Pakistan. African Journal of Business Management, 6(1),274-279.
Khan, Z. W., Tanveer, M., & Saleem, I. (2013). Analyzing Learning Environment: A ComparativeStudy of Public and Private Sector Schools of Pakistan. Journal of Management &Organizational Studies, 2(1), 49-54.
210
Khilji, S. E., & Wang, X. (2006). ‘Intended’ and ‘implemented’ HRM: the missing linchpin in strategichuman resource management research. The International Journal of Human ResourceManagement, 17(7), 1171-1189.
Killion, J. P., & Todnem, G. R. (1991). A process for personal theory building. EducationalLeadership, 48(6), 14-16.
Kim, W., & Park, J. (2017). Examining Structural Relationships between Work Engagement,Organizational Procedural Justice, Knowledge Sharing, and Innovative Work Behavior forSustainable Organizations. Sustainability, 9(2).
Kivunja, C., & Kuyini, A. B. (2017). Understanding and Applying Research Paradigms in EducationalContexts. International Journal of Higher Education, 6(5), 26-41.
Kleysen, R. F., & Street, C. T. (2001). Toward a multi-dimensional measure of individual innovativebehavior. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 2(3), 284-296.
Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The Effects of Feedback Interventions on Performance: AHistorical Review, a Meta-Analysis, and a Preliminary Feedback Intervention Theory.Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254-284.
Knol, J., & Van Linge, R. (2009). Innovative behaviour: The effect of structural and psychologicalempowerment on nurses. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 65(2), 359-370.
Knowles, M. S. (1984). Andragogy in action: Applying modern principles of adult education.
Koberg, C. S., Boss, R. W., Senjem, J. C., & Goodman, E. A. (1999). Antecedents and outcomes ofempowerment: Empirical evidence from the health care industry. Group & OrganizationManagement, 24(1), 71-91.
Kock, N., & Lynn, G. (2012). Lateral collinearity and misleading results in variance-based SEM: Anillustration and recommendations.
Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning as the science of learning and development.
Kraiger, K., & Ford, J. K. (2007). The Expanding Role of Workplace Training: Themes and TrendsInfluencing Training Research and Practice. (L. L. Koppes ed.). Mahwah, NJ, US: LawrenceErlbaum Associates Publishers.
Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: how difficulties in recognizing one'sown incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology, 77(6), 1121.
Kwakman, K. (2003). Factors affecting teachers’ participation in professional learning activities.Teaching and Teacher Education, 19, 149-170.
Kyndt, E., Gijbels, D., Grosemans, I., & Donche, V. (2016). Teachers’ everyday professionaldevelopment: Mapping informal learning activities, antecedents, and learning outcomes. Reviewof Educational Research, 86(4), 1111-1150.
Kyndt, E., & Baert, H. (2013). Antecedents of Employees’ Involvement in Work Related Learning: ASystematic Review. Review of Educational Research, 83(2), 273-313.
Kyndt, E., Dochy, F., & Nijs, H. (2009). Learning conditions for non-formal and informal workplacelearning. Journal of Workplace Learning, 21(5), 369-383.
211
Kyndt, E., Govaerts, N., Verbeek, E., & Dochy, F. (2013). Development and validation of aquestionnaire on informal workplace learning outcomes: A study among socio-educational careworkers. The British Journal of Social Work, 44(8), 2391-2410.
Lai, H. J., Wu, M. L., & Li, A. T. (2011). Adults' participation in informal learning activities: Keyfindings from the adult education participation survey in Taiwan. Australian Journal of AdultLearning, 51(3), 409.
Lai, H. J., Wu, M. L., & Li, A. T. (2011). Adults' participation in informal learning activities: Keyfindings from the adult education participation survey in Taiwan. Australian Journal of AdultLearning, 51(3), 409.
Laschinger, H. K. S., Finegan, J., Shamian, J., & Wilk, P. (2001). Impact of structural andpsychological empowerment on job strain in nursing work settings: expanding Kanter’smodel. Journal of Nursing Administration, 31(5), 260-272.
Lawler III, E. E. (1992). The ultimate advantage: Creating the high-involvement organization.
Lawler III, E. E. (1994). From job‐based to competency‐based organizations. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 15(1), 3-15.
Lawler, P. A. (2003). Teachers as adult learners: A new perspective. New Directions for Adult andContinuing Education, 2003(98), 15-22.
Ledoux, K., Forchuk, C., Higgins, C., & Rudnick, A. (2018). The effect of organizational and personalvariables on the ability to practice compassionately. Applied Nursing Research, 41, 15-20.
Lee Endres, M., Endres, S. P., Chowdhury, S. K., & Alam, I. (2007). Tacit knowledge sharing, self-efficacy theory, and application to the Open Source community. Journal of KnowledgeManagement, 11(3), 92-103.
Lee, H., & Choi, B. (2003). Knowledge management enablers, processes, and organizationalperformance: An integrative view and empirical examination. Journal of Managementinformation systems, 20(1), 179-228.
Lepak, D. P., & Snell, S. A. (2002). Examining the human resource architecture: The relationshipsamong human capital, employment, and human resource configurations. Journal ofManagement, 28(4), 517-543.
Lepak, D. P., Liao, H., Chung, Y., & Harden, E. E. (2006). A conceptual review of human resourcemanagement systems in strategic human resource management research. In Research inPersonnel and Human Resources Management (pp. 217-271). Emerald Group PublishingLimited.
Lewin, K. (1935). A dynamic theory of personality: Selected papers (DK Adams & KE Zener,Trans.). New York: McGraw.
Lewis, M., & Haviland-Jones, J. M. (2000). Handbook of emotions (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.
Li, J., Brake, G., Champion, A., Fuller, T., Gabel, S., & Hatcher-Busch, L. (2009). Workplace learning:the roles of knowledge accessibility and management. Journal of Workplace Learning, 21(4),347-364.
Li, X. (2010). From a process perspective: How an HRM system influences employee attitudes inChinese hotels. The University of New South Wales.
212
Li, X., Frenkel, S. J., & Sanders, K. (2011). Strategic HRM as process: how HR system andorganizational climate strength influence Chinese employee attitudes. The International Journalof Human Resource Management, 22(9), 1825-1842.
Liao, H., Toya, K., Lepak, D. P., & Hong, Y. (2009). Do they see eye to eye? Management andemployee perspectives of high-performance work systems and influence processes on servicequality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 371.
Liden, R. C., & Arad, S. (1996). A power perspective of empowerment and work groups: Implicationsfor human resources management research. Research in Personnel and Human ResourcesManagement, 14, 205-252.
Lilley, D., & Hinduja, S. (2007). Police officer performance appraisal and overall satisfaction. Journalof Criminal Justice, 35(2), pp. 137-150.
Lin, H.-F. (2007). Knowledge sharing and firm innovation capability: an empirical study. InternationalJournal of Manpower, 28(3/4), 315-332.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry (Vol. 75). Sage.
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. Springer Science &Business Media.
Lindeman, E. C. (1926). Andragogik: The method of teaching adults. Workers’ Education, 4(3), 8.
Linden, D. V. D., Keijsers, G. P., Eling, P., & Schaijk, R. V. (2005). Work stress and attentionaldifficulties: An initial study on burnout and cognitive failures. Work & Stress, 19(1), 23-36.
Ling, T. N., San, L. Y., & Hock, N. T. (2009). Trust: facilitator of knowledge-sharingculture. Communications of the IBIMA, 7(15), 137-142.
Liu, N. C., & Liu, M. S. (2011). Human resource practices and individual knowledge-sharingbehavior–an empirical study for Taiwanese R&D professionals. The International Journal ofHuman Resource Management, 22(04), 981-997.
Livingstone, D. W. (1999). Exploring The Icebergs Of Adult Learning: Findings Of The First CanadianSurvey Of Informal Learning Practices. WALL Working Paper, 19, 1-23.
Livingstone, D. W. (2001). Expanding notions of work and learning: Profiles of latent power. NewDirections for Adult and Continuing Education, 2001(92), 19-30.
Locke, E. A., & Schweiger, D. M. (1979). Participation in decision-making: One more look. Researchin Organizational Behavior, 1(10), 265-339.
Lodhi, S. A., & Ahmad, M. (2010). Dynamics of Voluntary Knowledge Sharing inOrganizations. Pakistan Journal of Commerce & Social Sciences, 4(2).
Lohman, M. C. (2000). Environmental inhibitors to informal learning in the workplace: A case study ofpublic-school teachers. Adult Education Quarterly, 50(2), 83-101.
Lohman, M. C. (2005). A Survey of Factors Influencing the Engagement of Two Professional Groupsin Informal Workplace Learning Activities. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 16(4),501-527.
Lohman, M. C. (2006). Factors influencing teachers' engagement in informal learning activities.Journal of Workplace Learning, 18(3), 141-156.
213
Lohman, M. C. (2009). A survey of factors influencing the engagement of information technologyprofessionals in informal learning activities. Information Technology, Learning, andPerformance Journal, 25, 43-53.
Lohmöller, J. B. (2013). Latent variable path modeling with partial least squares. Springer Science &Business Media.
London, M., & Sessa, V. I. (2006). Group Feedback for Continuous Learning. Human ResourceDevelopment Review, 5(3), 303-329.
Longenecker, C. O., Sims Jr, H. P., & Gioia, D. A. (1987). Behind the mask: The politics of employeeappraisal. Academy of Management Perspectives, 1(3), 183-193.
Luan, J., & Serban, A. M. (2002). Technologies, products, and models supporting knowledgemanagement. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2002(113), 85-104.
MacKenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, P. M., & Jarvis, C. B. (2005). The problem of measurement modelmisspecification in behavioral and organizational research and some recommendedsolutions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(4), 710.
Macky, K., & Boxall, P. (2007). The relationship between ‘high-performance work practices’ andemployee attitudes: an investigation of additive and interaction effects. The InternationalJournal of Human Resource Management, 18(4), 537-567.
Macky, K., & Boxall, P. (2009). Employee well-being and union membership. New Zealand Journal ofEmployment Relations, 34(3), 14.
Mahmood, K. (2016). Overall Assessment of the Higher Education Sector. Higher EducationCommission (HEC): H-9, Islamabad, Pakistan, 1-80.
Majoka, M. I., & Khan, M. I. (2017). Education Policy Provisions and Objectives. A Review ofPakistani Education Policies. Italian Journal of Sociology of Education, 9(2).
Malcolm, J., Hodkinson, P., & Colley, H. (2003). The interrelationships between informal and formallearning. Journal of Workplace Learning, 15(7/8), 313-318.
Manuti, A., Pastore, S., Scardigno, A. F., Giancaspro, M. L., & Morciano, D. (2015). Formal andinformal learning in the workplace: a research review. International Journal of Training andDevelopment, 19(1), 1-17.
Marsick, V. J. (1988A). A new era in staff development. New Directions for Adult and ContinuingEducation, 1988 (38), 9-21.
Marsick, V. J. (1988B). Learning in the workplace: The case for Reflectivity and critical reflectivity.Adult Education Quarterly, 38(4), 187-198.
Marsick, V. J. (2009). Toward a unifying framework to support informal learning theory, research andpractice. Journal of Workplace Learning, 21(4), 265-275.
Marsick, V. J., & Volpe, M. (1999). The Nature and Need for Informal Learning. Advances inDeveloping Human Resources, 1(3), 1-9.
Marsick, V. J., & Watkins, K. E. (1990). Towards a theory of informal and incidental learning.London: Routledge.
Marsick, V. J., & Watkins, K. E. (2001). Informal and incidental learning. New Directions for Adultand Continuing Education, 2001(89), 25-34.
214
Marsick, V. J., Nicolaides, A., & Watkins, K. E. (2014). Adult learning theory and application inHRD. Handbook of Human Resource Development, 40-61.
Marsick, V. J., Nicolaides, A., & Watkins, K. E. (2014). Adult Learning Theory and Application inHRD (N. E. Chalofsky, T. S. Rocco & M. L. Morris ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
Marsick, V. J., Volpe, M., & Watkins, K. E. (1999). Theory and Practice of Informal learning in theknowledge era. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 1 (3), 80-95.
Marsick, V. J., Watkins, K. E., Callahan, M. W., & Volpe, M. (2006). Reviewing Theory and Researchon Informal and Incidental Learning. ERIC. online submission.
Marsick, V., & Watkins, K. (1996). A framework for the learning organization. In Action: Creating theLearning Organization, American Society for Training and Development, Alexandria VA, 3-12.
Mathieu, J. E., Gilson, L. L., & Ruddy, T. M. (2006). Empowerment and team effectiveness: anempirical test of an integrated model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(1), pp. 97-108.
Maxwell, B. (2014). Improving workplace learning of lifelong learning sector trainee teachers in theUK. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 38(3), 377-399.
Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (1999). The effect of the performance appraisal system on trust formanagement: A field quasi-experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(1), 123.
Menon, S. (2001). Employee empowerment: An integrative psychological approach. AppliedPsychology, 50(1), 153-180.
Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2007). Learning in Adulthood: AComprehensive Guide. John Wiley & Sons.
Messersmith, J. G., Patel, P. C., Lepak, D. P., & Gould-Williams, J. S. (2011). Unlocking the BlackBox: Exploring the Link Between High-Performance Work Systems and Performance. Journalof Applied Psychology, 96(6), 1105-1118.
Mihail, D. M., & Kloutsiniotis, P. V. (2016). The effects of high-performance work systems on hospitalemployees' work-related well-being: Evidence from Greece. European ManagementJournal, 34(4), 424-438.
Miles, R. E., & Snow, C. C. (1984). Designing Strategic Human Resources Systems (pp. 36-52).Institute of Industrial Relations, University of California.
Montani, F., Odoardi, C., & Battistelli, A. (2014). Individual and contextual determinants of innovativework behaviour: Proactive goal generation matters. Journal of Occupational and OrganizationalPsychology, 87(4), 645-670.
Moolenaar, N. M., Daly, A. J., & Sleegers, P. J. (2010). Occupying the principal position: Examiningrelationships between transformational leadership, social network position, and schools’innovative climate. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(5), 623-670.
Morgan, D. L. (2007). Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: Methodological implications ofcombining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 48-76.
Morgeson, F. P., & Campion, M. A. (2003). Work design. Handbook of Psychology: Industrial andOrganizational Psychology, 12(2), 423-452.
215
Mumford, A., & Honey, P. (1992). Questions and answers on learning styles questionnaire. Industrialand Commercial Training, 24(7).
Mumford, M. D. (2000). Managing creative people: Strategies and tactics for innovation. HumanResource Management Review, 10(3), 313-351.
Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. (1995). Understanding Performance Appraisal: Social,Organizational, and Goal-Based Perspectives. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.
Nankervis, A., Miyamoto, Y., Taylor, R., & Milton-Smith, J. (2005). Managing Services. CambridgeUniversity Press.
Nawab, A. (2011). Workplace learning in Pakistani schools: a myth or reality?. Journal of WorkplaceLearning, 23(7), 421-434.
Neal, A., West, M. A., & Patterson, M. G. (2005). Do organizational climate and competitive strategymoderate the relationship between human resource management and productivity?. Journal ofManagement, 31(4), 492-512.
Neher, M. S., Ståhl, C., & Nilsen, P. (2015). Learning opportunities in rheumatology practice: aqualitative study. Journal of Workplace Learning, 27(4), 282-297.
Newmann, F. M., King, M. B., & Youngs, P. (2000). Professional development that addresses schoolcapacity: Lessons from urban elementary schools. American Journal of Education, 108(4), 259-299.
Ngari, J. M. K., & Ndirangu, L. N. (2014). Effects of Performance Appraisal Quality on Performanceof Employee in the Financial Sector: A Case of Investment Management Firms in Kenya.
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane‐Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: Amodel and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218.
Nicol, J. S., & Dosser, I. (2016). Understanding reflective practice. Nursing Standard, 30(36).
Nilsson, S., & Rubenson, K. (2014). On the determinants of employment-related organised educationand informal learning. Studies in Continuing Education, 36(3), 304-321.
Nisbet, G., Dunn, S., & Lincoln, M. (2015). Interprofessional team meetings: Opportunities forinformal interprofessional learning. Journal of interprofessional care, 29(5), 426-432.
Nishii, L. H., & Wright, P. M. (2007). Variability within organizations: implications for strategichuman resource management. CAHRS Working Paper #07–02.
Nishii, L. H., Lepak, D. P., & Schneider, B. (2008). Employee attributions of the “why” of HRpractices: Their effects on employee attitudes and behaviors, and customersatisfaction. Personnel Psychology, 61(3), 503-545.
Noe, R. A., & Wilk, S. L. (1993). Investigation of the factors that influence employees' participation indevelopment activities. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(2), 291.
Noe, R. A., Clarke, A. D. M., & Klein, H. J. (2014). Learning in the Twenty-First Century Workplace.The Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior 1, 245-275.
Noe, R. A., Tews, M. J., & Dachner, A. M. (2010). Learner Engagement: A New Perspective forEnhancing Our Understanding of Learner Motivation and Workplace Learning. The Academy ofManagement Annals, 4(1), 279-315.
216
Noe, R. A., Tews, M. J., & Marand, A. D. (2013). Individual differences and informal learning in theworkplace. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 83, 327-335.
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese CompaniesCreate the Dynamics of Innovation (Vol. 1). New York: Oxford University Press.
Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., & Hirata, T. (2008). Managing Flow: A Process Theory of the Knowledge-Based Firm. Springer.
O'Dell, C., & Grayson Jr, C. J. (1998). The transfer of internal knowledge and best practice: if only weknew what we know. New York, NY, 10020.
Omri, W. (2015). Innovative behavior and venture performance of SMEs: The moderating effect ofenvironmental dynamism. European Journal of Innovation Management, 18(2), 195-217.
Organ, D. W. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior: It's construct clean-up time. HumanPerformance, 10(2), 85-97.
Orlitzky, M., & Frenkel, S. J. (2005). Alternative pathways to high-performance workplaces. TheInternational Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(8), 1325-1348.
Orvis, K. A., & Leffler, G. P. (2011). Individual and contextual factors: An interactionist approach tounderstanding employee self-development. Personality and Individual Differences, 51(2), 172-177.
Ostroff, C., & Bowen, D. E. (2000). Moving HR to a higher level: HR practices and organizationaleffectiveness. In S. W. J. Kozlowski & K. J. Klein (Eds.), Multilevel Theory, Research, andMethods in Organizations (pp. pp. 211–266). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ostroff, C., & Bowen, D. E. (2016). Reflections on the 2014 Decade Award: Is There Strength In TheConstruct Of Hr System Strength? Academy of Management Review, 41(2), 196-214.
Özbebek, A., & Toplu, E. K. (2011). Empowered Employees’ Knowledge SharingBehavior. International Journal of Business and Management Studies, 3(2), 69-76.
Palaniammal, V. S., Iswarya, S., & Dr.B.Saravanan. (2016). Performance Appraisal System ofEmployees at Private Metals and Alloys Pvt. Ltd in Vellore. International Journal for Researchin Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET), 4(9), 173-179.
Parker, S. K., & Griffin, M. A. (2011). Understanding active psychological states: Embeddingengagement in a wider nomological net and closer attention to performance. European Journalof Work and Organizational Psychology, 20(1), 60-67.
Parsons, M., & Stephenson, M. (2005). Developing reflective practice in student teachers: collaborationand critical partnerships. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 11(1), 95-116.
Paul, R. J., Niehoff, B. P., & Turnley, W. H. (2000). Empowerment, expectations, and thepsychological contract-managing the dilemmas and gaining the advantages. The Journal ofSocio-Economics, 29(5), 471-485.
Peng, J., Zhang, G., Fu, Z., & Tan, Y. (2014). An empirical investigation on organizational innovationand individual creativity. Information Systems and e-Business Management, 12(3), 465-489.
Pereira, C. M. M., & Gomes, J. F. S. (2012). The strength of human resource practices andtransformational leadership: impact on organisational performance. The International Journal ofHuman Resource Management, 23(20), pp. 4301-4318.
217
Petter, S., Straub, D., & Rai, A. (2007). Specifying formative constructs in information systemsresearch. MIS Quarterly, 623-656.
Pfeffer, J., & Jeffrey, P. (1998). The human equation: Building profits by putting people first. HarvardBusiness Press.
Pfeffer, J., & Villeneuve, F. (1994). Competitive advantage through people: Unleashing the power ofthe work force (Vol. 61). Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Phung, V. D., Hawryszkiewycz, I., Chandran, D., & Ha, B. M. (2017). Knowledge Sharing andInnovative Work Behaviour: A Case Study from Vietnam. Paper presented at the AustralasianConference on Information Systems, Hobart, Australia.
Piening, E. P., Baluch, A. M., & Ridder, H.-G. (2014). Mind the Intended- Implemented Gap:Understanding Employees’ Perceptions Of HRM. Human Resource Management, 53(4), 545-567.
Pieterse, A. N., Knippenberg, D. v., Schippers, M., & Stam, D. (2010). Transformational andtransactional leadership and innovative behavior: The moderating role of psychologicalempowerment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(4), pp. 609-623.
Pifer, M. J., Baker, V. L., & Lunsford, L. G. (2015). Academic departments as networks of informallearning: faculty development at liberal arts colleges. International Journal for AcademicDevelopment, 20(2), 178-192.
Ployhart, R. E., & Moliterno, T. P. (2011). Emergence of the Human Capital Resource: A MultilevelModel. Academy of Management Review, 36(1), 127-150.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases inbehavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal ofapplied Psychology, 88(5), 879.
Polonsky, M. J., & Waller, D. S. (2018). Designing and managing a research project: A businessstudent's guide. Sage publications.
Purcell, J., & Hutchinson, S. (2007). Front‐line managers as agents in the HRM‐performance causalchain: theory, analysis and evidence. Human Resource Management Journal, 17(1), 3-20.
Quinn, R. E., & Spreitzer, G. M. (1997). The road to empowerment: Seven questions every leadershould consider. Organizational Dynamics, 26(2), 37-49.
Rasheed, M. I., Aslam, H. D., Yousaf, S., & Noor, A. (2011). A critical analysis of performanceappraisal system for teachers in public sector universities of Pakistan: A case study of theIslamia University of Bahawalpur (IUB). African Journal of Business Management, 5(9), 3735-3744.
Reece, I., & Walker, S. (2016). Teaching, training and learning: A practical guide. Business EducationPublishers Ltd.
Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J. M. (2017). SmartPLS 3. Boenningstedt: SmartPLS GmbH,http://www. smartpls. com.
Roberts, G. E. (2003). Employee Performance Appraisal System Participation: A Technique thatWorks. Public Personnel Management, 32(1), pp. 89–98.
Rothwell, W., Lindholm, J., & Wallick, W. G. (2003). What CEOs expect from corporate training:Building workplace learning and performance initiatives that advance. New York: AMACOM.
218
Rousseau, D. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations: Understanding written and unwrittenagreements. Sage Publications.
Rowe, A. D., & Fitness, J. (2018). Understanding the Role of Negative Emotions in Adult Learningand Achievement: A Social Functional Perspective. Behavioral Sciences, 8(2), 27.
Runhaar, P., & Sanders, K. (2016). Promoting teachers’ knowledge sharing. The fostering roles ofoccupational self-efficacy and Human Resources Management. Educational ManagementAdministration & Leadership, 44(5), 794-813.
Ryua, S., Hob, S. H., & Han, I. (2003). Knowledge sharing behavior of physicians in hospitals. ExpertSystems with Applications, 25(113-122).
Saba, F. (2003). Distance education theory, methodology, and epistemology: A pragmaticparadigm. Handbook of Distance Education, 1, 3-20.
Sadegh, T. (2015). Introducing a Model of Relationship between Knowledge Sharing Behavior, OCB,Psychological Empowerment and Psychological Capital: A Two-Wave Study. American Journalof Applied Psychology, 4(4), 95-104.
Sagnak, M. (2012). The empowering leadership and teacher’s innovative behavior: The mediating roleof innovation climate. African Journal of Business Management, 6(4), 1635-1641.
Sanders, K., & Frenkel, S. (2011). HR-line management relations: characteristics and effects. TheInternational Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(8), 1611-1617.
Sanders, K., & Yang, H. (2016). The HRM process approach: The influence of employees’ attributionto explain the HRM‐performance relationship. Human Resource Management, 55(2), 201-217.
Sanders, K., Dorenbosch, L., & de Reuver, R. (2008). The impact of individual and shared employeeperceptions of HRM on affective commitment: Considering climate strength. PersonnelReview, 37(4), 412-425.
Sanders, K., Shipton, H., & Gomes, J. F. (2014). Guest editors’ introduction: Is the HRM processimportant? Past, current, and future challenges. Human Resource Management, 53(4), 489-503.
Sarkar, A., & Singh, M. (2012). Non-work Domain Control as an Additional Dimension ofPsychological Empowerment of Women Teachers. Psychological Studies, 57(1), 86-94.
Sarkar, M. B., Echambadi, R., Cavusgil, S. T., & Aulakh, P. S. (2001). The influence ofcomplementarity, compatibility, and relationship capital on alliance performance. Journal of theAcademy of Marketing Science, 29(4), 358-373.
Saunders, M. N., & Lewis, P. (2012). Doing research in business & management: An essential guide toplanning your project. Pearson.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business students. Pearsoneducation.
Savaneviciene, A., & Stankeviciute, Z. (2011). Human resource management practices linkage withorganizational commitment and job satisfaction. Economics & Management, 16.
Schei, V., & Nerbo, I. (2015). The invisible learning ceiling: Informal learning among preschoolteachers and assistants in a Norwegian kindergarten. Human Resource Development Quarterly,26, 299-328.
Schneider, B. (1990). Organizational climate and culture. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1990.
219
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner how professionals think in action.
Schön, D. A. (1992). The theory of inquiry: Dewey's legacy to education. Curriculum Inquiry, 22(2),119-139.
Schugurensky, D. (2000). The forms of informal learning: Towards a conceptualization of the field.
Schürmann, E., & Beausaert, S. (2016). What are drivers for informal learning?. European Journal ofTraining and Development, 40(3), 130-154.
Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1994). Determinants of Innovative Behavior: A Path Model of IndividualInnovation in theWorkplace. The Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 580-607.
Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1998). Following the Leader in R&D: The Joint Effect of SubordinateProblem-Solving Style and Leader-Member Relations on Innovative Behavior. IEEETransactions on Engineering Management, 45(1), 3-10.
Seibert, S. E., Silver, S. R., & Randolph, W. A. (2004). Taking Empowerment to the Next Level: AMultiple-Level Model of Empowerment, Performance, And Satisfaction. Academy ofManagement Journal, 47(3), 332-349.
Seibert, S. E., Wang, G., & Courtright, S. H. (2011). Antecedents and Consequences of Psychologicaland Team Empowerment in Organizations: A Meta-Analytic Review. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 96(5), 981–1003.
Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2003). Research methodology for business.
Senge, P. M. (1991). The fifth discipline, the art and practice of the learningorganization. Performance+ Instruction, 30(5), 37-37.
Shahnawaz, M. G., & Juyal, R. C. (2006). Human resource management practices and organizationalcommitment in different organizations. Journal of the Indian Academy of AppliedPsychology, 32(3), 171-178.
Shantz, A., Arevshatian, L., Alfes, K., & Bailey, C. (2016). The effect of HRM attributions onemotional exhaustion and the mediating roles of job involvement and work overload. HumanResource Management Journal, 26(2), 172-191.
Shipton, H., West, M. A., Dawson, J., Birdi, K., & Patterson, M. (2006). HRM as a predictor ofinnovation. Human Resource Management Journal, 16(1), 3-27.
Sibaran, R. M., Tjakraatmadja, J. H., Putro, U. S., & Munir, N. S. (2015). The Influence ofmultigenerational workforce in effective informal team learning. Journal of Economics andBusiness Research, 21(2), 199-127.
Siegall, M., & Gardner, S. (2000). Contextual factors of psychological empowerment. PersonnelReview, 29(6), 703-722.
Skule, S. (2004). Learning conditions at work: a framework to understand and assess informal learningin the workplace. International Journal of Training and Development, 8(1), 8-20.
Slatten, T., & Mehmetoglu, M. (2011). What are the drivers for innovative behavior in frontline jobs?A study of the hospitality industry in Norway. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality &Tourism, 10(3), 254-272.
Smith, M. (1987). Feedback as a performance management technique. Management Solutions. 32, 20-9.
220
Smylie, M. A. (1988). The enhancement function of staff development: Organizational andpsychological antecedents to individual teacher change. American Educational ResearchJournal, 25(1), 1-30.
Somech, A., & Drach-Zahavy, A. (2000). Understanding extra-role behavior in schools: Therelationships between job satisfaction, sense of efficacy, and teachers’ extra-rolebehavior. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16(5-6), 649-659.
SPREITZER, G. (2007). Giving peace a chance: Organizational leadership, empowerment, and peace.Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28, 1077-1095.
Spreitzer, G. (2008). Taking Stock: A Review of More Than Twenty Years of Research onEmpowerment at Work. In J. Barling & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Handbook of OrganizationalBehavior (pp. 54–72). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological Empowerment in the Workplace: Dimensions, Measurement,and Validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38(5), 1442-1465.
Spreitzer, G. M. (1996). Social Structucal characteristics of psychological empowerment. Academy ofManagement Review, 39(2), 483-504.
Spreitzer, G. M., & Quinn, R. E. (1996). Empowering middle managers to be transformationalleaders. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 32(3), 237-261.
Spreitzer, G. M., Janasz, S. C. d., & Quinn, R. E. (1999). Empowered to Lead: The Role ofPsychological Empowerment in Leadership. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20(4), 511-526.
Spreitzer, G. M., Kizilos, M. A., & Nason, S. W. (1997). Dimensional Analysis of the Relationshipbetween Psychological Empowerment and Effectiveness, Satisfaction, and Strain. Journal ofManagement, 23(5), 679-704.
Srivastava, A., Bartol, K. M., & Locke, E. A. (2006). Empowering leadership in management teams:Effects on knowledge sharing, efficacy, and performance. Academy of ManagementJournal, 49(6), 1239-1251.
Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F. (1998). Self-efficacy and work-related performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 240.
Stander, M. W., & Rothmann, S. (2009). Psychological empowerment of employees in selectedorganizations in South Africa. South Asian Journal of Industrial Psychology, 35(1), 196-203.
Stone, M. (1974). Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions. Journal of theRoyal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 111-147.
Strimel, G., Reed, P., Dooley, G., Bolling, J., Phillips, M., & Cantu, D. V. (2014). Integrating andmonitoring informal learning in education and training. Techniques: Connecting Education &Careers, 89(3), 48-54.
Stumpf, S. A., Doh, J. P., & Tymon Jr, W. G. (2010). The strength of HR practices in India and theireffects on employee career success, performance, and potential. Human ResourcesManagement, 49(3), 353-375.
Subramony, M. (2009). A Meta-Analytic Investigation of The Relationship Between HRM Bundlesand Firm Performance. Human Resource Management, 48(5), 745-768.
221
Sutherland Olsen, D. (2016). Adult learning in innovative organisations. European Journal ofEducation, 51(2), 210-226.
Svensson, L., Ellström, P. E., & Åberg, C. (2004). Integrating formal and informal learning atwork. Journal of Workplace Learning, 16(8), 479-491.
Takeuchi, R., Chen, G., & Lepak, D. P. (2009). Through the Looking Glass of A Social System: Cross‐Level Effects of High‐Performance Work Systems on Employees’ attitudes. PersonnelPsychology, 62(1), 1-29.
Takeuchi, R., Lepak, D. P., Wang, H., & Takeuchi, K. (2007). An empirical examination of themechanisms mediating between high-performance work systems and the performance ofJapanese organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 1069.
Tandung, J. C. (2016). The link between HR attributions and employees' turnover intentions. GadjahMada International Journal of Business, 18(1), 55.
Tannenbaum, S. I., Beard, R. L., McNall, L. A., & Salas, E. (2010). Informal Learning andDevelopment in Organizations (S. W. J. Kozlowski & E. Salas ed.). New York, NY, US:Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
Taylor, S. S., Fisher, D., & Dufresne, R. L. (2002). The aesthetics of management storytelling: A keyto organizational learning. Management Learning, 33(3), 313-330.
Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2003). Major issues and controversies in the use of mixed methods inthe social and behvioral sciences. Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & BehavioralResearch, 3-50.
Tenenhaus, M., Vinzi, V. E., Chatelin, Y. M., & Lauro, C. (2005). PLS path modeling. ComputationalStatistics & Data Analysis, 48(1), 159-205.
Terpstra, D. E., & Rozell, E. J. (1993). The relationship of staffing practices to organizational levelmeasures of performance. Personnel Psychology, 46(1), 27-48.
Terry Kim, Taegoo, Gyehee Lee, Soyon Paek, and Seunggil Lee. "Social capital, knowledge sharingand organizational performance: what structural relationship do they have inhotels?." International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 25, no. 5 (2013): 683-704.
Thayer, F. C. (1987). Performance appraisal and merit pay systems: The disasters multiply. Review ofPublic Personnel Administration, 7(2), 36-53.
Thomas, K. W., & Velthouse, B. A. (1990). Cognitive Elements of Empowerment: An "Interpretive"Model of Intrinsic Task Motivation. The Academy of Management Review, 15(4), 666-681.
Thurlings, M., Evers, A. T., & Vermeulen, M. (2015). Toward a model of explaining teachers’innovative behavior: A literature review. Review of Educational Research, 85(3), 430-471.
Tikkanen, T. (2002). Learning at work in technology intensive environments. Journal of WorkplaceLearning, 14(3), 89-97.
Toossi, M. (2009). Labor force projections to 2018: Older workers staying more active. Monthly LaborReview, 132(11), 30-51.
Torunn Bjørk, I., Tøien, M., & Lene Sørensen, A. (2013). Exploring informal learning among hospitalnurses. Journal of Workplace Learning, 25(7), 426-440.
222
Treadway, D. C., Ferris, G. R., Duke, A. B., Adams, G. L., & Thatcher, J. B. (2007). The moderatingrole of subordinate political skill on supervisors' impressions of subordinate ingratiation andratings of subordinate interpersonal facilitation. Journal of Applied psychology, 92(3), 848.
Trust, T. (2017). Motivation, empowerment, and innovation: Teachers' beliefs about how participatingin the Edmodo math subject community shapes teaching and learning. Journal of Research onTechnology in Education, 49(1-2), 16-30.
Tziner, A., Murphy, K. R., Cleveland, J. N., Beaudin, G., & Marchand, S. (1998). Impact of RaterBeliefs Regarding Performance Appraisal And Its Organizational Context On Appraisal Quality.Journal of Business and Psychology, 12(4), 457-467.
Tzokas, N., & Saren, M. (2004). Competitive advantage, knowledge and relationship marketing: where,what and how?. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 19(2), 124-135.
Úbeda-García, M., Marco-Lajara, B., García-Lillo, F., & Sabater-Sempere, V. (2013). Universalisticand Contingent perspectives on human resource management: an empirical study of the Spanishhotel industry. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & Tourism, 12(1), 26-51.
Uner, S., & Turan, S. (2010). The construct validity and reliability of the Turkish version of Spreitzer'spsychological empowerment scale. BMC public health, 10(1), 117.
Van Baalen, P., Bloemhof-Ruwaard, J., & Van Heck, E. (2005). Knowledge Sharing in an EmergingNetwork of Practice: The Role of a Knowledge Portal. European Management Journal, 23(3),300-314.
Van De Voorde, K., & Beijer, S. (2015). The role of employee HR attributions in the relationshipbetween high‐performance work systems and employee outcomes. Human ResourceManagement Journal, 25(1), 62-78.
Van den Boom, G., Paas, F., Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Van Gog, T. (2004). Reflection prompts andtutor feedback in a web-based learning environment: Effects on students' self-regulated learningcompetence. Computers in Human Behavior, 20(4), 551-567.
Van Den Hooff, B., & De Ridder, J. A. (2004). Knowledge sharing in context: the influence oforganizational commitment, communication climate and CMC use on knowledgesharing. Journal of knowledge management, 8(6), 117-130.
Van Der Heijden, B., Boon, J., Van der Klink, M., & Meijs, E. (2009). Employability enhancementthrough formal and informal learning: an empirical study among Dutch non‐academic universitystaff members. International Journal of Training and Development, 13(1), 19-37.
Van der Vegt, G., & Janssen, O. (2003). Joint Impact of Interdependence and Group Diversity onInnovation. Journal of Management & Organization, 29(5), 729–751.
Van Eekelen, I. M., Boshuizen, H. P. A., & Vermunt, J. D. (2005). Self-regulation in higher educationteacher learning. Higher Education, 50(3), 447-471.
van Woerkom, M. (2003). Critical reflection at work: Bridging individual and organizational learning.Twente: Twente University Press.
Veld, M., Paauwe, J., & Boselie, P. (2010). HRM and strategic climates in hospitals: does the messagecome across at the ward level?. Human Resource Management Journal, 20(4), 339-356.
Viskovic, A. (2006). Becoming a tertiary teacher: learning in communities of practice. HigherEducation Research & Development, 25(4), 323-339.
223
Vrasidas, C., & Glass, G. V. (2004). Teacher professional development. Online ProfessionalDevelopment for Teachers, 1-11.
Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. 1964. NY: John Wiley & Sons, 45.
Wahab, M. S. A., Saad, R. A.-J., & Samsudin, M. A. M. (2016). Situational Inhibitors to InformalLearning in the Workplace: A Case Study of Accountants. The European Proceedings of Social& Behavioural Sciences, 26-31. doi:10.15405/epsbs.2016.08.5
Wall, T. D., & Wood, S. J. (2005). The romance of human resource management and businessperformance, and the case for big science. Human Relations, 58(4), 429-462.
Wallace, J. C., Johnson, P. D., Mathe, K., & Paul, J. (2011). Structural and psychologicalempowerment climates, performance, and the moderating role of shared felt accountability: amanagerial perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(4), pp. 840-850.
Walton, R. E. (1985). Toward a strategy of eliciting employee commitment based on policies ofmutuality. HRM Trends and Challenges, 49.
Wan, F., Williamson, P. J., & Yin, E. (2015). Antecedents and implications of disruptive innovation:Evidence from China. Technovation, 39-40, 94-104.
Wang, D., Waldman, D. A., & Zhang, Z. (2014). A meta-analysis of shared leadership and teameffectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(2), 181.
Watkins, K. E., & Marsick, V. J. (1992). Towards a theory of informal and incidental learning inorganizations. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 11(4), 287-300.
Watkins, K. E., & Marsick, V. J. (1993). Sculpting the learning organization: Consulting using actiontechnologies. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 1993(58), 81-90.
Watkins, K. E., & Marsick, V. J. (1997). Dimensions of learning organization(DLOQ)[survey]. Warwick, RI: Partners for the Learning Organization.
Watkins, K. E., Yang, B., & Marsick, V. J. (1997, March). Measuring dimensions of the learningorganization. In Proceedings of the 1997 Annual Academy of HRD Conference (pp. 543-546).
Weiner, B. (1979). A theory of motivation for some classroom experiences. Journal of EducationalPsychology, 71(1), 3.
Weiner, B. (1985). " Spontaneous" causal thinking. Psychological Bulletin, 97(1), 74.
Weiner, B. (2008). Reflections on the history of attribution theory and research: People, personalities,publications, problems. Social Psychology, 39(3), 151-156.
Wellins, R. S. (1991). Empowered teams: Creating self-directed work groups that improve quality,productivity, and participation. Jossey-Bass Inc., 350 Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA94104-1310.
Werts, C. E., Linn, R. L., & Joreskog, K. G. (1974). Quantifying unmeasured variables. Measurementin the Social Sciences. Chicago: Aldine, 270-92.
White, M., & Bryson, A. (2013). Positive employee attitudes: how much human resource managementdo you need?. Human Relations, 66(3), 385-406.
Woerkom, M. v. (2004). The Concept of Critical Reflection and Its Implications for Human ResourceDevelopment. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 6(2), 178-192.
224
Woerkom, M. V., Nijhof, W. J., & Nieuwenhuis, L. F. (2002). Critical reflective working behavior: Asurvey research. Journal of European Industrial Training, 26, 375-383.
Woodman, R. W., Sawyer, J. E., & Griffin, R. W. (1993). Toward a theory of organizationalcreativity. Academy of Management Review, 18(2), 293-321.
Wright, P. M., & Gardner, T. M. (2000). Theoretical and empirical challenges in studying: the HRpractice-firm performance relationship. CAHRS Working Paper Series. 83.
Wright, P. M., & Gardner, T. M. (2003). The human resource-firm performance relationship:methodological and theoretical challenges. The new workplace: A guide to the human impact ofmodern working practices, pp.311-328.
Wright, P. M., & Nishii, L. H. (2007). Strategic HRM and organizational behavior: Integrating multiplelevels of analysis. CAHRS Working Paper Series, 468.
Wright, P. M., Gardner, T. M., & Moynihan, L. M. (2003). The impact of HR practices on theperformance of business units. Human Resource Management Journal, 13(3), 21-36.
Wright, P. M., Gardner, T. M., Moynihan, L. M., & Allen, M. R. (2005). The relationship between HRpractices and firm performance: Examining causal order. Personnel Psychology, 58(2), 409-446.
Wright, P. M., Gardner, T. M., Moynihan, L. M., Park, H. J., Gerhart, B., & Delery, J. E. (2001).Measurement error in research on human resources and firm performance: Additional data andsuggestions for future research. Personnel Psychology, 54(4), 875-901.
Wu, F., & Cavusgil, S. T. (2006). Organizational learning, commitment, and joint value creation ininterfirm relationships. Journal of Business Research, 59(1), 81-89.
Yoo, J. (2017). Customer power and frontline employee voice behavior: Mediating roles ofpsychological empowerment. European Journal of Marketing, 51(1), 238-256.
Youndt, M. A., Snell, S. A., Dean Jr, J. W., & Lepak, D. P. (1996). Human resource management,manufacturing strategy, and firm performance. Academy of Management Journal, 39(4), 836-866.
Yousaf, A., Sanders, K., & Yustantio, J. (2018). High commitment HRM and organizational andoccupational turnover intentions: the role of organizational and occupational commitment. TheInternational Journal of Human Resource Management, 29(10), 1661-1682.
Yu, B. T. W., & To, W. M. (2013). The effect of internal information generation and dissemination oncasino employee work related behaviors. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 33,475-483.
Yu, P., Wu, J.-J., Chen, I.-H., & Lin, Y.-T. (2007). Is playfulness a benefit to work? Empiricalevidence of professionals in Taiwan. International Journal of Technology Management, 39(3/4),pp. 412-429.
Feilzer, M. Y (2010). Doing mixed methods research pragmatically: Implications for the rediscovery ofpragmatism as a research paradigm. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(1), 6-16.
Zhang, X., & Kwan, H. K. (2018). Empowering leadership and team creativity: The roles of teamlearning behavior, team creative efficacy, and team task complexity. In Creative Leadership (pp.95-121). Routledge.
225
Zhang, Y., Zheng, J., & Darko, A. (2018). How Does Transformational Leadership Promote Innovationin Construction? The Mediating Role of Innovation Climate and the Multilevel Moderation Roleof Project Requirements. Sustainability, 10(5).
Zhu, C. (2015). Organisational culture and technology-enhanced innovation in higher education,Technology, Pedagogy and Education. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 24(1), 65–79.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (Eds.). (2013). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement:Theoretical perspectives. Routledge.
Zimmerman, M. (2000). Empowerment Theory (Vol. 43-63): Plenum Publishers.
Zimmerman, M. A. (1990). Toward a Theory of Learned Hopefulness: A Structural Model Analysis ofParticipation and Empowerment. Journal of Research in Personality, 24, 71-86.
Zimmerman, M. A. (1995). Psychological Empowerment: Issues and Illustrations. American Journal ofCommunity Psychology, 23(5), 581-599.
226
Annexure-I
COMSATS UniversityIslamabad
(Department of Management Sciences)
Dear Sir/Madam,Assalam-o-Alikum
This survey is conducted as a partial requirement for the completion of the Doctor ofPhilosophy in Management Sciences, COMSATS University, Islamabad.
The aim of this study is to link performance appraisal quality with employeeparticipation in informal learning activities through psychological empowerment withsupport from HRM system strength.
I would like to invite your participation in this survey by filling up the attachedquestionnaires. All information will be treated with the strict confidentiality and onlythe aggregate data will be analyzed. In other words, individuals who respond to thisquestionnaire will not be identified.
The survey will take approximately 15 - 20 minutes and your participation is verymuch appreciated.
Thank you for your valuable assistance.
Prepared byAamer Waheed SattiDoctoral Student, Department of Management SciencesCIIT, Islamabad
Supervised byProf. Dr. Qaisar AbbasDirector, CIIT, Lahore Campus.
Co-Supervised byDr. Omer Farooq MalikAssistant ProfessorDepartment of Management SciencesCIIT, Islamabad
227
Section A: Informal Learning ActivitiesThe following set of statements describes your participation in Informal Learning Activities in your current
organization. For each statement, please indicate to which extent you feel it is agreeable or disagreeable.Please Encircle or Tick () one answer. There is no right or wrong answer.
Reflection
No Description
Stro
ngly
Disa
gree
Disa
gree
Neut
ral
Agre
e
Stro
ngly
Agre
e
1 I think about what I find important in my job 1 2 3 4 5
2 I check if I move forward in reaching my goals in my job 1 2 3 4 5
3 I compare my functioning with how I functioned a year ago 1 2 3 4 5
4 I compare my functioning with that from my colleagues 1 2 3 4 5
Knowledge Sharing
No Description
Stro
ngly
Disa
gree
Disa
gree
Neut
ral
Agre
e
Stro
ngly
Agre
e
1 I share my knowledge and experiences with my colleagues on a regularbasis 1 2 3 4 5
2 I discuss with my colleagues what I think is important in my job 1 2 3 4 5
3 I discuss problems in my classroom teaching with others in order tolearn from them 1 2 3 4 5
4 I ask my colleagues for advice on a regular basis 1 2 3 4 5
Innovative Behavior
No Description
Stro
ngly
Disa
gree
Disa
gree
Neut
ral
Agre
e
Stro
ngly
Agre
e
1 I come up with creative solutions for problems 1 2 3 4 5
2 I go searching for new methods and ways to work 1 2 3 4 5
3 I promote and defend my innovative ideas to others 1 2 3 4 5
4 I try to convince colleagues of alternatives ways to work 1 2 3 4 5
5 I try to reach agreement about new ways to realize tasks 1 2 3 4 5
228
Section B: HRM System StrengthThe following set of statements describes your perception of HRM system in appraisal process by your
organization. For each statement, please indicate to which extent you feel it is agreeable or disagreeable.Please Encircle or Tick () one answer. There is no right or wrong answer.
HRM Distinctiveness
No Description
Stro
ngly
Disa
gree
Disa
gree
Neut
ral
Agre
e
Stro
ngly
Agre
e
1 In our organization it is clear what belongs to the tasks and what’soutside the field of HR. 1 2 3 4 5
2 When one asks the HR department for help, they provide clearanswers. 1 2 3 4 5
3 The procedures and practices developed by HR are easy to understand. 1 2 3 4 5
4 In general, the HR employees in this organization are highlyappreciated. 1 2 3 4 5
5 The HR department undertakes exactly those actions that meet ourneeds. 1 2 3 4 5
6 The employees in this organization experience the HR practices asrelevant. 1 2 3 4 5
HRM Consistency
No Description
Stro
ngly
Disa
gree
Disa
gree
Neut
ral
Agre
e
Stro
ngly
Agre
e
1 The suggestions, procedures, and practices that HR comes up withactually contribute to the better functioning of this organization. 1 2 3 4 5
2 The HR instruments for staff appraisal succeed in reinforcing thedesired behaviors. 1 2 3 4 5
3 The appraisal system is designed in such a way that desiredperformances are being encouraged. 1 2 3 4 5
4 One can have faith that the HR practices realize the goals for whichthey were designed. 1 2 3 4 5
5 HR practices in this organization achieve their intended goals. 1 2 3 4 5
6 In our organization there is clear consistency between words and deedsof the HR department. 1 2 3 4 5
HRM Consensus
No Description
Stro
ngly
Disa
gree
Disa
gree
Neut
ral
Agre
e
Stro
ngly
Agre
e
1 The people in our organization responsible for HR have a mutualagreement about how to deal with employees. 1 2 3 4 5
2 If employees perform well, they get the necessary recognition and 1 2 3 4 5
229
Section C: Performance Appraisal QualityThe following set of statements describes your perceptions of performance appraisal quality in the appraisalprocess by your organization. For each statement, please indicate to which extent you feel it is agreeable or
disagreeable. Please Encircle or Tick () one answer. There is no right or wrong answer.
Section D: Psychological EmpowermentThe following set of statements describes your feeling or perception of being empowered in making decisionabout your work- and job-related activities and support from your organization. For each statement, please
indicate to which extent you feel it is agreeable or disagreeable. Please Encircle or Tick () one answer. Thereis no right or wrong answer.
rewards.
3 Employees consider promotions as fair in this organization. 1 2 3 4 5
4 The HR department in our organization takes decisions impartially. 1 2 3 4 5
Perceptions of Performance Appraisal Quality
No Description
Stro
ngly
Disa
gree
Disa
gree
Neut
ral
Agre
e
Stro
ngly
Agre
e
1 My supervisor regularly holds performance appraisal conversation withme 1 2 3 4 5
2 In performance appraisals I get clear feedback on my performance 1 2 3 4 5
3 Supervisors keep open communications with me in the job 1 2 3 4 5
Meaning
No Description
Stro
ngly
Disa
gree
Disa
gree
Neut
ral
Agre
e
Stro
ngly
Agre
e
1 The work I do is very important to me 1 2 3 4 5
2 My job activities are personally meaningful to me 1 2 3 4 5
3 The work I do is meaningful to me 1 2 3 4 5
230
Competence
No Description
Stro
ngly
Disa
gree
Disa
gree
Neut
ral
Agre
e
Stro
ngly
Agre
e
1 I am confident about my ability to do my job 1 2 3 4 5
2 I am self-assured about my capabilities to perform my work activities 1 2 3 4 5
3 I have mastered the skills necessary for my job 1 2 3 4 5
Self-Determination
No Description
Stro
ngly
Disa
gree
Disa
gree
Neut
ral
Agre
e
Stro
ngly
Agre
e
1 I have significant autonomy in determining how I do my job 1 2 3 4 5
2 I can decide on my own how to go about doing my work 1 2 3 4 5
3 I have considerable opportunity for independence and freedom in howI do my job 1 2 3 4 5
Impact
No Description
Stro
ngly
Disa
gree
Disa
gree
Neut
ral
Agre
e
Stro
ngly
Agre
e
1 I have a large impact on what happens in my section of this department 1 2 3 4 5
2 I have a great deal of control over what happens in my section of thisdepartment 1 2 3 4 5
3 I have significant influence over what happens in my section of thisdepartment 1 2 3 4 5
231
1. Age:
12 20 — 24 years 22 25 — 29 years 33 30 — 34 years
44 35 — 39 years 55 40 — 44 years 66 45 and above
2. Gender:
11 Male 22 Female
3. Educational Level:
11 Master’s degree 22 PhD 33 Post-Doctoral Degree
4. Marital Status:
11 Single 22 Married 22 Other
5. Current Job Position.
11 Research Associate/Teaching Assistant 11 Lecturer 22 Assistant Professor
11 Associate Professor 11 Professor 22 Other
6. Estimated Monthly Personal Income:
11 Less then Rs.15000 22 Rs. 15,001 – 20,000
33 Rs. 20,001 – 25,000 44 Rs. 25,001 – 30,000
55 Rs.30,001 – 35,000 66 Rs. 35,001 – 40,000
77 Rs.40,001 – 45,000 88 Rs.45,001 – 50,000
88 Above Rs.50,000
7. How many years have you worked for your current employer?
11 Less than 1 years 22 1 – 5 years
33 6 – 10 years 44 More than 10 years
Thank you very much for your assistance in completing this questionnaire. It surely will
be of great help to me.
Wish you the very best in your future.
Section E: Personal Information
Please Tick () in the box that best describes yourself: -
232
Annexure-II
Graphical Representation of Descriptive Statistics
Figure 4.1: Histogram of Perceptions ofPerformance Appraisal Quality
Figure 4.2: Normal Q-Q Plot of Perceptions ofPerformance Appraisal Quality
Figure 4.3: Histogram of Meaning
m
Figure 4.4: Normal Q-Q Plot of Meaning
234
Figure 4.5: Histogram of Competence Figure 4.6: Normal Q-Q Plot of Competence
Figure 4.7: Histogram of Self-Determination Figure 4.8: Normal Q-Q Plot of Self-Determination
235
Figure 4.9: Histogram of Impact Figure 4.10: Normal Q-Q Plot of Impact
Figure 4.11: Histogram of PsychologicalEmpowerment
Figure 4.12: Normal Q-Q Plot of PsychologicalEmpowerment
.
236
Figure 4.13: Histogram of Distinctiveness Figure 4.14: Normal Q-Q Plot of Distinctiveness
Figure 4.15: Histogram of Consistency Figure 4.16: Normal Q-Q Plot of Consistency
237
Figure 4.17: Histogram of Consensus Figure 4.18: Normal Q-Q Plot of Consensus
Figure 4.19: Histogram of Perceptions of HRMSystem Strength
Figure 4.20: Normal Q-Q Plot of Perceptions ofHRM System Strength
238
Figure 4.21: Histogram of Reflection Figure 4.22: Normal Q-Q Plot of Reflection
Figure 4.23: Histogram of Knowledge Sharing Figure 4.24: Normal Q-Q Plot of KnowledgeSharing
239
Figure 4.25: Histogram of Innovative Behavior Figure 4.26: Normal Q-Q Plot of InnovativeBehavior