See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313652544
High-performance work systems and employee engagement: Empirical
evidence from China
Article in Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources · February 2017
DOI: 10.1111/1744-7941.12140
CITATIONS
READS
46
4,097
3 authors, including:
Zhenzhong Ma
University of Windsor
77 PUBLICATIONS 1,593 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Knowledge management and customer value creation View project
Entrepreneurship View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Zhenzhong Ma on 15 February 2020.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
1
High performance work systems and employee engagement: Empirical
evidence from China
Yufang Huang
School of Business
Jiangnan University, Wuxi, China
Zhenzhong Ma 1
School of Management Studies
Shanghai University of Engineering Science
Shanghai China
Odette School of Business
University of Windsor
Windsor, Ontario, Canada N9B 3P4
Tel.: 1-519-253-3000 ext 4251
Fax: 1-519-973-7073
maz@uwindsor.ca
Yong Meng
School of Management Studies
Shanghai University of Engineering Science
Shanghai, China
For Reference:
Huang, Y., Ma, Z., & Meng, Y. (2018). High performance work systems and employee
engagement: Empirical evidence from China. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 56(3),
341-359.
1
Corresponding author: Dr. Z. Ma, maz@uwindsor.ca
2
Abstract
Employee engagement and commitment has been a very important issue in human resource
managers’ agenda. The present study adds to the literature by examining the impact of high
performance work systems (HPWS) on employee attitudes and further on employee
engagement in China in response to the increasing interest in the universalistic effects of
high performance work systems in the globalized world market. With the data from 782
employees working in China’s manufacturing and service sectors, this study shows that
HPWS are positively related to employees’ positive mood and job satisfaction, and job
satisfaction and positive mood further lead to high employee engagement. Moreover,
employee’s positive mood and job satisfaction also mediate the relationship between
HPWS and employee engagement. The result helps explore one mechanism via which
HPWS affect employee behaviors and provides empirical evidence for the applicability of
HPWS in an international context.
3
Research has showed that an engaged workforce can lead to numerous benefits, such as high
organizational performance, high job satisfaction (e.g. Harrison, Newman, & Roth, 2006; Harter,
Schmidt, & Hayes, 2002; Whitman, Van Rooij, & Viswesvaran, 2010), and low turnover rates
(Allen, Shore, & Griffeth, 2003). Highly engaged employees have a passion for their work and
feel a deep connection to their company while disengaged employees put only time, not energy or
attention into their work (Bal, Kooij, & De Jong, 2013). Engaged employees are thus more
enthusiastic, working harder, and are more committed to their company (Kahn, 1990). They are
also more creative (Sahoo, & Mishra, 2012), more likely to perform better (Whitman, et al., 2010),
and can often help create and further maintain sustainable competitive advantage for their
companies (Rich, Lepine, & Crawford, 2010). Given the strong need for high engagement and
commitment among a changing and increasingly diversified workforce, an increasing amount of
research on human resource management has focused on exploring the universalistic effects of
high performance work systems on employee performance (Snape and Redman, 2010) and on the
mechanism through which the high performance work systems relate to employee outcomes (Bal,
et al., 2013; Jiang, Lepak, Hu, & Baer, 2012).
High performance work systems (HPWS) refer to a set of broadly defined human resource
management practices, including performance-related pay, various employee communication
programs, training and team-based work (Bill, 2002; Huselid, 1995; Jiang, et al., 2012), and when
used in combination, HPWS are said to be mutually reinforcing and able to generate superior
organizational performance (Bill, 2002; Combs, Liu, Hall, & Ketchen, 2006). While an impressive
array of research has explored HPWS and organizational performance in the West, relatively little
has been done to explore the effectiveness of HPWS in an international context (Ghebregiorgis &
Karsten, 2007), even though the universalistic effect of HPWS have been the focus for many
4
studies in the HRM field. When multinational enterprises seek international expansion and
offshore outsourcing in the emerging markets where contemporary management practices have yet
to be validated, human resource management theories developed in the West are often subject to
criticism in that they are not sufficiently contextualized and thus may not be effective in a different
cultural context. This study is intended to help bridge the gap to explore the implications of HPWS
in the Chinese context by examining the impact of HPWS on Chinese employees’ affective mood
and their job satisfaction, and further on employees’ engagement in the workplace.
Studying HPWS practices and employee attitudes and behaviors in China also has important
practical implications (Fan, Cui, Zhang, Zhu, Härtel, & Nyland, 2014; Sun, Aryee, & Law, 2007;
Zhang, Zhu, Dowling, & Bartram, 2013). Although China has become the world’s manufacturing
center for the past years thanks to its large and relatively cheap labor force, employee engagement
in China is actually alarmingly low, if not the lowest among the world: according to a Gallup
survey, only 2% of Chinese employees were engaged in their work in the year 2009 (the number
increased to 6% in 2012, but still very low), compared with the global average of 11% (Yu &
Srinivasan, 2013). With such a large number of disengaged employees, China’s economic growth
and the competitive advantage brought by its cheap labor force will not sustain. It is thus
imperative to explore whether HPWS can improve Chinese employees’ engagement at the
workplace in order to find viable solutions to this alarming issue.
In this study, we sampled across a range of workplaces in different sectors in China using
employees’ rating of HPWS practices to predict their attitudes and engagement behaviors. This
approach allows us to go beyond the study on HPWS practices and organizational performance at
the organizational level by focusing on individual employees and their behaviors in order to help
examine the black box of how HPWS practices affect work performance at individual level (Bal,
5
et al., 2013; Ramsay, Scholarios, & Harley, 2000). In the following sections, we will first review
the studies of HPWS to develop hypotheses in order to test them in the Chinese context. We then
present our methodology, data collection, and the results, concluding the paper with a discussion
of the implications and limitations of the study for further research.
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND HYPOTHESES
High Performance Work Systems and Employee Engagement
Over the past decades, a burgeoning body of literature has emerged on the ways in which
human resource practices affect organizational performance (Combs, et al., 2006), and prominent
among this literature is the concept of high performance work systems (HPWS), which claim to
have strong effects on employee work outcome and organizational performance (Snape & Redman,
2010). According to the social exchange theory (Blau, 1964; Bal, et al., 2013), individuals in a
social exchange relationship are normally viewed as emotional beings who obtain information,
cognitively process it, and then make decisions concerning the nature and pattern of exchange with
organizations. The exchange process thus produces emotions and feelings which lead individuals
to attribute these emotions to different social units such as their organizations. These attributions
of emotion, in turn, dictate how strongly individuals feel attached to their organizations, which
further drives engagement behavior and commitment to the relationship (Blau, 1964; Lawler,
2001). Based on the social exchange theory, HPWS scholars expect that since HPWS focus on
providing support to employee development by enriching job, enhancing employee job skills, and
encouraging participative decision making (Snape & Redman, 2010), they will be reciprocated by
employees through increased work engagement and commitment to the organizations, which
consequently leads to high organizational performance (Bal, et al., 2013; Shore & Shore, 1995).
In other words, when people engage in a social exchange relationship and they voluntarily act in
6
favor of another party, they expect this favor will be reciprocated in the future (Bal, et al., 2013;
Blau, 1964). When an organization employs HPWS, there will be an expectation that employees
will return this investment through higher engagement and commitment. This is in line with
research demonstrating that work engagement mediates the relationships between job resources
(which result from human resource practices offered by the organization) and job performance
(Christian, et al., 2011), and thus forms a crucial positive link between what the organization offers
to employees and how the employees perform in return. This body of work on HPWS is now
extensive, with a recent meta-analysis of 92 studies on HPWS-organizational performance
relationship showing that HPWS indeed are impactful (Combs, et al, 2005, Snape & Redman,
2010).
At the same time, in contrasting to the notion that there exists a positive relationship between
HPWS practices and organizational performance, many scholars also contend that managers in
capitalism are constantly driven to find ways to make employees work longer and harder as a
means to maximize labor input (Braverman, 1974; Harley, 2002; Ramsay, et al., 2000), and thus
HPWS actually lead, directly or indirectly, to work intensification. Employees working under the
HPWS practices may suffer a higher level of stress, overload, burnout, and heightened pressure
than other workers, arising directly from HPWS work practices as well as indirectly from added
responsibility, enhanced discretion, and work intensification (Ramsay, et al., 2000). This dark side
of HPWS suggests that while HPWS are aimed to creating a competitive advantage for
organizations, they may bring benefits to organizations at the expense of employees and thus result
in negative consequences for individual workers (Jensen, et al., 2011).
In response to these contrasting views on the impact of HPWS practices on employee and
organizational performance, it is thus even more meaningful to explore whether HPWS is able to
7
generate positive impact in an international context. It is argued in this study that the socialexchange based relationship between HPWS and employee engagement still exists in an
international context. More specifically, it is argued that according to the social exchange theory,
HPWS can produces emotions and feelings which lead individuals to attribute these emotions to
their exchange partners or organizations even in an international context. For HPWS in the Chinese
context in particular, it is widely accepted that Chinese culture is a highly collectivistic culture
(Hofstede, 2001; Triandis, 1995) and the group-oriented Chinese employees are by nature
motivated to work harder for the collective good and for their company than for themselves. In
addition, the strong guanxi-oriented Chinese society relies heavily on reciprocity in their social
networks (Hofstede, 2001; Tsui & Farh, 1997; Xin & Pearce, 1996), an important element of social
exchange relationship. As a result, the Chinese are likely to reciprocate the favor they receive
either in their social lives or at the workplace (Tsui & Farh, 1997; Xin & Pearce, 1996; Yang,
1994). Therefore, it is proposed that a positive relationship also exists between HPWS practices
and employee engagement in China due to the strong favor-returning orientation embedded in the
Chinese guanxi society (Fan, et al., 2014; Sun, et al., 2007; Zhang, et al., 2013). In other words,
when HPWS practices are applied in Chinese companies as a favor to employees, management
cedes a degree of control to employees and introduces a set of employee-oriented progressive
methods such as teamwork, training and development, frequent open communication, performance
based compensation, participative decision making, and other employee involvement programs. It
is thus very likely that Chinese employees will return the favor by working hard and performing
well with highly engaged behaviors, resulting in high employee engagement. Therefore, it is
expected that
Hypothesis 1: High performance work systems will enhance employees’ engagement.
8
High Performance Work Systems and Employee Attitudes and Behaviors
Much of the early work evaluating the impact of HPWS practices on work performance
focused on the issues at the organizational level (Huselid, 1995), and examined the effect of HPWS
practices on organizational outcomes such as employee turnover rate, productivity, financial and
perceptual measure of organizational performance (Snape & Redman, 2010). More recent work
has turned to the effects of HPWS practices on individual employee attitudes and behaviors (Allen,
et al., 2003; Bal, et al., 2013; Kuvaas, 2008; Snape & Redman, 2010). For example, Allen and
colleagues (2003) show that a positive relationship exists between supportive HPWS and
organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and employee retention, and Snape and Redman
(2010) find that HPWS practices positively affect employee attitudes and behaviors including
helping behaviors and organizational citizenship behaviors.
Studies on human resource management practices have also shown a positive relationship
between HPWS practices and a range of employee gains, including positive psychological
implications and increased autonomy (Den Hartog, Boon, Verburg, & Croon, 2013). For instance,
Boxall and Macky (2009) have shown that opportunities in HPWS practices for skill development
and employee participation positively impact job satisfaction. Wood and de Menezes (2011) report
that the consultative elements of HPWS practices contribute to employee’s well-being and job
satisfaction by enhancing individual employee’s sense of value, worth, and confidence. The
consultative nature of HPWS fits in well with the Chinese context where everyone belongs to a
big family/company and managers are more likely, and often encouraged to, discuss with
employees before final decisions are made, and employees are also allowed to actively participate
in the process of everyday operations. Within such an environment, employees are likely to feel
9
enthusiastic, active, and alert with high energy, full concentration, and pleasurable engagement,
and thus a positive affective state and high job satisfaction (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988).
In a similar vein, despite the potential negative result of work intensification as discussed in
the previous section, highly involvement human resource practices in HPWS are less likely to lead
the group-oriented Chinese employees to feel guilty, fearful, nervous, or distressful, and thus a
negative affective state (Watson, et al., 1988), simply because collectivistic Chinese employees
are expected by their cultural norms to get more involved in group activities, participate more in
group work, and contribute more to group interests rather than to individual interests (Hofstede,
2001; Triandis, 1995). It is therefore expected that the positive relationship between HPWS and
employee attitudes will apply to the collectivistic context in China when high involvement HPWS
practices are used on Chinese employees, which will lead to positive mood and high job
satisfaction, and at the same time, high involvement HPWS practices are also likely to reduce
negative mood in employees. Therefore, it is hypothesized that:
Hypothesis 2a: High performance work systems will be positively related to employees’
positive mood.
Hypothesis 2b: High performance work systems will be positively related to job
satisfaction.
Hypothesis 2c: High performance work systems will be negatively related to employees’
negative mood.
In addition, since individuals’ mood and attitudes are strongly associated with their behaviors,
it has long been found in the literature on HPWS practices and employee outcomes that employee’s
affective states and attitudes will influence employee behaviors such as behavioral commitment
and engagement (Bal, et al., 2013; Combs, et al., 2006). Employee engagement refers to an
10
individual’s involvement with, satisfaction with, and enthusiastic for the work he or she does,
which includes physical engagement, emotional engagement, and cognitive engagement (Rich, et
al., 2010). It is expected that the more satisfied employees feel with various human resource
practices in the workplace, the more likely they will get engaged with their work with more energy,
enthusiasm, and concentration. Similarly, employees with positive affective state are also more
likely to exert high energy, full concentration, and pleasurable engagement with their work
(Watson, et al., 1988), while employees with negative affective state are more likely to feel
stressful and display a variety of aversive mood states including anger, contempt, fear, and
nervousness, and thus more likely to disengage with their work. Therefore, it is hypothesized that:
Hypothesis 3a: Employees’ job satisfaction will be positively related to their
engagement.
Hypothesis 3b: Employees’ positive mood will be positively related to their engagement.
Hypothesis 3c: Employees’ negative mood will be negatively related to their
engagement.
Furthermore, employee’s positive mood reflects the extent to which a person feels enthusiastic,
active, and alert, while negative mood is a general dimension of subjective distress and unpleasant
engagement that subsumes a variety of aversive mood states (Watson, et al., 1998). These two
mood factors represent affective states and are related to corresponding affective trait dimensions
in personality, which are more stable emotional responses to environmental stimuli. Emotional
responses can influence individuals’ perception and cognitive evaluation of their environment
(Watson, et al., 1998). In the context of HPWS studies, employees with positive mood are more
likely to retrieve positive information from their memory systems and perceive positive
information cues, and respond more positively to workplace events and environment, which thus
11
forms positive evaluation that helps improve their job satisfaction. On the contrary, employees
with negative mood are more likely to focus on negative events and unpleasant incidents, with
negative perception of their work and environment, leading to low job satisfaction (Staw & CohenCharash, 2005). As a result, it is expected in this study that:
Hypothesis 4a: Employees’ positive mood will be positively related to their job
satisfaction.
Hypothesis 4b: Employees’ negative mood will be negatively related to their job
satisfaction.
The Mediating Effect of Employee Attitudes on HPWS Practices
A growing body of literature has empirically established a relationship between HPWS and a
variety of organizational outcomes, including organizational performance, productivity, employee
turnover (Huselid, 1995; Jensen, et al., 2013; Jiang, et al., 2012), in support of the notion that
HPWS are an important contributor to organizational success. However, there are still concerns
about HPWS research on its lack of theoretical articulation of what explains the black box
phenomenon or how and why a particular HPWS practice can enhance firm performance (Boselie,
Dietz, and Boon, 2005). Although research that integrates employee attitudes and behaviors is
surprisingly limited, what is known is that improved organizational performance can only be
achieved through employees who exert greater efforts and more committed behaviors to help the
firm succeed, For example, out of the more than 100 studies on HPWS examined by Boselie and
colleagues (2005), only 11 used employee survey data to test attitudes and employee behaviors
such as commitment and engagement. Few studies have properly tested the mechanism between
HPWS and employee outcomes at the individual level (Wood & de Menezes, 2011).
12
This study argues that employee mood and job satisfaction mediate the relationship between
HPWS and employee engagement. HPWS can generate organizational performance because
HPWS practices enhance employee discretion which in turn flows into improved attitudes and
behaviors at work (Harley, 2002). Employee mood states refer to an individual’s affective states
that last relatively long and fluctuate as a function of individual experiences and can have an
important influence on an individual’s thinking and acting (Watson, et al., 1998). Job
satisfaction refers to how content an individual is with his or her job, and employee
engagement refers to an individual’s behaviors including involvement with, satisfaction with, and
enthusiastic for his or her work (Rich, et al, 2010). Employee moods states as one type of general
affect and job satisfaction as an evaluative attitude towards one’s job are expected to mediate the
impact of HPWS on employee engagement behaviors because established HPWS practices
influences workplace atmosphere, which changes employee mood and attitudes, with increased
satisfaction and with consequent effect on employee behaviors and engagement, which in turn feed
through to the performance of the work group and eventually the company (Edwards & Wright,
2001). That is, HPWS practices can improve employees’ mood and their attitudes/orientation to
their work which in turn makes them more productive. Previous research has also shown that
HPWS influence organizational performance and this relationship is mediated by employee
perception and attitudes (Combs, et al., 2006). In other words, HPWS practices help generate
employees with positive mood who are more likely to retrieve positive information from their
memory systems and perceive positive information cues, and respond more positively to
workplace events and environment, such as HPWS practices, which thus form positive evaluation
that helps improve their engagement behaviors. Therefore, it is hypothesized that (with the
integrated research model in Figure 1):
13
Hypothesis 5: Employee mood (employee affective states) and job satisfaction will
mediate the relationship between high performance work systems and employee
engagement.
------------------------------------------Please insert Figure 1 about here
------------------------------------------METHODS
Data and Sample
The data for this study were collected from four different cities in South China from three
different sectors, including manufacturing sector, hotel service sector, and health care sector. The
sample was identified through the government bureau that is in charge of business development.
We used their provided contact list to approach the key HR officers of all the companies on the
list. Once the consent was obtained, senior managers and their HR officers accompanied the
investigators and their assistants to call for volunteer employees to participate in this study.
Questionnaires were distributed by the research assistants to these volunteer participants who were
allowed to complete the questionnaires on their own time and then return the questionnaires in
self-addressed envelopes. In order to reduce the common method bias, we collected the data at two
different times: the second wave of data collection was lagged by two months. We distributed 1000
copies of questionnaires and a pseudo ID to each participant for the first wave of data collection
which measured employees’ perceived HPWS practices in their companies, with 864 copies of
questionnaires returned. The second wave of data collection was to measure employee mood and
attitudes and the engagement behaviors for those employees who returned the questionnaires in
the first round, resulting in 782 usable questionnaires after the deletion of those with missing
information or incomplete. The two waves of data collected were matched based on employees’
14
assigned pseudo IDs and employees were debriefed on the purpose and potential implications of
the research project after the second wave of data collection was completed.
Among the 782 employee participants, 66% of them were from service sectors, 42% from hotel
sector, 24% from health care sector, and 34% were from manufacturing sector, with 57.5% male
respondents, with all companies from the public sector. The age of the participants was ranged
from 24 years old or younger (15.4%), 25 to 34 years old (39.7%), 35 to 44 years old (25.3%), to
45 years old or older (19.6%). The average tenure at current company was 1 to 3 years (27.1%),
followed by 1 year or less (26.1%), 3 to 5 years (12%), and 5 years or longer (34.8%). The
education level was ranged from high school or below (51.4%), college/vocational school (42.8%),
to university or above (5.8%).
Measures
The measures of perceived HPWS practices, employee’s positive and negative mood, job
satisfaction, employee engagement, and the control variables were included in the employee
questionnaire. All the measures were adopted from widely used standardized scales often
employed in HPWS studies. Questionnaires were administered in Chinese mandarin, and all the
questionnaires were translated into Chinese and back-translated into English to ensure reliability
and equivalency by bilingual colleagues of the authors, following the recommended procedures
(Brislin, 1976).
High performance work systems were measured with ten items adopted from the study by Den
Hartog and colleagues (2013), with participants responding on a five-point Likert scale from “1 =
strongly disagree” to “5 = strongly agree”, which covers skills-, motivation-, and empowermentenhancing practices including training, development, promotion, performance management,
teamwork, autonomy, and job design. Example items include “Training is provided to me
15
regularly”, “Managers take my career ambitions and goals into account here”, and “I can
determine and make changes in the way in which I perform my work”. We conducted a set of
confirmative factor analyses and the results showed an acceptable fit for the three-factor structure
(χ2 = 3.947, p < .01, GFI = .987, CFI = .986, RMSEA = .061). Because of high inter-correlations
among these three factors, we then performed another CFA to test a model including one secondorder factor representing the whole set of HPWS practices. This model was found to fit the data
significantly better than the three-factor model (χ2 = 2.042, p < .001; GFI = .995, CFI = .996,
RMSEA = .037). Therefore, we combined the full set of HPWS items into three subsystems scores
and then combined these in one aggregate HPWS score. Cronbach’s alpha of this measure was
0.83.
Employee mood and attitudes were assessed in three aspects: employee’s positive mood,
negative mood, and job satisfaction. The overall job satisfaction was measured with the Michigan
Organizational Satisfaction Scale (Cammann, Fichman, Jenkins, & Klkesh, 1979), with sample
items including “In general, I am very satisfied with my job”. The Cronbach alpha of this measure
was 0.79. Employee’s positive mood and negative mood were measured using the widely used
PANAS scale (Watson, et al., 1988) to ask an employee to indicate his or her affective state in the
past two months. The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) comprises two mood scales,
one that measures positive mood state and the other measures negative mood state. Used as a
psychometric scale, the PANAS is a widely accepted scale for assessing employee mood states
(Wason, et al., 1988). Sample items for positive mood include “I am interested” (excited,
enthusiastic, proud), and for negative mood include “I am irritable” (nervous, jittery, afraid), with
1 = “strong disagree” and 5 = “strongly agree”. The Cronbach alpha’s for these two scales were
0.81 and 0.91, respectively.
16
Employee engagement refers to an individual’s involvement with, satisfaction with, and
enthusiastic for the work he or she does. Employee engagement was measured in this study using
the scale developed by Rich and colleagues (2010), which assesses employee engagement from
three aspects, including physical engagement, emotional engagement, and cognitive engagement.
This scale has 18 items, on a five-point Likert scale (1 = “strong disagree” and 5 = ‘strongly agree”),
with sample items including “I work with intensity on my job”, “I am enthusiastic in my job”, and
“At work, my mind is focused on my job”. A set of confirmative factor analyses supported a model
with one second-order factor representing overall employee engagement (χ2 = 2.909, p < .001;
GFI = .981, CFI = .986, RMSEA = .049). Similarly, we combined three sub-scores into one
aggregate employee engagement score. Cronbach’s alpha of this measure was 0.86.
RESULTS
The research model and the hypotheses previously developed were empirically tested using
structural equation modeling (SEM) with the AMOS 17.0 program with age, gender, education
level, tenure in the current company, and industry as control variables. The impact of age, gender,
tenure in the current company, and the education level were controlled for in this study because
older employees, female employees, and senior employees are more likely to show higher level of
commitment, while employees with a higher level of education are more likely to change jobs and
thus less committed (Bal, et al., 2013). Industry was also included as another control variable in
order to control the impact of different mobility level of employees in various industrial sectors.
SEM is a widely used statistical tool in academic research and there are two basic advantages of
using SEM as opposed to more traditional regression analysis techniques. First, it can represent
interrelated latent concepts and to account for measurement error in the estimation process. Second,
SEM allows estimating multiple and interrelated relationships simultaneously. In contrast to
17
multiple regression analysis, SEM can assess several equations at once and these equations can be
interrelated, implying that the dependent variable in one equation can simultaneously be an
independent variable in one or more other equations. This allows modeling of complex causal
relationships and mediating effects which is not possible with any other multivariate techniques
available. SEM is appropriate here because the study is to test the mediating effect of employee
mood and job satisfaction on the relationship between HPWS and employee engagement.
Therefore, SEM is an appropriate technique for testing the research hypotheses in this study.
Given that the SEM approach has no single statistical test of significance for model fit, several
goodness-of-fit measures were used to assess the fit of the model. The chi-square (χ2), the Bentler–
Bonett normed fit index (NFI), the comparative fit index (CFI), the Goodness of Fit Index (GFI),
and the root mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA) were used as the measures for
goodness-of-fit. Among these indexes, NFI and CFI should exceed 0.90 and a RMSEA should be
0.08 or below to be acceptable.
SEM analysis involves two major steps: the measurement model assessment and the structural
model assessment. There is no meaning in proceeding to the structural model until the
measurement model is convinced to be valid. Kline (2005) has suggested that SEM researchers
should always test the full measurement model underlying the full structural model first, and if the
fit of the measurement model is found acceptable, then proceed to the second step of testing the
structural model by examining its various fit indexes. Based on this recommendation a two-step
analysis was carried out to explore the relationship between HPWS, employee attitudes (including
job satisfaction, positive affect, and negative affect), and employee engagement.
Measurement Model To estimate the measurement model with the latent factors as specified,
covariance between each pair latent variables was allowed, that is, each latent variable with every
18
other latent variable in the model. The statistical test of this measurement model is equivalent to a
confirmatory factor analysis of all study variables. The descriptive statistics are reported in Table
1, and the output of the robust maximum likelihood analysis on the full-measurement model
provides a robust chi-square statistic and a set of model fit index, which clearly showed that a fivefactor measurement model (HPWS practices, positive mood, negative mood, job satisfaction, and
employee engagement) fits the data very well (Please see Table 2), with χ2= 1218.44; NFI = .907;
GFI = .901; CFI = .924; RMSEA = .057, and thus this five-factor measurement model was used
in the testing of the structure model discussed next.
------------------------------------------Please insert Table 1 & 2 about here
------------------------------------------Structural Model The hypotheses predicted that employee mood and attitude mediate the
positive relationship between HPWS and employee engagement. Using the aforementioned
measurement model, a structural model was constructed and tested which incorporated every path
based on all the hypotheses developed for this study. After removing the path of HPWS to negative
mood and negative mooed to employee engagement because of their insignificance, the revised
structural model showed a good fit to the data (χ2 = 616.208; GFI = .916; CFI = .918; NFI = .882;
RMSEA = .065; Please see Model 1 in Table 3). In order to test the mediating effect of employee
mood and attitude on the relationship between HPWS and employee engagement, six other models
were built and assessed by adding/removing different paths to fit the data, and the Akaike
Information Criterion (AIC) was used for model comparison. The relative size of AIC provides
valuable information for model comparison: for the two models from the same data set, the model
with a smaller AIC is to be preferred. Among all models in Table 3, Model 2 has the best fit indexes
with smallest AIC (χ2 = 512.922; GFI = .930; CFI = .928; NFI = .902; RMSEA = .058; AIC =
19
632.923). In this study, Model 2 was thus chosen as the final model for hypothesis testing and
analysis. Figure 2 displays the final structural model and estimates of its parameters. The numbers
along the path represent standardized path coefficients.
------------------------------------------Please insert Table 3 & Figure 2 about here
------------------------------------------The SEM results indicate that HPWS are positively related to employees’ job satisfaction and
positive mood (β = 0.68, p < 0.001; β = 0.52, p< 0.001, respectively), which supports H2b and
H2a. Job satisfaction and positive mood further lead to high employee engagement (β = 0.39, p <
0.001; β = 0.33, p < 0.001, respectively), which supports H3a and H3b. Furthermore, positive
mood is also positively related to job satisfaction (β = 0.16, p < 0.01), which supports H4a, and
negative mood is negatively related to job satisfaction (β = -0.15, p < 0.01), which supports H4b.
The indirect total effects of HPWS on employee engagement are also significant (β = 0.46, p
< .001), which supports H1. The SEM results thus support all our hypotheses except H2c and H3c
which predict that HPWS will be negatively related to employee negative mood and employee
negative mood will be negatively related to employee engagement, respectively. In addition, the
final revised model clearly indicates that employee mood and job satisfaction fully mediate the
relationship between HPWS and employee engagement, in support of H5, which thus provides
another approach to explain the mechanism how HPWS influence employee outcomes and further
organizational performance.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
The increasingly globalized world economy has created a strong need to understand different
human resource management practices across the globe, in particular on how to manage employees
from Eastern cultures. This study began with the fact that tremendous intercultural differences
20
across the globe had made it essential for a better understanding of human resources management
practices in different national settings. High performance work systems in an international context,
in particular about Chinese culture and its impact on employees’ response to HPWS practices,
deserved more research efforts. Then this study used the data from different sectors in China to
explore the impact of HPWS on employee mood and job satisfaction and further on employee
engagement in the Chinese cultural context. The results of this study provided empirical support
for previous research findings and evidence is founded for the universalistic impact of HPWS
practices on employee behaviors in an international context. The findings will enrich our
knowledge on HPWS practices as well as on human resources management in general in a global
context, which is able to advance contemporary human resources management and employee
engagement studies.
This study has important implications both in theory and in practice. In theory, the findings of
this study are very similar to the ones found in the West, which provides empirical evidence for
the universalistic impact of HPWS in the international context. This is an important addition to the
literature, in particular when more multinationals are expanding into emerging markets where
contemporary management practices have yet to be validated in order to improve their
competitiveness. Human resource management theories developed in the West are often subject to
criticism in that they are not sufficiently contextualized and thus may not be generalizable to other
cultural contexts. This study seems to support a set of universally accepted management practices,
at least the HPWS practices that may be common across cultures. More studies are called on to
validate the effectiveness of HPWS in other cultural contexts (Bal, et al., 2013; Harley, 2002; Jiang,
et al., 2012).
21
In addition, while it has been argued that HPWS practices could provide employees with more
discretion and support in exchange for more employee compliances and creative capability as well
as engaged behaviors, it has also been argued that HPWS practices could lead to work
intensification (Ramsay, et al., 2000) and HPWS practices may create competitive advantage for
organizations at the expense of employees’ well-beings (Danford, et al., 2008). Employees
subjected to HPWS practices may also suffer higher level of stress as a result of the added
responsibility associated with enhanced discretion, insecurity, and job anxiety (Danford, et al.,
2008; Jensen, et al., 2013; Ramsay, et al., 2008). However, despite such a debate, this study seems
to provide indirect support for the positive effect of HPWS practices in that HPWS practices in the
Chinese context will not lead to employee’s negative mood, which is often associated with high
pressure and job anxiety resulting from work intensification. The findings thus may indicate that
researchers need to re-examine the notion about the negative impact of HPWS, if any, in a
collectivistic context where people are often motivated to work hard for group interests, and thus
the often-debated work intensification might not be an issue in such a context. This could be a new
perspective for contemporary research on HPWS in the global market. Moreover, the findings
about the important role of positive mood in the underlying mediation process help answer the
question of how HPWS affect employee engagement and demystify the black box of how HPWS
impact individual attitudes and behaviors (Ramsay, et al., 2000). The findings of the mediating
impact of positive mood states enable us to better understand the mechanism through which HPWS
practices influence workplace atmosphere and further create positive employee mood and attitudes,
which results in increased satisfaction and engaged employee behaviors, and then feeds through
to the performance of the work group and eventually the company (Edwards & Wright, 2001).
22
The study also adds value to the literature on HPWS in that it examines the impact of HPWS
on employee attitudes and behaviors at the individual level, thus overcoming the problems
associated with traditional HPWS research which often examines the relationship between high
involvement human resource practices and organizational performance at a unit or company level.
The question of why and how HPWS affect employee engagement often remains a black box as it
is not very clear how HPWS impact individual attitudes and behaviors (Ramsay, et al., 2000).
Examining HPWS and their impact on variables at the individual level will contribute to a better
understanding on the mechanism through which HPWS practices create reciprocity power in the
receiving employees so that employees will work harder and longer with enhanced engagement in
return.
This study can have important practical implications as well. Human resource management
practitioners can use the findings of this study to improve their practices and further employee
engagement in China. For example, with China as a newly emerged industrialized economy, many
Chinese managers, including human resource managers, are still following the principles of
scientific management theories, and thus are largely ignoring employees’ attitudes or well-beings
in motivating Chinese employees. Consequently, they have increasingly constrained the
improvement of work engagement and work performance in China. Recent job actions happened
in several manufacturing companies in China and the low Gallup survey result on employee
engagement in China (Yu & Srinivasan, 2013) have indicated that human resource managers in
China need to pay more attention to employees’ feelings and attitudes and other labor relation
related factors in order to achieve sustainable development. HPWS seem to be one viable solution
to creating high employee commitment and better employee relations in the Chinese context.
23
Second, as an increasingly important emerging market, China has proven to be a very tough
place to apply Western management theories due to its complex collectivistic cultural traditions
and strong interpersonal guanxi-oriented practices. Yet the findings of this study suggest that
HPWS practices can improve employee’s positive mood and increase job satisfaction which
further leads to engaged employees, similar to what is found in the West. Considering the nature
of HPWS, which is to create the incentive and motivation for employee to become highly
committed and involved, this study points out a new perspective in exporting management theories
developed in the West to China and other collectivistic cultures: team or group-based management
practices that can involve employees, together with constant open communication may work well
in collectivistic cultures and thus have better generalizability across the globe. Future research is
also called upon to explore other cultural aspects in China, such as the impact of guanxi and the
impact of in-group favoritism (Ma, 2010; Triandis, 1995) on the relationship between HPWS and
employee engagement. International managers can pick these types of practices/theories in
practicing management across the global market for more effective human resources management.
More studies can also explore industrial characteristics and the impact of HPWS as well as the
potential interaction impact between HPWS and firm ownership in helping human resource
management practitioner identify more appropriate human resource practices.
Caution has to be exercised, however, in applying the findings of this study to other contexts.
While this is a longitudinal study, we don’t have a much longer time period to measure the same
variables and thus the causal effect of HPWS on employee mood and attitude and engagement
needs further validation. More studies are required to replicate and validate the findings of this
study. Future studies could replicate this study to validate the results and to further explore the
cultural differences in the impact of HPWS on employee attitudes including job satisfaction and
24
positive and negative mood in the international context. Moreover, this study uses employees as
participants, which is a strength comparing with other studies that often use company reports for
HPWS studies on employee outcomes, and thus increases the external validity in generalizing the
findings of this study to other populations, yet the samples used are not perfectly representative
samples, which is the issue often associated with the survey method. While we collected the data
at different times, the common method bias could still affect the relationship, which should be
addressed in future studies. In addition, this study examines individual employee’s perception of
HPWS and behavioral outcomes at the individual level. Next step in this line of research is to
explore the relationship between HPWS and individual and organizational performance using a
multi-level approach in order to fully capture the essence of HPWS and the associated impact on
performance outcomes.
25
REFERENCES
Allen, D. G., Shore, L. M., & Griffeth, R. W. (2003). The role of perceived organizational support
and supportive human resource practices in the turnover process. Journal of Management, 29:
99-118.
Bal, P. M., Dorien T., & De Jong, S. B. (2013). How do developmental and accommodative HRM
enhance employee engagement and commitment? The role of psychological contract and SOC
strategies. Journal of Management Studies, 50(4): 545-572.
Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Boselie, P., Dietz, G., & Boon, C. (2005). Commonalities and contradictions in HRM and
performance research. Human Resource Management Journal, 15: 67-94.
Braverman, H. (1974). Labor and Monopoly Capital: The Degradation of Work in the Twentieth
Century. London: Monthly Review Press.
Brislin, R.W. (1976). Comparative research methodology: Cross-cultural studies. International
Journal of Psychology, 11: 215-229.
Cammann, C., Fichman, M., Jenkins, G. D., & Klkesh, J. (1979). The Michigan Organizational
Assessment Questionnaire. New York, NY: Wiley.
Christian, M. S., Garza, A. S., & Slaughter, J. E. (2011). Work engagement: A quantitative review
and test of its relations with task and contextual performance. Personnel Psychology, 64: 89136.
Combs, J., Liu, Y., Hall, A., & Ketchen, D. (2006). How much do high-performance work practices
matter? A meta-analysis of their effects on organizational performance. Personnel Psychology,
59: 501-528.
26
Danford, A., Richardson, M., Stewart, P., Tailby, S., & Upchurch, M. (2008). Partnership, high
performance work systems and quality of working life. New Technology, Work, and
Employment, 23: 151-166.
Den Hartog, D. N., Boon, C., Verburg, R. M., Croon, M. A. (2013). HRM, communication,
satisfaction, and perceived performance: A cross-level test. Journal of Management, 39(6):
1637-1665.
Edwards, P., & Wright, M. (2001). High-involvement work systems and performance outcomes:
The strength of variable, contingent and context-bound relationships. International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 12 (4): 565-585.
Fan, D., Cui, L., Zhang, M., Zhu, C., Härtel, C., & Nyland, C. (2014). Influence of high performance
work systems on employee subjective well-being and job burnout: Empirical evidence from the
Chinese healthcare sector. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(7): 931950.
Ghebregiorgis, F., & Karsten, L. (2007). Employee reactions to human resource management and
performance in a developing country: Evidence from Eritrea. Personnel Review, 36(5): 722738
Harrison, D. A., Newman, D. A., & Roth, P. L. (2006). How important are job attitudes? Metaanalytical comparisons of integrative behavioral outcomes and time sequences. Academy of
Management Journal, 49: 305-325.
Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hayes, T. L. (2002). Business-unit-level relationship between
employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: a meta-analysis. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 87: 268-379.
27
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values.
Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
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.
Jensen, J. M., Patel, P. C., & Messersmith, J. G. (2013). High-performance work systems and job
control: Consequences for anxiety, role overload, and turnover intentions. Journal of
Management, 39(6): 1699-1724.
Jiang, K., Lepak, D. P., Hu, J., & Baer, J. C. (2012). How does human resource management
influence organizational outcomes? A meta-analytic investigation of mediating mechanisms.
Academy of Management Journal, 55: 1264-1294.
Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work,
Academy of Management Journal, 33(4): 692-724.
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and Practices of Structural Equation Modeling (2nd ed.), New
York: The Guilford Press.
Kuvaas, B. (2008). An exploration of how the employee-organization relationship affects the
linkage between perception of developmental human resource practices and employee
outcomes. Journal of Management Studies, 45: 1-25.
Lawler, E. J. (2001). An affect theory of social exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 107(2):
321–352.
Ma, Z. (2010). The SINS in business negotiation: Explore the cross-cultural differences in business
ethics between Canada and China. Journal of Business Ethics, 91, 123-135.
28
Ramsay, H., Scholarios, D., & Harley, B. (2000). Employees and high-performance work systems:
Testing inside the black box. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 38(4): 501-531.
Rich, B. L., Lepine, J. A., Crawford, E. R. (2010). Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on job
performance. Academy of Management Journal, 53(3): 617-635.
Sahoo, C. K., & Mishra, S. (2012). A framework towards employee engagement: The PSU
experience. ASCI Journal of Management, 42 (1): 92-110.
Shore, L. M., & Shore, T. H. (1995). Perceived organizational support and organizational justice.
In R. Cropanzano & K. M. Kacmar (Eds.), Organizational Politics, Justice and Support:
Managing Social Climate at Work: 149-164. Westport, CT: Quorum Press.
Snape, E., & Redman, T. (2010). HRM practices, organizational citizenship behavior, and
performance: A multilevel analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 47: 1219-1247.
Staw, B. M., & Cohen-Charash, Y. (2005). The dispositional approach to job satisfaction: More
than a mirage, but not yet an oasis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(1): 59-78.
Sun, L., Aryee, S., & Law, K.S. (2007). High-performance human resource practices, citizenship
behavior, and organizational performance: A relational perspective. Academy of Management
Journal, 50(3): 558-577.
Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and Collectivism. Boulder, Colorado: Westview.
Tsui, A. S., & Farh, J. L. (1997). Where guanxi matters: Relational demography and guanxi in the
Chinese context. Work and Occupations, 24: 56-79.
Whitman, D. S., Van Rooij , D. L., & Viswesvaran, C. (2010). Satisfaction, citizenship behaviors,
and performance in work units: A meta-analysis of collective construct relation. Personnel
Psychology, 63(1): 41-81.
29
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of
positive affect and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 54(6): 1063-1070.
Wood, S., & de Menezes, L. M. (2011). High involvement management, high performance work
systems and well-being. International Journal of Human Resources Management, 22: 15861610.
Xin, K., & Pearce, J. L. (1996). Guanxi: Good connections as substitutes for institutional support.
Academy of Management Journal, 36: 1641-1658.
Yang, M. (1994). Gifts, Favors and Banquets: The Act of Social Relationships in China. Ithaca,
NY: Cornell University Press.
Yu, D., & Srinivasan, R. (2013). Employee engagement increases in China, but still very low.
Gallup, Feb 20, 2013, http://www.gallup.com/poll/160190/employee-engagement-increaseschina-low.aspx.
Zhang, M., Zhu, C., Dowling, P., & Bartram, T. (2013). Exploring the effects of high-performance
work systems (HPWS) on the work-related well-being of Chinese hospital employees.
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(16): 3196-3212.
30
Table 1: Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations of Variables
Variables
Mean
s. d.
1
2
1. Gender
1.57
0.50
-
2. Age
2.20
0.95
-.18**
-
3. Tenure
2.72
1.44
-.21**
.60***
4. Education
1.48
0.71
-.11*
.14*
5. Industry
0.54
0.50
-.00
-.07
6. HPWS
3.49
1.06
.16**
7. Positive Mood
3.39
0.87
8. Negative Mood
2.38
9. Job Satisfaction
10. Employee Engagement
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
-.14*
-
.22**
-.42***
-.23**
-.34***
-.20**
.16**
(.83)
.11*
-.12*
-.17*
-.07
.04
.44***
1.05
.06
-.14*
-.12*
-.23**
-.04
3.63
0.91
.08*
-.09*
-.21**
-.08*
.10*
.64***
.46***
-.11*
(.79)
3.78
0.83
.14*
.01
.05
.07
.36***
.41***
-.03
.41***
-.03
-
-.03
(.91)
-.08*
(.81)
Note: N = 782, * p <.05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001; Variables were coded as follows: gender, 1 = male, 2 = female; Age: 1 = 24 or younger, 2 = 25-34, 3 = 35-44, 4 = 45-54,
5 = 55 or older; tenure: 1 = one year or less, 2 = 1-3 years, 3 = 4-5 years, 4 = 6-8 years, 5 = 8 years or more; education: 1 = high school diploma or lower, 2 = college, 3 =
university, 4 = master or above; industry: 0 = service (hotels or health care), 1 = manufacturing; The bold numbers in brackets along the diagonal line are Cronbach alphas.
(.86)
31
Table 2: Assessment of the measurement model on HPWS and employee engagement
Models
One factor model
(HPWS + PM + NM +JS + EE)
Two factor model
(HPWS; PM + NM +JS + EE)
Three factor model
(HPWS; PM + NM +JS; EE)
Four factor model
(HPWS; PM + NM; JS; EE)
Five factor model
(HPWS; PM; NM; JS; EE)
χ2
df
χ2/df
Δχ2
RMSEA
CFI
GFI
NFI
7390.08
377
19.60
-
.154
.388
.492
.377
4699.13
371
12.67
2690.95***
.122
.627
.652
.609
3501.44
367
9.54
1197.69***
.105
.726
.741
.705
2295.60
357
6.43
1205.84***
.083
.831
.829
.806
1218.24
345
3.53
1077.36***
.057
.901
.907
.924
Note: *** P < 0.001; HPWS = high performance work systems; PM = positive mood; NM = negative mood; JS = job satisfaction; EE = employee engagement.
32
Table 3: Assessment of the structural models on HPWS and employee engagement
The Model tested
χ2
Df.
χ2/df
RMSEA
AIC
CFI
GFI
NFI
TLI
616.208
154
4.001
0.065
728.208
0.918
0.916
0.882
0.887
512.922
155
3.309
0.058
632.923
0.928
0.930
0.902
0.909
632.956
156
4.057
0.066
740.956
0.905
0.913
0.879
0.885
667.573
157
4.252
0.068
773.573
0.899
0.910
0.872
0.877
Model 1 (Partial Mediation)
HPWS  EE;
HPWS  PM  EE;
HPWS  JS  EE;
HPWS  PM  JS  EE
Model 2: (Full Mediation 1)
HPWS  PM  EE;
HPWS  JS  EE;
HPWS  PM JS  EE
Model 3: (Full Mediation 2)
HPWS  PM  EE;
HPWS  JS  EE;
Model 4: (No Mediation)
HPWS  EE;
HPWS  PM
HPWS JS
Note: HPWS = high performance work systems; PM = positive mood; JS = job satisfaction; EE = employee engagement; negative mood was removed during the assessment
of alternative paths because negative mood was not found significantly related to the criterion variable or the predictor variable.
33
Figure 1: The research model of the impact of HPWS on employee engagement
Positive Mood
H2a (+)
H2b (+)
HPWS
H2c (-)
H1 (+)
H4a (+)
Job
Satisfaction
H4b (-)
H3b (+)
H3a (+)
Employee
Engagement
H3c (-)
Negative Mood
Figure 2: The revised structural model of HPWS and employee engagement
Positive Mood
0.52***
HPWS
0.68***
0.16**
Job
Satisfaction
0.33***
0.39***
-0.15**
n.s.
n.s.
Negative Mood
View publication stats
Employee
Engagement