‘There’s Many a Slip “Twixt the Cup and the Lip”’: HR Management Practices and Firm Performance

Abstract

Divergent but complementary perspectives have been articulated regarding how management practices and their implementation influence firm performance. Integrating such perspectives in the human resource (HR) management literature, we examine how HR management practices formulated at firm level interact with HR decisions at lower levels, and how this affects firm performance. HR implementation models have proposed that consistency in HR practices across organizational levels and units is key; conversely, idiosyncratic deals (i-deals) theory advances individualization as a central principle, suggesting that lower-level initiative in making decisions that reflect local circumstances should have beneficial effects. Addressing the interplay between the consistency and individualization perspectives in a sample of 870 employees nested in 36 firms, we present evidence suggesting that individualized HR decisions positively affect firm performance only in the presence of strong firm-level HR practices. This interplay occurs through two mediating social exchange processes: perceived organizational support and perceived distributive justice.

Understanding the negotiation and performance effects of idiosyncratic deals: Test of a moderated mediation model

“…We extend prior research that focused on motivational mechanisms such as social exchange (Liao et al, 2016;Liu et al, 2013, Vossaert et al, 2022 by uncovering personal skill development as an outcome of i-deals and therefore more proximal to employee performance. Furthermore, while creativity in general and in service contexts has been shown to be an outcome of i-deals (Liu et al, 2016), this relationship has been explained in terms of motivational constructs such as work engagement (Sumaneeva et al, 2021).…”

“…Third, considering the multilevel nature of organizational life, future research should examine how contextual factors (e.g. HR systems, leadership, and climate) shape the negotiation and implementation of i-deals at the group and organizational levels as well as their performance implications at these levels (Anand et al, 2022;Vossaert et al, 2022). To demonstrate mutuality, research should also broaden the outcomes of i-deals to examine their implications for individual career performance and well-being (De Vos and Cambre, 2017;Guerrero and Bentein, 2022).…”

“…Even though i-deals are meant to supplement standardized employment arrangements (Rousseau, 2005), an organization’s philosophy to managing employees as manifested in its HR system, has not been examined as a boundary condition of the documented effects of employee and leadership characteristics on i-deals. Consequently, we do not know the extent to which an organization’s HR (standardized human resource practices) system facilitates the negotiation and implementation of i-deals (Vossaert et al, 2022). The second objective of this study therefore is to examine whether high-commitment HR system constitutes a boundary condition of the influence of employee approach motive and supervisor political skill on i-deals negotiation and implementation.…”

Do Multiple I-Deals in a Team Help or Hinder Team Outcomes? A Resource Scarcity Perspective

“…Our study also goes beyond Anand et al’s (2021) study by revealing that team reactions to team i-deals are fairly complex and are contingent on both organizational- and team-level factors. This multi-level account of team i-deals represents our second contribution to i-deals research—addressing scholars’ call for research to examine how contextual factors beyond the individual level modify the meanings that employees ascribe to i-deals (Liao et al, 2016; Vossaert, Anseel, Collewaert, & Foss, 2021). In particular, whereas extant i-deals research has predominantly adopted an intra - organization perspective and neglected the role of organizational characteristics, our examination of an organizational contingency (i.e., organizational i-deal scarcity) and the concomitant consideration of inter- organizational variation provides a more comprehensive account of how i-deals operate.…”

The Productivity Puzzle, Management Practices and Leadership

“…Consequently, this sensitivity gives rise to customized implementations of people management practices for different employees and varying interpretations of people management practices across countries (Dastmalchian et al, 2020;Newman & Nollen, 1996;Pak & Kim, 2018;Robert et al, 2000;Vossaert et al, 2022). As highlighted within the institutional theory, national cultures and institutional actors such as labor unions exert pressure on the adoption and implementation of people management practices, including compensation systems .…”