Understanding HRM-Firm Performance Linkages: The Role of the "Strength" of the HRM

System
Author(s): David E. Bowen and Cheri Ostroff
Source: The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 29, No. 2 (Apr., 2004), pp. 203-221
Published by: Academy of Management
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20159029
Accessed: 11-03-2015 12:13 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Academy of Management is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Academy of Management
Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 134.208.96.85 on Wed, 11 Mar 2015 12:13:04 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Academy o?Management Review

2004, Vol. 29, No. 2, 203-221.

HRM-FIRMPERFORMANCE
UNDERSTANDING
LINKAGES:THE ROLE OF THE "STRENGTH"

OF THEHRMSYSTEM
DAVID E. BOWEN
The American

Thunderbird,

Graduate

School

of International

Management

CHERI OSTROFF
Teachers

Columbia

College,

University

on the intermediate
has
Theory
building
lagged
linkages
HRM and firm performance.
We
introduce
ship between
HRM system"
and describe
the metafeatures
of an HRM
climate,

organizational
uals
share
strength
accumulate

In recent

scholars
have
to examining

years
of attention

tween

to affect

HR practices
and
on research
evidence

Based

clear

that

ing increasingly
component
important
more
zation
become
competitive
a

However,

swered:

that can

How

a great
be
linkage

the

help
and

HRM

an

These

questions

the

effects

manifest

unan

call

for

theory

of more

development

. .
and

refinement

models

comprehensive

of the HRM-firm performance

that
relationship
include
intermediate
and boundary
linkages
conditions....

this

a high

given

Hochwarter,

of

type

priority

research

Harrell-Cook,

Buckley,

should

by HRM scholars

on

lationship,
perspectives.
approach.
a focus

We

One

have

1999:

thank

Blake

HRM

Ashforth,

and Art Brief,

University,
for their comments
and
time.

State

re
performance
two
assumed
on a systems
based

often

has been
in this area

Research
on separate

has moved

practices

and

of Business,
College
then associate
editor

from
em

Arizona
for AMR,

considering

examined
the particular
"fit" between
various
HRM practices
and the organization's
competi
tive strategy
&
1994; Wright
(e.g., Miles & Snow,
in this view
is the notion
Snell,
1991). Embedded
that organizations
must
also horizontally
align
their various
toward their strate
HRM practices

be

the HRM-firm

scholars

by

A second approach
has been the strategic
per
on
which
has taken on different
HRM,
spective
in the literature
(Ferris et al., 1999). In
meanings
one strategic-based
researchers
have
approach,

394).
In research

& Sch?ler,
lackson,
on
trend in research
to
has been
linkage

formance.

(Ferris,

& Frink,

1996; Huselid,
is, the dominant

of
aggregation
HRM practices
(Ferris, Arthur, Berkson,
Kaplan,
& Frink,
Harrell-Cook,
1998), rather than by ex
the effects
of individual
HRM practices
amining
on firm performance
& Huselid,
(e.g., Delaney
& Doty,
1996; Delery
1996) or on individual
per

1998).

themselves?.

attributes

take

More specifically,
if there is indeed an impact of
HRM systems on firm performance,
how do these
effects occur? What are the mechanisms
through
these

rewarded.

the HRM-firm
performance
a systems
view
of HRM
or
the overall
configuration

organi
a
achieve

formance?

which

are expected
and
individual
employee

& Becker,
1997). That

to firm per

contribute

how

for the relation

of the
"strength
in a strong
that result
system
in which
individ
situation,"

to a more macro
focus on
pioyee
performance
set of HRM practices
the overall
and firm perfor
mance
1992; Huselid,
1995; Huselid
(e.g., Arthur,

devoted

remains

question

does

organizational

(Becker & Huselid,

larger

help explain
effectiveness.

firm performance.
to datef it is becom
is one
the HR system

effective

advantage

"strong
behaviors

of what

interpretation
can
of the HRM system

The

deal

to Mischel's

analogous

a common

responsible
the construct

that practices
must
gic goal and
complement
one another
to achieve
the firm's business
strat
& lackson,

& Snell,
1987a,b; Wright
& McWilliams,
McMahan,
1994).
logic is that a firm's HRM practices
must develop
and
skills, knowledge,
employees'
motivation
such that employees
in ways
behave
to the implementation
that are instrumental
of a
egy (Sch?ler
1991; Wright,
The guiding

203

This content downloaded from 134.208.96.85 on Wed, 11 Mar 2015 12:13:04 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

204

Academy

of Management

have
researchers
strategy.
particular
Similarly,
with
the as
taken a contingency
perspective,
that the effectiveness
of the HR system
sumption
on
contextual
features
such as indus
depends
or
firm
size,
try,
policies
(e.g.,
manufacturing
1995; Youndt,

MacDuffie,

Snell,

Dean,

& Lepak,

1996).
within
the strategic
related
per
approach
on
set
to
HRM
the overall
how
spective
pertains
is generally
with
of HRM practices
associated
A

and competitive
firm performance
advantage
et
Central
here is the resource
al., 1999).
(Ferris
based
1991) such that, col
perspective
(Barney,
a firm's human
are believed
resources
lectively,
to have

for firm performance

and
implications
a unique
source
advan
of competitive
to replicate
tage that is difficult
(Wright et al.,
is that HRM prac
1994). The guiding
proposition
and intricately
linked
tices are socially
complex

provide

in ways
to copy
ties of
process
vantage
tutable

for competitors
them difficult
that make
(Boxall,
1996). More
fully, the complexi
resource
creation
value
the human
ad
HRM a source of competitive
make
and nonsubsti
that is rare, inimitable,
et al.,
1991; Ferris
1999). The
(Barney,
recent work
prompted
to firm perfor
contribute
human
discretion
capital,

view
resource-based
on how HRM practices
mance
by leveraging

has

and behaviors
attitudes
effort, and desired
& Gerhart,
1996; Lado & Wilson,
(e.g., Becker
et al., 1994).
1994; Wright
on the
these two perspectives
Taken
together,

ary

HRM-firm
tems and
how HRM

sys
relationship?the
performance
stage
strategic
perspectives?help
on em
and their influence
practices
can lead to desired
outcomes
attributes
ployee
at the firm level, such as productivity,
financial
Yet
and competitive
advantage.
performance,
still

which
take

is the process
unanswered
through
this occurs.
both perspectives
Although
a macro
implicit,
they assume
approach,
left

multilevel
individual

relationships
employee

tional

performance
1994). The features
to facilitate
these

among
attributes,

(Huselid,
of HRM
linkages

HRM

practices,

and organiza
et al.,
1995; Wright
that are necessary

have

not been

well

addressed.
a
follows we develop
how
HRM
practices,
understanding
can contribute
to firm performance
In what

ing employees
behaviors
that,
the organization's

to adopt
desired
in the collective,
strategic

goals.

for
framework
as a system,
by motivat
attitudes
and
help achieve
We
first focus

Review

April

as an important mediating
on climate
variable
in the HRM-firm
The
relationship.
performance
not so much
in
HRM system
itself is discussed
set of HRM
terms of content
(e.g., the specific
an organiza
for achieving
necessary
practices
tional goal) but rather process
of an
(the features
to employees
HRM system
that send signals
that
and ap
allow
them to understand
the desired
sense
and form a collective
responses
propriate
is expected).
We describe
how a "strong
climate"
&
Subirats,
(Schneider,
2002)
Salvaggio,
can be viewed
as a "strong situation"
(Mischel,
share a common
1973, 1977), in which
employees
is important
of what
and what
interpretation
are expected
and rewarded. We
behaviors
then
of what

the concept
introduce
of
and
the
specify
system"
HRM system
overall
that
we
after which
climates,
versus
of strong
quences
that

arguing

of the HRM
"strength
of the
metafeatures
would
lead to strong
examine
the conse
weak

the emergence
climate
from

ganizational
mates
is moderated

HRM

systems,
or
intended
cli
psychological
of the

of the HRM
by the strength
We
close
with
directions
for
future re
system.
on this new strength
search
of the HRM system
conse
construct
its antecedents
and
and
Our

quences.

is framed within
discussion
the
that concerns
the simultaneous

mesoparadigm
study of organizational,
and specifies
processes
lated

and
individual
group,
how
levels are interre

in the form of linking

& Thomas-Hunt,

mechanisms

Rousseau,

(House,

1995).

CLIMATE AS A MEDIATOR OF THE HRM-FIRM

PERFORMANCE RELATIONSHIP
our framework
We begin
with
the notion
that
are linked to differ
different
business
strategies
on the contin
ent sets of HRM practices,
based
resource
of strategic
human
gency
perspective
& lackson,
1987b,
(e.g., Sch?ler
a strategy
of innovation
example,
foster adoption
of HRM practices
that
should
a strategy
of cus
share a focus on innovation;
tomer service
to a set of prac
should be linked

management
1995). For

tices that center around

on the view
that HRM

service.

We

then build
em
influence
systems
as
as
and
well
attitudes
behavior,
organ
ployee
izational
outcomes,
through employee
interpre
tations
of the work
climate
(Ferris et al., 1998;
Brief, & Guzzo,
1990).
Kopelman,
as a mediator,
it is
climate
Before developing
to
note
delin
that
other
important
perspectives

This content downloaded from 134.208.96.85 on Wed, 11 Mar 2015 12:13:04 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

2004 Bowen

as a
that can operate
eate different
variables
relation
in the HRM-firm
mediator
performance
the technical
per
subsystem
ship. For example,
on
and
task
task
focuses
requirements
spective
and
has
&
Kahn,
1978)
(Katz
accomplishment
HRM research
dominated
(Sch?ler &
historically
is
1995). The underlying
lackson,
assumption
knowl
to employee
lead
that HRM practices
and abilities
skills,
(KSAs) that, in turn,
edge,
at the collective
firm performance
influence
level

& lackson,
1995).
are perspectives
that
there
Additionally,
on
interactive
focus
socially
"higher-order"
(Sch?ler

Ferris

constructs?what
(1998) term social

his

and

colleagues
views
of the

context
theory
HRM and performance.
between
By
relationship
structures
that
social
order, we mean
higher
to an aggregation
cannot be reduced
of the per
the
individuals
of
composing
currently
ceptions
the organization.
we
Although
of higher-order
tional culture
ture. Culture,

on climate,
structures

two examples
are organiza
role struc
the organization
and
as
organization
conceptualized
focus

social

can
and values,
assumptions
ally embedded
to the HRM sys
function both as an antecedent
to firm
tem and as a mediator
of its linkage
as
(Denison,
1996). Organizational
performance
HRM practices,
and values
sumptions
shape
norms and rou
in turn, reinforce
cultural
which,
tines that can shape
and firm perfor
individual
mance.
the organi
Role theorists
conceptualize
zation as a system of formal roles, existing
apart
serve
to
which
from any one current occupant,
to employees
information
of
(Ashforth,
patterns
activity
expected
the HRM
2001; Katz & Kahn,
1978). In this view
can
seen
as
the
"maintenance
be
of
part
system

convey
about

standardized

subsystem"
roles, which,
firm

1978) that defines

(Katz & Kahn,
in turn, influence
and
individual

performance.

the techni
Our focus on climate
complements
structure
cal and higher-order
social
perspec
tives on the HRM-firm
relationship.
performance
in
of our interest
focus on climate
because
We
since
relationships,
individual-level
climates?as

both

multilevel
cal
and

psychologi

perceptions?
a shared
per
been positioned
between
HRM
et
(e.g., Kopelman

and

205

Ostroff

climate
our
veloping

HRM,

construct
is an appropriate
on the
based
framework,

on

climates

for de
recent

around

strategic
objec
emphasis
to enhance
tives
effective
that are purported
ness
2000).
(e.g., Schneider,
is an experiential
climate
Psychological
of what
"see" and re
based
perception
people
as

sense
of
they make
This
1990,
2000).
(Schneider,
is relative
to the goals
the organi
sensemaking
are
to perform
zation pursues;
how employees
the management
their daily activities;
practices
to them

port happening
their environment

which
the percep
work; and
employees
tions of the kinds of behaviors
that management
and
rewards
(Schneider,
expects,
supports,
is a
climate
Brief, & Guzzo,
1996). Organizational
under

is
of what
the organization
perception
in terms of practices,
policies,
procedures,
is important
and rewards?what
and
routines,
are expected
what
and
behaviors
rewarded
shared
like

(e.g., lames
Schneider,

among
units.

ceptions
izational
Climate
gic

focus

content

1974; Jones & James,

on shared
is based
within

employees

global,

perceptions
criterion

(Delbecq & Mills,

or
service
1996)
(Schneider,
level psychological
climates

Climate
exploring
HRM and

relates

1985; Klein & Sorra,

1990). Individual
as a
may
emerge

climate,

organizational

ultimately

per
organ

to linking cli
issues
generic
to a shared,
strategic
specific,
of interest, such as a climate
for

innovation

shared

formal

1979;

a strate
researchers
have acquired
over
the years, with
the move
from
as
climate
shared
percep
perceptions

viewing
tions about
mate

& Jones,
2000)?and

which,

to organizational

is a critical
multilevel

in turn,

performance.

mediating

construct

in

between

relationships

Because
organizational
performance.
as
is
climate
defined
the perception
of
widely
formal and informal
these
organizational
poli

and procedures
&
cies,
(Reichers
practices,
that the HRM prac
Schneider,
1990), it follows
tices and HRM system will play a critical
role in
climate
determining
ical demonstrations
izational

climate?as
organizational
at
the
firm
level?have
ception
as mediators
of the relationship

haviors

and performance
practices
& Bowen,
1990; Ostroff
al.,
2000). Additionally,
our interest
on
in strategic
given
perspectives

ganizational

climate

In turn, empir
perceptions.
have
indicated
that organ
is related
to higher-level
be

and
organizational
customer
indicators,
including
tomer service quality,
financial

management

effectiveness,
outcomes

performance
cus
satisfaction,
or
performance,
and

(e.g.,

This content downloaded from 134.208.96.85 on Wed, 11 Mar 2015 12:13:04 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

total

Borucki

quality
& Burke,

206

1999; Johnson,
Schneider

1996; Ostroff & Schmitt,

1993;

& Bowen,
1985).
are well
estab
the above
variables
the mechanisms
the literature,
by
are poorly
understood.
they interrelate

Although
in
lished
which

Review

of Management

Academy

April

can be designed
and ad
the HRM system
how
metafeatures
ministered
by defining
effectively
that can create strong
of an overall HRM system
about
in
of
form
shared
situations
the
meaning
to
lead
that might
the content
organ
ultimately

as Boxall
observed,
(1996) has
but
is
HRM
of
widespread,
practices
knowledge
them
to
refine
and
of
how
implement
knowledge
a particular
context
within
(e.g., a particular
to cli
focus) may not be. With
respect
strategic

performance.
a desired
content
of the HRM system,
still not elicit appropriate
the HRM system may
for
and attitudes
needed
behaviors
collective
inter
because
individuals
effectiveness,
may

that there is
(2000) has observed
or understanding
of how organi
Intuitive
climate
zational
develops.
actually
an
far ex
HRM-climate
of
linkage
acceptance
of
the
mechanisms
ceeds
theory development

pret

For

example,

Schneider

mate,
little

research

izational
Given

lead
the HRM practices
idiosyncratically,
in
climate
to
per
psychological
ing
variability
as
a
can
viewed
be
HRM
practices
ceptions.
mes
or
function
by sending
signaling
symbolic
use to make
sense of and
that employees
sages

of their
meaning
psychological
HRM
All
1995).
(e.g., Rousseau,
communicate
messages
constantly
practices
can be
and messages
and in unintended
ways,
em
two
understood
whereby
idiosyncratically,
to define

responsible.

INTEGRATINGHRM CONTENT AND PROCESS

features
of
Two interrelated
can be distinguished:
content
the individual
content, we mean
a
to
achieve
intended
policies
to promote
tive (e.g., practices
The content

tonomy).
the set of practices
driven
be largely

an HRM

system
process.
By
and
practices

and

particular
innovation

of the HRM
and,

adopted
by the

objec
or au
refers

system
ideally,

should

of

To be effective
HRM practices
ular

strategic

While

the foci of the

in terms of content,
must be designed
around a partic
focus,

a number

such

as

service

or

innovation.

models
detailing
for different
practices

of different

HRM
appropriate
&
offered
been
have
(e.g., Dyer
strategies
&
Sch?ler
Miles
&
1994;
Snow,
Jack
1988;
Holder,
this contingency
about
rhetoric
son,
1987b),
it (cf.
data
outpaces
supporting
perspective
the

& Jack
1995; Sch?ler
1995; MacDuffie,
Huselid,
et al., 1996). It is likely that
son, 1987a; Youndt
set of
most
is not a single
there
appropriate
a
for
objective.
strategic
particular
practices
be
of practices
sets
different
Rather,
may
so
as
&
effective
1996),
long
Doty,
(Delery
equally
around
climate
a
of
allow
type
particular
they
for inno
some strategic
(e.g., climate
objective
to develop
(Klein & Sorra, 1996).
and process
content
HRM
that
propose
for pre
in
order
must
be integrated
effectively
to
HRM
of
models
actually
strategic
scriptive
we
to
refer
link to firm performance.
By process,
vation
We

or service)

the same practices

interpret
ployees
1994). Although
(Guzzo & Noonan,
the substantive
about
been written

differently
has
much
content
of
that can

is, the specific

practices
such
skills and motivations
task-relevant
build
as those for a climate
for innovation
(Delbecq &

HRM?that
to

and
strategic
goals
some
That is, given
the organization.
or qual
strategic
goal such as service, efficiency,
to
a
devised
be
should
set
of
HRM
practices
ity,
resources
in
this
goal.
meeting
help direct human

values

the

situation

work

1990), change
(Schneider,
1985), service
et al., 1996), or safety
(Zohar, 2000)?
(Schneider
to the social con
has been given
little attention
make
of their inter
that employees
structions
time
and
HRM across
with
actions
practices

Mills,

& Greller,
1984).
(Rousseau
focus
follows we
In what
send unambiguous
messages
result in a shared construction
the

situation.

Thus,

we

on how HRM
to employees
of the meaning

concentrate

on

can
that
of

under

can lead
of HRM process
features
what
standing
re
and
to
interpret
appropriately
employees
in
HRM
to
information
the
prac
conveyed
spond
that characteristics
the notion
tices. We develop
in order
of a strong HRM system must be present
to
climate
shared,
strong
organizational
from
the
level)
(at
emerge
psychologi
aggregate
cal climates
level) and propose
(at the individual
is a linking
of the HRM system
that the strength
that builds
mechanism
shared, collective
percep
for a

tions, attitudes,

and behaviors

among

employees.

CLIMATE AS THE SITUATION: THE CONCEPT

OF SITU?TIONAL STRENGTH
Kurt Lewin's
early work on climate
of situationism
of discussions

dation

This content downloaded from 134.208.96.85 on Wed, 11 Mar 2015 12:13:04 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

is the foun
in social

2004 Bowen

and

(Ross & Nisbett,

1991). Lewin and his
1939) demon
(Lewin, Lippit, & White,
created
strated
that different
leadership
styles
in turn, led to different
different
which,
climates,
reactions
of members
behavioral
and attitudes
sum
in the groups
studied. As Ross and Nisbett
psychology
associates

"The main

marize,
was
that

of Lewin's
situationism
creates
forces
potent
behavior"
(1991: 9).

point
context
social
or constraining

producing

of Situation

Strength

as developed
in situationism,
situation,
entails
the psychological
of situations
meaning
and the behavior
of
for the individual
potential
situations
for the individual
&
(Endler
Magnus
or
is not in the physical
son, 1976). The interest
The

per se but, rather,

on their
"see" based

situation

actual

individuals
even

in the situation

behavior

1999).
Kazanjian,
In an attempt
to explain
istics of a situation
would
in behaviors,
relative

consistency
of

concept
control

the

to construe

the

and

pattern,

instill

situations

versely,

the degree

way,
the most

provide
of that

the skills

adequate

Con

are

conditions

the behavior

or

fail

for successful

(Mischel,

to

weak

that they are not uniformly

expectancies
not offer

concerning
incen
sufficient
to provide
construction

the
of

1973: 276).

havior

Mischel

Strong

Climates

Only
people

when
does

that identify when

or will not control

are

Additionally,
content?for

about what behaviors

perceptions
in the organization.
and rewarded
on strategic
climate
the work

for safety and innovation

example,
that the more
Schneider,
1990)?assumes
(e.g.,
HRM practices
about what
send strong signals
are
most
and what
strategic
goals
important
are
behaviors
employee
expected,
supported,
rewarded

likely

relative

it is those

goals

to those
will

goals,
be achieved.

the more

STRENGTHOF THE HRM SYSTEM

of an HRM system
that
allow
for the creation
Al
of a strong situation?
for appropriate
for
process
though suggestions
have been offered
separate
practices
(e.g., em
in the design
and adminis
participation
ployee
tration of performance
metafeatures
appraisal),
of an HRM system
overall
have not been
identi
What

are

the features

employees.

individual

dif

individual

be

shared

climate

its roots

in McGuire's

(1972) two-step
of the mes
"reception"?encoding
to the message,
to its
attention
sage
(exposure
of the content)?and
content,
comprehension
of the message
"yielding"?acceptance
(agree

process

across

become

can be viewed
as communica
HRM practices
tions from the employer
to employee
(Guzzo &
Por
Noonan,
1994; Rousseau,
1995; Tsui, Pearce,
on
&
The
literature
ter,
1997).
message
Tripoli,
based
& Eagley,
(Chaiken, Wood,
persuasion
1996) has

(1997).

perceptions
organizational

cies,
velop shared
are expected

when

in which
mes
situations
strong
unambiguous
are
to
about
communicated
sages
employees
is appropriate
what
behavior.
These
character
a
istics refer to the process
which
consistent
by
can be sent
about
HRM content
to
message

encoded,

In sum, situational
deals
with
the
strength
a situation
extent
to which
induces
conform
as
situation?or
is interpreted
strong
ity?a
situation
weak
(Mischel & Peake,
ambiguous?a
is in specifying
situational
1982). The interest
contingencies
will
ferences

a
employees
develop
of the organization's
interpretation
poli
and goals
and de
practices,
procedures,
situation

cial

for its

execution.

treatments

not generate
uniform
the desired
do
behavior,
tives
for its performance,

strong
shared

(Jackofsky &
et al., 2002).
can acf as a

social
fied. Using
and so
cognitive
psychology
a set of char
influence
theories, we propose
acteristics
that allow
HRM systems
to create

response

necessary

and

and

do

learning

same

the

regarding

construction

satisfactory

are

"treatments"

events

expectancies

response
pattern,
for the performance

appropriate
incentives

the
to

developed
situations

that they lead all persons

particular

uniform

in perceptions
about
the situation
1988; Payne,
2000; Schneider
Slocum,
climate
As such, an organizational

to

lead

likely
of

and

construct
the
(James, 1982). Recently,
meaningful
to
notion of strong or weak
climates
has begun
a
on
in
the
focus
the
with
literature,
emerge
extent
to which
the situa
interpret
employees
variance
tion similarly,
low
thereby producing

and
&

207

the character

Mischel

to the degree

powerful
induce

when
most

"situations"

Psychological

and

(Drazin, Glynn,

power
behavior:

individual

perceptions,

enactments,

schemata,

maps,

cognitive

the situation

Ostroff

of

the message
it in memory).
and storing
ing with
to have
For a message
its desired
effect, both
are necessary.
and yielding
Yet mak
reception

This content downloaded from 134.208.96.85 on Wed, 11 Mar 2015 12:13:04 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

208

Academy

nu
often entails
the environment
to information,
inter
of attending
on it, and receiving
information,
acting

of
ing sense
merous
cycles
preting
feedback

particularly
or subject
Attribution

has

been

in helping
in help
for mes
allow

persuasion
message-based
that will
ing identify key features
to be received
and interpreted
sages
uniformly
1991). In the
(Fiske & Taylor,
among
employees
are required
to infer
HRM context,
employees
explain

from these communica

attributions
cause-effect
are impor
to determine
behaviors
what
tions
inference
and rewarded.
Causal
tant, expected,
can be understood
not solely as the inner work
by which
ings of the mind but also as a process
elicit

causal

gather
people
communicate
and
from others
tions to others
(Fiske & Taylor,

explanations
their explana
1991).
in a social con

of
the cause
individual
attributes
whether
or
to
external
internal
behavior
another
person's
factors, Kelley's
(1967) attribution
theory details
not only to
for making
attributions
the process
factors as well.
but to situational
other people
to Kelley's
model,
(1967) covariation
According
can make
an individual
attributions
confident
in situations
cause-effect
about
relationships
on
of
distinctiveness
the
(the
degree
depending
is highly
event-effect
observable),
consistency
itself the same across
(the event-effect
presents
consensus

(there is
of the
views
agreement
Mischel's
event-effect
Indeed,
relationship).
im
of a strong situation
(1973, 1977) explication
one
is
distinctive
it
in
is
which
there
that
plies
time),

ness,

consistency,

and

individuals'

among

and

strong

types of information
situation.

needed

to create

Distinctiveness
Distinctiveness
fers to features

consensus.

re
the situation
generally
it to stand out in the
that allow
attention
and
capturing
thereby
of

environment,
interest. We
arousing
istics of HRM that can

ity,

an

and

the

ibility,

In order to function effectively

accurate
about a sit
text and make
attributions
an
must
and
have
uation,
adequate
employee
attribu
information.
Although
unambiguous
to explain
have
been
used
frameworks
tional

modalities

ing

useful

and

and

April

climate
idiosyncratic
perceptions.
psychological
can be concep
The strength
of the HRM system
in convey
in terms of its effectiveness
tualized

to clarify one's sense

of the situation,
are highly
events
when
ambiguous
to change
1992).
(Weick, 1995; Wicker,
theory

Review

of Management

and

understandability,

elucidate
four character
vis
foster distinctiveness:
of author
legitimacy

relevance.

re
of the HRM practices
Visibility
Visibility.
to which
fers to the degree
these
practices
are salient
is a
This
and
observable.
readily
for
basic
prerequisite
interpretation
involving
an HRM practice
its component
and
whether
are disclosed
to employees,
affording
parts
for sensemaking.
them the opportunity
or salience
has
identified
long been
in
characteristic
portant
determining
to information
attend
whether
people

Visibility
as an im
not
but

only
how

it (e.g., Tajfel,
1968)
they cognitively
organize
and make
cause-effect
attributions
(Taylor &
criteria
if performance
Fiske,
1978). For example,
or if pay administration
are not transparent
out
are withheld,
comes
such as with pay secrecy,
not create Mischel's
will
this certainly
(1973)
in which
has shared
everyone
strong situation,
ex
of the situation
and uniform
constructions
the most
appropriate
regarding
pectancies
are
incentives
and what
response
pattern
available.

situa
The creation
of a strong organizational
be
characteristics
tion requires
that situational
of employ
much
and visible
salient
throughout
When
the
ees' daily work routines and activities.
a wide
of HRM
HRM system
includes
spectrum

is per
the HRM system
that when
propose
as high
in distinctiveness,
ceived
consistency,
it will create a strong situation.
and consensus,
on message-based
literature
persuasion
Using

di
selection,
training,
example,
practices?for
assistance
pro
programs,
versity
employee
affect a large number
and so forth?that
grams,
to be higher.
is likely
of employees,
visibility

we
nine
elucidate
influence,
that build distinc
of HRM systems
metafeatures
and consensus,
tiveness,
thereby
consistency,
a strong
in which
situation
influence
creating
of the situation.
share constructions
employees

and range of practices

the number
Expanding
because
and visibility,
salience
should enhance
set of
allows
the
and
for
it increases
complexity
more
to
relative
other
to
be
figurai
practices
are principles
of sa
of which
stimuli?both

We

and

social

such, the features

help foster
of a strong organizational
climate,

As

the emergence
as opposed

to

lience

(Fiske

shared

meanings

& Taylor,
cannot

This content downloaded from 134.208.96.85 on Wed, 11 Mar 2015 12:13:04 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

1991). Additionally,
unless
be developed

2004 Bowen

or all employees
are subjected
same
the
perceive
practices.

most

to and

can

derstood

can

of the stimulus

nitive

have

categories

no authority
(Barnard,
or situation
evoke

(e.g.,

sch?mas,

scripts,

1938).
cog
cogni

tive maps),
to some
attention
features
drawing
dif
and away
from others. Sometimes
profound
across people
exist in category
ferences
systems
that the situational
1955). To the extent
(Kelley,
or unclear,
cat
is ambiguous
stimulus
multiple
are
That
is,
1981).
(Feldman,
egorizations
likely
are
use
to
different
different
cog
likely
people
to attend
to different
of
categories
aspects
in
different
attribu
information,
resulting
to
must
tions. For example,
be able
employees
how the practice
works.
understand
HRM prac
tices such as benefit
plans,
gain-sharing
plans,

nitive
the

and succession
plans are easily misunderstood
or at least open to multiple
interpretations.
of authority.
Legitimacy
Legitimate
authority
of the HRM system and its agents
leads individ
ex
to consider
to performance
uals
submitting
as formally
pectations
fluence by legitimate

sanctioned
authority
is, one

In
behaviors.
a
is essentially
sees the behav
role as subordi

perceptual
process?that
ioral requirements
of one's

own

nate

out as

to another

authority
concept

that stands

& Hamilton,

(Kelman
of authority
whereby
to submit
to the necessities

the legitimate
1989). It is the
are
individuals

of coopera
willing
tive systems
(Barnard,
1938).
is most
The HRM system
likely to be perceived
as an authority
situation when
the HRM function
is perceived
function and
HRM

as

a high-status,
high-credibility
This is most
activity.
likely when

has

and visible
top manage
significant
in the firm and can be achieved
support
or the HRM
in HR practices
investments
through
or perhaps
of
the
director
function,
by placing
HRM in a high-level
This
position.
managerial

ment

fits

the observation
about
the requirements
for
the success
of HRM systems
generally;
namely,
success
on top management
depends
largely
about
beliefs
support,
top managers'
including
the importance
of people,
in human
investment
and involvement
of HRM profession
resources,
in the strategic
als
(Ostroff,
process
planning
1995).

In such

a way,

the signal

Ostroff

209

is

management

that

HRM

is

or

"legitimate"

"credible."

of HRM
Understandability
Understandability.
a
content
lack of ambiguity
and ease of
refers to
of HRM practice
content. An or
comprehension
cannot be un
communication
that
ganizational
Features

and

sent

from

top

This

source
to message
in
since
of the
the characteristics
are linked to attributions
made
of persuasion
(Fiske & Taylor,

is related

notion

social

cognition,
source
message
and the outcomes

et al.,
1991). Communicator
(Chaiken
credibility
in attribution,
1996) is a critical
per
component
and
influence
the
suasion,
However,
attempts.
elaboration
likelihood
model
of persuasion
that persua
1986) indicates
(Petty & Cacioppo,
are not simply
sion and influence
of
functions
features
but,

of

rather,

credibility
the outcomes

the

communicator
and
credibility
of
functions
communicator's
the
joint
and
in
the recipients'
involvement

obedience
(Hass, 1981). Relatedly,
a
more
to legitimate
is
function
than
of
authority
to a position
the individual's
subordination
of
an
it
involves
also
individual's
"higher office";

at
of the relevance
of influence
interpretation
to them (Kelman & Hamilton,
1989).
tempts
re
of the HRM system
Relevance
Relevance.
fers to whether
is defined
in such a
the situation
sees
as rele
that individuals
the situation
way
to an important
(Kelman & Hamilton,
goal
au
with
1989). Relevance,
coupled
legitimate
means
on
a
is
that
influence
based
both
thority,

vant

of superordinate
and what
perception
authority
term
Kelman
and Hamilton
motivational
(1989)
For the latter,
must
individuals
significance.
as
situation
to
the
relevant
their
perceive
impor
tant goals,
are clear
that the desired
behaviors
and

suited
for goal attainment,
and
have
the personal
agents
influencing
to affect
the achievement
of these goals
power
(Kelman & Hamilton,
1989).
consideration
of both
individual
Here,
goals
optimally

that

and

organizational

goals?in

our

case,

the

stra

in the form of HRM con

in that
individual
goals
to align with
those of the
or congruence
between
Alignment

desired
tegic goal
tent?is
important
should
be fostered

organization.
individuals'
and managers'
has been
goals
to have
shown
for both
consequences
important
as well
as
individual
attitudes
and behaviors,
for effective
(Vancou
organizational
functioning
ver & Schmitt,
must be
1991). Thus, the situation
in such a way
are will
defined
that individuals
ing to work
them to meet

that not only allow

goals
their own needs
so,
but, in doing
the organization
to achieve
also allow
its goals.
For example,
if the organization
has a strategic
an
of
customer
service
and
val
goal
employee
toward

This content downloaded from 134.208.96.85 on Wed, 11 Mar 2015 12:13:04 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

210

ues

of Management

Academy

then service-based
bonuses
gain,
will heighten
relevance
and allow
both the in
to
achieve
their
dividual
and
organization
financial

mance

behaviors
desired
to their perfor
obstacles

the relevant

goals. Relatedly,
must be specified

and

Additionally,
power
individuals
help

of

perceived

is a

function

of

the
to

the influencing
agent(s)
relevant
achieve
goals
on
is based
1989). Influence

(Kelman & Hamilton,

an
to which
the extent
or line manager
member

(e.g., HRM staff

HRM prac
enacting
as
is
tices)
capa
possessing
personal
perceived
to use
is willing
them to aid goal
bilities
and
influ
from his or her
achievement?separate
ence

agent

on position
power
of
Perceived
power
authority.
on
two
factors.
agent(s)
depends
can affect some of the
the agent
of
for the achievement
essary
based

and

legitimate

the

influencing
is whether
One
nec
conditions

relevant
goals
of unique
for example,
the application
re
or the allocation
of necessary
expertise
sources.
that bear
of the agent
Characteristics
on this issue include his or her prestige,
special
or expertise,
representativeness,
knowledge
through,

and ability
control of resources,
tions. A second
is the perceived
use his
the agent will actually

sanc
to apply
that
likelihood
or her relevant

the likeli
in ways
affect
that will
capabilities
hood of goal achievement.
the relation
and Fiske
(1991) explain
Taylor
or
the
relevance
and
between
credibility
ship
of

legitimacy

the

message

source.

If outcomes

attainment)
(rewards,
goal
punishments,
as well
as the
actions
else's
pend on someone
a
creates
then
this
condi
individual's
actions,
in
tion of outcome
turn, af
which,
dependency,
When
and attributions.
fects perceptions
people
are more outcome
when
dependent,
particularly
more
ac
are
outcomes
direct
the
relevant,
they
or source of commu
to the person
tive attention
are
same
outcomes
nication.
At the
time, when
of the message
relevant,
credibility
particularly
source has less of an influence.
Thus, it appears
can enhance
alone
relevance
distinctiveness;
when

relevance

gitimacy

plays

is not strongly
a greater
role.

established,

Consistency
understand
of visibility,
features
and
relevance
of
authority,
legitimacy
ability,
commu
to
and
the
attention
draw
message
help
The

above

le

the probability
and
encoded

increasing
will
be

that
inter

However,
among
employees.
is not
alone
sufficient
likely
to view
uni
for people
the situation
to the message
sent by
and to respond

preted
uniformly
distinctiveness

formly
to make
For employees
the set of HRM practices.
are
accurate
behaviors
attributions
about what
and
expected
of causation

attributional

rewarded,
must
be

present.
attribution

principles
Fundamental

for causal
include priority,
principles
causes
and contiguity
effects,
whereby
precede
causes
occur close
with
in
the effect, whereby
time to an effect
&
or,
(Kassin
1985).
Pry
as alluded
to above,
the literature
Similarly,
on authority
indicates
that indi
and
influence
who

viduals

are

to be influenced
in the situation

must

perceive
be
whereby
lead to rewards.
haviors
That is, the distinctive
ness characteristics
ensure
that the HRM system
as significant
in defining
is viewed,
the
overall,
a consis
context
social
for employee
behavior;
instrumentalities

across
tent pattern
of instrumentalities
HRM
that link specific
time, and employees
practices,
events
and effects
the likeli
further enhances
that desired

hood

played.
These

notions

specific
are

of consistency.

concept
to establishing
refers
modalities
whereby
is present,
the entity
the

de

April

nicator,
thereby
the HRM message

enough

removed.

relevance

Review

interactions.

Thus,

behaviors

related

people,
and consistent

be dis

to Kelley's

(1967)

Consistency
generally
over
an effect
time and
time
the effect occurs
each
of
form
of
the
regardless
we

focus

consistent
and contexts:

establish

will

on

relationships
instrumentality,
HRM messages.

features

over

that

time,

validity,

to es
refers
Instrumentality.
Instrumentality
an
cause
unambiguous
perceived
tablishing
to the HRM sys
in reference
effect
relationship
tem's

desired

content-focused

associated
that
with
tern.

behaviors

and
It ensures

consequences.
employee
are adequate
incentives
associated
of the desired
behavioral
pat
performance
there

with
combined
instrumentalities,
Strong
lever
"relevance"
of social
the earlier
influence,
an expectancy
within
influence
age
theory of
motivation
1964).
perspective
(e.g., Vroom,
a central
role in instrumen
Perception
plays
an
it
how
because
employees
emphasizes
tality
Instru
of behavior.
ticipate
likely consequences
are shaped
reinforcement
mentalities
largely by
and are established
consistency
by consistency
over
and
time, particularly
through
repetition

This content downloaded from 134.208.96.85 on Wed, 11 Mar 2015 12:13:04 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

2004 Bowen

of reinforcement
application
principles.
Employ
ees are more
to perceive
the instrumen
likely
are closely
behavior
and outcomes
tality when
linked in time (evoking
causation
the contiguity
are
attribution
and
when
admin
principle)
they
over
some
istered
time
schedule
consistently
(evoking
ciple).
managers
outcomes

To

the priority
the extent

causation

attribution
prin
that HRM staff and
line
have
to link
the resources
and power
to behavior
or performance
on a

and consistent
schedule,
timely
they will
to influence
able
attributions.
cause-effect

be

of HRM practices
is impor
Validity.
Validity
tant because
to de
message
recipients
attempt
termine
the validity
of a message
in making
attributions
(Fiske & Taylor,
1991). Thus, HRM
must
between
practices
display
consistency
to do and what
what
they purport
they actually
a strong
to help
do in order
for them
create
situation.

Selection
on
screen

tests,
desired

for example,

must

abilities,
validly
employee
a
to
substantive
contribution
thereby making
one
as
human
that
Recall
capital
development.
is that employees
have
pect of a strong situation
to execute
the skills necessary
the behaviors
of them. Barnard
(1938) long ago ob
expected
served
view a communi
that employees
would
as authoritative
cation
if
able
only
they were
and

to comply with
it.
physically
a
also makes
contribution
Validity
symbolic
to employees
what
KSAs are val
by signaling
ued in a setting and by adding more employees

mentally

with

to the workforce.
Further,
is implemented
and advertised
to have
certain
and
not do
then does
effects,
it was
what
to do, the message
intended
sent to
is contradictory,
are
and employees
employees
left to develop
their own idiosyncratic
interpre

when

specified
a practice

skills

tations.

Consistent

HRM messages.
These
convey
and stability
in the signals
sent by
compatibility
the HRM practices.
Considerable
evidence
indi
cates
that individuals
desire
in or
consistency
life (e.g., Kelley,
1973; Lidz,
1973;
ganizational
in "double
Siehl,
1985). The lack of consistency
can lead to particularly
bind"
communication
intense
dissonance
(Siehl,
1985).
cognitive
occurs when
a per
Double-bind
communication
son is faced with
in
communication
significant
two separate
(Bateson,
Jack
messages
volving
& Weakland,
son, Haley,
1956). The messages
are related
to each other and deal with
the same
content area, but they are incongruent
or contra

and

Ostroff

211

can be
of inconsistency
Consequences
(Lidz, 1973).
are required,
Three types of consistency
each
of which
to avoid
entails
the need
sending

dictory.
severe

double-bind
to employees
communications
and
to allow
for HRM content
to be perceived
consis
is between
what
senior managers
tently. One
are
the
and
say
organization's
goals and values
what
and

employees
are
values

conclude
those goals
actually
on their perceptions
based
of
a
here
is
differ
Inconsistency

HRM practices.
ence between
what
has been
values
and
inferred
values
1983). For example,
managers
value

of

risk

termed
(Martin
may

espoused
& Siehl,
espouse

but

infer
may
employees
that performance
and
reward
system
appraisal
reinforce
it safe.
practices
playing
A second
for avoiding
double
requirement
bind
is internal
communication
consistency
the HRM practices
themselves.
In recent
among
on
much
written
has
been
the
years,
importance
taking,

an HRM system with practices

that
one
a
as
another
fit
and
complement
together
in achieving
whole
the organization's
goals
1996; Delery & Doty,
1996;
(e.g., Becker & Gerhart,
Sch?ler
& Jackson,
& McMahan,
1995; Wright
& Snell,
1992; Wright
1991). Internal
alignment
in performance
should
result
among
practices
for firms, because
the different
sets
advantages
of HRM practices
will elicit,
reward, and control
of designing

the appropriate
behaviors
for achiev
employee
(Arthur, 1992; Ulrich &
ing strategic
objectives
et al., 1994). For example,
if
Lake,
1991; Wright
to work
the ability
in teams is a screening
focus
in selection,
then internal
will
be
consistency
if group,
ensured
rather than individual,
perfor
mance
is the basis
for rewards.
if
Furthermore,
each employee
encounter
with an HRM practice
in
(e.g., hiring decision,
performance
appraisal
as a separate
is conceptualized
situa
terview)
Mischel
tion, then,
(1968), the func
following
tional similarity
of these situational
stimuli will
influence
the generalizability
of team-oriented
across
behavior
situations.
on-the-job
A third dimension
of consistency
is stability
over time. HRM practices
are situational
stimuli,
the meaning
of which
is acquired
across
time.
one
a
how
to
situation
de
Certainly,
responds
on one's

the stimulus
prior history with
and behavioral
1968). Behaviors
(e.g., Mischel,
remain
stable when
the evoking
consequences
conditions
remain
stable.
In organizations
where
in place a long time,
have been
practices
pends

This content downloaded from 134.208.96.85 on Wed, 11 Mar 2015 12:13:04 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

212

of Management

Academy

Review

April

there is stronger
among
agreement
employees
as to what
is expected
of them and what
they
in return (Rousseau
&
of the organization
expect
Wade-Benzoni,
1994).

"see" the practice

As more
employees
bility).
on
that top decision
makers
and perceive
agree
can be facilitated.
Further,
it, consensus
integra
HRM profes
interactions
tion and close
among

Consensus

foster the
and top managers
managers,
for
the
formulation
tacit
of
knowledge
exchange
strat
of an organizational
and implementation
the firm's stra
that reflect
egy and HRM system
sionals,

results

Consensus
among
fluence

when

employees?the
the HRM

system?in
More
relationship.

by
event-effect

is agreement
of in
targets

there

intended

their view of the

accurate
attribu

lead
and responses
tions about what behaviors
are more
to be
to what
consequences
likely
is consensus
made
when
there
1972).
(Kelley,
consensus
can
foster
factors
Several
help
whether
influence
and can
among
employees
re
same
with
effect
the
individuals
perceive
or
in
situation
to
the
question.
entity
spect
these are agreement
message
among
Among
can foster consensus
which
(Fiske &
senders,
HRM
of
the
the
fairness
and
1991),
sys
Taylor,
consensus
can also
inas
influence
tem, which
much

as

fairness

involves

whether
employees
rules by which
they
they feel they deserve

the distribution
understand
or
do
not, receive what
do,
their
contributions.
for
to point out
is
It
also
important
are
consensus
distinct
tency and

that

consis

but

interre

when
individuals
For example,
concepts.
consis
the organization
experience
throughout
consensus
is more
likely
tency in HRM practices,
to be fostered. At the same
time, when message
lated

cannot

senders

intended

agree

message,

themselves

among

is likely

consistency

on

the

to be

hampered.

in
1994). These
(Lado & Wilson,
can help
makers
decision
among
relevance
impor
identifying
promote
by clearly
as
to goal
tant goals
and means
attainment,
as enhance
the
of
of
well
authority
legitimacy
tegic

direction

tegrations

and

HR managers
HRM policies.

line managers

of the top
to the extent
that members
Second,
team disagree
themselves
among
management
with
the goals
of HRM and/or
about
disagree
or managers,
and to the ex
HRM professionals
dis
and staff members
tent that HRM managers
agree
send

themselves,
and
unambiguous
among

to produce
poor consistency
different
thus,
employees
practices;
ence different
event-consequence
Overall,
makers

then, agreement
among
can help
foster
greater
since
it allows
employees,

viewed

the message,
a
because
send

similar

can

distinctiveness
larger number
communications

of

be

enhanced
can
individuals
(increasing

visi

consistent

in delivering
will experi
relationships.
top decision
consensus
for more

vis
among
to
be
and consistent
ible, relevant,
messages
to employees.
conveyed
is a
of the HRM system
Fairness
Fairness.
of whether
of employees'
perceptions
composite

in the organization
makers
(e.g., top
pal decision
set
the
HR
executives)
strategic
managers,
goals
for achiev
the set of HRM practices
and design
view mes
individuals
ing those goals. When
as
them
senders
among
sage
agreeing
strongly
are
more
on the message,
selves
likely to
they
1991). This
(Fiske & Taylor,
can
in
be
facilitated
of
agreement
perception
to
is
distinctiveness
related
and
several
ways
and consistency.
makers
decision
First, when multiple
agree on

to

difficult

likely

adhere
HRM practices
three dimensions
ering

consensus

it becomes

internally
of
to employees.
Low consistency
messages
are
consensus
and lack of
related
HRM practices
is
decision
in that disagreement
makers
among

HRM decision
among
principal
Agreement
send
these message
makers.
among
Agreement
consensus
ers helps promote
among
employees.
a strategic
the princi
HRM perspective,
Within

form a

the

enacting

to the principles
of deliv
of justice: distributive,
interactional
(e.g., Bowen, Gilli

and
procedural,
1998).
1999; Folger & Cropanzano,
land, & Folger,
fairness
that the perceived
indicates
Research
is
HRM activity
how positively
of HRM affects
influence
searchers

to
of the HRM system
the capability
Re
behaviors.
and
attitudes
employee
that there is a positive
have argued

and

between
perceptions
relationship
ness and what has been
termed

of HRM

fair

the acceptabil
&
criterion
of
HRM
Milkovich,
(Bretz,
practices
ity
re
& Bowen,
1998), which
Read,
1992; Waldman
to which
contribute
fers to the extent
employees
to and

utilize
and

appraisals
their behavior).

HRM
use

(e.g., complete
from
feedback

This content downloaded from 134.208.96.85 on Wed, 11 Mar 2015 12:13:04 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

360 degree
it to shape

and

2004 Bowen

among

perceptions
employees'
will be influenced
relationships

Agreement
event-effect
whether
what

employees
distribution

tive justice?apply
such as rewards
"equality"
outcome;

have

similar

of

by
of
perceptions
of distribu

rules?principles
in what
situations.
Outcomes
on an
can be distributed
based
in which
the same
all receive

rule,
an "equity"
rule,
receive
different

in which
subsets
of
on
amounts
based
employees
such as in a merit pay sys
relevant
differences,
need" rule, such as flexi
tem; or an "individual
in unique
for a single mother
hours
ble working
(Bowen et al., 1999).
that lead to employee
practices
Management
of
and interactional
jus
procedural
perceptions
of these distribu
tice increase
the transparency
tion rules (Bowen et al., 1999) and, by so doing,
that the HRM system will
increase
the likelihood
event
about
be characterized
by consensus
can be
Procedural
effect
justice
relationships.
circumstances

enhanced
mining
are

sions

ees

by giving
the methods
made?for

in designing

employees
by which
example,

behavior

a voice

in deter
outcome
deci

involving

employ

or outcome-based

Interactional
justice in
appraisals.
performance
ex
and
volves
managers'
respectfully
openly
reasons
to
the
deci
behind
employees
plaining
It can
sions and
of outcomes.
the distribution
formula
distribution
what
include
clarifying
was
increase
in making
individual
used
pay
not all employees
in situations
decisions
where
the same pay increase.
received

213

Ostroff

leads every
such that the situation
viewpoints
one to "see" the situation
induces uni
similarly,
form expectancies
about
responses,
provides
incen
rewards
and
clear
about
expectations
tives for the desired
and behaviors,
responses
and conformity
and induces
through
compliance
we propose
that a
influence.
social
Therefore,
can enhance
organ
strong HRM system process
to shared mean
izational
owing
performance
of collective
that
responses
ings in promotion
are consistent
with
strategic
organizational
of those
the appropriateness
(assuming
an
HRM
More
system high in
goals).
specifically,
consensus
and
distinctiveness,
consistency,
in the
of
should
enhance
interpretation
clarity
goals

for similar
"cognitive
thereby allowing
or
to
"causal maps"
among peo
develop
maps"
situation"
ple, as well as to create an "influence
to
the message
and
individuals
yield
whereby
setting,

of behaving.
the appropriate
ways
interactions
and communica
Further, while
are
to result
in
tion among
likely
employees
& Slocum,
collective
sensemaking
(Jackofsky
of the strength
of the HRM sys
1988), regardless
that in cases where
the strength
tem, we argue

understand

is strong,
the sensemaking
system
to
most
in the in
be
result
process
likely
If the HRM sys
tended organizational
climate.
tem is weak,
HRM practices
will send messages
to individual
that are ambiguous
and subject
one of two
Given
interpretation.
ambiguity,
of

the HRM

will

things

may

happen:

variability

or unintended

sensemaking.

CONSEQUENCES OF THE STRENGTHOF THE

HRM SYSTEM

of indi
First, with a weak
system,
variability
vidual
be
(Mischel,
1973).
responses
may
large
Considerable

variance

across

individuals'

per

HRM practices
influence
percep
employee
at the individual
level. Further,
tions of climate
are
of strong HRM systems
the characteristics
more
to
and
shared
promote
perceptions
likely
of a strong organiza
give rise to the emergence

climates
will
of psychological
exist,
ceptions
in the form of organiza
and shared perceptions
can
Individuals
tional climate will not emerge.
own
construct
version
of
their
(House et
reality
or
own
their
version
of what messages
al., 1995)

That is,
about
the HRM content.
tional climate
we propose
of the HRM system
that the strength
cli
of organizational
will
foster the emergence

are being
communicated
and
by HRM practices
use
their own behavior.
in
this to guide
Thus,
consis
weak
situations
(low distinctiveness,
at the individ
constructs
tency, and consensus),
ual but not the organizational
level are likely to

mate

from psychological
(collective
perceptions)
climates
(individual-level
perceptions).
em
In a strong
situation,
among
variability
situ
of
of
the
the
perceptions
meaning
ployees'
ation will be small and will
reflect a common

content.
In turn, organizational
climate
a
em
association
with
significant
display
occurs
be
attitudes
and
behaviors.
This
ployee
cause
a strong HRM system
can foster similar
desired

will

show strong relationships;

climate
psychological
will have a significant
association
perceptions
with
individual
and behaviors.
attitudes
a weak
is produced
While
situation
by low
we
and
consensus,
distinctiveness,
consistency,
or weakest
also argue
that the most ambiguous
situation
is produced
when
is
distinctiveness

This content downloaded from 134.208.96.85 on Wed, 11 Mar 2015 12:13:04 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

214

Academy

of Management

low consistency
and consen
high, coupled with
sus. Distinctiveness
That is,
drives up attention.
are salient
or visible,
and em
HRM practices
are aware
of them. However,
if the mes
ployees
are
now
to are
that
sages
attending
employees
or conflicting,
as different
inconsistent
individ
are
to
with
different
uals
experiences
subjected
the HRM practices,
disillusionment,
confusion,
or other negative
reactions
will
In
likely result.
not only will
shared
such a case,
perceptions
and climate
the practices
to
but many
emerge,
unlikely
attitudes.
have negative
about

particularly

be
may

employees

in weak
the ambiguity
inherent
Alternatively,
cause
in
to
situations
engage
may
employees
et
collective
al.,
1995).
(House
sensemaking
or attri
situation
When
faced with an equivocal
butional
to reduce

uncertainty,
this uncertainty

individuals

may

attempt
in a so

by engaging
with
and consulting
of interacting
process
inter
to develop
another
their own shared
1999; Fiske & Taylor,
(Drazin et al.,
pretations
is that the
here
1991; Weick,
1995). The danger
draw
that employees
collective
interpretation
is not the one in
situation
from the ambiguous
cial
one

That is, the "strong"

by the organization.
not match
the in
does
that emerges
it may
conflict
tended
climate
content;
hence,
and
with
and
strategies
goals
organizational
lead to conflicts,
poor productiv
may ultimately
is particularly
This
ity, or low effectiveness.
occur
is low (al
to
"distinctiveness"
when
likely
consensus
will also
and
low
consistency
though
sa
are
a
not
made
When
role).
practices
play
tended

climate

is
and understandable,
visible,
ambiguity
are
more
to
to
refer
and
employees
likely
high,
one another
to define
the situation
in an attempt
that Jow
in their own way.
Thus, we propose
lient,

of the HRM system

distinctiveness
a collective
process
sensemaking
sult in unintended
organizational
HRM system process
ther, a weak
promote
creates

organizational
a weak
situation

contributes
that may
climates.

to
re
Fur

to
is unlikely
it
because
effectiveness
in which
individ
either
or collective
sensemak

ual processes
dominate
that may be
in shared
interpretations
ing results
inconsistent
with organizational
strategic
goals.
to note
of
that this process
It is important
of climate
of similar
emergence
perceptions
the HRM
While
in a vacuum.
not occur
does
of this system
form the
and the strength
system
similar
basis
of whether
fundamental
percep
that
have argued
tions will be derived,
scholars

Review

April

are also relevant

among
employees
and Hof
&
Slocum,
1988). Morgeson
(Jackofsky
mann
the
for
rationales
(1999) provide
impor
in forming collective
tance of these interactions
constructs.
Within
individuals
collective,
any
are likely to meet one another
and interact. Each
in a discrete
interaction
results
event, and sub
interactions

are
event
interactions
termed
sequent
cycles.
can be
The structure
of any collective
group
as a series of ongoing
viewed
events,
activities,
and event cycles
These
the individuals.
among
and interactions
indi
among
interdependencies
over time can result in jointly produced
viduals
and it is this structure
that forms the
responses,
for the eventual
of collective
basis
emergence
constructs?one
that can transcend
individuals,
individual

and

behaviors,

individual

percep

tions.

This

to the emergence

is similar

process

of

"causal

cognitive
overlapping
maps"
through
1995; Wicker,
1992). Indi
processing
(e.g., Weick,
are cogni
which
viduals
causal maps,
develop
tive representations
in the situa
of the entities
certain

of those
and
entities,
qualities
them. Overlapping
among
perceived
linkages
can be facilitated
causal
social
maps
through
and
transactions
among
exchange
employees.
can coIJecfively
In such a way, employees
agree
tion,

on the appropriate
to
of the environment
aspects
as how to interpret
these as
to, as well
to them appropriately.
pects and how to respond
that a strong HRM system
fa
Thus, we propose
attend

cilitates

event
needed

interactions,

such

cycles
to develop

interdependencies,

that

fewer

shared

event

cycles
interpretations.

and

are

CONTEXT AND HRM SYSTEM STRENGTH

we
as
discussion
In the preceding
implicitly
climate.
sumed an organizational
Yet research
ers and
the multidimen
theorists
recognize
such that multiple
sional nature of climate
types
a
can exist within
of organizational
climates
firm and
organization
functional

in the
of analysis
different
That
is,
1990).
(Schneider,
or groups
areas,
may
departments,

at different

levels

subclimates
different
2000).
(e.g., Payne,
develop
to
used
has been
cluster
Likewise,
analysis
within
climates
collective
different
demonstrate
an organization?climates
clus
that represent
who perceive
the organization
ters of employees
units
and span
formal organizational

similarly

This content downloaded from 134.208.96.85 on Wed, 11 Mar 2015 12:13:04 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

and

2004 Bowen

Ostroff

215

1988; Joyce & Slocum,

(e.g., Jackofsky & Slocum,
1984).
We acknowledge
that the content
of the cli
can vary across
mate
the
within
groups
organi
zation. Further,
different
HRM practices
around
a different
to different
content might
be applied

the specific
that make up different
sys
practices
to delineate
is needed
tems). That is, research
the attributes
of
how these processes
influence
as perceived
the work situation
by employees.
Little is known
the important
about
parame
ters underlying
situations
organizational
(e.g.,

that if the
propose
is
process
system
strong, a shared
in organ
of the climate will emerge
perception
some
differences
izational
albeit with
subunits,
or strategic
in content
In
focus across
groups.

Bern & Funder,

1978; Chatman,
1989; Fredrickson,
a set of features, based
1972). We have proposed
on social
influence
and social
theo
cognition

of employees.
of the HRM

groups

We

for many
firms this may be strategically
deed,
in diversified
desirable?for
firms,
example,
firms with
international
locations,
multiple
firms, or firms pursuing
strategic
multiple
objec
It is
parts of the organization.
some
in
the
for
that,
groups
organi
likely
will
whereas
climate
zation, a shared
emerge,
in the
it will not, owing
to differences
for others
across
HRM process
different
groups.
tives

in different

also

concern

Another

is

the

that

possibility
and resistant
be inflexible
strong climate might
to change,
compromising
organization
thereby
on strong
cul
al effectiveness.
The
literature
tures offers a resolution
of this issue. A culture
whose

content

comprises

values

and

beliefs

can be strong, without

support
flexibility
to adapt
to its
the organization's
limiting
ability
environment
Sathe
&
Sim
Davidson,
2000).
(e.g.,
that a strong climate
that has
ilarly, we propose
for
termed a climate
elements
of what has been
exam
innovation
for
&
Klein
Sorra,
1996),
(e.g.,
that

strong and adapt

ple, can be simultaneously
In other words,
the process
of the HRM
able.
can
a
to
create
climate
strong
system
adaptable
content
if
the
the
climate
includes
of
change,
innova
that focus on flexibility
and
elements
tion. Although
individual
behaviors
employees'
or flexible,
all
may differ so as to be innovative
should
still share
the idea that this
employees
is
is
of
what
of them.
type
adaptability
expected
of
will
the
climate
be the
Thus,
perceptions
same with a strong system
in
that encourages
or flexibility,
novation
but there may
be vari
ance

and

changes

in actual

behavior

over

time.

FUTURE RESEARCH AND THEORY

DEVELOPMENT
Research
HRM process,
properties
the content

on the properties
is needed
as distinct
from research
of practices
(e.g., reliability)
of HRM practices

and

systems

of
on

a strong
situation
that the via
It is critical
of the organization
bility of these metafeatures
as
be tested
elements
that create
important
ries, that should
help
and shared meaning.

create

a
Frederiksen
(1972) proposes
strong situations.
means
to
of different
for attempting
number
taxonomies
of situations.
and develop
classify
to attempt
to group
In this case,
it may be useful
or cluster
on the basis
situations
of their ten
dency

to elicit
similar
behaviors.
a three-dimensional
data

require
the dimensions

This

would

matrix,

with

behavior,
person,
representing
situational
attributes
(Frederiksen,
1972).
one could derive clusters
With
such a procedure,
or behaviors
cor
of responses
that differentially
and

the nine HRM process

features.
respond with
to determine
is needed
In addition,
research
means
the most appropriate
for "combining"
the
metafeatures

of the HRM system. As suggested

are more
it is likely that some
features
earlier,
a strong
in creating
than others
situa
critical
tion. For example,
without
consistent
HRM mes
lose
distinctiveness
and consensus
sages,
may
we
this
believe
impact. Alternatively,
although

a compensatory
be
model
may
a
one
in
of
feature
that
level
appropriate
high
will make
feature.
up for a low level of another
one
test
could
and
the
of
Thus,
compare
viability
an additive
sum
across
model
the
all
fea
(i.e.,
model
tures), a configurai
(i.e., different
profiles
or contingency
of features),
and a multiplicative
is

less

likely,

model

the features).
(i.e., interactions
among
is
to
it
determine
the rela
Further,
important
tive impact
of and
between
interrelationships
HRM system
and other determinants
of
strength
or
as
situations
climates.
Factors
such
strong
social
and structural
leadership,
relationships,
can also affect
features
the strength
of
design

and

and can foster the development

the situation
of
a shared climate
1985; Ostroff, Kinicki,
(Ashforth,
are
& Tamkins,
to
features
2003). HRM
likely
interact with
these other factors to further foster
a shared
sense
of the situation.
For example,

(e.g.,

supervisors

the
the

can

serve

as

interpretive

This content downloaded from 134.208.96.85 on Wed, 11 Mar 2015 12:13:04 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

filters

of

216

of Management

Academy

in
when
they are visible
or
promote
implementing
practices
high-quality
with
exchanges
employees,
they can introduce
a common
unit members
among
interpretation

HRM

practices,

and

1989; Naumann

& Doherty,

(Kozlowski

& Bennett,

2000).
a
with
Thus, a strong HRM system
coupled
relation
foster
visible
may
stronger
supervisor
and performance
HRM, climate,
among
ships
while
than each would
individually.
Similarly,
our primary
to elucidate
the charac
intent was
teristics
of an HRM process
allow
for
that would
to emerge,
of climate
perceptions
to determine
is needed
research

shared

addi
the ex

tional
tent to which
these HRM system
characteristics
can also
structures
such
other
social
impact
culture,
works,
hance

roles, communication
patterns
and social
all of which
capital,
HRM
the relationship
between

and

as
net
en

may
and per

formance.

Between

Relationships

is needed

to test

HRM process

strength
examines

Research
between

approach
HRM practices
so that the

configurai
numerous
formance

than

and

Content

Process

interrelationships
The
and content.
how a pattern
of
to firm per
is related
is
of HRM
total effect

the sum of the individual

practices
&
1996; Delery
(Becker & Gerhart,
Shaw, & Prennushi,
1996; Ichniowski,
1997).
Doty,
is on the sets of
The
focus of this approach
that may be re
practices
mutually
reinforcing
to
The strength
of the
firm performance.
lated
a
factor
be
HRM
may
system
influencing
to HRM-firm
the configurai
whether
approach
in em
is supported
relationships
performance
greater
themselves

studies.
pirical
HRM practices

likelihood

The
would

manner,
reinforcing
of those practices
internal
consistency
with which
the effectiveness
they are im

mutually
of the
and

that individual
as a set, in a
may be a function

function

together.
case can be developed
for assessing
content
and
interactions
between
strength
across
for different
foci.
For
climates
strategic
on
one
not
it
be
difficult
the
hand,
may
example,

plemented
A similar

to incorporate
for a climate

of a strong HRM system

or
on cost
leadership
outcomes
and
the desired
can be
with
those criteria

features

focused
that

given
safety,
associated
behaviors
clearly. On the other hand,
specified
more difficult
to create a strong HRM

it may
system

be
for

Review

April

a climate

for service,
that the intangibility
given
to specify
it difficult
service
makes
and the employee
behaviors
that
quality
goals
will
lead to them (Bowen & Schneider,
1988). This
of

service

a
to create
either
the ability
complicate
the relationship
strong HRM system or moderate
between
that strength
and
the uniformity
of
in
of
the
form
perceptions
organiza
employees'

may

tional

climates.

and Measurement

Methodological

Issues

are
Two
interrelated
issues
methodological
raised by our proposals.
The first of these con
cerns appropriate
measurement
for the strength
concerns
of the HRM system.
The second
levels
of analysis
and aggregation
in moving
issues
of climate
to
from individual-level
perceptions
constructs.
A full discussion
of these
collective
issues
is beyond
the scope of this article.
to be developed
New measures
need
to
will
assess
of the HRM system.
It is
the strength
to note
is a situa
that this construct
important
tional context variable,
and, as we have defined
a higher-level
construct.
In past
it, it represents
on HRM practices
research
and systems,
schol
ars

on reports
relied
from a
typically
or
executive.
In our
HR
manager
higher-level
HR
directors
and
could
be
case,
top managers
to
of
of strength
asked
evaluate
the dimensions
have

the system.
This procedure
has the obvious
ad
a single,
measure
of obtaining
vantage
global
for each
dimension
of strength
of the system.
measurement
this
focuses
However,
technique
a
measures
on
of
the
attributes
from
only
single
source
that is at a higher
level in the organiza
our primary
theoretical
focus lies in
tion, while
on
the impact
these practices
have
perceptions
Because
of strength
of employees.
the concept
of employ
and perceptions
requires
judgments
is to
that a better alternative
ees, we
suggest
assess
of the HRM system
these characteristics
That
from employees
themselves.
is, the ap
measurement
unit
of
of
assessing
propriate
strength
attributions
vidual.

is

the
and

individual,
perceptions

since
reside

employee
in the indi

at developing
Future work should be directed
a valid measure
For example,
of HRM strength.
be given a
to assess
could
visibility,
employees
of HRM practices
list of a variety
to which
indicate
the extent
each

This content downloaded from 134.208.96.85 on Wed, 11 Mar 2015 12:13:04 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

and asked
is utilized

to
in

2004 Bowen

the firm. A comparison

between
those practices
are in
assert
of the HRM function
are
those
that employees
indicate

that agents
and
place

some assessment
of how
provide
are to employees.
the practices
to assess
consistency,
Similarly,
employees
to what
extent
could be asked
they have actu
in or experienced
each of these
ally participated
used

would

visible

a semiannual
practices
(e.g., received
perfor
mance
The
of people
review).
percent
indicating
would
the practice
they experienced
provide
some indication
of how consistently
the practice
across

in the organi
employees
could be
alternative,
employees
to which
to indicate
the extent
they be
to all employees.
the practice
applies

is administered
zation. As an
asked
lieve

be assessed
top
Agreement
might
by asking
to delineate
makers
decision
the strategic
goals
to HRM and the intended message
of the
related
innovation
and
HRM practices
risk
(e.g., promote
promote
loyalty and longevity,
decision
makers
among
safety). High agreement
consensus
to higher
should
be related
among
as to what practices
are salient,
vis
employees
so
forth.
administered
and
ible,
consistently,
Such measures
be useful
from multiple
would
on the di
mean
score
the
First,
perspectives.
promote

taking,

an

to the
would
indication
provide
are present.
at which
these characteristics
score on measures
is, a higher mean
tap

mension
level
That

as

and consen
ping distinctiveness,
consistency,
sus would
of strong HRM pro
be one indicator
cess.
assess
the
researchers
could
Second,
to which
extent
character
perceive
employees
istics in the same way?that
is, they could as
sess

or variability
of agreement
in
the extent
responses
among
agreement
employees.
Higher
consensus
and a strong system,
would
support
in responses
in
whereas
would
high variance
a weak
dicate
system.
As

to assessments

among
employees
be demonstrated
of psychological
to represent
used
level

climate

of
about
before

climate,
agreement
must
their perceptions
measures
aggregated
can be
perceptions

climate
a unit-level

construct

or organizational
it
(James,
1982). Further,
both the level (e.g., the

is important
to examine
level of rating on a dimension

of climate)
and
an
the variability
in responses.
is
Level
indica
tor of "content," whereas
is an indi
variability
cator of situational
"strength." At the individual
level of analysis,
if one is interested
in examin
between
of the
ing the relationship
perceptions

and

217

Ostroff

and
individual
the level of
responses,
on the variables
is
the individual's
responses
most
to
useful.
when
However,
moving
higher
measurement
is
levels of analysis,
additional
sues
HRM
and
emerge.
well-designed
Strong
climate

of per
greater
produce
homogeneity
and responses
the organization,
within
in organizational
climate.
The strength

systems
ceptions

resulting
is indicated
of the climate
of vari
by the degree
in
of
the
level
of
responses,
ability
regardless
on
content
the aggregate
the
of
climate.
rating
cre
An indication
of whether
the HRM system
a
is the extent
ates
situation
of agree
strong
ment on climate
ratings
(Payne, 2000).

FINAL THOUGHTS
In listing challenges
that the HRM community
in the future, Ulrich
cites the need
for HR
to
be
HR
He
reminds
practice
guided
by
theory.
HRM professionals
that theory helps explain
the
manner
in which
outcomes
emerge:
faces

To make HR practices more than isolated acts,

must master
and HR professionals
the
managers
theory behind HR work; they need to be able to
how and why HR practices
explain conceptually
to

lead

...

outcomes

their

of

Regardless

the

pre

ferred theory, managers

and HR professionals
from it a higher level of reason
should abstract
ing for their day-to-day work and thus better ex
their work accomplishes
its goals
plain why
(1997: 238; emphasis
added).
in the

Recently,

literature

"why" HR practices

veloped

scholars
have de
to sustainable

lead

this present
competitive
advantage.
Hopefully,
on the strength
effort at theory building
of the
can begin
to help explain
HRM system
"how"
HRM practices
lead to outcomes
the organiza
tion desires.

REFERENCES
J. B.

1992. The

industrial

relations

Arthur,
mills.

Industrial

link
and

between

business
in American

systems
Labor

Relations

and
strategy
mini
steel
45: 488

Review,

506.
Ashforth,

B. E.

sions.
Ashforth,

bridge,

formation:

of Management

B. E. 2001.

Hole

transitions

NI: Lawrence

Erlbaum

Mahwah,
Barnard,

1985. Climate

Academy

C.

I. 1938.
MA:

The

Harvard

functions
University

J. 1991. Firm resources

Barney,
of Management,
Journal

Issues

exten

in organizational
Associates.
of

the

executive.

life.

Cam

Press.

and competitive
17: 99-120.

This content downloaded from 134.208.96.85 on Wed, 11 Mar 2015 12:13:04 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

and

10: 837-847.

Review,

advantage.

218

Bateson,

G.,

D. D., Haley,
of schizophrenia.

Jackson,
a theory

Toward

of Management

Academy

J., & Weakland,

J. H.

Behavioral

1956.

Review

L., & Holder,

Dyer,

1:

Science,

B.
on

management
and
prospects.

1996. The

resource

of human

impact

organizational
performance:
of Management
Academy

39:

Journal,

and
systems
and managerial
Human

1998. High
work
performance
firm performance:
A synthesis
of research

in Personnel
Research
implications.
Resources
16:
53-101.
Management,

Bern, D. J., & Funder,

of

the

C. C,

Borucki,

related

D. C.

& Burke,

M.

D.

over

Organizational
B.

P.

1996. The

state

of performance

Concerns,

directions,

agement

18: 321-352.

employees
27(3):

spills
7-23.

and
marketing
for organizational
behavior.
10: 43-80.
Behavior,

W.

1992. The

research
and
appraisal
and
Journal
implications.

research:

interactional
Improving
A model
of person-organization

organizational
fit. Academy

M.

P. K.

& Mills,
innovation.

A.

1996. The

practices
Academy

of human
impact
on perceptions
of organ
of Management
Jour

1985. Managerial
Organizational

that

practices

14(1):

Dynamics,

24-34.

Denison,

Academy
D. R.

and

of Management

1996. What

of

theorizing
Tests
of universal

man

Resource

R. G.

Hass,

A native's
Academy

between

K. A.
and

Management,

situations.

resource

1994. Human

practices
contract.
Hu

the psychological
33: 447-462.

of source

1981. Effects

of

on

characteristics

and persuasion.
In R. E. Petty,
responses
trom, & T. C. Brock
(Eds.), Cognitive
responses
sion:
141-172.
Lawrence
Hillsdale,
NJ:

cogni
T. M. Os

of view
point
of Management

House,

D. M.,

R., Rousseau,

Erlbaum

& Thomas-Hunt,

framework

for the

M.

1995.

behavior.
organizational
17: 41-114.
Behavior,

The

of mi

integration
Research

in Or

M. A.

1995. The impact

resource
of human
manage
on turnover,
and corporate
practices
productivity,
financial
of Management
Jour
performance.
Academy
nal, 38: 635-672.

Huselid,

ment

Huselid,

M. A., & Becker,

cross-sectional

Relations,

human
A

panel

C,

Journal,
Shaw,

resource

1996. Methodological
issues
estimates
of the human

resource

R. S.

firm performance.
40: 171-188.

K., & Prennushi,

G.

E. F., & Slocum,

J.W.,
Jr. 1988. A
Jackofsky,
of climates.
of Organizational
Journal
334.

This content downloaded from 134.208.96.85 on Wed, 11 Mar 2015 12:13:04 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Industrial

effective
Academy

1997. The

practices
lines. American

in
re

1997. Technical

management

of

management

study of steel
finishing
87: 291-313.
view,

link.

performance

S. E., & Sch?ler,

Jackson,

human
strategic
as determinants

Management
Ichniowski,

B. E.

and

management-firm
35: 400-422.

M. A.,

ness

on

in persua

Associates.

and

culture

M. A., & Kazanjian,

R. K. 1999. Multilevel
Drazin,
R., Glynn,
in organizations:
about
A sense
creativity
theorizing
of Management
Review,
making
perspective.
Academy
24: 286-307.

26:

communications

Huselid,

performance
predic
39: 802-835.
Journal,

is the difference

climate?
organizational
a decade
wars.
of paradigm
21: 619-654.
Review,

in stra

York:

New

cognifion.

a taxonomy
114-123.

Toward

R. A., & Noonan,

as

source

J. E., & Doty, D. H. 1996. Modes

Delery,
resource
tegic human
management:
and
is?e,
contingency,
configurai
tions.

1972.

Psychologist,

ganizational

39: 949-969.

A.,
Delbecq,
enhance

N.

meso-paradigm:
cro and macro

14: 333-349.

Review,

J. T., & Huselid,

Delaney,
resource
management
izational
performance.

1991. Sociai

R. 1998. Organizational
R., & Cropanzano,
and
Folger,
justice
resource
human
Park, CA: Sage.
management.
Newbury

current
practice:
of Man

S. E.

McGraw-Hill.

tive

1989.

of Management

nal,

S. T., & Taylor,

Fiske,

American

& Eagly,
A. H.
of
1996. Principles
S., Wood,
W.,
In E. T. Higgins
& A. W. Kruglanski
(Eds.),
persuasion.
Social
of basic
Handbook
702
psychology:
principles:
744. New York: Guilford
Press.
J. A.

W. A., Buckley,
M. R., Harrell-Cook,
resource
1999. Human
management:
directions.
of Management,
25: 385
Journal

new

Frederiksen,

Chaiken,

Chatman,

Re

415.

Dynamics,

T., & Read,

G.

management
Human

D. D.

& Frink,

Some

and

HRM debate
and
the resource
strategic
the firm. Human
Resource
Management

Jr., Milkovich,

H. M., Kaplan,
D. M.,
a social
1998. Toward

G. R., Hochwarter,

Ferris,

Guzzo,

R. D.

D. D.

the organiza
128-138.

of the human
resource
theory
effectiveness
organization
relationship.
source Management
8: 235-264.
Review,

6: 59-75.

Journal,
Bretz,

of

view

Berkson,

& Frink,

G.,

and
66:

context

G.,

1999. HRM

M. M.,

R., Arthur,

Harrell-Cook,

1988. Services

management:
Implications
in Organizational
Research

based

R.

1981. Perception,
cognition,
of Applied
Psychology,

Journal

G.

Ferris,

Journal

Hemisphere.

J.M.

tion.

of service

performance.
20: 943-962.

& Folger,
fair with
being

How

D. E., & Schneider,

Boxall,

examination

S. W.,

fairness:
to customers.

Bowen,

Interactional
York:

Feldman,

of the people
of situations.

store

Behavior,

E., Gilliland,

service

J. 1999. An
to retail

antecedents

of Organizational
Bowen,

more

1978. Predicting

time?assessing
personality
85: 485-501.
Review,

Psychological

New

M. A.

D.

1976. Personality
and person
In N. S. Endler & D. Magnusson
and personality:
1-25.
psychology

situation

by

(Eds.),

B. E., & Huselid,

more

N. S., & Magnusson,

interactions.

Endler,

Progress

of
strategic
perspective
In L. Dyer
(Ed.), Human

roles and responsibili

Evolving
DC: Bureau
of National
Affairs.

management:
1-45. Washington,

ties:

779-801.

and

1988. A

management.

resource

B., & Gerhart,

Becker,

G. W.

resource

human

251-264.
Becker,

April

effect

of

of

on productivity:
Economic
Re

longitudinal
Behavior,

study
9: 319

219

2004Bowen and Ostroff

L. R.

James,

1982. Aggregation

tual agreement.
229.
L. R., & Jones,

James,

review

of

P.

A.

of percep
67: 219?

Psychology*

1974. Organizational
research.
Psychological

and

theory

in estimates

bias
of Applied

Journal

turing

J.W.

Johnson,

1996. Linking
employee
to customer
satisfaction.

climate

Psychology*

A. P., & James,

mensions

and

L. R.

climate:

1979. Psychological
of individual
relationships

environment
work
perceptions.
gated
Decision
Behavior
and Human
Processes,

and

climates
Journal,

R. E., & Snow,

Miles,

fame.

as
Agreement
in organiza

Mischel,

27: 721-742.

Mischel,

New

of attribu
S. M., & Pryor,
J. B. 1985. The development
tion processes.
In J. Pryor & J. Day
(Eds.), The develop
ment
of social
3-34.
New
York:
cognition:
Springer

R. L. 1978. The

W.

1967. Attribution

Nisbett,

S. Valins,

ceiving
General

the causes

1973. The

Toward
bility.

social
Haven,

K. J., & Sorra,

Klein,

San

the attribution

151-174.

pro
R. E.
Per

Morristown,

of causal

attribution.

psychology
CT: Yale

1989. Crimes
of authority

Amer

W.

1996. The

level

Ostroff,

innovation
21:

Review,

R. E., Brief,

A. P., & Guzzo,

R. A.

climate

1990.

and

In B. Schnei

culture:

and

S. W.
leadership:

J., & Doherty,

J. L. 1989. Integration
Examination
of a neglected

A. A., & Wilson,

and

sustained

M. C.

based

perspective.
19: 699-727.

Academy

Jour

74: 721-742.

1994. Human

competitive

of climate

resource

systems
A competency
advantage:
of Management
Review,

Lidz,

T.
ders.

1973. Origin
New York:

and
Basic

1939. Patterns

treatment
Books.

created

of aggressive
social
climates.

10: 271-299.
of

schizophrenic

and

C.

climate:

C,

Academy

Review,

Ideas

case
test

Kinicki,

43: 881-889.

Journal,

Man

Resources
(356):

1-12.

(Eds.), Multilevel
J. Kozlowski
in organizations:
211-266.

J., & Tamkins,

InW.

and

565-594.

climate.

New

36:

Culture

efficiency.
1345-1361.
and

In N. M. Ashkanasy,
get?
Peterson
(Eds.), Handbook
Thousand

Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo,

of persuasion.
model

handbook

of psy
psy*

organizational

1993. Configurations
and

Journal,

2003. Organiza
D. R. Ilgen,

York: Wiley.

N.

& Schmitt,

163-176.

M. M.

C. Borman,

(Eds.), Comprehensive
12: Industrial
and

effectiveness

R. L. 2000.

for procedural
of a multilevel

Jossey-Bass.
A.

chology:

agement

& S. W.
and methods

volume

O,

and

of

Academy

D. E. 2000. Moving
HR to a higher
level:
and organizational
effective
practices

chology,

tional

2000.

and

for multi

Implications

Human
survey.
in Personnel
Trends

and

& Bowen,
resource

culture

structure

1999. The

1995. SHRM/CCH

& R. J. Klimoski

Ostroff,

N.

Development
of Management

In K. J. Klein

climate:
disor

in the search

Psychological

theory
development.
24: 249-265.

Review,

theory, research,
San Francisco:

Payne,
R.
K., Lippit, R., & White,
in experimentally
behavior
of Social
Journal
Psychology,

Lewin,

J. John
psychol

vu

d?j?

re

and

In R. Hogan,

of personality
Press.

consistency.

282-318.

issue.

In

Associates.
revisited

dispositions
decades.

P. K. 1982. Beyond

S. E., & Bennett,

Human

Ostroff,

nal of Applied Psychology,

Lado,

& Peake,

research

tional
Kozlowski,

Erlbaum

F. P., & Hof mann,

D. A.
Morgeson,
function
of collective
constructs:

Ostroff,

responsi

in

situation.

and

89: 730-755.

ness.

(Ed.), Organizational
Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.

issues

1997. Personality
after
three

W.,

Mischel,

agement:

of

challenge
of Management

Academy

York:

at the
Personality
interactional
psychology:

son, & S. Briggs

(Eds.), Handbook
113-132. New York: Academic

justice
model.

of obedience:
and

New

(Eds.),

NJ: Lawrence

A view

Naumann,

Press.

University

of

concep
learning
80:
Review,

of person

S. Endler

ogy:

NJ:

107-128.
V. C.

social

Psychological

interaction

Hillsdale,

Management

processes

J. S.

implementation.
1055-1080.
Kopelman,
der

a cognitive

for cross-situational

H. H. Kelley,
(Eds.), Attribution:

of behavior:

& Hamilton,

New

192?

E. Kanouse,

D.

& B. Weiner

28:

Psychologist,
H. C,

Kelman,

and

the hall

and

assessment

and

personality.

1977. The

vised:

Press.

Press.

Learning

H. H.

schemata

In

psychology.
on motivation:

symposium
of Nebraska

University

H. H. 1972. Causal
Kelley,
cess,
?n E. E. Jones,

in social

theory

(Ed.), Nebraska

240. Lincoln:

ican

of

The psychology
theory of personality:
constructs.
New York: Norton.

personal

failure

1994. Fit

Personality

of

333-352.

1955. A

H. H.
Kelley,
D. Levine

New

Press.

1973. Toward

W.

Mischel,
G. A.

Kelley,

1968.

W.

Mischel,

of organ

psychology

pro

Wiley.

York: Wiley.

New

izing.

social

information

(Ed.), Experimen
York: Holt, Rinehart

252-283.

Verlag.

Kelley,

C. C.

D. Magnusson
& N.
crossroads:
Current

D., & Kahn,

and

Organizational

The
change:
In C. G. McClintock

Free

York:

tualization

Kassin,

Katz,

customer

symbiosis.

108-141.

Indus

aggre

Organizational
23: 201-250.

climate:

J. 1984. Collective
Joyce, W., & Slocum,
a basis
for defining
aggregate
tions. Academy
of Management

Di

48:

flexible

industry.
199-221.

J. 1972. Attitude

cessing
paradigm.
tal social psychology:
& Winston.

49: 831-852.
Jones,

W.

McGuire,

auto

J. 1983. Organizational

uneasy
12(2): 52-64.

Dynamics,

of service

perceptions
Personnel

C.

and

logic

Review,

An

counterculture:

81: 1096-1112.

and manufac

bundles

Organizational
in the world

systems
Labor Relations

J., & Siehl,

Martin,

Bulletin,

resource

1995. Human

performance:

production
trial and

climate:

J. P.

MacDuffie,

climate:
C.

Academy

How

of organiza
of Man

close

P. M. Wilderom,

of organizational
CA: Sage.
Oaks,

can

they
& M. F.

culture

and

likelihood
J. T. 1986. The elaboration
In L. Berkowitz
in
(Ed.), Advances

This content downloaded from 134.208.96.85 on Wed, 11 Mar 2015 12:13:04 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

220

vol.

social
experimental
psychology,
Press.
Academic

of Management

Academy

19:

123-205.

Review

San

A. E., & Schneider,

J.Martin

tional

climate

and

and

B. 1990. Climate
In B. Schneider

of constructs.

evolution

5-39.

culture:

culture:

R. E.

L., & Nisbett,

1991. The person

of social

Perspectives

D. M.

1995. Psychological
Thousand
CA: Sage.
Oaks,

tions.

D. M.,

Rousseau,

& Greller,

M.

Human

D. M.,

K. A.

& Wade-Benzoni,
resource

human

egy and
customer

are

contracts

Man

CA:

the

B. 1990. The

tional

In B. Schneider
culture:

and

climate

for service:

climate

construct.

climate

383-412.

An

of
application
(Ed.), Organiza
San Francisco:
Jos

and

culture
of organizational
CA: Sage.
Thousand
Oaks,

(Eds.), Handbook
xvii-xxii.

perceptions
sion. Journal

of service
of Applied

climate
change.

Organizational

strength:

S. E. 1987a. Organizational
as determinants
of

management
10: 125-141.

strategies
Academy

and

their

Human

practices.

Jackson,
human

S. E.

environment.

1987b.

strategy
re
human

Resource

Plan

competitive

Linking

in

human
1995. Understanding
of organizations
the context

Annual

Review

of Psychology,

46: 237-264.
Siehl,

C.

J. 1985. After

the

founder:

An

opportunity

to manage

agenda
Harvard

Creat
capability:
of Management

Academy

K. E.

exam

R.

relationship
37: 117-130.
Thousand

Price

G.

C.

Hillsdale,

Law

NJ:

1992. Theoretical

resource

B.

In W.
Person

(Eds.),

perspec
Journal

management.

18: 295-320.
G. C,

& McWilliams,

sustained

competitive
International

perspective.

Resource

S. A.

A.

1994. Hu
A

advantage:

of Hu

Journal

5: 301-326.

Management,

human

1991. Toward

resource
Review,

M. A., Snell,

S. A., Dean,

resource

management,

Human

of

acceptability

of environments.
H.

157-192.

human

strategic
source Management

an

management.
1: 203-225.
J.W.,

integrative
Human

Jr., & Lepak,

D. P.

view
He

1996.

manufacturing
of Management
Academy

strategy,

D. 2000. A group-level
of safety
climate:
model
on microaccidents
of group
climate

Testing
in manu

and
nal,
Zohar,

sense
&

& McMahan,

for strategic

P. M., & Snell,

Youndt,

1998. The

in organizations.

psychology:
Associates.

P. M., McMahan,
Wright,
man
resources
and

Wright,
of

E.

York: Wiley.

A customer-supplier
Resource
Management,

1992. Making
H. Craik,

Erlbaum

P. M.,

New

goal

Sage.

K.

man

D.

& Bowen,

1995. Sensemaking

CA:
A. W.

Wright,

motivation.

and

of Management,

practices.
management
Executive,
1(3): 207-219.

S. E.

perspective.
Weick,

tives

resource

of Management

R. S., & Jackson,

Sch?ler,
resource
management
and

1991. Organizational

appraisals:
Human

resource-based

level

organization

R. S., &

Sch?ler,

D. A.,

Waldman,

rence

1996. Creating

D.

1964. Work

environment

87: 220-229.

R. S., & Jackson,

ning,

exten

organizational
24(4): 7-19.

Dynamics,

Psychology,

Applied

source

and

M. 2002. Climate
A. N., & Subirais,
B., Salvaggio,
A new direction
of
for climate
research.
Journal

Schneider,

and

Psychology,

R. A.
B., Brief, A. P., & Guzzo,
and
for sustainable
culture

Schneider,

Sch?ler,

V.

Vroom,

Walsh,

70: 423-433.

Boston:

N. W.
1991. An exploratory
of person-organization
fit: Organizational
44: 333-352.
Personnel
congruence.
Psychology,

Oaks,

customer

and

1985. Employee
in banks:
Replication

The next

champions:
results.

delivering

ination

Wicker,

D. E.

B., & Bowen,

Schneider,

climate:

1089-1121.

Press.

School

360-degree

In
life of organizations.
B. 2000. The psychological
& M. F. Peterson
C. P. M. Wilderom,
Ashkanasy,

N. M.

249

psychology:

J. B., & Schmitt,

Vancouver,

sey-Bass.
Schneider,

and

40:

ing competitive
advantage.
Executive,
5(1): 77-91.

Sage.

Schneider,

In L. Berkowitz

Press.

resource

value

D., & Lake,

Ulrich,

a new
E. J. 2000. Toward
conceptual
In
N.
M.
C. P. M.
ization
of culture
Ashkanasy,
change.
of organi
& M. F. Peterson
Wilderom,
(Eds.), Handbook
279-296.
culture
and climate:
Thousand
zational
Oaks,
V., & Davidson,

Sathe,

and

attention,

L. W., & Tripoli,

A. M.
1997.
to employee-organization
rela
in employees
pay off? Acad

1997. Human

for adding
Business

and

In
psy

J. L., Porter,

S., Pearce,

D.

Ulrich,

strat

33: 463-490.

agement

Academic

approaches
investment
Does
tionship:
Journal,
emy of Management

Re

1994. Linking

How
employee
practices:
Resource
created.
Human

York:

Alternative

resource

1994. Human

Administrative
contract-makers.
practices:
source Management,
33: 385-402.
Rousseau,

A.

Tsui,

M.

&
Lundberg,
125-140. Beverly

Sage.

287. New

in organiza

contracts

C.

Louis,

culture:

S. E? & Fiske,
S. T. 1978. Salience,
Taylor,
attributions:
Top of the head phenomena.
in experimental
social
(Ed.), Advances

Temple

Press.

University
Rousseau,

the situation:

and

Philadelphia:

psychology.

M.

H. 1968. Social
in perception.
and cultural
factors
Tajfel,
& E. Aronson
G. Lindzey
of social
(Eds.), Handbook
MA: Addison-Wesley.
315-394.
Reading,
chology:

(Ed.), Organiza
Francisco:
Jossey

San

L. Moore,

(Eds.), Organizational

CA:

Hills,

An

Bass.
Ross,

In P. Frost,

culture.

Diego:
Reichers,

April

firm performance.
39: 836-866.

the effect
facturing
596.

jobs.

Journal

of Applied

This content downloaded from 134.208.96.85 on Wed, 11 Mar 2015 12:13:04 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Psychology*

Jour

85: 587

2004

Bowen

David

E. Bowen

search
between
Cheri

interests
human
Ostroff

bia

University.
State
Michigan
issues,

human

221

Ostroff

at
of management
and professor
re
His
International
Management.
are organizational
in service
issues
and the linkage
behavior
quality
resource
effectiveness
and competitive
management
advantage.
is dean

The

Thunderbird,

and

American

of

and programs
faculty
Graduate
of
School

is a professor
of psychology
She
received
her Ph.D.

and

education

at Teachers

in industrial-organizational
research
interests
include

Her current
University.
resource
management
systems,

and

person-environment

Colum
College,
from
psychology
levels
of analysis
congruence.

This content downloaded from 134.208.96.85 on Wed, 11 Mar 2015 12:13:04 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions