SISTEM HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT DAN PERILAKU PROAKTIF INDIVIDU

Samsul Hidayat, Muhammad Rasyid Abdillah, Adi Rahmat

Abstract


This paper aims to explain the relationship between human resource management (HRM) systems and proactive behavior. By using a literature review approach, this study proposes several propositions. First, a change-oriented HRM system has a positive effect on role breadth self-efficacy, felt responsibility for change, trust in management, and proactive behavior. Second, role breadth self-efficacy (RBSE), felt responsibility for change (FRC), and trust in management mediate the relationship between HRM systems and individual proactive behavior


Full Text:

PDF

References


Belschak, F. D., & Den Hartog, D. N. 2010. Pro-self, prosocial, and pro-organizational foci of proactive behaviour: Differential antecedents and consequences. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83: 475-498.

Bindl, U. K., & Parker, S. K. 2010. Proactive work behaviour: Forward-thinking and change-oriented action in organizations. In S. Zedeck (Ed.), APA handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, vol. 2: 567-598. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Chuang, C.-H., Jackson, S. E., & Jiang, Y. 2016. Can knowledge-intensive teamwork be managed? Examining the roles of HRM systems, leadership, and tacit knowledge. Journal of Management, 42: 524-554.

Gardner, T. M., Wright, P. M., & Moynihan, L. M. 2011. The impact of motivation, empowerment, and skillenhancing practices on aggregate voluntary turnover: The mediating effect of collective affective commitment. Personnel Psychology, 64: 315-350.

Jiang, K., Takeuchi, R., & Lepak, D. P. 2013. Where do we go from here? New perspectives on the black box in strategic human resource management research. Journal of Management Studies, 50: 1448-1480.

Lepak, D. P., Liao, H., Chung, Y., & Harden, E. E. 2006. A conceptual review of human resource management systems in strategic human resource management research. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 25: 217-271.

Liao, H., Toya, K., Lepak, D. P., & Hong, Y. 2009. Do they see eye to eye? Management and employee perspectives of high-performance work systems and influence processes on service quality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94: 371-391.

Macky, K., & Boxall, P. 2007. The relationship between “high-performance work practices” and employee attitudes: An investigation of additive and interaction effects. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18: 537-567.

Nishii, L. H., Lepak, D. P., & Schneider, B. 2008. Employee attributions of the “why” of HR practices: Their effects on employee attitudes and behaviors, and customer satisfaction. Personnel Psychology, 61: 503-545.

Parker, S. K., Bindl, U. K., & Strauss, K. 2010. Making things happen: A model of proactive motivation. Journal of Management, 36: 827-856.

Parker, S. K., & Collins, C. G. 2010. Taking stock: Integrating and differentiating multiple proactive behaviors. Journal of Management, 36: 633-662.

Rank, J., Nelson, N. E., Allen, T. D., & Xu, X. 2009. Leadership predictors of innovation and task performance: Subordinates’ self-esteem and self-presentation as moderators. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 82: 465-489.

Raub, S., & Liao, H. 2012. Doing the right thing without being told: Joint effects of initiative climate and general self-efficacy on employee proactive customer service performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97: 651-667.

Schuler, R. S., & Jackson, S. E. 1987. Linking competitive strategies with human resource management practices. Academy of Management Executive, 1: 207-219.

Takeuchi, R., Chen, G., & Lepak, D. P. 2009. Through the looking glass of a social system: Cross-level effects of high-performance work systems on employees’ attitudes. Personnel Psychology, 62: 1-29.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2022 Samsul Hidayat, Muhammad Rasyid Abdillah, Adi Rahmat