The efficiency of each of an organization’s individual workers determines its effectiveness. The study aims to explore the relationship between human resource management (HRM) practices and organizational effectiveness with employee performance as a mediating variable.
Data were collected from 800 police officers in the Greater Accra and Tema regions. The data were supported by the hypothesized relationship. Construct reliability and validity was established through confirmatory factor analysis. The proposed model and hypotheses were evaluated using structural equation modeling.
The results show that career planning and employee performance were significantly related. Self-managed teams and employee performance were shown to be nonsignificantly related. Similarly, performance management and employee performance were shown to be nonsignificantly related. Employee performance significantly influenced organizational effectiveness. The results further indicate that employee performance mediates the relationship between HRM practices and organizational effectiveness.
The generalizability of the findings will be constrained due to the research’s police service focus and cross-sectional data.
The study’s findings will serve as valuable pointers for the police administration in the adoption, design and implementation of well-articulated and proactive HRM practices to improve the abilities, skills, knowledge and motivation of officer’s to inordinately enhance the effectiveness of the service.
By evidencing empirically that employee performance mediates the relationship between HRM practice and organizational effectiveness, the study extends the literature.
Introduction
Policing is a collection of social control mechanisms that have existed in some form or another in all human cultures (Carter & Fox, 2019; Jackson & Bradford, 2009; Shupard & Kearns, 2019). The police play a momentous role in the evolution of democratic political systems (Adegbile & Debo, 2017; Bailey & Dammert, 2006; Matvejeys, 2018). The Ghana police service has been at the forefront of the country’s criminal justice system. It is the most visible arm of government, serving as a symbol of law and order to the general public (Aning, 2006; Atuguba, 2007; Gyamfi, 2020). A rapidly changing business climate characterized by greater competition, evolving client needs and a tight labor market has been a challenge for many organizations (Akpan, Udoh, & Adebisi, 2022; Ployhart & Moliterno, 2011; Seran, Kase, & Nursalam, 2022).
The implementation of competitive strategies for fundamental capabilities and competencies to address these challenges have been advocated by academics and professionals (Akdere & Egan, 2020; Brinckmann, Dew, Read, Mayer-Haug, & Grichnik, 2019; Martínez-Martínez, Cegarra-Navarro, Garcia-Perez, & Wensley, 2019). Competitive human resource strategies have become increasingly important in boosting organizational effectiveness, not only because they are difficult to duplicate but also because they provide a quick and effective response to market needs (Chen, Lam, & Zhu, 2020; Gupta, Drave, Dwivedi, Baabdullah, & Ismagilova, 2020; Purnamawati, Gusti, Ferry, Puah, & Gede, 2022). Such resources are enormously essential with law enforcement agencies, especially the police service, which is perhaps the most prominent and obtrusive governmental control agency that interacts with the general public (Benson, 1981; Federman, 2020; Gyamfi, 2020). Hence, the need for proper and well-articulated human resource practices (Cooper, Wang, Bartram, & Cooke, 2019; Gutierrez-Gutierrez, Barrales-Molina, & Kaynak, 2018; Otoo, 2019).
HRM practices help coordinate human elements and achieve the highest level of human efficiency (Boxall & Steenveld, 1999; Katou, Budhwar, & Patel, 2021; Rasool, Samma, Wang, Zhao, & Zhang, 2019). HRM practices improves organizational effectiveness by influencing work structure, skills and motivation of employees (Anwar & Abdullah, 2021; Jiang, Li, & Zhu, 2022; Katou, 2017). However, despite the evidence indicating a positive relationship between HRM and organizational outcomes, the mechanisms by which HRM influences effectiveness remain unclear (Huselid & Becker, 2011; Jerez-Gómez, Céspedes-Lorente, & Pérez-Valls, 2019; van Esch, Wei, & Chiang, 2016).
Studies has examined the relationship between HRM practices and effectiveness using various mediating variables in an effort to delve further into this relationship (Boon, Den Hartog, & Lepak, 2019; Delery & Gupta, 2016; Mcclean & Collins, 2019). Literature suggests the relevance of employee performance in promoting organizational effectiveness and performance (Dakhoul, 2018; Guan & Frenkel, 2018; Oravee, Zayum, & Kokona, 2018). However, few empirical studies provide evidence of the role or the context that determines employee performance as a mediator in the association between HRM practices and organizational effectiveness (e.g. Aguinis & Burgi-Tian, 2021; Han, Kang, Oh, Kehoe, & Lepak, 2019; Otoo, 2019).
Research has emphasized the critical role of employee performance in organizational development and competitiveness (Jabeen & Rahim, 2021; Siraj, Hágen, Cahyadi, Tangl, & Desalegn, 2022; Shrouf, Al-Qudah, Khawaldeh, Obeidat, & Rawashdeh, 2020). Employee performance is a valuable resource and source of competitive advantage (Kerdpitak & Jermsittiparsert, 2020; Ogbonnaya & Messersmith, 2019; Sutduean, Sutduean, & Jermsittiparsert, 2019). Drawing on these contentions, the study endeavors to fill this gap by proposing a model to explore employee performance as a mediator in the nexus between HRM practices and organizational effectiveness. The study contributes to the strategic HRM literature in twofold. First, the study theoretically supports the mediating role of employee performance in the relationship between HRM practices and organizational effectiveness.
Employee performance contributes to organizational effectiveness by leveraging employee skills, knowledge and various competencies. Second, the study provides empirical evidence of the mediating effect of employee performance in the HRM practices–organizational effectiveness relationship using both financial and nonfinancial effectiveness measures. Previous studies have analyzed the mediating role of employee performance using perceptual nonfinancial or financial measures (Chua, Chrisman, De Massis, & Wang, 2018; Venkatraman & Ramanujam, 1986; Williams et al., 2018). The studies of Jiang and Liu (2015) and Otoo (2020) focused on nonfinancial measures (goal attainment, systems resource, system constituency and competing value).
An and Kim (2019) used perpetual financial measures (sales growth, market share, profitability, return on asset and return on investment and return on equity). The findings contribute to the literature by providing, on one hand, theoretical arguments which justify that employee performance positively influences both financial and nonfinancial effectiveness and, on the other hand, empirical evidence that HRM practices can have a direct effect on specific effectiveness variables and an indirect effect on others. The theoretical foundations of HRM practices, organizational effectiveness and employee performance are discussed to set a groundwork for the study.
The model that establishes the connection between HRM practices, organizational effectiveness and employee performance is then used to frame the hypotheses. The efficacy of the proposed model and hypotheses were evaluated using structural equation modeling, and the outcomes are then contrasted with those of prior studies that came to similar conclusions. The study’s limitations, implication and suggestions for future investigation are provided.
Literature review
Theory and hypothesis development
The human capital theory (Guo & Chen, 2021; Mubarik, Devadason, & Govindaraju, 2020; Ployhart, Nyberg, Reilly, & Maltarich, 2014) and abilities-motivation-opportunities (AMO) theory (Boselie, 2010; Meuer, 2017; Mom, Chang, Cholakova, & Jansen, 2019) serve as the theoretical foundations in determining the connection between HRM practices, organizational effectiveness and employee performance. Human capital theory is concerned with the potential worth of an organization’s collective human capital (Huang, Yu, Shao, Yu, & Li, 2020; Hamadamin & Atan, 2019; Kurdi and Alshurideh, 2020). According to the human capital theory, every social phenomenon begins with an individual’s behavior and people build human capital by acting in their own best interests (Al Khajeh, 2018; Harris & Brown, 2021; Hitka et al., 2019).
The AMO postulates that employees perform exceptionally well when their work environment allows them to engage and when they have the motivation and skills (Linehan & O’Brien, 2017; Ma, Silva, Trigo, & Callan, 2020; Ma, Long, Zhang, & Lam, 2017). The AMO theory enhance the discretionary behavior among employees in respect of employee abilities, motivation and contributions toward organizational success (Andreeva & Sergeeva, 2016; Lee, Fee, & Khulida, 2017; Reizer, Brender-Ilan, & Sheaffer, 2019).
Human resource management practices
The value of HRM practices spawned the strategic approach associated with HRM (Boxall & Purcell, 2022; Dessler, 2016; Phutela, 2016). Adopting a strategic approach entail evaluating the alignment of various HRM practices with the organization’s competitive strategy (Boxall and Purcell, 2011; Chen et al., 2020; Storey, Ulrich, & Wright, 2019). This necessitates the alignment of employee competencies, skills and knowledge with organizational objectives (Gahlawat & Kundu, 2019; Otoo, Kuar, & Otoo, 2022; Sung & Choi, 2014). HRM is an important management strategy that successfully connects developing the right strategy for organizations (Alsafadi & Altahat, 2021; Cooper et al., 2019).
HRM practices are a set of procedures that an organization employs to manage human resources by fostering complex social interactions, encourage the development of firm-specific talents and creating organizational knowledge to maintain a competitive advantage (Boselie, 2010; Cooke, Schuler, & Varma, 2020; Hee & Jing, 2018). HRM practices facilitate the development of a social climate that fosters employees' commitment and motivating them to collaborate to generate new knowledge (Boon et al., 2019; Liu, Gong, Zhou, & Huang, 2017; Peccei et al., 2019). HRM practices such as career planning, self-managed teams and performance management help firms enhance their performance by promoting creativity, employee and customer satisfaction and the establishment of positive brands (Delaney & Huselid, 1996; Liao, Toya, Lepak, & Hong, 2009; Noe, Hollenbeck, Gerhart, & Wright, 2019). Career planning effectively improves employee competencies and performance (McGraw, 2014; Zia-ur-Rehman, Faisal, & Khan, 2015). Self-managed teams boost productivity, team effectiveness and employee satisfaction (Druskat & Wheeler, 2003; Tata & Prasad, 2004). Performance management significantly influences organizational effectiveness, employee commitment and attitude (Buckingham & Goodall, 2015; DeNisi & Murphy, 2017).
HRM practices attributes of career planning, performance management and self-managed teams were examined in the study.
Employee performance
The performance of an organization’s workforce determines its success or failure (Hermawati & Mas, 2017; Jabeen & Rahim, 2021; Mathis & Jackson, 2016). Employee performance is a crucial variable in organizational behavior and HRM studies (Afshan, Sobia, Kamran, & Nasir, 2012; Ogbonnaya & Messersmith, 2019; Oravee et al., 2018). Guan and Frenkel (2018) define employee performance as the level of ability to accomplish a specific task within the context of their knowledge, expertise and job needs. Al-Busaidi, Alias, and Alam (2021) contend that the efficiency and effectiveness of an organization’s personnel directly affects its level of growth and success.
Dryer and Reeves (1995) highlighted planning of work (Viswesvaran & Ones, 2000), efficiency of work (Price, 2001), making efforts (Bernardin & Russell, 1993) and creativity and innovation (Sarmiento, Beale, & Knowles, 2007) as employee performance attributes. They further emphasized that these qualities offer value to both corporate and personal outcomes. Several authors assert that the efficiency of each of an organization’s individual workers determines its effectiveness (Mastrangelo, Eddy, & Lorenzet, 2014; Veth, Korzilius, Van der Heijden, Emans, & De Lange, 2019; Wulandari & Putriyanti, 2020). Creativity and innovation, planning of work, making efforts and efficiency of work attributes of employee performance were examined in this study.
Organizational effectiveness
Organizational effectiveness is a prominent research subject in organizational theory (Cameron, 1980; Roy & Dugal, 2005; Zheng, Yang, & McLean, 2010). Organizational effectiveness parallels organizational success or organizational worth and has developed into a significant multidimensional construct as a way to quantify organizational success (Georgopoulos & Tannenbaum, 1957; Parke & Seo, 2017; Quinn & Rohrbaugh, 1981). Despite its importance, organizational effectiveness has escaped a clear definition (Cameron, 1986; Bowers & Seashore, 1966; Yuchtman & Seashore, 1967). Instead, it has become one of the most difficult to comprehend, intricate and contentious subjects in management (Cunningham, 1977; Price, 1972).
Georgopoulos and Tannenbaum (1957) defined organizational effectiveness as the degree to which an organization achieves its goals within a given set of resources and means without exhausting those resources or putting undue pressure on its members. Cameron (1980) argues that choosing the right criteria is necessary for measuring organizational success. Distinct schools of thought have different values and preferences for effectiveness, which are reflected in different models and related criteria’s (Etzioni, 1960; Goodman & Pinning’s, 1980; Pfeffer, 1977). Four models for evaluating organizational effectiveness have been proposed by theorists: goal attainment, strategic constituency, competing value and system resources (Connolly, Conlon, & Deutsch, 1980; Quinn & Rohrbaugh, 1983; Yuchtman & Seashore, 1967).
Goal attainment approach is the degree to which the organization succeeds in achieving its goals (Cameron, 1978; Lee, 2006). System resource approach focuses on the organization’s capacity to take advantage of its surroundings to get important resources, to meet established objectives and preserve equilibrium and stability (Cunningham, 1977; Wolfe & Putler, 2002). Strategic constituency approach measures the extent to which organizational strategic constituents can be minimally satisfied (Chelladurai, Szyszlo, & Haggerty, 1987; Keeley, 1978). Competing value approach presupposes that members of the organization have objectives that may be based on personal values, preferences and interests and are unable to agree on which objectives should take precedence over others (Campbell, 1977; Quinn & Rohrbaugh, 1983).
Organizational effectiveness attributes of goal attainment, strategic constituency, competing value and system resources were examined in the study.
Human resource management practice and employee performance
The relationship between HRM practices and employee performance has been espoused by many authors (Ismail, El Irani, & Kertechian, 2022; Lim & Ahmad, 2021; Stirpe, Profili, & Sammarra, 2022). Human resources are a collection of people’s expertise, skills and knowledge which boost organizational performance and competitive advantage (Chadwick, 2010; Ulrich, Younger, Brockbank, & Ulrich, 2012). HRM practices are effective in modifying employee behaviors, competencies and attitudes to meet organizational goals more efficiently and effectively (Gahlawat & Kundu, 2019; Rodjam, Thanasrisuebwong, Suphuan, & Charoenboon, 2020; Schuler & Jackson, 2014). Several studies have demonstrated that certain inclinations in HRM practices enhance organization’s competitive edge and employee performance (Balochi et al., 2010; Guest, 2017; Yusoff, Nejati, Kee, & Amran, 2018). Many authors assert that HRM practices promote positive attitudes among the workforce in the form of employee well-being (Bombiak & Marciniuk-Kluska, 2018; Jiang et al., 2022; Meijerink, Beijer, & Bos-Nehles, 2021). Subsequent reviews shed light on the relationship between selected HRM practices and employee performance.
Career planning and employee performance
The relationship between career planning and employee performance has been examined by several studies (Kakui & Gachunga, 2016; Saleem & Amin, 2013; Zacher, Rudolph, Todorovic, & Ammann, 2019). Career planning is the process through which people establish their talents, values and interests (Baruch, 2003; Gunz & Jalland, 1996; Martin, Romero, Valle, & Dolan, 2001). Career planning aligns employees’ skills and interest to organizational goals and objectives which improves employee performance (Ikechukwu & Paschal, 2017; Nwuche & Awa, 2011; Zia-ur-Rehman et al., 2015). Researchers contend that a well-designed career planning system enables organizations to tap the wealth of their in-house talents by aligning employees' abilities, expertise, experience and aspirations with organization’s needs and objectives (Mohamad & Yahya, 2017; Mugaa, Guyo, & Odhiambo, 2018; Patrick & Kumar, 2011).
This corroborates the findings of numerous academics who argue that career planning enhances employee productivity and organizational effectiveness (Kraimer, Seibert, Wayne, Liden, & Bravo, 2011; Mathis & Jackson, 2010; Oduma & Were, 2014). The following hypothesis is advanced.
Career planning is significantly related to employee performance.
Self-managed teams and employee performance
Several studies have supported the association between self-managed teams and employee performance (Bastos, Cordeiro, & Drohomeretski, 2019; Geerts, Bierbooms, & Cloudt, 2021; Lemmetty & Collin, 2020). Self-managed teams are a multi-skilled, stable and multifunctional group that is responsible for the completion of a relatively complete piece of work as well as the control conditions that influence team performance (Bishop & Scott, 2000; Davis, Carson, & Robinson, 2004; Pasmore & Mlot, 1994). Several authors emphasize that self-managed teams are effective strategies for tapping individuals' tacit and experienced knowledge since they provide organizational flexibility, motivational incentives and dynamism needed for learning and sharing knowledge (Van Wyk, 2017; Weerheim, Van Rossum, & Ten Have, 2019; Choi & Park, 2014).
In a similar vein, academics argue that self-managed teams generate a sense of attachment and promotes employee participation and commitment, which influences business performance (Doblinger & Class, 2023; Moura, Dominguez, & Varajão, 2019; Tata & Prasad, 2004). The following hypothesis is proposed:
Self-managed teams are significantly related to employee performance
Performance management and employee performance
Academics have advocated for the relationship between performance management and employee performance (Cappelli & Tavis, 2016; Garengo & Sardi, 2020; Lappalainen, Saunila, Ukko, Rantala, & Rantanen, 2019). Performance management is the process of determining, assessing and improving team and individual performance and ailing them with the organization’s strategic goals (Adler et al., 2016; DeNisi & Murphy, 2017; Taylor & Pierce, 2019). Eminent scholars contend that performance management drives strategic evolution and ensures systematic goal-alignment (Brown, O’Kane, Mazumdar, & McCracken, 2019; Pulakos, 2019; Smith & Bititci, 2017). Similarly, many authors stressed that an efficient system of performance management facilitates the assessment and enhancement of individual performance to develop the necessary competencies and capabilities for the firm (Cunha, Vieira, Rego, & Clegg, 2018; Pichler et al., 2016; Varma & Budhwar, 2020).
This corroborates the findings of several researchers, who assert that performance management improves an employee’s behavior, abilities, motivation, performance and competency (Longenecker & Fink, 2017; Taylor & Pierce, 2019; Weibel et al., 2016). The following hypothesis is advanced:
Performance management is significantly related to employee performance
Employee performance and organizational effectiveness
The association between employee performance and organizational effectiveness has been examined by several scholars (Kareem, 2019; Rahman, Ng, Sambassivan, & Wong, 2013; Roy & Dugal, 2005) The main resources of an organization are its employees (Danish & Usman, 2010; Singh, Gupta, Busso, & Kamboj, 2021; Matricano, 2020). Employee performance is crucial to an organization’s accomplishments, growth and success (Garg, Dar, & Mishra, 2018; Harris & Brown, 2021; Mubarik et al., 2020). Employees' knowledge, skills and competencies are a crucial prerequisite for the effective and efficient functioning of diverse organizational activities (Irawan, Bastian, & Hanifah, 2019; Ngwa, Adeleke, Agbaeze, Ghasi, & Imhanrenialena, 2019; Turulja & Bajgoric, 2018). Amir, Ali, Ali, and Ali (2022) postulate that employee performance provides specialized human elements with competence that enhance organizational effectiveness. The following hypothesis is proposed:
Employee performance has a significant influence on organizational effectiveness
The mediating role of employee performance
Though some studies have shown a direct relationship between certain HRM practices and organizational effectiveness (Chen & Huang, 2009; Jiang & Liu, 2015; Otoo, 2020), strategic HRM research is founded on the assumption that, rather than directly impacting organizational effectiveness, these practices may have an impact through their influence on particular organizational characteristics. Employee performance is a key factor in determining the degree of internal congruence among HR practices (Delery & Shaw, 2001 Aguinis, 2009; Huselid & Becker, 2011). Numerous academics argue that employees having a wide range of knowledge, abilities and expertise help firms innovate (Irawan et al., 2019; Swanson, Kim, Lee, Yang, & Lee, 2020; Zhao & Zhou, 2021).
This study is grounded on the AMO and human capital theories (Kurdi and Alshurideh, 2020; Mom et al., 2019). Employee performance is one crucial criterion for firms to achieve a competitive edge (Kerdpitak & Jermsittiparsert, 2020; Sutduean et al., 2019; Veth et al., 2019). Similarly, scholars contend that in the face of fierce competition, employee performance is essential to a firm’s ability to survive and thrive (Al-kharabsheh, Attiany, Alshawabkeh, Hamadneh, & Alshurideh, 2023; Khan, Md Yusoff, Hussain, & Binti Ismail, 2019; Siraj et al., 2022). The following hypothesis is advanced:
Employee performance mediates the relationship between HRM practices and organizational effectiveness.
Methods
Research setting and data structure
The police service is essentially a high-volume law enforcement agency that requires personnel that are well-trained, motivated and dedicated (Arisukwu et al., 2020; Federman, 2020). All of these qualities necessitate the creation of a comprehensive HR policy for the police administration, making it distinct in addressing HRM related issues. The study employs a positivist methodological paradigm, which uses the hypotheticodeductive approach to validate a priori hypotheses articulated quantitatively and allows for the derivation of functional linkages between causal and explanatory elements (Park, Konge, & Artino, 2020; Varpio & MacLeod, 2020). A purposive sampling technique was employed in the selection of police officers (Lincoln, Lynham, & Guba, 2018; Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2019; Ghana Police Service, 2023).
Data were obtained from 1160 policers officers in the Greater Accra and Tema regions comprising 340 senior police officers and 820 junior police officers through a standardized questionnaire (Denzin & Lincoln, 2018; Malhotra, Nunan, & Birks, 2019). A thorough answer from 800 respondents (69.0% response rate) was considered acceptable. Inference from Table 1, men constituted 57.3% (majority) respondents. The age range of 26–35 years was represented by (51.1%) of the respondents. The majority of respondents (39.1%) have between 6 and 10 years of experience working in the police service. Senior police officers make up 57.5%, while junior police officers make up 42.5%.
Profile of respondents
| Variables | Frequency (s) | Percentage of totals (%) | Variables | Frequency (s) | Percentage of totals (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Department | ||||
| Male | 458 | 57.3 | Operations | 270 | 33.8 |
| Female | 342 | 42.7 | Criminal investigation | 115 | 14.4 |
| General services | 120 | 15.0 | |||
| Age | Motor transport and traffic | 85 | 10.6 | ||
| 18–25 | 80 | 10.0 | Human resource | 30 | 3.8 |
| 26–35 | 409 | 51.1 | Interpol | 45 | 5.6 |
| 36–45 | 170 | 21.3 | Technical | 45 | 5.6 |
| 46–55 | 91 | 11.4 | Legal | 25 | 3.1 |
| 56–65 | 50 | 6.2 | Research | 30 | 3.7 |
| Finance | 35 | 4.4 | |||
| Education | |||||
| Senior high | 241 | 30.1 | Experience | ||
| Diploma | 145 | 18.1 | Less than one year | 40 | 5.0 |
| HND | 187 | 23.4 | 1–5 years | 153 | 19.1 |
| Bachelor’s degree | 169 | 21.1 | 6–10years | 319 | 39.9 |
| Master’s degree | 58 | 7.3 | 11–15years | 122 | 15.3 |
| 16–20years | 98 | 12.2 | |||
| Ranks | 20years and above | 68 | 8.5 | ||
| Senior officers | 340 | 42.5 | |||
| Junior officers | 460 | 57.5 |
Source(s): Table by the author
Measures
The measures were scored using the Likert scale, which has a range of 1 (“strongly disagree”) to 5 (“strongly agree”). The construct standards estimate criterion proposed by Hair and Sarstedt (2021) and Rigdon and Sarstedt (2022) was applied. A construct’s statements that fell short of the ideal threshold of 0.60 or higher were removed (Henseler & Schuberth, 2020; Schuberth, Henseler, & Dijkstra, 2018).
Human resource management practices scale
Career planning (Rogers & Creed, 2011), self-managed teams (Allen, Shore, & Griffeth, 2003) and performance management (Kinicki, Jacobson, Peterson, & Prussia, 2013) were used in measuring HRM practices. Sample items include ‘‘my immediate supervisors are aware of my career aspirations”. The reliability of each of the three dimensions HRM practices was 0.91, 0.86 and 0.83, respectively. The reliability score for all eleven items was 0.84. The interdimensional correlations which ranged between 0.54 and 0.73 were high.
Employee performance scale
Creativity and innovation (Price, 2001), efficiency of work (Lepak, Liao, Chung, & Harden, 2006), making efforts (Bernardin & Russell, 1993) and planning of work (Sempane, Rieger, & Roodt, 2002) were used in measuring employee performance. Sample items include ‘‘effective work planning aids in the establishment and achievement of corporate objectives”. The reliability of each of the four dimensions of employee performance was 0.85, 0.87, 0.84 and 0.83, respectively. The reliability score for all 14 items was 0.82. The inter-dimensional correlations which ranged between 0.56 and 0.77 and 0.54 and 0.73 were high.
Organizational effectiveness scale
Goal attainment approach (Price, 1972), system constituency approach (Connolly et al., 1980), competing value approach (Quinn & Rohrbaugh, 1983) and system resource approach (Cunningham, 1977), were used to measure organizational effectiveness. Sample items include “anticipate surprises and crises”. The reliability of each of the dimensions of four organizational effectiveness was 0.78, 0.77, 0.85 and 0.82, respectively. The reliability score for all nine items was 0.80. The inter-dimensional correlations which ranged between 0.55 and 0.78 and 0.56 and 0.77 were high.
Common method bias
A number of a priori measures were implemented in addressing the issues of common method bias (Cooper et al., 2020; Jordan & Troth, 2020). During the pre-test study, ambiguous questions were clarified, psychological separation of constructs were ensured as well the provision of mid-point scales for each survey item (Griffiths, Roberts, & Price, 2019; Kock, Berbekova, & Assaf, 2021). To lessen social desirability bias, confidentiality and anonymity were guaranteed (Malhotra, Schaller, & Patil, 2017; Rodríguez-Ardura & Meseguer-Artola, 2020). As a post hoc analysis, the Harman’s one-factor test was applied (Chang, van Witteloostuijn, & Eden, 2020; Steenkamp & Maydeu-Olivares, 2021). The results show that the set of benchmarks were appropriate (Fuller, Simmering, Atinc, Atinc, & Babin, 2016; Spector, Rosen, Richardson, Williams, & Johnson, 2019). The possibility of method bias will be negligible as a result of these strategies.
Analytic approach
For adequate representation of postulated constructs, a confirmatory factor analysis was applied (Sellbom & Tellegen, 2019; Schuberth et al., 2018). A two-hierarchical linear model was developed (Hair & Sarstedt, 2021; Henseler & Schuberth, 2020). Analysis of Moment Structure (AMOS) 26.0 and the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) 21.0 were used to evaluate the proposed model and hypotheses (Kock & Hadaya, 2018; Sarstedt et al., 2020a, b). The association between sub-dimensions as well as the nexus between observable indicators and their latent construct were examined (Hwang, Sarstedt, Cheah, & Ringle, 2020; Kuppelwieser, Putinas, & Bastounis, 2019). Construct reliability, validity and convergent validity were examined (Hair et al., 2020; Rhemtulla, van Bork, & Borsboom, 2020). Discriminant validity between constructs was examined (Franke Sarstedt, 2019; Henseler, Ringle, & Sarstedt, 2015). The mediation model was tested by employing the Baron and Kenny (1986) classical product approach (Cheah, Sarstedt, Ringle, Ramayah, & Ting, 2018; Sarstedt et al., 2020a, b). Figure 1 show a representation of the mediation model.
Results
A three-factor CFA model representing HRM practices, employee performance and organizational effectiveness established a good model fit (2/df = 2.60, root mean squared error approximation (RMSEA) = 0.054, standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) = 0.039, Tucker–Lewis’s index (TLI) = 0.980 and comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.983) (Shi, Lee, & Maydeu-Olivares, 2019; Xia & Yang, 2019). Estimates of the coefficient ranged from 0.77–0.91 (Danks, Sharma, & Sarstedt, 2020; Jing, Kuang, Leite, Marcoulides, & Fisk, 2022). The standard estimates range from 0.74–0.88 (Sarstedt, Hair, Cheah, Becker, & Ringle, 2019; Shmueli et al., 2019). The range of estimates for average variance extracted (AVE) was 0.57–0.68, whereas composite reliability (CR) was 0.78–0.88 (Chin et al., 2020; Sharma, Shmueli, Sarstedt, Danks, & Ray, 2021). Discriminatory validity was achieved (Aguirre-Urreta, Ro¨nkko¨, & McIntosh, 2019; Radomir & Moisescu, 2019).
Table 2 presents descriptive statistics and correlation analysis, while Table 3 presents the results of the model test. Table 4 display CFA results, while Table 5 presents discriminant validity test results. Table 6 displays the results of the hypothesis test, whereas Table 7 displays results of HRM practices effect test. Career planning and employee performance are significantly related (0.767, p < 0.05), thereby supporting Hypothesis 1. Self-managed teams and employee performance were shown to be nonsignificantly related (0.478, p > 0.05). Hypothesis 2 is unsupported. Performance management and employee performance were shown to be nonsignificantly related (0.387, p > 0.05). Hypothesis 3 is unsupported. Employee performance significantly influenced organizational effectiveness (0.538, p < 0.05). Hypothesis 4 is supported. Employee performance mediates the relationship between HRM practices and organizational effectiveness (0.679, p < 0.05), thereby supporting Hypothesis 5. HRM practices had a significant indirect (mediated) effect on organizational effectiveness (0.07, p 0.05) (Nitzl, Roldán, & Cepeda Carrión, 2016; Rasoolimanesh, Wang, Roldán, & Kunasekaran, 2021).
Correlation matrix
| Items | Mean | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Career planning | 9.68 | 4.45 | 1 | ||||
| 2. Self-managed Temas | 9.34 | 4.27 | 0.163** | 1 | |||
| 3. Performance management | 8.83 | 4.07 | 0.198** | 0.426* | 1 | ||
| 4. Employee performance | 13.36 | 6.23 | 0.219* | 0.523** | 0.488** | 1 | |
| 5. Organizational effectiveness | 11.74 | 5.17 | 0.451** | 0.561** | 0.495** | 0.429** | 1 |
Note(s): **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed). *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed)
Source(s): Table by the author
Results of the measurement and structural model test
| Model | x2 | Df | x2/df | P | RMSEA | SRMR | TLI | CFI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First order CFA | ||||||||
| HRM practices | 210.417 | 67 | 3.14 | 0.000 | 0.057 | 0.055 | 0.919 | 0.936 |
| Organizational effectiveness | 219.806 | 69 | 3.19 | 0.000 | 0.058 | 0.056 | 0.914 | 0.926 |
| Employee performance | 215.735 | 68 | 3.17 | 0.000 | 0.059 | 0.058 | 0.928 | 0.934 |
| Second order CFA | ||||||||
| HRM Practices | 208.306 | 67 | 3.10 | 0.000 | 0.058 | 0.057 | 0.931 | 0.942 |
| Organizational effectiveness | 211.472 | 69 | 3.06 | 0.000 | 0.059 | 0.058 | 0.925 | 0.949 |
| Employee performance | 210.412 | 68 | 3.09 | 0.000 | 0.060 | 0.059 | 0.921 | 0.941 |
| Measurement model-overall model | 224.596 | 64 | 3.51 | 0.000 | 0.058 | 0.057 | 0.953 | 0.972 |
| Structural model-overall model | 124.931 | 48 | 2.60 | 0.000 | 0.054 | 0.039 | 0.980 | 0.983 |
Note(s): RMSEA = Root mean square of approximation; SRMR=Standardized root mean residual; TLI = Tucker–Lewis index and CFI=Comparative fit index; *p < 0.05
Source(s): Table by the author
Confirmatory factor analysis
| Factor names, factor loadings and Cronbach’s alpha | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Factor | Items | (λ) | AVE | CR |
| Career planning (α = 0.91) | My immediate supervisors are aware of my career aspirations | 0.865 | ||
| My personal and professional development requirement are matched | 0.827 | |||
| My professional options are clear to me | 0.718 | 0.64 | 0.88 | |
| I have clear career paths | 0.734 | |||
| Self-managed team (α = 0.86) | Corporate and team goals are synchronized | 0.875 | ||
| Team members encourage a learning environment and share their skills and knowledge | 0.716 | |||
| Collective consensus is used to make decisions | 0.693 | 0.60 | 0.80 | |
| Performance management (α = 0.83) | The organization provides written and operational performance appraisal system | 0.786 | ||
| Performance is evaluated based on objective and quantifiable outcomes | 0.749 | 0.57 | 0.86 | |
| Employees are given feedback and counseling based on their performance | 0.764 | |||
| Discussions about performance reviews are held with the utmost professionalism and care | 0.723 | |||
| Planning of work (α = 0.85) | Effective work planning aids in the establishment and achievement of corporate objectives | 0.753 | ||
| Employees of the company have the capacity to prepare and carry out their obligations according to a predetermined schedule | 0.769 | |||
| Effective work planning naturally improves employees' capacity to focus on completing their allocated obligations | 0.795 | 0.60 | 0.81 | |
| Efficiency of work (α = 0.87) | Employees demonstrate sincerity, commitment and the capacity for accountability | 0.881 | ||
| Employees have the necessary technical and professional expertise to carry out their tasks effectively | 0.836 | |||
| Employees carry out their responsibilities in accordance with the established policies and procedures | 0.748 | 0.68 | 0.83 | |
| Making efforts (α = 0.84) | Employees are motivated to go above and beyond their given duties by a sense of pride in their work | 0.738 | ||
| Employees are interested in working outside of normal working hours and exhibit a readiness to do so | 0.725 | 0.56 | 0.86 | |
| Employees are rewarded with additional benefits in order to encourage them to work more | 0.846 | |||
| Employees who carefully complete assigned obligations are granted salary increases | 0.662 | |||
| Creativity and innovation (α = 0.83) | Employees are eager to improve their working practices | 0.765 | ||
| Employees refrain from emulating others when it comes to resolving work-related issues | 0.827 | 0.63 | 0.88 | |
| Employees of the company are capable of presenting ideas and proposing solutions to work-related issues | 0.738 | |||
| Employees have the ability to express themselves freely and without cohesion | 0.843 | |||
| Goal attainment approach (α = 0.78) | Identify new business opportunities | 0.749 | ||
| Anticipate crises and surprises | 0.729 | 0.57 | 0.80 | |
| Decrease market response times | 0.794 | |||
| System resource approach (α = 0.77) | Organize and coordinate the development efforts of various units | 0.764 | ||
| Quickly adapt to unanticipated developments | 0.835 | 0.64 | 0.78 | |
| System constituency approach (α = 0.85) | Anticipate potential market opportunities for new products/services | 0.775 | ||
| Avoid overlapping development of corporate initiatives | 0.818 | 0.63 | 0.78 | |
| Competing value approach (α = 0.82) | Rapidly commercialize new innovations | 0.796 | ||
| Adapt goals and objectives quickly to the industry/market changes | 0.810 | 0.64 | 0.79 | |
Note(s): AVE represents average variance extracted and CR represents composite reliability. All Factor loadings are significant at p < 0.05
Source(s): Table by the author
Discriminant validity
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Career planning | (0.804) | ||||||||||
| 2. Self-managed teams | 0.090 | (0.817) | |||||||||
| 3. Performance management | 0.130 | 0.498 | (0.740) | ||||||||
| 4. Planning of work | 0.571 | 0.239 | 0.355 | (0.772) | |||||||
| 5. Efficiency of work | 0.175 | 0.399 | 0.606 | 0.288 | (0.811) | ||||||
| 6.Making efforts | 0.038 | 0.424 | 0.587 | 0.227 | 0.536 | (0.779) | |||||
| 7. Creativity and innovation | 0.131 | 0.299 | 0.462 | 0.344 | 0.397 | 0.670 | (0.775) | ||||
| 8. Goal attainment approach | 0.072 | 0.224 | 0.154 | 0.093 | 0.156 | 0.231 | 0.203 | (0.823) | |||
| 9. System resource approach | 0.089 | 0.288 | 0.197 | 0.116 | 0.199 | 0.209 | 0.184 | 0.679 | (0.853) | ||
| 10. System constituency approach | 0.048 | 0.136 | 0.096 | 0.061 | 0.097 | 0.140 | 0.124 | 0.352 | 0.517 | (0.784) | |
| 11. Competing value approach | 0.065 | 0.201 | 0.138 | 0.085 | 0.139 | 0.125 | 0.180 | 0.661 | 0.478 | 0.307 | (0.829) |
Note(s): Values in diagonal represent the squared root estimate of average variance extracted (AVE)
Source(s): Table by the author
Inferences drawn on the hypotheses
| Hypothesis | Beta coefficient | p value | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| H1: Career planning is significantly related to employee performance | 0.767 | 0.004 | Accepted |
| H2: Self-managed teams are significantly related to employee performance | 0.478 | 0.296 | Rejected |
| H3: Performance management is significantly related to employee performance | 0.376 | 0.239 | Rejected |
| H4:Employee performance has a significant influence on organizational effectiveness | 0.538 | 0.012 | Accepted |
| H5: Employee performance mediates the relationship between HRM practices and organizational effectiveness | 0.679 | 0.007 | Accepted |
Source(s): Table by the author
Discussion
This study offers significant empirical insights in comprehending the nexus between HRM practices and organizational effectiveness via employee performance as a mediating variable. HRM practices influence and shape the behavior, knowledge and skills of employees to achieve organizational goals (Kehoe & Wright, 2013; Stirpe et al., 2022; Van Beurden, Van Veldhoven, & Van de Voorde, 2022). The results show that career planning and employee performance are significantly related. Career planning effectively improves employee competencies and performance (Akhter, Siddique, & Alam, 2013; McGraw, 2014; Thangavelu & Kanagasabapathi, 2019). Prior studies have revealed a positive relationship between career planning and employee performance (e.g. Ghosh et al., 2019; Mugaa et al., 2018; Oduma & Were, 2014).
The findings show that career planning has a significant impact on task performance (Mohamad & Yahya, 2017; Samuel, Magwagwa, & Mazingi, 2019) and contextual performance (Ikechukwu & Paschal, 2017; Koopmans et al., 2013). Thus, career panning not only facilitates the enhancement of workplace competencies but favors the necessary conditions for strengthening job efficiency. Self-managed teams and employee performance were shown to be nonsignificantly related. Self-managed teams motivate employees and boost overall productivity (Caruso, 2018; Lee & Edmondson, 2017). Earlier studies have found a positive relationship between self-managed teams and employee performance (e.g. Bastos et al., 2019; Naikar & Elix, 2021; Rezvani, Barrett, & Khosravi, 2019).
The findings show that self-managed teams have a positive impact on creativity and innovation (Frank, Ayala, Corso, & Ribeiro, 2018; Pfutzenreute et al., 2021) and efficiency of work (Moura et al., 2019; Okoshi, Pinheiro de Lima, & Gouvea da Costa, 2019). Hence, self-managed teams facilitate the improvement of organizational systems and support the prerequisites for increasing employee satisfaction and productivity. Performance management and employee performance were shown to be nonsignificantly related. Performance management improves employee and organizational performance (Choong & Islam, 2020; Kuvaas, Buch, & Dysvik, 2016). Previous studies have revealed a positive relationship between performance management and employee performance (e.g. Bourne et al., 2018; Murphy, 2020; Neher & Maley, 2020).
The findings show that performance management has a significant impact on task performance (Abbaspour & Dabirian, 2019; Maley, Dabic, & Moeller, 2020) and contextual performance (Kamble & Gunasekaran, 2020; Pulakos, Mueller-Hanson, & Arad, 2019). Therefore, performance management interventions support the prerequisite for encouraging innovation and creativity and the development of new competencies. Employee performance significantly influenced organizational effectiveness. The efficiency and effectiveness of an organization’s personnel directly affects its level of growth and success (Al-Busaidi et al., 2021). Prior research has found a significant relationship between employee performance and organizational effectiveness (e.g. Armstrong, 2020; Bayyurt & Rizvi, 2015; Kareem, 2019).
The findings indicate that employee performance has a significant impact on goal attainment (Cameron, 1986; Cunningham, 1977), system resource (Connolly et al., 1980; Pfeffer, 1977), system constituency (Quinn & Cameron, 1983; Wolfe & Putler, 2002) and competing value (Campbell, 1977; Etzioni, 1960). Thus, employee performance facilitates the attainment of organizational goals and supports the necessary conditions to fulfill internal and external work demands. The results further indicate employee performance mediates the relationship between HRM practices and organizational effectiveness. Employee performance enhances organizational productivity, effectiveness and efficiency (Dakhoul, 2018; Wulandari & Putriyanti, 2020).
Previous studies have found a positive relationship between HRM practices and organizational effectiveness (e.g. Jiang & Liu, 2015; Otoo, 2020; Potnuru, Sahoo, & Parle, 2021) and between employee performance and organizational effectiveness (e.g. Kareem, 2019; Lee, 2006; Akhtar, Awan, Naveed, & Ismail, 2018). In light of the findings, since employee performance exerts partial mediation on the relationship between HRM practices and organizational effectiveness. It is imperative to take into account both direct and indirect effects while elucidating organizational effectiveness. Therefore, HRM practices not only facilitate the development and enhancement of employee competencies and capabilities but favouring the necessary conditions to develop employee skills, knowledge and behavior.
Theoretical implications
The study bolsters the supposition for enhancing organizational effectiveness and further research into the relationship between HRM practices, organizational effectiveness and employee performance. The study’s findings elucidate the vagueness in the literature on HRM practices, organizational effectiveness and employee performance (Cameron, 1978; Gerhart, 2012; Vanhala & Stavrou, 2013). Career planning and employee performance are significantly related. The results corroborate past studies which show that career planning enables organizations to make informed decisions regarding succession planning and remuneration in order to attract, retain, developed and motivate a sizable workforce of productive workers (Antoniu, 2010; Inyang & Akaegbu, 2014; Rehman, 2017).
They also support earlier studies which indicate that career planning systems help people build skills that are essential for their own advancement and development and organizational success and growth (Ayanda & Sani, 2010; Mugaa et al., 2018; Shokri, 2019). The findings support the postulation of researchers (Kakui & Gachunga, 2016; Samuel et al., 2019). Self-managed teams and employee performance were shown to be nonsignificantly related. The result does not parallel the findings of several authors who postulate that self-directed teams enhance organizational processes, elevates employee satisfaction and boost productivity (Geerts et al., 2021; Petermann & Zacher, 2020). The findings do not support the assumption of researchers (Lee & Paunova, 2017; Lemmetty & Collin, 2020).
Performance management and employee performance were shown to be nonsignificantly related. The result does not parallel the findings of many scholars, who argue that performance management increases employee performance and enhance team and individual capabilities to provide sustainable success (Bragger, Kutcher, Menier, Sessa, & Sumner, 2014; Roberts, 2017; Saratun, 2016). The findings do not support the supposition of researchers (DeNisi & Murphy, 2017; Smith & Bititci, 2017). Employee performance significantly influenced organizational effectiveness. The results concur with earlier studies which indicate that employees' knowledge, skills and competencies improve organizational outcomes (Chadwick, 2010; Huselid & Becker, 2011; Kerdpitak & Jermsittiparsert, 2020).
They also corroborate earlier studies which show that employee performance is a crucial resource for accomplishing corporate objectives (Oravee et al., 2018; Reizer et al., 2019; Tumbuan & Simanjorang, 2016). The findings validate the postulation of researchers (Irawan et al., 2019; Matricano, 2020). Moreover, the study shows employee performance mediates the relationship between HRM practices and organizational effectiveness. The results support earlier studies which indicate that task-relevant knowledge, skills and abilities are a necessity for the successful and efficient execution of diverse tasks (Raineri, 2017; Su Wright, & Ulrich, 2018; Sung & Choi, 2014).
They also concur with past studies which show that employee performance serves as a measure of an organization’s capacity to meet its objectives while successfully utilizing available resource in a constantly changing environment (Boon, Eckardt, Lepak, & Boselie, 2017; Keegan & Den Hartog, 2019; Li, Wang, Van Jaarsveld, & Lee, 2018). The findings validate the assumption of researchers (Jabeen & Rahim, 2021; Khan & Wisner, 2019).
Implications for practice
HRM practices are effective in modifying employee behaviors, competencies and attitudes to meet organizational goals more efficiently and effectively (Gahlawat & Kundu, 2019; Rodjam et al., 2020; Schuler & Jackson, 2014). HRM practices ensure organization’s human capital supports its strategic goals (Alagaraja & Shuck, 2015; Alserhan & Shbail, 2020; Hee & Jing, 2018). The results show that career planning and employee performance are significantly related. An effective career planning system enables employees to acquire new skills that are useful for their professional development and the successful accomplishment of organizational goals. (Akhter et al., 2013; Zia-ur-Rehman et al., 2015).
The police administration has a foremost interest to (re)evaluate a career planning practices, where personal and professional development requirement are matched and supervisors are aware of the career aspirations of officers (Mathis & Jackson, 2010; Otoo, 2019). A well-designed career planning system structure serves as a strong motivator for higher performance (Thangavelu & Kanagasabapathi, 2019; Zacher et al., 2019). The police administration would have to (re)evaluate a career planning practices, where the professional options and career paths are clarified for officers (Ikechukwu & Paschal, 2017; Kakui & Gachunga, 2016).
The results also indicate that employee performance significantly influenced organizational effectiveness. Employee performance influences one’s overall perspective and assessment of the workplace (Chua et al., 2018; Sutduean et al., 2019). The police administration would have to (re)evaluate employee performance strategies where effective work planning aids in the establishment and achievement of corporate objectives (Neher & Maley, 2020; Guan & Frenkel, 2018). Employee performance relates to a favorable emotional state resulting from a person’s job experiences and evaluation (Hermawati & Mas, 2017; Ogbonnaya & Messersmith, 2019).
The police administration would have to re(evaluate) employee performance strategies, where employees are motivated to go above and beyond their given duties by a sense of pride in their work (Keegan & Den Hartog, 2019; Deogaonkar, Zaveri, & Vichoray, 2020). The study further shows that employee performance mediates the relationship between HRM practices and organizational effectiveness. Employee performance leverages employee skills, knowledge and various competencies (Ngwa et al., 2019; Tumbuan & Simanjorang, 2016). The study emphasizes the importance of developing a system for improving employee performance since human resource qualities are a crucial component of organizational success (Delery & Roumpi, 2017; Veth et al., 2019). HRM practices enhance work quality, employee performance and organizational effectiveness (Alshammari, 2020; Khan & Abdullah, 2019; Singh et al., 2021). Jiang et al. (2022) stressed that firms can acquire competent, efficient human resources and high-performing specialists by promoting efficient management practices. Consequently, the police administration would have to adopt, design and implement well-articulated and proactive HRM practices to improve the abilities, skills, knowledge and motivation of officer’s to inordinately enhance the effectiveness of the service.
Limitations and future study
The study’s limitations should be considered when interpreting the findings, notwithstanding its theoretical and practical advancements. The study took into account the subjective viewpoints of the employees (Burnes, 2020; Hansen & Madsen, 2019). Objective measures are encouraged in future studies (Jakobsen & Jensen, 2015; Williams & McGonagle, 2016). The possibility of method bias will be negligible when objective measures are used (Aguirre-Urreta & Hu, 2019; Baumgartner, Weijters, & Pieters, 2021). By examining a mediation mechanism, the present study sought to elucidate the effects of HRM practices on organizational effectiveness using a number of HRM measures.
However, in order to conduct an exhaustive and focused inquiry, further theoretical and practical work is required to have a comprehensive grasp of the nexus between HRM practices and organizational effectiveness. The generalizability of the findings will be constrained due to the research’s police service focus. Replicating the model to others industries and areas are encouraged in future studies. Finally, due to the study’s cross-sectional nature, it is impossible to completely exclude the potential that the results could be construed showing a reverse causality or causal relationship (Kesmodel, 2018; Schmidt & Brown, 2019). Future longitudinal study is necessary (Baumgartner, van der Schuur, Lemmens, & Poel, 2018; Le-Rademacher, Storrick, & Jatoi, 2019).
