academy of management 2016: hrm, employability, and outcomes

EXAMINING THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN HRM, EMPLOYABILITY AND OUTCOMES

JOS AKKERMANS, MARIA TIMS, & SUSANNE BEIJER ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT MEETING 2016, ANAHEIM

KEY TAKEAWAYS FROM THIS PRESENTATION

EMPLOYABILITY STIMULATES COMMITMENT AND REDUCES COUNTERPRODUCTIVE BEHAVIOR Except for external employability…

STIMULATING PERCEIVED EMPLOYABILITY Investing in HRM Communication & Participation

THE ROLE OF TIME Understanding the timeframe required for influencing

perceived employability

INTRODUCTION: EXAMINING THE EMPLOYABILITY MANAGEMENT PARADOX

Investing in employees helps them develop their

competencies

But won’t that make them leave the organization and/or become less productive?

SHOULD ORGANIZATIONS INVEST IN EMPLOYABILITY? Mixed evidence so far, but overall positive (AOM Symposium 2014)

Potential advantages: increase in human capital, more competent and committed employees

Potential disadvantages: risk of turnover, risk of employees being less motivated to “do the right thing”

HRM PRACTICES Training & Development Performance Management Communication & Participation

INTRODUCTION: EXAMINING THE EMPLOYABILITY MANAGEMENT PARADOX

CONSERVATION OF RESOURCES THEORY (Hobfoll, 2001; 2002)

People strive to protect their resources + avoid risks of losing them Investing in employability = an increase of resources

SOCIAL EXCHANGE THEORY (Blau, 1964)

Social interactions are shaped by a reciprocal exchange of rewards Investing in employability = setting the “right” example; invitation

to reciprocate HRM investments will enhance commitment and decrease

counterproductive behaviors through perceived employability

INTRODUCTION: INCLUDING SOCIAL CONTEXT

RESEARCH MODEL

HRM T&D

HRM PM

HRM C&P

External PE

Internal PE

Organizational Commitment

Counterproductive Behavior

METHOD

TWO STUDIES Study 1: 2 waves, 6 weeks in between waves Study 2: 2 waves, 1 year in between waves (part of sample 1)

DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS

Study 1: Study 2: N = 469 N = 127 59.5% female, Mage = 35.2 69.3% female, Mage = 36.4

Analyses SEM using Amos 23, bootstrapping to test indirect effects Study 1: x = T1, mediator and outcomes = T2 (6 weeks later) Study 2: x = T1, mediator and outcomes = T2 (1 year later)

RESULTS STUDY 1 (6 WEEKS)

HRM T&D

HRM PM

HRM C&P

Internal PE

Organizational Commitment

Counterproductive Behavior

.206** .201**

-.152**

-.131**

.276**

Fit: χ²=1.843, df=4, p=.765 AGFI=.992, TLI=1.020, RMSEA=.000 Significant indirect effects: HRM T&D -> Organizational Commitment HRM T&D -> Counterproductive Behavior

RESULTS STUDY 2 (1 YEAR)

HRM T&D

HRM PM

HRM C&P

External PE

Internal PE

Organizational Commitment

Counterproductive Behavior

.279**

.304**

.159*

.188**

Fit: χ²=3.169, df=4, p=.530 AGFI=.944, TLI=1.034, RMSEA=.000 Significant indirect effects: HRM C&P -> Organizational Commitment

.258**

-.280**

.181**

WHAT DOES ALL THIS MEAN?

IMPORTANCE OF HRM COMMUNICATION & PARTICIPATION For creating employability as well as stimulating commitment

INTERNAL EMPLOYABILITY As stimulator of organizational commitment and reducer of

counterproductive behavior

DIFFERENTIAL RESULTS FOR STUDY 1 & 2 Role of external employability HRM communication & participation versus training

& development

j.akkermans@vu.nl m.tims@vu.nl

s.e.beijer@vu.nl