Investigating the validity of the Human Resource Practices Scale in South Africa: Measurement invariance across gender

Abstract

Orientation: The effective delivery of human resource management (HRM) services is often associated with positive organisational outcomes, including innovation. Within the context of HRM service delivery, as well as within the scope of innovative behaviour, gender differences are often researched.Research purpose: To effectively research the role of HRM services in organisations, including the effects thereof on innovation, instruments that yield valid and invariant measures for men and women are required.Motivation for the study: To date no measurement invariance research on the Human Resource Practices Scale (HRPS), with reference to gender, could be located. Researchers and practitioners alike should be hesitant to use the HRPS without such information.Research approach/design and method: A cross-sectional quantitative survey design was used. The present study addressed the measurement invariance for the HRPS across men and women, applying pairwise multigroup confirmatory factor analyses with robust maximum likelihood estimation to examine four levels of measurement invariance across the groups. Data from 2936 employees, representing 52 South African organisations, were used.Main findings: Results support the construct validity of the HRPS and demonstrate strict measurement invariance for the HRPS across gender, which implies that the HRPS yields scores with equivalent meaning, measurement units and measurement precision for men and women.Practical/managerial implications: It will therefore be possible to test hypotheses regarding mean differences between men and women as well the relationship between the effective delivery of HRM services and positive organisational outcomes without fear that the HRPS will yield gender-biased results.Contribution/value-add: The research demonstrates that the items of the HRPS are valid for both men and women, suggesting that men and women have similar experience of the workplace. This finding should advance debate and research regarding the segregated delivery of HRM services and gender matters in general.

Gender differences in the relationship between innovation and its antecedents

“…Nyawose (2009) reported reliabilities varying from 0.74 to 0.93, while Steyn (2012) HRPS. Steyn and De Bruin (2018a) were able to replicate the factorial structure as proposed by both Nyawose and Steyn across gender (equal latent means invariance; CFI = 0.97 and RMSEA = 0.042), and report reliabilities for the seven scales which were 'uniformly satisfactory and similar across men and women', varying from 0.735 to 0.845 for men and from 0.710 to 0.853 for women.…”

Differential item functioning of the CESDR-R and GAD-7 in African and white working adults

“…This is problematic because decisions are made on observed scores with the assumption that these scores are uncontaminated by unwanted sources of variance (e.g. Gamerman, Gonçalves, & Soares, 2018;Steyn & De Bruin, 2018).…”