Model High Performance Work System (HPWS)

• Authors: Milena Gojny-Zbierowska
• Languages of publication: PL

Abstracts

PL

Badania nad systemami wysoce efektywnymi mają swoje korzenie w różnych dziedzinach zarządzania i ekonomii; są to m.in. ekonomia pracy, strategiczne HRM, zachowania organizacyjne, zarządzanie operacjami. Można zaobserwować coraz większą popularność wysoce efektywnych systemów w literaturze z zarządzania, ostatnie dekady obfitowały w wiele badań z tego zakresu. Wprawdzie nie istnieje jedna, powszechnie akceptowana definicja, jednak można przyjąć, że większość badaczy tematu opisuje HPWS jako specyficzną kombinację praktyk ZZL, struktur i procesów maksymalizujących wiedzę, umiejętności, zaangażowanie i elastyczność pracownika. Ciągłe poszukiwanie optymalnych rozwiązań w nauce o zarządzaniu i udoskonalanie istniejących modeli jest często podyktowane potrzebą zwiększenia efektywności organizacji. Systemy wysokiej efektywności można traktować jak próbę odpowiedzi na potrzeby organizacji, wiele bowiem badań wskazuje na pozytywną korelację systemów HPWS z efektywnością organizacji. Niniejszy artykuł stanowi teoretyczną analizę uwarunkowań wdrożenia systemów wysoce efektywnych we współczesnych organizacjach. Na podstawie przeglądu literatury przedstawiony zostanie stan wiedzy z tego zakresu, wyniki badań dotyczące związku HPWS z efektywnością zespołów, wzorcowe praktyki z zakresu ZZL, wynikające z założeń modelu, a także zagadnienia związane z procesem implementacji HPWS.

EN

This paper explores aspects of the contentious debate around the impact on workers of High Performance Work Systems (HPWS). Although, the concept of an HPWS has not been consistently and precisely defined in the literature, it has generally been utilized to describe a system of horizontally and vertically aligned employment practices designed to affect both the ability and the motivation of employees. High performance work systems (HPWS), a type of HR system, are an important concept in contemporary research on workplaces. There is growing empirical evidence that high performance work systems (HPWS) can have a significant impact on organizational performance. HPWS have been found to favourably affect turnover [Guthrie, 2001; Huselid, 1995], labor productivity [Huselid, 1995], firm productivity [Guthrie, 2001], and firm financial performance [Guthrie, 2001; Huselid, 1995]. Given these findings, HPWS are now seen as a potential source of competitive advantage [Camps, Luna- -Arocas, 2012]. This paper explores the meaning and significance of high performance work systems and provides a theoretical framework illustrating the model.

Keywords

PL

Efektywność organizacji; Praktyki zarządzania zasobami ludzkimi; Systemy wysoce efektywne

EN

High performance work systems; Human resource management practices; Organizational performance

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Katowicach
• Journal: Studia Ekonomiczne
• Year: 2015
• Volume: 230
• Pages: 55-70

Contributors

author

Milena Gojny-Zbierowska

References

• Anderson-Connolly R., Grunberg L., Greenberg E.S., Moore S. (2002): Is Lean Mean? Workplace Transformation and Employee Well-being. „Work, Employment and Society”, 16(3), s. 389-413.
• Appelbaum E., Batt R. (1994): The New American Workplace. ILR Press, Ithaca.
• Appelbaum E., Bailey T., Berg P., Kalleberg A. (2000): Manufacturing Advantage: Why High-Performance Work Systems Pay Off. ILR Press, Ithaca.
• Arthur J.B. (1992): The Link Between Business Strategy and Industrial Relations Systems in American Steel Minimills. „Industrial and Labor Relations Review”, 45, s. 488-506.
• Arthur J.B. (1994): Effects of Human Resource Systems on Manufacturing Performance and Turnover. „Academy of Management Journal”, 37, s. 670-687.
• Ashton D., Sung J. (2002): Supporting Workplace Learning for High Performance Working. International Labour Office, Geneva.
• Bailey T., Berg P., Sandy C. (2001): The Effect of High-performance Work Practices on Employee Earnings in the Steel, Apparel and Medical Electronics and Imaging Industries. „Industrial and Labor Relations Review”, 54(2A), s. 525-543.
• Barney J.B. (1991): Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. „Journal of Management”, 17, s. 99-120.
• Batt R. (2002): Managing Customer Services: Human Resource Practices, Quit Rates, and Sales Growth. „Academy of Management Journal”, 45, s. 587-597.
• Bauer T. (2004): High Performance Workplace Practices and Job Satisfaction: Evidence from Europe. Discussion Paper No. 1265, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
• Becker B., Gerhart B. (1996): The Impact of Human Resource Management on Organizational Performance: Progress and Prospects. „Academy of Management Journal”, 39: 4, s. 779-801.
• Beltra´ n-Martı´n I., Roca-Puig V., Escrig-Tena A.B., Bou-Llusar J.C. (2008): Human Resource Flexibility as a Mediating Variable Between High Performance Work Systems and Performance. „Journal of Management”, 5, s. 1009-1044.
• Bohlander G.W., Snell S. (2004): Managing Human Resources. 13th ed. Mason, OH: Thomson/South-Western.
• Boxall P. (2003): HR Strategy and Competitive Advantage in the Service Sector. „Human Resource Management Journal”, 13(3), s. 5-20.
• Boxall P., Purcell J. (2008): Strategy and Human Resource Management. 2nd ed. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke and New York.
• Burton M.D., O’Reilly C. (2004): Walking the Talk: The Impact of High Commitment Values and Practices on Technology Start-ups. Unpublished manuscript. Retrieved from http://works.bepress.com/m_diane_burton/4.
• Camps J., Luna-Arocas R. (2012): A Matter of Learning: How Human Resources Affect Organizational Performance. „British Journal of Management”, No. 23, s. 1-21.
• Cappelli P., Neumark D. (2001): Do “High Performance” Work Practices Improve Establishment Level Outcomes? „Industrial and Labor Relations Review”, 54, s. 737-776.
• Carlson D. S., Upton N., Seaman S. (2006): The Impact of Human Resource Practices and Compensation Design on Performance: An Analysis of Family-owned Firms. „Journal of Small Business Management”, 44(4), s. 531-543.
• Chi N., Lin C. (2011): Beyond the High-Performance Paradigm: Exploring the Curvilinear Relationship between High-Performance Work Systems and Organizational Performance in Taiwanese Manufacturing Firms. „British Journal of Industrial Relations”, 49(3), s. 486-514.
• Collins C.J., Smith K.G. (2006): Knowledge Exchange and Combination: The Role of Human Resource Practices in the Performance of High-technology Firms. „Academy of Management Journal”, 49, s. 544-560.
• Combs J., Liu Y., Hall A., Ketchen D. (2006): How Much do High-performance Work Practices Matter? A Meta-analysis of Their Effect on Organizational Performance. „Personnel Psychology”, 59, s. 501-528.
• Dandridge T. C. (1979): Children are not Little Grown-ups: Small Business Needs its Own Organizational Theory. „Journal of Small Business Management”, 17(2), s. 53-57.
• Danford A. (2003): Workers, Unions and the High Performance Workplace. „Work, Employment and Society”, 17(3), s. 569-587.
• Datta D.K., Guthrie J.P., Wright P.M. (2005): Human Resource Management and Labor Productivity: Does Industry Matter? „Academy of Management Journal”, 48, s. 135-145.
• Delaney J.T., Huselid M.A. (1996): The Impact of Human Resource Practices on Perceptions of Organizational Performance. „Academy of Management Journal”, 39, s. 949-969.
• Delery J., Shaw J. (2001): The Strategic Management of People in Work Organizations: Review, Synthesis, and Extension. „Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management”, 20, s. 165-197.
• Delery J.E., Doty D.H. (1996): Modes of Theorizing in Strategic Human Resource Management: Tests of Universalistic, Contingency, and Configurational Performance Predictions. „Academy of Management Journal”, 39, s. 802-835.
• Dyer L., Reeves T. (1995): Human Resource Strategies and Firm Performance: What do We Know and Where do We Need to Go? „International Journal of Human Resource Management”, 6(3), s. 656-670.
• 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), s. 568-585.
• Evans R., Davis W. (2005): High-performance Work Systems and Organizational Performance: The Mediating Role of Internal Social Structure. „Journal of Management”, 31(5), s. 758-775.
• Farias G.F., Varma A. (1998): High Performance Work Systems: What We Know and What We Need to Know. „Human Resource Planning”, 21(2), s. 50-54.
• Farris D., Tohyama H. (2002): Productive Efficiency and the Lean Production System in Japan and the United States. „Economic and Industrial Democracy”, 23(4), s. 529-554.
• Gephart M.A. (1995): The Road to High Performance: Steps to Create a Highperformance Workplace. „Training & Development”, 49(6), s. 29-38.
• Gephart M.A., Van Buren M.E. (1996): Building Synergy: The Power of High Performance Work Systems. „Training and Development”, 50(10), s. 21-36.
• Godard J. (2001): High Performance and the Transformation of Work? The Implications of Alternative Work Practices for the Experience and Outcomes of Work. „Industrial and Labor Relations Review”, 54(4), s. 776-805.
• Godard J. (2004): A Critical Assessment of the High-performance Paradigm. „British Journal of Industrial Relations”, 42(2), s. 349-378.
• Guest D. (2002): Human Resource Management, Corporate Performance and Employee Well-being: Building the Worker into HRM. „Journal of Industrial Relations”, 44(3), s. 335-358.
• Guest D., Michie J., Conway N., Scheehan M. (2003): Human Resource Management and Corporate Performance in the UK. „British Journal of Management”, 41, s. 291-314.
• Guthrie J.P. (2001): High-involvement Work Practices, Turnover, and Productivity: Evidence from New Zealand. „Academy of Management Journal”, 44(1), s. 180-191.
• Hayton J.C. (2005): Promoting Corporate Entrepreneurship through Human Resource Management Practices: A Review of Empirical Research. „Human Resource Management Review”, 15(1), s. 21-41.
• Hostager T.J., Neil T.C., Decker R.L., Lorentz R.D. (1998): Seeing Environmental Opportunities: Effects of Entrepreneurial Ability, Efficacy, Motivation and Desirability. „Journal of Organizational Change”, 11(1), s. 11-25.
• Huselid M.A. (1995): The Impact of Human Resource Management Practices on Turnover, Productivity, and Corporate Financial Performance. „Academy of Management Journal”, 38(3), s. 635-672.
• Ichniowski C., Shaw K., Prennush G. (1997): The Effects of Human Resource Management Practices on Productivity: A Study of Steel Finishing Lines. „American Economic Review”, 87(3), s. 291-313.
• Jackson S.E., Hitt M., DeNisi A. (2004): Managing Knowledge for Sustained Competitive Advantage: Designing Strategies for Effective HRM. Jossey- Bass, San Francisco.
• Kauhanen A. (2009): The Incidence of High-performance Work Systems: Evidence from a Nationally Representative Employee Survey. „Economic and Industrial Democracy”, 30(3), s. 454-480.
• Kroon B., Van De Voorde K., Timmers J. (2013): High Performance Work Practices in Small Firms: A Resource-poverty and Strategic Decision-making Perspective. „Small Bus Econ”, No. 41, s. 71-91.
• Lawler E.E. (1992): The Ultimate Advantage: Creating the High Involvement Organization. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
• Lee J., Miller D. (1999): People Matter: Commitment to Employees, Strategy and Performance in Korean Firms. „Strategic Management Journal”, 20(6), s. 579-593.
• Lepak D.P., Liao H., Chung Y., Harden E.E. (2006): A Conceptual Review of Human Resource Management Systems in Strategic Human Resource Management Research. W:, Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management. Red. J. Martocchio, 25, JAI Press, Greenwich, s. 217-271.
• Lepak D.P., Smith K.G., Taylor M.S. (2007): Value Creation and Value Capture: A Multilevel Perspective. „Academy of Management Review”, 32, s. 180-194.
• MacDuffie J.P. (1995): Human Resource Bundles and Manufacturing Performance: Organizational Logic and Flexible Production Systems in the World Auto Industry. „Industrial and Labor Relations Review”, 48(2), s. 197-221.
• Mayson S., Barrett R. (2006): The ‘Science’ and ‘Practice’ of HRM in Small Firms. „Human Resource Management Review”, 16(4), s. 447-455.
• Messersmith J.G., Guthrie J.P. (2010): High Performance Work Systems In Emergent Organizations: Implications For Firm Performance. „Human Resource Management”, 49(2), s. 241-264.
• Michie J., Sheehan M. (1999): HRM Practices, R&D Expenditure and Innovative Investment: Evidence from the UK’s 1990 Workplace Industrial Relations Survey (WIRS). „Industrial and Corporate Change”, 8(2), s. 211-234.
• Nadler D.A., Gerstein M.S., Shaw R.B. (1992): Organizational Architecture: Designs for Changing Organizations. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
• Nadler D.A., Nadler M.B., Tushman M.L. (1997): Competing by Design: The Power of Organizational Architecture. Oxford University Press, New York.
• Paauwe J. (2004): HRM and Performance: Achieving Long-Term Viability. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
• Pfeffer J. (1998): Seven Practices of Successful Organizations. „California Management Review”, 40, s. 96-124.
• Purcell J. (1999): The Search for “Best Practice” and “Best Fit”: Chimera or Cul-desac? „Human Resource Management Journal”, 9(3), s. 26-41.
• Rauch A., Frese M., Utsch A. (2005): Effects of Human Capital and Long-term Human Resources Development and Utilization on Employment Growth of Small-scale Business: A Causal Analysis. „Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice”, 29(6), s. 681-698.
• Shaw J.D., Gupta N., Delery J.E. (2005): Alternative Conceptualizations of the Relationship between Voluntary Turnover and Organizational Performance. „Academy of Management Journal”, 48(1), s. 50-68.
• Soutaris V. (2002): Firm-specific Competencies Determinin Technological Innovation: A Survey in Greece. „R&D Management”, 32(1), s. 61-77.
• Sun L.Y., Aryee S., Law K.S. (2007): High Performance Human Resource Practices, Citizenship Behavior, and Organizational Performance: A Relational Perspective. „Academy of Management Journal”, 50, s. 558-577.
• Takeuchi R., Lepak D.P., Chen G. (2009): Through the Looking Glass of a Social System: Cross-level Effects of High Performance Work Systems on Employees’ Attitudes’. „Personnel Psychology”, 62, s. 1-29.
• Takeuchi R., Lepak D. P., Wang H., Takeuchi K. (2007): An Empirical Examination of the Mechanisms Mediating between High-performance Work Systems and the Performance of Japanese Organizations. „Journal of Applied Psychology”, 92, s. 1069-1083.
• Tomer J. F. (2001): Understanding High-performance Work Systems: The Joint Contribution of Economics and Human Resource Management. „Journal of SocioEconomic”, 30, s. 63-73.
• Tregaskis O., Daniels K., Glover L., Butler P., Meyer M. (2013): High Performance Work Practices and Firm Performance: A Longitudinal Case Study. „British Journal of Management”, No. 24, s. 225-244.
• Wall T., Jackson P., Davids K. (1992): Operator Work Design and Robotics System Performance. „Journal of Applied Psychology”, 77(3), s. 353-362.
• Way S. (2002): High Performance Work Systems and Intermediate Indicators of Firm Performance within the US Small Business Sector. „Journal of Management”, 28: 6, s. 765-785.
• Welbourne T.M., Andrews A.O. (1996): Predicting the Performance of Initial Public Offerings: Should Human Resource Management Be in the Equation? „Academy of Management Journal”, 39(4), s. 891-919.
• White M., Hill S., McGovern P., Mills C., Smeaton D. (2003): High-performance Management Practices, Working Hours and Work-life Balance. „British Journal of Industrial Relations”, 41(2), s. 175-195.
• Zacharatos A., Barling J., Iverson R.D. (2005): High Performance Work Systems and Occupational Safety. „Journal of Applied Psychology”, 90, s. 77-93.

Identifiers

ISSN

2083-8611