Strategic Human Resource Practices: Introducing Alternatives for Organizational Performance Improvement in the Public Sector

Abstract

Can public sector organizations increase productivity through competition in spite of inherent limitations, such as budget constraints? Th is study addresses that question by examining the impact of four factors that contribute to employees' expectations regarding competitive work environments on organizational performance in terms of overall quality of work and client satisfaction. Th e four factors measured include rewards for merit such as salary and benefi ts, opportunities, organizational rules, and the capacity to deal with risks as perceived by employees. Using data on public and nonprofi t sector employees, expectations for merit rewards were positively related to employees' perception of organizational performance when the conditions of performance-based organizational rules and risk-taking behaviors were also satisfi ed. Moreover, employees' perceptions of organizational performance tended to increase when they felt that organizational rules were oriented toward performance plus organizational members and top leaders exhibited greater risk-taking behaviors. However, no correlation was evident between employees' expectations of opportunities and perceived organizational performance.

Funding, Management, and Individual-Level Factors: What Factors Matter in Predicting Perceived Organizational Effectiveness?

“…Although there is a conceptual difference between objective quantifiable effectiveness and perceived effectiveness, research suggests the actual difference is minimal (Dess & Robinson, 1984;Dollinger & Golden, 1992;McCracken, McIlwain, & Fottler, 2001;Powell, 1992;Venkatraman & Ramanujam, 1987). Furthermore, similar factors that have affected objective effectiveness have also been found to have an impact on perceived effectiveness (Brewer & Selden, 2000;Caillier, 2011;Choi & Rainey, 2010;Cotton, Vollrath, Froggatt, Lengnick-Hall, & Jennings, 1988;Garnett et al, 2008;Kim, 2005;Kim, 2010;Moynihan & Pandey, 2005;Ostroff, 1992;Park & Rainey, 2008;Perry & Miller, 1991), suggesting that perceived organizational effectiveness is a reasonable measure of organizational effectiveness.…”

“…Since then, scholars have tested components of this theory on state and federal government agencies to determine which factors matter. Their findings revealed that public organizational effectiveness was affected by environmental, human resource management, organizational, and individual-level factors (Brewer & Selden, 2000;Caillier, 2011;Choi & Rainey, 2010;Chun & Rainey, 2005;Garnett, Marlowe, & Pandey, 2008;Kim, 2005;Kim, 2010;Moynihan & Pandey, 2005;Park & Rainey, 2008). However, what was Correspondence should be addressed to James Gerard Caillier, The College at Brockport, State University of New York, 107 Metro Center, 55 St. Paul Street,Rochester, NY 14604,USA.…”

“…Because of the problems that are associated with measuring effectiveness, public administration research has recently focused more on perceived instead of actual organizational effectiveness (Brewer & Selden, 2000;Caillier, 2011;Choi & Rainey, 2010;Chun & Rainey, 2005;Garnett, et al, 2008;Kim, 2005;Kim, 2010;Moynihan & Pandey, 2005;Park & Rainey, 2008;Perry & Miller, 1991). Perceived organizational effectiveness refers to subjective employee attitudes about how well their employing organization is performing.…”

La caractérisation et le management des déviances organisationnelles liées à la mise en oeuvre d’une démarche de performance publique : application au contexte public local français

“…La volonté de s'écarter du modèle d'administration public traditionnel, d'introduire des principes de gestion fondés sur la responsabilisation, l'autonomie, la recherche de performance et d'efficacité, confère au réformateur le statut de déviant positif tel qu'il a été défini par Heckert et Heckert (2002). On retrouve cette idée à travers le concept d'entrepreneur ou d'entreprenariat public développé par Kim (2010) ainsi que Bernier et Hafsi (2007). Sans remettre en cause les finalités de l'action publique, l'entrepreneur public adopte des comportements opportunistes, proactifs et innovateurs qui bousculent les normes, les routines et les habitudes constitutives du modèle bureaucratique et de la culture administrative traditionnelle.…”

Analysis of Labor Force Management to Arrange the Affective Employment Policy in Indonesia

“…And also with the manpower policy is supposed to be made effectively in order to the competition of labor force can contribute to the achievement of nation's goal that is nation's prosperity. Labor force is the strategic resource and competitive potentiality that are not easy disappeared like technology [1]. In reality there are many of the management practice that has not put the labor force as the strategic resource.…”