The impact of ability‐, motivation‐ and opportunity‐enhancing HR sub‐bundles on employee wellbeing: An examination of nonlinearities and occupational differences in skill levels

IF 5.4 2区 管理学 Q1 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR Human Resource Management Journal Pub Date : 2024-04-09 DOI:10.1111/1748-8583.12551
Yanqing Lai, Cai‐Hui (Vernoica) Lin, George Saridakis, Yannis Georgellis
{"title":"The impact of ability‐, motivation‐ and opportunity‐enhancing HR sub‐bundles on employee wellbeing: An examination of nonlinearities and occupational differences in skill levels","authors":"Yanqing Lai, Cai‐Hui (Vernoica) Lin, George Saridakis, Yannis Georgellis","doi":"10.1111/1748-8583.12551","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Existing research examines the impact of human resource (HR) practices on employee wellbeing by considering each practice in isolation or multiple practices as a bundle, focusing on linear associations. Drawing on the too‐much‐of‐a‐good‐thing (TMGT) meta‐theory, we examine possible nonlinear effects of Ability‐Motivation‐Opportunity (AMO) sub‐bundles on job satisfaction and job stress. We, also, examine boundary conditions on whether and how the nature of the identified curvilinear associations varies across employees in high‐, medium‐, and low‐skilled occupations. Using data from the Workplace Employment Relations Study (WERS2011), we uncover an inverse U‐shaped association between motivation‐enhancing (ME) practices and job satisfaction and a U‐shaped association between opportunity‐enhancing (OE) practices and job stress. No evidence of a curvilinear ability‐enhancing (AE) practices‐wellbeing association emerges. Additionally, occupational differences in skills levels moderate the curvilinear ME practices‐stress association. Likewise, occupational skills differences moderate the associations between OE practices and job satisfaction, and work stress. There is no suggestion that occupational differences moderate the AE practices‐wellbeing association. These findings underline the contingent nature of the TMGT effect and call for a more nuanced investigation of the HR‐wellbeing association.","PeriodicalId":47916,"journal":{"name":"Human Resource Management Journal","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Resource Management Journal","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12551","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Existing research examines the impact of human resource (HR) practices on employee wellbeing by considering each practice in isolation or multiple practices as a bundle, focusing on linear associations. Drawing on the too‐much‐of‐a‐good‐thing (TMGT) meta‐theory, we examine possible nonlinear effects of Ability‐Motivation‐Opportunity (AMO) sub‐bundles on job satisfaction and job stress. We, also, examine boundary conditions on whether and how the nature of the identified curvilinear associations varies across employees in high‐, medium‐, and low‐skilled occupations. Using data from the Workplace Employment Relations Study (WERS2011), we uncover an inverse U‐shaped association between motivation‐enhancing (ME) practices and job satisfaction and a U‐shaped association between opportunity‐enhancing (OE) practices and job stress. No evidence of a curvilinear ability‐enhancing (AE) practices‐wellbeing association emerges. Additionally, occupational differences in skills levels moderate the curvilinear ME practices‐stress association. Likewise, occupational skills differences moderate the associations between OE practices and job satisfaction, and work stress. There is no suggestion that occupational differences moderate the AE practices‐wellbeing association. These findings underline the contingent nature of the TMGT effect and call for a more nuanced investigation of the HR‐wellbeing association.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
提高能力、激励和机会的人力资源子基金对员工福利的影响:对技能水平的非线性和职业差异的研究
现有研究通过孤立地考虑每种做法或将多种做法捆绑在一起来研究人力资源(HR)做法对员工福利的影响,重点关注线性关联。借鉴 "好事太多"(TMGT)元理论,我们研究了能力-动机-机会(AMO)子束对工作满意度和工作压力可能产生的非线性影响。此外,我们还研究了高技能、中等技能和低技能员工之间的曲线关联性质是否不同以及如何不同的边界条件。通过使用 "工作场所雇佣关系研究"(WERS2011)的数据,我们发现了激励提升(ME)实践与工作满意度之间的反 U 型关系,以及机会提升(OE)实践与工作压力之间的 U 型关系。没有证据表明能力提升(AE)实践与工作满意度之间存在曲线关系。此外,技能水平的职业差异缓和了ME实践与压力之间的曲线关系。同样,职业技能差异也缓和了 OE 实践与工作满意度和工作压力之间的关联。没有迹象表明职业差异会缓和 AE 实践与福利之间的关系。这些发现强调了 TMGT 效应的偶然性,并要求对人力资源与福利之间的联系进行更细致的调查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
10.90%
发文量
56
期刊介绍: Human Resource Management Journal (CABS/AJG 4*) is a globally orientated HRM journal that promotes the understanding of human resource management to academics and practicing managers. We provide an international forum for discussion and debate, and stress the critical importance of people management to wider economic, political and social concerns. Endorsed by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, HRMJ is essential reading for everyone involved in personnel management, training, industrial relations, employment and human resource management.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Neuronormativity as ignorant design in human resource management: The case of an unsupportive national context Reflections on achieving anti‐racism in organisations: The role of human resource management scholars and practitioners Gender composition at work and women's career satisfaction: An international study of 35 societies Antecedents and outcomes of enabling HR practices: The paradox of consistency and flexibility
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1