Job engagement, perceived organizational support, high‐performance human resource practices, and cultural value orientations: A cross‐level investigation

Abstract

SummaryDrawing on social exchange theory, we developed and tested a cross-level model of organizational-level predictors of job engagement. Specifically, we examined the impact of high-performance human resource (HR) practices on employee engagement and work outcomes. Based on a sample of 605 employees, their immediate supervisors, and HR managers from 130 companies, our results indicated that high-performance HR practices were directly related to job engagement as well as indirectly related through employees' perceived organizational support. In turn, job engagement was positively related to in-role performance and negatively related to intent to quit. Culture was found to act as a critical contextual factor, as our results also revealed that the relationship between HR practices and perceived organizational support was stronger when collectivism was high and when power distance orientation was low. Overall, the findings shed new light on the processes and conditions through which employee work-related outcomes are enhanced owing to high-performance HR practices.

Cross‐level effects of support climate: Main and moderating roles

“…The cultural context of our study (i.e., Asian) may have influenced our findings and therefore may constrain their generality to other cultural contexts as well as industries. However, this should not be a concern because the conceptual arguments used to derive the hypotheses are not culturally bound and the findings are consistent with the conceptual arguments in the HRM literature in both Asian (e.g., Liao, Toya, Lepak, & Hong, 2009;Takeuchi et al, 2009;Zhong et al, 2016) and non-Asian contexts (e.g., D. G. Allen et al, 2003;Messersmith et al, 2011). Nevertheless, we encourage future research to replicate and extend our findings with data obtained from multiple cultural contexts.…”

“…There is strong empirical evidence that individuals' perceptions toward the use of certain HRM practices affect the way they perceive organizational support (D. G. Allen et al, 2003). In addition, a few multilevel HRM studies have examined the effect of adopting HRM practices at the organization, establishment, or unit level on individuals' perceptions of organizational support (e.g., Snape & Redman, 2010;Zhong, Wayne, & Liden, 2016). Although perceived organizational support was originally conceptualized at the individual level (Eisenberger et al, 1986), a unit-level psychological climate emerges when employees from the same unit form a consensus about whether the organization values them (Chuang & Liao, 2010).…”

“…Consistent with Takeuchi et al (2009), we hypothesize that unit HPWS use is positively associated with unit support climate-that is, unit members' shared beliefs about the extent to which their organization Furthermore, social exchange theory and the norm of reciprocity (Gouldner, 1960) connote that positive, beneficial actions directed at unit members by the organization contribute to the establishment of a high-quality exchange relationship obliging unit members to reciprocate in positive, beneficial ways (Settoon, Bennett, & Liden, 1996, p. 219). Hence, unit HPWS use is postulated to improve unit members' perceptions of their work environment and their firm's commitment to them (unit support climate) and engender a sense of obligation to repay the organization for treating them well (e.g., Collins & Smith, 2006;Kehoe & Wright, 2013;Snape & Redman, 2010;Zhong et al, 2016). Affective commitment can be viewed as a means by which individual unit members can repay organizations (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002).…”

“…Consistent with the conceptual work of Bowen (2000, 2016) and Bowen and Ostroff (2004) In terms of practical implications, findings in the current study may be helpful to managers seeking ways to enhance the benefits of their HPWS. First, in fostering a more committed workforce, the , and if they are satisfied with the way the organization treats them they would feel obliged to repay the organization (e.g., Snape & Redman, 2010;Zhong et al, 2016).…”

Perceived Organizational Support for Enhancing Welfare at Work: A Regression Tree Model

“…The former includes interventions regarding allowances, housing, transportation, medical insurance, wellness coverage, and so on (Schmitz and Schrader, 2015). The latter includes less tangible benefits such as perceived working conditions, the interpersonal environment in which work takes place, and organizational actions and support perceived by employees (Zhong et al, 2016). …”