Exploring alternative relationships between perceived investment in employee development, perceived supervisor support and employee outcomes

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to explore alternative relationships between perceived investment in employee development (PIED), perceived supervisor support (PSS), and employee outcomes in the form of attitudes (affective commitment and turnover intention) and work performance (work effort, work quality and organisational citizenship behaviour). A cross‐sectional survey among 331 employees from a Norwegian telecommunications organisation showed that the relationship between PSS and employee attitudes was partially mediated by PIED. In addition, PSS was found to moderate the relationship between PIED and three self‐report measures of work performance. The form of the moderation revealed a positive relationship only for high levels of PSS. These findings suggest that line managers are of vital importance in implementing developmental HR practices, either because they influence how such practices are perceived by employees, which, in turn, affects employee attitudes, or because positive experiences with both line managers and HR practices seem to be needed in order for developmental HR practices to positively influence employee performance.

The link between perceived human resource management practices, engagement and employee behaviour: a moderated mediation model

“…Recently, findings have emerged which suggest that POS and LMX are distinct and pivotal variables in explaining the relationship between HRM practices and employee outcomes (Kuvaas, 2008, Kuvaas andDysvik, 2010). In this study, we build upon this collection of studies to explore the moderating effect of POS and LMX on the relationship between employee engagement and OCB and turnover intentions.…”

How can personal development lead to increased engagement? The roles of meaningfulness and perceived line manager relations

“…Although this theory has been used to explain the mediation processes that link perceptions of development with engagement (e.g. , a growing number of scholars argue that social exchange mechanisms may moderate or accentuate the psychological processes that translate HR practices into positive employee states, attitudes and behavior (e.g., Kuvaas & Dysvik, 2010;Kuvaas, Buch, & Dysvik, 2012). This is because line managers are often responsible for the day-to-day implementation of HR practices (Wright & Nishii, 2007) and play a key role in the career management of their direct reports (Crawshaw & Game, 2015), and so they act as deliverers and implementers of personal development practices and as agents of the organization (Kuvaas & Dyskvik, 2010).…”

“…These items were designed to capture the individual's perceptions regarding the formal (e.g., secondments, qualifications) and informal (e.g., increased responsibilities, leading on a new project) opportunities available to them to develop their personal skills/abilities as well as their careers (Shuck & Rocco, 2014). The items drew upon those from Lee and Bruvold's (2003) and Kuvaas and Dysvik's (2010) perceived investment in employee development scales, as well as Bakker and Bal's (2010) opportunity for development scale. The remaining items can be found in Table 1.…”

Implementing HRM Systems: The Role of Employees' Co-Production Behavior and HRM Attributions

“…Piening, Baluch & Salge, 2013). Prior research found that the perceived intensity of HRM systems is positively related with employee task performance (Kooij, Jansen, Dikkers, & De Lange, 2010;Kuvaas & Dysvik, 2010) and OCB (Alves, Shantz, Truss, & Soane, 2013;Kehoe & Wright, 2013). Given that employee perceptions of HRM systems follow from the degree to which employees co-produce them, we predict a relationship between HRM coproduction and employee performance, which is mediated by the employee reports of HRM systems.…”

“…As reflected in Hypothesis 1, higher levels of HRM co-production result into higher levels of perceived intensity of HRM systems by employees. Others have argued that these perceptions of HRM system intensity induce employees to engage in task performance and OCB (Kehoe & Wright, 2013;Kuvaas & Dysvik, 2010). In doing so, they have mostly build on the social exchange theory to conceptualize the performance effects of HRM practices (Blau, 1964).…”