Content uploaded by Mugizi Wilson
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Mugizi Wilson on Mar 15, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
J E R JOURNAL OF EDUCATION REVIEW
VOL. 10. N0 1, JANUARY-MARCH 2018
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES:
DEVELOPING AND TESTING AN INSTRUMENT IN
THE CONTEXT OF ACADEMIC STAFF IN
UNIVERSITIES IN UGANDA
1 Wilson Mugizi
Faculty of Humanities and Education, Kampala International University (Western Campus)
2Fred E. K. Bakkabulindi
East African School of Higher Education Studies and Development, College of Education and
External Studies, Makerere University, Uganda.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to develop and test instrument for HRM practices in the
context of academic staff in universities in Uganda. HRM practices were operationalised
as recruitment, selection, job design, training, performance appraisal, promotion,
employee participation, rewards, job security and safety, and grievances handling
mechanisms. In particular, the study sought to establish the validity and reliability of
each of the 10 HRM practices and the correlation between them. The sample of 301
academic staff was chosen from four public and three private universities. The
development and testing of the instrument was carried out basing on review of literature.
The factors were tested using factor analysis and Cronbach alpha (á). The relationship
between the HRM practices subscales was examined using Pearson product-moment
correlations. It was found out that the items measuring HRM practices sub scales were
valid and reliable measures. The correlation results suggested that the HRM subscales
were independent with job design as the most independent subscale. It was concluded that
the instrument provides appropriate measures for the different HRM practices.
Keywords: Academic Staff, Factor Analysis, HRM Practices, Measurement,
Reliability, Scale Development, Testing, University
Introduction
Human Resource Management (HRM) practices refer
to a system that attracts, develops, motivates, and
retains employees to ensure the effective
implementation and the survival of the organisation
and its members (Tan & Nasurdin, 2011). Indermun
(2014) suggests that HRM practices are a set of
internally consistent policies and practices designed
and implemented to ensure that an organisation's
human capital contribute towards the achievement of
its objectives. There are several HRM practices,
namely recruitment, selection, job design,
performance appraisal, training, promotion,
participation, rewards, job security and safety, and
grievances handling. Recruitment is the searching for
and obtaining potential job candidates in sufficient
numbers and quality so that the organisation can
select the most appropriate people to fill its job needs
(Georgia, George & Labros,
2013). Selection is the process of assessing the
suitability of candidates by predicting the extent to
which they will be able to carry out a role
successfully (Armstrong, 2010). Job design
according to Maxwell (2008) also referred to as job
redesign refers to any set of activities that involve
the alteration of specific jobs or interdependent
systems of jobs with the intent of improving the
quality of employee job experience and their on-
the-job productivity.
Performance appraisal refers to the systematic
evaluation of the employee with regard to his or her
performance on the job and his potential for
development (Toppo & Prusty, 2012). Training is a
systematic approach to learning and development to
improve individual, team and organisational
effectiveness (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009). Promotion
refers to an increase in job responsibility, scope,
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES:
131
authority, or level within or outside the
organisation (Singh, Ragins & Tharenou, 2009).
Employee participation refers to employees having
the opportunity to influence of decision-making
throughout the organisation (Busck, Knudsen &
Lind, 2010). Rewards are the benefits that arise
from performing a task, rendering a service or
discharging a responsibility (Agwu, 2013). Job
security refers to the perceived stability and
continuance of one's job while job safety deals with
the prevention of accidents and minimising the
resulting loss and damage to persons and property
(Armstrong, 2010). With grievance handling
mechanisms, van Huijstee, Ricco and Ceresna-
Chaturvedi (2012) indicate that they are
procedures that offer formalised means through
which individuals or groups negatively affected by
certain organisational activities and operations
can seek remedy.
Importance of Human Resource Management
Practices
Human resource management practices (HRM)
practices are of strategic significance to organisations
(Demo, Neiva, Nunes& Rozzett, 2012) . HRM
practices enhance employee capabilities, motivation,
and stability (Gellatly, Hunter, Currie & Irving,
2009). HRM practices (e.g. recruitment and
selection) that ensure selective staffing, job design,
comprehensive training,
p r o m o t i o n o p p o r t u n i t i e s a n d e m p l o y e
e participation) enhance employee capabilities. These
HRM practices help to increase feelings of internal
control (autonomy) and competence, which, in turn,
increase an employee's identification, involvement, and
emotional connection with the work and the
organisation hence commitment to the organisation
(Gellatly et al. 2009; Thusyanthy, 2014). Nieves and
Quintana (2016) state that HRM practices such as
recruitment procedures that give access to a large
number of qualified candidates, combined with an
adequate candidate selection process, can influence the
level of knowledge held by new employees, which is
necessary for better job performance.
With respect to job design, Thusyanthy (2014)
argues that job design directly affects employee's
training and development. For instance, the job
design aspect of job rotation increases the employee's
knowledge, skills and competency. Foss, Minbaeva,
Pedersen and Reinholt (2009) state that job design is
an antecedent of knowledge-sharing behaviours that
is sending and receiving knowledge. On the other
hand, training increases individual performance and
encourages employees to adjust their knowledge and
skills to organisational needs. Besides, training
encourages professional development helping
organisations build
idiosyncratic knowledge that is more valuable for the
organisations than for their competitors. In addition,
internal promotion policies allow firms to not only
take advantage of investment in training but also
incentivise employeesso they develop firm-specific
skills and knowledge (Nieves &Quintana, 2016).
Busck, Knudsen and Lind (2010) indicate that
employee participation leads to increased
productivity, greater responsibility and avoidance of
conflicts in connection with changes, and contributes
to a higher degree of well-being at work through
motivation and empowerment.
HRM practices (e.g. performance appraisal and
rewards) motivate employees' performance and
commitment (Gellatly et al., 2009). Ayers (2013)
specify that performance appraisals are the seminal
tool for linking individual performance to
organisational goals and outcomes. This linkage,
referred to as goal alignment, is important for
increasing organisational performance. Enhancing
organisational performance starts with aligning
individual performance with organisational goals and
subsequently holding those individuals accountable
for achieving organisational outcomes. Trivellas
(2009) argues that appraisal provides feedback
guidance in the context of an effective and more
complete system of performance management that
fosters employee motivation contributing to
increased commitment. With respect to rewards,
Stumpf, Tymon Jr, Favorito and Smith (2013)
indicate that these are either intrinsic or extrinsic.
Intrinsic rewards are based on employees getting a
positively valued experience from doing their work
such as experience of work as meaningful, the ability
to exercise some degree of choice, the experience of
progress and the development of a greater sense of
competence.
Extrinsic rewards to refer to valuable goals
that are external to the job itself that provide
satisfaction to individuals such as pay, job security,
supervisor and peers support among others
(Ganzach & Fried, 2012). Bartol and Srivastava
(2002) reports that intrinsic rewards have a positive
effect on feelings of self-determination that is
beneficial for intrinsic motivation. The intrinsic
motivation is a propellant of individual creativity in
an organisation. Dysvik and Kuvaas (2013) indicate
that intrinsically motivated employees are more
involved in their jobs and demonstrate greater effort
and goal attainment than those less intrinsically
motivated. However, extrinsically motivated
behaviours depend upon the perception of a
contingency between the behaviour and attaining a
desired consequence such as implicit approval or
tangible rewards or avoiding a negative consequence
such as punishment. Payrelates to increased
performance quantity, but not quality of
132
JOURNAL OF EDUCATION REVIEW VOL. 10. N0 1, JANUARY-MARCH 2018
work.
HRM practices (e.g. employment security and
effective grievance and dispute resolution processes)
provide supportive and secure working conditions
leading to employee stability (Gellatly et al., 2009).
Noble (2008) explains that within the classic
Maslow's hierarchy of needs, the notions of security
and safety occupy the second tier of the model,
suggesting that they are even more sophisticated
needs than the fundamental physiological concerns.
He argues that job security fears can lead to several
negative consequences, including decreased
satisfaction and a greater propensity to leave one's
job. Peene (2009) suggests that security and safety
build psychological contract between employee and
the organisation, which is an agreement about
employees' beliefs regarding the terms of
employment or, in other words, the perceived mutual
obligations between employer and employee. In this
respect, there is an exchange between job security
that is the obligation of the employer, and loyalty
that is the obligation of the employee. By perceiving
insecurity about the job on the part of the employees,
they will perceive the psychological contract as
violated by the organisation hence losing faith in the
dependability of the organisation.
According to Schreurs et al. (2012) uncertainty
will develop eliciting feelings of powerlessness,
alienation, and lack of control over their situation.
Employees will most likely interpret the environment
as stressful, have higher negative emotional
responses, and exhibit more strain. In such stressful
situations, employees will develop a detached
attitude to the job leading to lower levels of
performance. Pertaining to grievances handling
mechanisms, Zuwena (2014) contends that when a
conflict is not dealt with effectively, it may lead to a
breakdown in team interaction, causing errors and
poor performance. Chronic unresolved conflicts
increase the rate of employee turnover in
organisations and affect people and relationships
other than those initially affected such as external
stakeholders (customers) and investors. Gomathi
(2014) suggests that effective grievance handling is
an essential part of cultivating good employee
relations and running a fair, successful and
productive workplace. Owing to the importance of
HRM practices, the purpose of this study was to
develop and test an aggregate instrument of
measurement scales for the 10 HRM practices.
Literature Review
Scholars (e.g. Azmi, 2009; Bhanugopan, Aladwan
& Fish, 2013; Coelho, Cunha, Gomes & Correia,
2015; Demo et al., 2012; Zhai, Liu& Fellows, 2013)
have made attempts to develop and test HRM
practice measurement scales. For instance, Azmi
(2009) developed and tested a measure of HR using
top companies in India.HR was conceptualised using
two dimensions, namely Internal Fit with eight items
and External Fit with14 items. Internal Fit measured
how integrated the various sub functions of HR were.
It focussed on issues like presence of HR vision
existence of a coherent HR strategy, information
sharing among HR managers, inter-linkages between
HR sub-functions and allocation of budget for HR
sub functions among others. External Fit measured
whether the HR function was integrated with other
functional areas of the organization. It covered inter-
linkages between HR and other functions,
information sharing between managers of HR and
other functional areas, devolvement of HR
responsibility to line managers and involvement of
other departments in HR policies and activities.
Statistical tests indicated reliability and validity of the
factors with evidence of convergent and discriminant
validity for the scales.
Bhanugopan et al. (2013) carried out
structural equation model for measuring human
resource management practices in the Jordanian
organisations. The study used frontline employees'
of various industries associated with insurance,
finance, services, and accounting in Amman. Their
structural equation model for four domains, namely
staffing function (recruitment and selection),
learning or skills enhancement (training and
development), performance appraisal, and
incentives (rewards and benefits) supported the
construct validity for 15 items for a consolidated
HRM practices scale. The items in the measure
were five items for recruitment and selection, five
for training and development, one item for
performance appraisal, and four for rewards and
benefits. Coelho et al.(2015) developed and tested
a questionnaire for the HRM system using
employees from a variety of sectors in Portugal in
three studies. The HRM system domains measured
were performance appraisal, career development,
communication, performance pay, recruitment, and
selection. Psychometric properties of the measures
revealed good internal consistency reliability, item
reliability and construct reliability, as well as
convergent and discriminant validity.
Demo et al. (2012) carried out exploratory and
confirmatory factor analysis for human resources
management policies and practices scale (HRMPPS)
with employees from various organizations in Brazil
as the units of analysis. A six-factor model with 40
items that included six items on recruitment and
selection, 12 questions on involvement, six items on
training, development and education, six items on
work conditions, five items on competency
performance appraisal, and five items on rewards,
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES:
133
showed that they were valid and reliable. Zhai et al.
(2013) developed a measurement scale for human
resource practices using middle level staff in Chinese
construction organisations. Confirmatory and
exploratory factor analyses led to the development of
a 15-item measurement scale of HR practices
comprising four categories of HRM practice
measures, namely job description and participation
with six items, training with four items, staffing with
two items and rewards with three items. The studies
above reveal that there has been effort to develop and
test measurement scales for HRM practices.
However, the studies were skewed towards the
Western World such as Portugal (Coelho et al.,
2015), Southern American Countries such as Brazil
(e.g. Demo et al., 2012) and Asia such as India (e.g.
Azmi, 2009), Jordan (Bhanugopan et al., 2013) and
China ( Zhai et al., 2013).In addition, all these
measures carried out in sectors other than
universities.
On the other hand, there are a number studies
(e.g. Chen & Huang, 2009; Dwivedula & Bredillet,
2009; Negash, Zewude & Megersa, 2014; Oldham,
Kulik, Stepina, & Ambrose, 1986; Wan, Ong & Kok,
2002; Zulkiflee, Faizal, Shakizah & Durrishah, 2010)
who carried out different studies on the HRM
practices whose instruments were reviewed. Chen
and Huang (2009) examined the role of knowledge
management capacity in the relationship between
strategic human resource practices and innovation
performance using top executives of Taiwanese
firms. The instrument used in the study comprised f o
u r H R M p r act i ces , n a m e l y ; tr a in in g ,
compensation, performance appraisal, staffing
(recruitment and selection) and participation. Their
factor analysis and reliability test indicated that their
instrument was valid and reliable. In their study,
Dwivedula and Bredillet (2009) sought to understand
the constructs of work motivation in project-based
organisations using respondents from various
industries and different nationalities as units of
analysis. In their study, work motivation that covered
HRM practices was conceptualised in terms of
employee development, work climate, perceived
equity, work objectivity and job security. The
reliability test of their instrument indicated that the
instrument was reliable. Negash et al. (2014)
investigated payment, promotion, recognition,
working conditions and benefit towards academic
staffs work motivation in Jimma University.
Reliability test of their instrument indicated that
except for the domain of payment, the rest were
reliable measures.
Oldham et al. (1986) studied relations between
situational factors and the comparative referents
using employees from a variety of organisations in
the USA. In their instrument, two HRM practices,
namely; compensation (rewards) and job security
were considered. Their reliability tests revealed that
the instrument was reliable. Zulkiflee et al. (2010)
investigated the styles used in handling employee
grievances with heads of departments of the largest
telecommunication company in Malaysia as units
of analysis. Their factor analysis and reliability
tests revealed that their instrument was valid and
reliable. However, whereas the literature above
shows that valid and reliable instruments had been
developed through various studies, their efforts
were discrete. Besides, their purpose was not to
develop and test measurement scales and only one
study (Negash et al., 2014) was carried out in
Ethiopia in the African context. Hence, this study
developed and tested measurements scales for
HRM practices in the African context particularly
Uganda and in universities.
Methodology
Instrument Development. The researchers were
interested developing and testing measurement scales
for HRM practices in the context of academic staff in
universities. The research plan involved constructing
a survey of HRM practices with 10 constructs. These
HRM practices include recruitment, selection, job
design, training, appraisal, promotion, participation,
rewards, job security and safety, and grievances
handling. The researchers specifically designed the
instrument for academic staff in universities. The
first step in developing and testing measurement
scales for the HRM practices involved reviewing
studies on instrument development on HRM
practices and related fields. The studies included a
measure on HR internal fit and external fit, HRM
practices, strength of the HRM system and HRM
policies and practices scale. While developing this
instrument, the purpose remained clear that the items
included would measure HRM practices employed
by universities. Already existing surveys in various
fields such as Schmidt et al. (2009) provided
information on the methodology and approach (see
Table 1) that the researchers used as they generated
items designed to measure each of the 10 HRM
practices. The present study develops an instrument
that promises a starting point for work designed to
examine HRM practices in universities. Before
collecting data, preliminary validation of the
instrument was carried out using face validity on the
items in the instruments of various scholars that were
used to develop this instrument as presented in Table
1. Face validity was carried out to identify those
items that were applicable to university contexts that
were thus adopted for inclusion in this instrument.
The items were scaled using the five-point Likert
scale from a minimum of 1 for the worst case
scenario (strongly disagree) to a maximum of 5,
which was the best case scenario (Strongly agree).
134
JOURNAL OF EDUCATION REVIEW VOL. 10. N0 1, JANUARY-MARCH 2018
Table 1: Variables in the Instrument, their Sources and Reliabilities
Construct
Number of items
Source of instrument, number of items
and their
adapted
reliability (á)
Recruitment
4
Demo et al., 2012 (6 items; á = 0.84)
Selection
2
Chen & Huang, 2009 (3 items; á=0.82)
2
Wan, Ong & Kok, 2002 (7 items; á = 0.8324).
Job design
5
Dwivedula & Bredillet, 2009 (18 items; á = 0.85)
Appraisal
3
Chen & Huang, 2009 (3 Items; á = 0.90 )
3
Demo et al., 2012 (5 items; á = 0.86)
Training
4
Wan et al., 2002 (7 items; á = 0.83).
3
Demo et al., 2012 (6 items; á = 0.88)
Promotion
5
Negash, Zewude & Megersa, 2014 (6 items; á
=
2
0.77)
Chen & Huang, 2009 (3 items; á=0.76)
Participation
5
Demo et al., 2012 (12 items; á = 0.93)
Rewards
3
Oldham, Kulik,
Stepina & Ambrose,
1986 (10
3
Items; á = 0.70)
Demo et al., 2012 (5 items; á = 0.81)
Job security and
3
Oldham et al., 1986 (10 items; á = 0.87)
safety
2
Demo et al., 2012 (6 items; á = 0.84)
Grievances
5
Zulkiflee, Faisal,
Shakizah & Durrishah, 2010 (11
handling
items; á = 0.83-0.93)
mechanism
Research Participants. The sample comprised 301
respondents from seven universities that were four
public and three private universities. The public
universities were Busitema, Gulu, Kyambogo and
Mbarara University of Science and Technology
(MUST). The private universities Islamic
University in Uganda (IUU), Kampala
International University (KIU) and Ndejje. The
respondents were as described in Table 1.
Table 2: Respondents Background Characteristics
Item
Categories
Frequency
Percent
Ownership of the University the
Public
128
42.5
respondent worked in
Private
173
57.5
Total
301
100.0
Age group of the respondent in
Up to 30 years
61
20.3
years
30 but below 40
152
50.5
40 and above
88
29.2
Total
301
100.0
Sex of the respondent
Male
182
61.5
Female
114
38.5
Total
296
100.0
Highest level of education
Bachelor’s degree
33
11.0
attained by the respondent
Post graduate diploma
14
4.7
Master’s degree
183
61.0
PhD degree
70
23.3
Total
300
100.0
Marital status of the respondent
Single never married
49
16.3
Married
237
78.7
Widowed
9
3.0
Divorced
6
2.0
Total
301
100.0
Tenure in years of employment
Up to one
26
8.6
attained by the respondent in the
One but below five
93
30.9
current University
Five but below 10
136
45.2
10 and above
46
15.3
Total
301
100.0
Position of the respondent in the
Administrative position (e.g.
62
20.8
hierarchy of current University
Principal of a college, Dean of
a faculty, Head of institute,
Head of dept)
236
79.2
Strictly academic
Total
298
100.0
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES:
135
Data Analysis. The researchers used quantitative
research methods to establish the extent of the
validity and reliability of the instrument. The
validities of multi-item constructs of HRM
practices, namely recruitment, selection, job
design, appraisal, participation, training,
promotion, rewards, job security and safety and
grievances handling mechanisms were tested using
Factor Analysis. The Cronbach Alpha method was
used to test reliabilities of the constructs.
Results
In the presentation of the results, the first step
involved running a factor analysis on the items
within each subscale to ascertain covariation among
the items and whether the patterns fitted well into the
HRM practices constructs. Kaiser-Guttman rule
(which states that factors with Eigen values greater
than one should be accepted to identify a number of
factors and their constitution based on the data
analysis was used (Schmidt et al., 2009). In addition,
reliability tests were done for the items in each
subscale. During factor analysis, those items that split
loaded by loading highly on more than one
component (Table 7) were eliminated because they
were considered to be complex items (Yong &
Pearce, 2013). After eliminating split loading items,
reliability test was repeated on the remaining items
and Cronbach alphas for all the items in constructs
measuring HRM practices were above the benchmark
of á = 0.7 (Tavakol & Dennick, 2005). The results are
as presented in the subsequent confirmatory factor
analysis and reliability tables.
Recruitment.
Table 3 shows that factor analysis reduced the five
items of the first HRM practice ( recruitment ) into
one factor. The factors had an Eigen value of 2.414,
meaning that the factor accounted for 2.414/5 x 100
= 48.27% of the total variance among the five items.
Table 3: Factor and Cronbach Alpha for Items of Recruitment
Recruitment Items
Factor Loadings
Á
I was provided adequate relevant information about
0.794
0.722
this University at the time of recruitment
0.779
I was given adequate relevant information about this
job at the time of recruitment in this
University
0.693
I obtained the job in this University
after
information was officially disclosed to me on the
criteria to follow for me to get the job
0.661
I joined this University after information about the
availability of job was widely disseminated
0.509
My recruitment to this University was strictly based
on merit
Eigen value
2.414
% variance
48.27
Selection.
Table 4 shows that factor analysis reduced the four
items of the second HRM practice (selection) into
one factor. The factors had an Eigen value of 2.272,
meaning that the factor accounted for 2.272/4 x 100
= 56.794% of the total variance among the four
items.
Table 4: Factor and Cronbach Alpha for Items of Selection
Selection Items
Factor Loadings
á
To get the job in this University I went through a
0.817
0.740
rigorous selection process
0.815
I went through a competitive selection process to obtain
the job in this University
0.696
When I was being selected to work in this University, my
skills relevant to the job were evaluated
0.675
When I was being selected to work in this University, my
attitudes relevant to the job were evaluated
Eigen value
2.272
% variance
56.794
136
JOURNAL OF EDUCATION REVIEW VOL. 10. N0 1, JANUARY-MARCH 2018
Job Design.
Table 5 shows that factor analysis reduced the five
items of the third HRM practice (job design) into one
factor. The factors had an Eigen value of 2.647,
meaning that the factor accounted for 2.647/4 x 100
= 52.941% of the total variance among the five
items.
Table 5: Factor and Cronbach Alpha for Items of Job Design
Job Design Items
Factor Loadings
á
My job in this
University
is designed in such a way that
0.753
0.883
my strengths is fully evoked
My job in this
University
provides me a flexible time
schedule
0.817
My job in this
University
is designed in a way that
optimises my skills
0.808
The requirements of my job in this University accurately
0.539
reflect my understanding of the job
I have the opportunity to rotate appointments in this
University
0.505
Eigenvalue
2.647
% variance
52.941
Performance Appraisal.
Table 6 shows that factor analysis reduced the six
items of the fourth HRM practice (performance
appraisal) into one factor. The factors had an Eigen
value of 3.955, meaning that the factor accounted
for 3.955/6 x 100 = 65.909% of the total variance
among the six items.
Table 6: Factor and Cronbach Alpha for Items of Performance Appraisal
Performance Appraisal Items
Factor Loadings
á
The appraisal system of this University has a strong
0.879
0.894
influence on my performance
The appraisal system of
this University advances my
0.856
career
The performance appraisal system of this University is
0.836
fair
In this University my performance is measured on the
0.835
basis of objective results
In this University after every appraisal I receive feedback
0.753
about my performance
0.697
In this University I am appraised at regular intervals
Eigen value
3.955
% variance
65.909
Training.
Table 7 shows that factor analysis reduced the seven
items of the fifth HRM practice (training) into two
factors. The factors had Eigen values of 3.725
and1.019, meaning that the factors accounted for
3.725/7 x 100 = 65.909% and 1.019/7 x 100 =
14.556of the total variance among the six items.
Cronbach's alpha for this set of items was 0.894 for
the initial test of the items. After dropping the second
and seventh items that split loaded, the items became
more valid but less reliable (hence the reduction of á
from 0.853 to 0.801). But the final alpha (á = 0.801)
being above 0.7 ( Tavakol & Dennick, 2011)
indicates that the remaining items were internally
consistent and thus reliably measured training
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES:
137
Table 7: Factors and Cronbach Alpha for Items of
Training
Training Items
Factor Loadings
2
á
1
The training programmes available for
0.785
0.853*
me in this University are relevant to
the changing needs of my job
0.744
-0.503
0.801**
In this University I receive regular
training in the different aspects of my
job (dropped)
0.733
My training needs in this University
are identified through a formal
performance appraisal mechanism
0.732
My University provides me extensive
training to enhance my job
performance
0.702
In this University I have been
encouraged to participate in seminars
and workshops
0.716
The mentoring I have received in this
University has been vital to my job
performance
0.690
0.504
In this University I have been assigned
challenging jobs to evoke my skills
(dropped )
Eigen value
3.725, 14.556
% variance
53.209, 1.019
*Initial Cronbach Alpha
**Cronbach Alpha after dropping items two and seven that loaded highly on two components/ factors.
Promotion.
Table 8 shows that factor analysis reduced the
five items of the sixth HRM practice
(promotion) into one factor. The factors had an
Eigen value of 3.333, meaning that the factor
accounted for 3.333/5 x 100 = 66.651% of the
total variance among the five items.
Table 8: Factor and Cronbach Alpha for Items of Promotion
Promotion Items
Factor Loadings
á
Promotion in this University is based on merit
0.851
0.874
I have a clear understanding of the promotion
0.834
requirements of my job in this University
Management of this University has communicated the
0.832
promotion policy to me very clearly
The promotional opportunities available to me in this
0.800
University are satisfying
There is an opportunity for me to get promoted in this
0.762
University soon
Eigenvalue
3.333
% variance
66.651
Employee Participation.
Table 8 shows that factor analysis reduced the seven
items of the seventh HRM practice (employee
participation) into one factor. The factors had an
Eigenvalue of 4.515, meaning that the factor
accounted for 4.515/7 x 100 = 64.494% of the
total variance among the seven items.
138
JOURNAL OF EDUCATION REVIEW VOL. 10. N0 1, JANUARY-MARCH 2018
Table 8: Factor and Cronbach Alpha for Items of Employee Participation
Employee Participation Items
Factor Loadings
á
I feel am equitably involved in the activities of this
0.871
0.907
University
I am encouraged to participate in problem solving matters
0.851
in this University
Open and honest self-expression is promoted in this
0.841
University
I am given opportunity to suggest improvements in the
0.831
way things are done in this University
0.804
I am involved in decision making in this University
I participate in different administrative activities in this
0.733
University freely
I am treated with respect in the handling of the activities of
0.670
this
University
Eigen value
4.515
% variance
64.494
Rewards.
Table 9 shows that factor analysis reduced the six
items of the eight HRM practice (rewards) into one
factor. The factors had an Eigen value of 4.089,
meaning that the factor accounted for 4.089/6 x 100
= 68.145% of the total variance among the six items.
Table 9: Factor and Cronbach Alpha for Items of Rewards
Rewards Items
Factor Loadings
á
The rewards/ remuneration I receive from this
University
0.887
0.901
are comparable to the market
I am satisfied with the rewards/ remuneration I receive
0.881
from this University
Rewards/ remuneration are fairly distributed in this
0.878
University
University
0.869
I am paid adequately for the work I do in this
My job performance is an important factor in determining
0.756
the rewards/ remuneration I receive in this University
My rewards/ remuneration in this University are/ is paid
0.643
timely
Eigen value
4.089
% variance
68.145
Job Security and Safety.
had an Eigen value of 2.822, meaning that the
Table 10 shows that factor analysis reduced the
factor accounted for 2.822/6 x 100 = 56.440% of
five items of the ninth HRM practice (job
the total variance among the five items.
security and safety) into one factor. The factors
Table 10: Factor and Cronbach Alpha for Items ofJob Security and Safety
Job Security and Safety Items
Factor Loadings
á
I find this University a good
place for me to work in
0.831
0.801
My personal safety in the University is guaranteed as I
0.787
carry out my work
University as long as I
I am assured of my job in this
0.746
continue performing
0.742
In this University staff are rarely made redundant
The place from where I work in this University has proper
0.638
hygiene conditions.
Eigenvalue
2.822
% variance
56.440
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES:
139
Grievance Handling Mechanisms.
Table 11 shows that factor analysis reduced the
five items of the tenth HRM practice (grievance
handling mechanisms) into one factor. The factors
had an Eigen value of 3.269, meaning that the
factor accounted for 3.269/5 x 100 = 65.390% of
the total variance among the five items.
Table 11: Factor and Cronbach Alpha for Items of Grievance Handling Mechanisms
Grievance Handling Mechanisms Items
Factor Loadings
á
In this University, problems concerning my job are first
0.882
0.864
investigated to find a solution acceptable me
The middle course is always found to resolve impasses
0.851
between me and my superiors in this University
My job concerns in this University are brought out in the open
0.814
so that they can be resolved in the best possible way
My superiors in this University work with me to find solutions
0.769
to the problems related to my job
My superiors in this University try to avoid unpleasant
0.715
exchanges with me
Eigen value
3.269
% variance
65.390
Correlations among the HRM practices
A final set of analysis examined the relationship
between the HRM practices subscales using
Pearson product-moment correlations (Table 12).
To examine the relationship between the HRM
practice subscales, average indices for the 10
HRM practices that were recruitment (Rec),
selection (Sel), job design (Jdes), performance
appraisal (PA), training (Train), employee
participation (EP), promotion (Promo), rewards
(Rew), job security and safety (JSS) and
grievances handling mechanisms (GHM) were
computed. With respect to sub scale of
recruitment, it weakly correlated with all the
subscales except job design. Selection weakly
correlated with five subscales namely training,
performance evaluation, training, employee
participation, rewards, job security and safety,
and grievances handling mechanisms. Job
design had no significant correlation with any of
the subscales. Performance appraisal had a
modest correlation with all the subscales except
job design. Training had a modest correlation
with all the subscales except job design while
selection had no correlation with job design.
Promotion, employee participation, rewards, job
security and safety, and grievances handling
mechanisms had modest correlation with all the
subscales except job design with which there
was no correlation. The correlation results
suggest that the HRM subscales were
independent with job design as the most
independent subscale.
Table 12: Inter-correlations of HRM Practices Measures
Rec
Sel
Jds
PA
Train
Prom
EP
Rew
JSS
GHM
Rec
1
0.460**
-0.040
0.393
**
0.423
**
0.443
**
0.338
**
0.389
**
0.389
**
0.366
**
Sel
1
-0.003
0.130
*
0.227
**
0.092
0.127
*
0.148
*
0.278
**
0.193
**
Jdes
1
-0.038
0.036
0.047
0.103
-0.069
0.037
0.035
PA
1
0.654
**
0.630
**
0.591
**
0.586
**
0.528
**
0.574
**
Train
1
0.496
**
0.583
**
0.504
**
0.484
**
0.535
**
Prom
1
.663
**
0.562
**
0.569
**
0.576
**
EP
1
0.588
**
0.557
**
0.606
**
Rew
1
0.667
**
0.618
**
JSS
1
0.686
**
GHM
1
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
140
JOURNAL OF EDUCATION REVIEW VOL. 10. N0 1, JANUARY-MARCH 2018
Discussion
The specific purpose in mind for designing this
instrument was to develop and test measurement
scales for HRM practices in the context of academic
staff in universities. The results reveal that this
instrument for the 10 HRM practices is a valid and
reliable measure. The internal consistency for all the
HRM practices was satisfactory since Cronbach
alphas (á) met the criterion of 0.70 (Tavakol &
Dennick, 2011).The results also showed that all the
items for the HRM practices were valid because the
factor loadings were above the cut off value of 0.50
and loaded highly one factor. The items for the first
HRM practice (recruitment) were reliable. These
results consistent with those of Demo et al. (2012)
whose reliability test for the same items found them
reliable. Similarly, the items for the second HRM
practice (selection) were reliable as was the case with
Chen and Huang (2009) and Wan et al.(2002)whose
reliability tests found the items reliability. The items
for the third HRM practice (job design) were reliable.
This was consistent with Dwivedula and Bredillet
(2009) because their reliability test indicated that the
items were reliable. The results for the fourth HRM
practice (performance appraisal) also indicated
reliability of the items.
Consistent with the results of Chen& Huang
(2009) and Demo et al. (2012), reliability test for the
fifth HRM practice (training) confirmed reliability of
the items. However, two items on training were
dropped because they split loaded on two factors. The
items for the six HRM practice (participation) were
reliable. These results consistent with those of Demo
et al. (2012) whose reliability test for the same items
showed that they were reliable. With respect to the
items for the seventh HRM practice (promotion), they
were also reliable as previously found out by Negash
et al. (2014). With regard to the items for the eighth
HRM practice (rewards), they were reliable as
already indicated by Oldham et al. (1986).The results
for the ninth HRM practice (job security and safety)
also indicated reliability of the items. This was
similar to the results of Oldham et al. (1986) and
Demo et al. (2012) whose reliability test for
suggested reliability of the items. Further still,
consistent with Zulkiflee et al. (2012) reliability test
for the tenth HRM practice (grievances handling
mechanisms) supported reliability of the items.
Overall, from the above results, it can be discerned
that this designed HRM practices instrument provides
appropriate measures for HRM practices in the
context of universities.
Conclusion
The instrument developed by this study provides
appropriate measures for the different HRM
practices. The 10 HRM practice subscales were
empirically supported. Therefore, this paper brings
various subscales measuring HRM practices
together. This paper provides a reliable and valid
instrument to measure HRM practices not only for
purposes of empirical research but also for the
purposes of organisations aiming at effective
management and high quality performance.
References
Aguinis, M., & Kraiger, K. (2009). Benefits of
training and development for individuals
and teams, organisations, and society.
Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 45-474.
d o i : 1 0 . 1 1 4 6 / a n n u r e v. p s y c h .
6 0 . 110707.163505
Armstrong. M. (2010). Armstrong's essential
human resource management practice: A
guide to people management. London, UK:
Kogan Page Limited.
Ayers, R. S. (2013). Building goal alignment in
federal agencies' performance appraisal
programs. Public Personnel Management,
4 2 ( 4 ) , 4 9 5 - 5 2 0 . d o i : 1 0 . 11 7 7 /
0 0 9 10260134960 77
Azmi, F. T. (2009) Measuring HRM-horizontal fit:
Scale construction and validation using
structural equation modelling. Management
and Labour Studies, 34(3), 329-350.
Bartol, K. M., & Srivastava, A. (2002).
Encouraging k n o w l e d g e s h a r i n g :
T h e r o l e o f organisational reward
systems. Journal of Leadership &
Organisational Studies, 9(1), 64-76.
Bhanugopan, R., Aladwan, K., & Fish, A. (2013).
A structural equation model for measuring
human resource management practices in
the Jordanian organisations. International
Journal of Organisational Analysis, 21(4),
565-587.doi: 10.1108/IJOA-09-2011-0510
Busck, O., Knudsen, H., & Lind, J. (2010). The
transformation of employee participation:
Consequences for the work environment.
Economic and Industrial Democracy, 31(3),
285–305. doi: 10.1177/0143831X0935121.
Chen, C. J., & Huang, J. W. (2009). Strategic
human resource practices and innovation
performance: The mediating role of
knowledge management capacity. Journal
of Business Research, 62(1), 104-
114.doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.11.016
Coelho, J. P., Cunha, R. C., Gomes, J. F., &
Correia, A. G. (2015). Strength of the
HRM system: The development of a
measure. Journal of Industrial Engineering
and Management, 8(4), 1069-1086.
Demo, G., Neiva, E. R., Nunes, I., & Rozzett, K.
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES:
141
(2012). Human resources management
policies and practices scale (HRMPPS):
Exploratory and confirmatory factor
analysis. BAR-Brazilian Administration
Review, 9(4), 395-420.
Dwivedula, R., & Bredillet, C. N. (2010). Profiling
work motivation of project workers.
I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u r n a l o f P ro j
e c t Management, 28(2), 158-165.
doi:10.1016/ j.ijproman.2 009.09 .001
Fong, C. Y., Ooi, K. B., Tan, B. I., Lee, V. H., & Yee-
Loong Chong, A. (2011). HRM practices and
knowledge sharing: An empirical study.
International Journal of Manpower,
32(5/6), 704-723.
Foss, N. J., Minbaeva, D. B., Pedersen, T., &
Reinholt, M. (2009). Encouraging
knowledge sharing among employees:
How job design matters. Human Resource
Management, 48 (6), 871 - 893 . doi:
10.1002/hrm.20320
Georgia, A., George, A., & Labros, S. (2013).
Employee recruitment and selection in the
insurance sector: The case of the Greek
insurance group. European Journal of
Management Sciences, 1(1), 1-20.
Gomathi, S. (2014). A study on grievance
management in improving employee
performance in a private enterprise.
Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences,
5(20), 20-29. doi: 10.5901/ mjss.2014.v
5n20p20
Indermun, V. (2014). Importance of human resource
management practices and the impact
companies face in relation to competitive
challenges. Singaporean Journal of
Business Economics, and Management
Studies, 2(11), 125-135.
Lewis, K. L., & Roux, G. (2011). Psychometric
testing of the inner strength questionnaire:
Women living with chronic health
conditions. Applied Nursing Research, 24
(3), 153 - 160 . doi:10 . 1016/j . apnr
.2009.06.003
Maxwell, J. R. (2008). Work system design to
improve the economic performance of the
firm. Business Process Management J o u
r n a l , 1 4 ( 3 ) , 4 3 2 - 4 4 6 . d o i :
10.1108/1463715081087 6715.
Negash, R., Zewude, S., & Megersa, R. (2014).
The effect of compensation on employees'
motivation in Jimma University academic
staff. Basic Research Journal of Business
Management and Accounts, 3(2), 17-27.
Nieves, J., & Quintana, A. (2016). Human resource
practices and innovation in the hotel
industry: The mediating role of human
capital. Tourism and Hospitality Research,
1–12. doi: 10.1177/1467358415624137
Noble, C. H. (2008). The influence of job security on
field sales manager satisfaction: Exploring
frontline tensions. Journalof Personal
Selling & Sales Management, 28(3), 247-
261. doi: 10.2753/PSS0885-3134280303
Oldham, G. R., Kulik, C. T., Stepina, L. P., &
Ambrose, M. L. (1986). Relations between
situational factors and the comparative
referents used by employees. The Academy
of Management Journal, 29(3), 599-608.
Peene, N. (2009). Occupational commitment as a
moderating variable insecure times: Job
insecurity and its consequences on
organisational commitment. Tilburg
University Human Resource Studies.
Retrieved from: arno . uvt . nl/show.
cgi?fid=97367
Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra,
P., Koehler, M. J., & Shin, T. S. (2009).
Technological pedagogical content
knowledge (TPACK) the development and
validation of an assessment instrument for
preservice teachers. Journal of Research on
Technology in Education, 42(2), 123-149.
Schreurs, B. H., van Emmerik, I. J., Günter, H., &
Germeys, F. (2012). A weekly diary study
on the buffering role of social support in
the relationship between job insecurity and
employee performance. Human Resource
Management, 51(2), 259-279.doi:10.1002/
hrm.21465
Singh, R., Ragins, B. R., & Tharenou, P. (2009).
Who gets a mentor? A longitudinal
assessment of the rising star hypothesis.
Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 74(1),
11-17. doi: 10.101 6/ j.jvb.2008.09.009
Snape, E., & Redman, T. (2010). HRM practices,
organisational citizenship behaviour, and
performance: A multi-level analysis.
Journal of Management Studies, 47(7),
1219-1247.doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.
00911.x
Tan, C. L., & Nasurdin, A. M. (2011). Human
resource management practices and
organisational innovation: Assessing the
mediating role of knowledge management
effectiveness. Electronic Journal of
Knowledge Management, 9(2), 155-167.
Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense
of Cronbach's alpha. International Journal
of Medical Education, 2, 53 - 55 . doi:
10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd.
Thusyanthy, V. (2014). A review on the relationship
variables to job design.International Journal
of Business Research and
142
JOURNAL OF EDUCATION REVIEW VOL. 10. N0 1, JANUARY-MARCH 2018
Management (IJBRM), 5(5), 18-87.
Toppo, L., & Prusty, T. (2012). From performance
appraisal to performance management.
IOSR Journal of Business and
Management (IOSRJBM), 3(5), 1-6.
van Huijstee, M., Ricco, V., & Ceresna-
Chaturvedi, L. (2012).How to use the UN
guiding principles on business and human
rights in company research and advocacy:
A guide for civil society organisations.
Amsterdam, Netherlands: SOMO.
Wan, D., Ong, C. H., & Kok, V. (2002). Strategic
human resource management and
organisational performance in Singapore.
Compensation & Benefits Review, 34(4),
33-42.
Yong, A. G., & Pearce, S. (2013). A beginner's guide
to factor analysis: Focusing on exploratory
factor analysis. Tutorials in Quantitative
Methods for Psychology, 9(2), 79-94.
Zhai, X., Liu, A. M., & Fellows, R. (2013). Human
resource practices in Chinese construction
o rg a n i z a t i o n s : D e v e l o p m e n t
o f a measurement scale.International
Journal of A r c h i t e c t u r e , E n g i n e
e r i n g a n d Construction, 2(3), 170-183.
Zulkiflee, D., Faizal, B. M. I., Shakizah, W. M. N., &
Durrishah, B. I. (2010, October). Grievance
handling mechanisms style among heads of
department at a telecommunication company
in Malaysia. International Conference on
Management, Economics and Finance
(ICMEF 2012), Hilton Hotel, Kuching,
Sarawak, Malaysia.
Zuwena, P. (2014). Best practice grievance
handling: Exploring its importance to the
internal/ external customer satisfaction
equation at a Caribbean University.
Journalism and Mass Communication,
4(2), 101-124.
