HRM, climate and employee well-being: comparing an optimistic and critical perspective

Abstract

A growing number of studies investigating the linkage between HRM and employee well-being largely supports a positive perspective on HRM (HRM positively affects employee well-being). There is only a limited body of empirical evidence that supports a critical perspective (HRM negatively affects well-being), or combines both perspectives. The present paper contributes to an understanding of the relationship between HRM and well-being, by testing both perspectives simultaneously. Following a positive perspective, we explore how HRM may enhance employee well-being via a climate for well-being; following a more critical perspective, we explore how HRM may negatively affect employee wellbeing via a climate for efficiency. Data from a Long-Term Care organization (N = 415 employees; 52 wards), provided support for the mediating role of a climate for well-being in the relation between HRM, ward commitment and need for recovery. In addition, climate for efficiency partially mediated the relationship between HRM and ward commitment, however the direction of the mediation was different than expected. Although the results of this study support a more optimistic perspective on HRM, it is argued that organizations need to be aware of the critical pathway in order to enhance employee well-being.

Fostering mutual gains: Explaining the influence of high‐performance work systems and leadership on psychological health and service performance

“…As Leroy et al () observed, the multifaceted nature of managing people in organisations calls for integration of human resource and leadership practices that promote workplace mutuality and ultimately, sustainable management of human resources. In this task, future research should abandon the continued focus on comparing the conflict and mutual gains perspective in HPWS research (Ogbonnaya & Messersmith, ; Veld & Alfes, ). Instead, grounded in SDT, this research should draw on conceptual work that proposed well‐being‐oriented HPWS (Guest, ) and leadership (Jiménez et al, ) or servant leadership to examine how the latter is shaped by the former and the processes through which they influence well‐being (variously operationalised) and ultimately, employee performance.…”

“…In this task, future research should abandon the continued focus on comparing the conflict and mutual gains perspective in HPWS research (Ogbonnaya & Messersmith, 2018;Veld & Alfes, 2017). Instead, grounded in SDT, this research should draw on conceptual work that proposed well-being-oriented HPWS (Guest, 2017) and leadership (Jiménez et al, 2017) or servant leadership to examine how the latter is shaped by the former and the processes through which they influence well-being (variously operationalised) and ultimately, employee performance.…”

The effects of high‐involvement work systems and shared leadership on team creativity: A multilevel investigation

“…Existing literature has considered employees' perception of organizational climate as a key mediating mechanism linking HRM to organizational outcomes (e.g., Bowen & Ostroff, 2004;Veld & Alfes, 2017). Veld and Alfes (2017) demonstrated how HRM will enhance employee wellbeing via a climate for wellbeing, and will negatively affect employee wellbeing via a climate for efficiency.…”

Developmental HRM, employee well‐being and performance: The moderating role of developing leadership

“…Building on Grant et al . 's () model, HRM research typically considers one or more of three types of well‐being: happiness (e.g., job satisfaction, commitment), health (e.g., stress, exhaustion) and social (e.g., trust, social support) well‐being (e.g., Baluch, ; Heffernan and Dundon, ; Veld and Alfes, ). In their review, Van de Voorde et al .…”

“…Their review showed a strong need for more balanced studies incorporating multiple dimensions of well‐being, especially those in a clear trade‐off (Van de Voorde et al ., ; Wood et al ., ). A few follow‐up studies have taken such a balanced approach (Boxall and Macky, ; Heffernan and Dundon, ; Veld and Alfes, ), yet show inconsistent findings. This additionally suggests a need to discover boundary conditions explaining under which circumstances organizations can avoid this inherent trade‐off, ensuring that employee well‐being (in all of its facets) as well as performance is fostered (Peccei et al ., ).…”