Institutional and competitive drivers on managers' training and organizational outcomes

  1. Esteban Lloret, Nuria N.
  2. Aragón Sánchez, Antonio
  3. Carrasco Hernández, Antonio José
Revista:
Business Research Quarterly

ISSN: 2340-9444,  2340-9436

Año de publicación: 2014

Volumen: 17

Número: 4

Páginas: 242-258

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.1016/J.BRQ.2014.03.003 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Business Research Quarterly

Resumen

Studies of the relationship between employee training and outcomes at the company level, in general, do not produce conclusive results. The objective of this paper is to analyze the drivers and outcomes of managers training. Drawing on institutional and economic-rational perspectives, this research explores the reasons why firms train their managers and which outcomes improve in response to training, to explain the ambiguity of the training effect on performance. To achieve the main objective, an empirical study was carried out on 374 Spanish firms. Findings support the idea that managers training is driven by institutional forces, particularly normative and mimetic forces, and to a lesser extent by competitive factors. That implies two different kinds of outcome are achieved by training managers: organizational legitimacy improves as well as organizational performance. While previous studies focus on the rational economic side of the training–outcome relationship, this paper aims to show the importance of the institutional forces in this relationship, looking at drivers and outcomes and so providing further explanations of the effect of training on performance.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Alegre J., Lapiedra R., Chiva R. A measurement scale for product innovation performance. Eur. J. Innovat. Manag. 2006, 9(4):333-346.
  • Amhad S., Schroeder G. The impact of human resource management practices on operational performance: recognizing country and industry differences. J. Oper. Manag. 2003, 21:19-43.
  • Anderson J.C., Gerbing D.W. Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach. Psychol. Bull. 1988, 103(3):411-423.
  • Apospori E., Nikandrou I., Brewster C., Papalexandris N. HRM and organizational performance in northern and southern Europe. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2008, 19(7):1187-1207.
  • Aragón A., Barba M.I., Sanz R. Effects of training on business results. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2003, 14:956-980.
  • Araujo A., Barrutia J., Hoyos J., Landeta J., Ibañez P. Comportamiento de las empresas respecto a la formación continua de sus directivos. Cuadernos de Gestión 2006, 1(6):83-98.
  • Audea T., Teo S.T.T., Crawford J. HRM professionals and their perceptions of HRM and firm performance in the Philippines. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2005, 16:532-552.
  • Bagozzi R., Yi Y. Specification, evaluation, and interpretation of structural equation models. J. Acad. Market. Sci. 2012, 40:8-34.
  • Bagozzi R., Yi Y. On the evaluation of structural equation models. Acad. Market. Sci. 1988, 16(1):74-94.
  • Bansal P., Roth K. Why companies go green: A model of ecological responsiveness. Acad. Manage. J. 2002, 43(4):717-736.
  • Barney J.B. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J. Manag. 1991, 17:99-120.
  • Barreto I., Baden-Fuller Ch. To conform or to perform? Mimetic behaviour, legitimacy-based groups and performance consequences. J. Manag. Stud. 2006, 43(7):1559-1581.
  • Barrett A., O'Connell P.J. Does training generally work? The returns to in-company training. Ind. Labor Relat. Rev. 2001, 54(3):647-663.
  • Bartel A.P. Productivity gains from the implementation of employee trainings programs. Ind. Relat. 1994, 33(4):401-425.
  • Baum J.A.C., Oliver C. Institutional linkages and organizational mortality. Admin. Sci. Q. 1991, 36(2):187-217.
  • Becker G.S. El capital humano 1983, Alianza, Madrid.
  • Berrone P., Gelabert L., Fosfuri A., Gomez-Mejía L. Can institutional forces create competitive advantage? Empirical examination on environmental innovation, WP n° 723 2007, IESE Business School-University of Navarra.
  • Birdi K., Clegg C., Patterson M., Robinson A., Stride C.B., Wall T.D., Wood S.J. The impact of human resource and operational management practices on company productivity: a longitudinal study. Person. Psychol. 2008, 61:467-501.
  • Björkman I., Fey C., Park H.J. Institutional theory and MNC subsidiary HRM practices: evidence from a three-country study. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 2007, 38:430-446.
  • Black S., Lynch L. Human capital investments and productivity. Am. Econ. Rev. 1996, 86(2):263-267.
  • Boon C., Paauwe J., Boselie P., Den Hartog D. Institutional pressures and HRM: developing institutional fit. Person. Rev. 2009, 38(5):492-508.
  • Booth A., Francesconi M., Zoege G. Unions, training and wages: evidence for British men. Ind. Labor Relat. Rev. 2003, 57(1):68.
  • Boselie P. A balanced approach to understanding the shaping of human resource management in organisations. Manag. Rev. 2009, 20:90-108.
  • Boselie P., Dietz G., Boon C. Commonalities and contradictions in HRM and performance research. Hum. Resour. Manag. J. 2005, 15:67-94.
  • Boselie P., Paauwe J., Richardson R. Human resource management, institutionalization and organizational performance: a comparison of hospitals, hotels and local government. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2003, 14:1407-1429.
  • Boxall P.F. The strategic HRM debate and the resource-based view of the firm. Hum. Resour. Manag. J. 1996, 6(3):59-75.
  • Boxall P.F., Purcell J. Strategy and Human Resource Management 2003, Palgrave Macmillan, London.
  • Brandes P., Hadani M., Goranova M. Stock options expensing: an examination of agency and institutional theory explanations. J. Bus. Res. 2006, 59:595-603.
  • Budhwar P.S., Sparrow P.R. An integrative framework for understanding cross-national human resource management practices. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2002, 12:377-403.
  • Burke M.J., Day R.R. Accumulative study of the effectiveness of managerial training. J. Appl. Psychol. 1986, 71(2):232-245.
  • Byrne B. Structural Equation Modelling with EQS 2006, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., New Jersey. 2nd ed.
  • Campbell J.L. Institutional analysis and the paradox of corporate social responsibility. Am. Behav. Sci. 2006, 49:925-938.
  • Campos e Cunha R., Pina e Cunha M., Morgado A., Brewster C. Market forces, strategic management, human resource management practices and organizational performance. Manag. Res. 2003, 1:79-91.
  • Certo S.T., Hodge F. Top management team prestige and organizational legitimacy: an examination of investor perceptions. J. Manag. Issues 2007, 19:461-477.
  • Chou C.P., Bentler P.M., Satorra A. Scaled test statistic and robust standard errors for non-normal data in covariance structure analysis. Br. J. Math. Stat. Psychol. 1991, 44:347-357.
  • Clemens B.W., Douglas T.J. Understanding strategic responses to institutional pressures. J. Bus. Res. 2005, 58:1205-1213.
  • Collins C.J., Clark K.D. Strategic human resource practices, top management team social networks, and firm performance: the role of human resource practices in creating organizational competitive advantage. Acad. Manag. J. 2003, 46:740-751.
  • Collins D., Holton E. The effectiveness of managerial leadership development programs: a meta-analysis of studies from 1982 to 2001. Hum. Resour. Dev. Q. 2004, 15(2):217-247.
  • Comacchio A., Scapolan A. The adoption process of corporate e-learning in Italy. Educ. Train. 2004, 46(6/7):315-325.
  • Combs J.G., Michael S., Castrogiovanni G.J. Institutional influences on the choice of organizational form: the case of franchising. J. Manag. 2009, 35(5):1268-1290.
  • Dacin M.T., Oliver C., Roy J.P. The legitimacy of strategic alliances: an institutional perspective. Strat. Manag. J. 2007, 28:169-187.
  • Delmas M., Toffel M.W. Stakeholders and environmental management practices: an institutional framework. Bus. Strat. Environ. 2004, 13(4):209-222.
  • De Kok J. The impact of firm-provided training on production: testing for firm-size effects. Int. Small Bus. J. 2002, 20:271-295.
  • DiMaggio P.J., Powell W.W. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. Am. Sociol. Rev. 1983, 48:147-160.
  • DiMaggio P.J., Powell W.W. Introduction. The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis 1991, 1-38. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. W.W. Powell, P.J. DiMaggio (Eds.).
  • Faems D., Sels L., De Winne S., Maes J. The effect on individual HR domains on financial performance: evidence from Belgian small business. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2005, 16:676-700.
  • Farndale E., Paauwe J. Uncovering competitive and institutional drivers of HRM practices in multinational corporations. Hum. Resour. Manag. J. 2007, 17(4):355-375.
  • Farndale E., Brewster C. In search of legitimacy: personnel management associations worldwide. Hum. Resour. Manag. J. 2005, 15(3):33-48.
  • Fennell M.L., Alexander J.A. Organizational boundary spanning in institutionalized environments. Acad. Manag. J. 1987, 30(3):456-476.
  • Fey C., Björkman I. The effect of human resource management practices on MNC subsidiary performance in Russia. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 2001, 32(1 (First Quarter)):59-75.
  • Fleetwood S., Hesketh A. HRM-performance research: under-theorized and lacking explanatory power. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2006, 17:1977-1984.
  • Fleetwood S., Hesketh A. Theorising under-theorisation in research on the HRM-performance link. Person. Rev. 2008, 37(2):126-144.
  • Fornell C., Larcker D.F. Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: algebra and statistics. J. Market. Res. 1981, 18(3):7-23.
  • Gerbing D.W., Anderson J.C. An updated paradigm for scale development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment. J. Market. Res. 1988, 25(2):186-192.
  • Ghebregiorgis F., Karsten L. Human resource management and performance in a developing country: the case of Eritrea. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2007, 18:321-332.
  • Gooderham P., Nordhaug O., Ringdal K. Institutional and rational determinants of organizational practices: human resource management in European firms. Admin. Sci. Q. 1999, 44(3):507-530.
  • Green F., Machin S., Wilkinson D. Trade unions and training practices in British workplaces. Ind. Labor Relat. Rev. 1999, 52(2):179-195.
  • Greenwood R., Suddaby R., Hinings C.R. Theorizing change: the role of professional associations in the transformation of institutionalized fields. Acad. Manag. J. 2002, 45(1):58-80.
  • Guler I., Guillén M.F., Macpherson J.M. Global competition, institutions and the diffusion of organizational practices: the international spread of ISO 9000 quality certificates. Admin. Sci. Q. 2002, 47(2):207-232.
  • Hagardon A., Douglas Y. When innovations meet institutions: Edison and the design of electric light. Admin. Sci. Q. 2001, 46:476-501.
  • Hair J.F., Anderson R.E., Tatham R.L., Black W.C. Multivariate Data Analysis 2006, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
  • Harel G.H., Tzafrir S.S. The effect of human resource management practices on the perceptions of organizational and market performance of the firm. Hum. Resour. Manag. 1999, 38:185-199.
  • Harris J. Do firms do worse by doing bad? Financial misrepresentation and subsequent firm performance. Acad. Manag. 2007, (Best Conference Paper).
  • Hartcourt M., Lam H., Hartcourt S. Discriminatory practices in hiring: institutional and rational economic perspectives. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2005, 16:2113-2132.
  • Hillebrand B., Nijholt J., Nijssen E. Exploring CRM effectiveness: an institutional theory perspective. J. Acad. Market. Sci. 2011, 39:592-608.
  • Honnig B., Karlsson T. Institutional forces and the written business plan. J. Manag. 2004, 30(29):29-48.
  • Hoyle R.H., Panter A.T. Writing about structural equation models. Structural Equation Modeling 1995, 158-176. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. R.H. Hoyle (Ed.).
  • Hu L., Bentler P.M., Kano Y. Can test statistics in covariance structure analysis be trusted?. Psychol. Bull. 1992, 112:351-362.
  • Hunt J.W., Baruch Y. Developing top manager: the impact of interpersonal skills training. J. Manag. Dev. 2003, 22:729-752.
  • Huselid M., Jackson S., Schuler R. Technical and strategic human resource management effectiveness as determinants of firm performance. Acad. Manage. J. 1997, 40(1):171-188.
  • Jayawarna D., Macpherson A., Wilson A. Training commitment and performance in manufacturing SMEs. Incidence, intensity and approaches. J. Small Bus. Enterprise Dev. 2007, 14:321-338.
  • Jerez-Gómez P., Cespedes-Lorente J., Valle-Cabrera R. Training practices and organisational learning capability. Relationship and implications. J. Eur. Ind. Train. 2004, 28:234-256.
  • Kathri N. Managing human resource for competitive advantage: a study of companies in Singapore. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2000, 11:336-365.
  • Katou A., Budhwar P.S. The effect of human resource management policies on organizational performance in Greek manufacturing firms. Thunderbird Int. Bus. Rev. 2007, 49:1-5.
  • King S. Business benefits of management development. Manag. Dev. Rev. 1993, 6(4):38-40.
  • Koch M.J., MacGrath R.G. Improving labor productivity: does human resource management policies do matter. Strat. Manag. J. 1996, 17:335-354.
  • Kostova T., Roth K. Adoption of an organizational practice by subsidiaries of multinational corporations: institutional and relational effects. Acad. Manag. J. 2002, 45:215-233.
  • Kostova T. Transnational transfer of strategic organizational practices: a contextual perspective. Acad. Manage. Rev. 1999, 24(2):308-324.
  • Kostova T., Zaheer S. Organizational legitimacy under conditions of complexity: the case of the multinational enterprise. Acad. Manag. J. 1999, 24:64-77.
  • Landeta J., Barrutia J., Araujo A., Hoyos J. Claves del comportamiento de la empresa respecto a la formación continua de sus directivos 2007, Thomson-Civitas, Pamplona.
  • Landeta J., Barrutia J., Hoyos J. Management turnover expectations: a variable to explain company readiness to engage in continuous management training. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2009, 20:164-185.
  • Love E.G., Cebon P. Meanings on multiple levels: the influence of field-level and organizational-level meaning systems on diffusion. J. Manag. Stud. 2008, 45:239-267.
  • Mabey C., Gooderham P.N. The impact of management development on perceptions of organizational performance in European firms. Eur. Manag. Rev. 2005, 2:131-142.
  • Mabey C. Developing managers in Europe: policies, practices and impact. Adv. Dev. Hum. Resour. 2004, 6(4):404-426.
  • Mabey C., Ramirez M. Does management development improve organizational productivity? A six-country analysis of European firms. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2005, 16:1067-1082.
  • Magán A., Céspedes J. Difusión del downsizing en la empresa española. Análisis del modelo de dos etapas. Rev. Eur. Dirección Econ. Empresa 2007, 16(3):55-72.
  • Mazza C., Alvarez J.L. Haute couture and prêt-a-pòrter: the popular press and the diffusion of management practices. Organ. Stud. 2000, 21(3):567-588.
  • McEvoy G.M. Organizational change and outdoor management education. Hum. Resour. Manage. 1997, 36(2):313-351.
  • Meyer J.W., Rowan B. Institutionalized organizations: formal structure as myth and ceremony. Am. J. Sociol. 1977, 83:340-363.
  • Meyer J.W., Scott W.R. Centralization and the legitimacy problems of local government. Organizational Environment: Ritual and Rationality 1983, 199-215. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA. J.W. Meyer, W.R. Scott (Eds.).
  • Montoya-Weiss M.M., Calantone R. Determinants of new product performance: a review and meta-analysis. J. Prod. Innovat. Manag. 1994, 11(5):397-417.
  • Murphy G.D., Southey G. High performance work practices: perceived determinants of adoption and the role of the HR practitioner. Person. Rev. 2003, 32(1):73-92.
  • Nikandrou I., Apospori E., Panayotopoulo L., Stavrou E.T., Papalexandris N. Training and firm performance in Europe: the impact of national and organizational characteristics. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2008, 19(11):2057-2078.
  • Oliver C. Sustainable competitive advantage: combining institutional and resource-based views. Strat. Manag. J. 1997, 18:697-713.
  • Ordiz M., Fernández E. Influence of the sector and the environment on human resource practices' effectiveness. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2005, 16:1349-1373.
  • Osterman P. How common is workplace transformation and who adopts it?. Ind. Labor Relat. Rev. 1994, 47(2):173-188.
  • Paauwe J. HRM and Performance: Achieving Long Term Viability 2004, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  • Paauwe J., Boselie P. Challenging 'strategic HRM' and the relevance of the institutional setting. Hum. Resour. Manag. J. 2003, 13(3):56-70.
  • Paauwe J., Boselie P. HRM and Societal Embeddedness, The Oxford Handbook of Human Resource Management 2007, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  • Paauwe J., Boselie P. Challenging 'strategic HRM' and the relevance of the institutional setting. Hum. Resour. Manag. J. 2005, 13:56-70.
  • Pasamar S., Valle R. Presiones institucionales para la conciliación de la vida profesional y personal. Cuadernos de Economía y Dirección de la Empresa 2011, 14(4):259-268.
  • Paul A.K., Anantharaman R.N. Impact of people management practices on organizational performance: analysis of a causal model. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2003, 14:1246-1266.
  • Podsakoff P.M., MacKenzie S.B., Lee J.Y., Podsakoff N.P. Common method biases in behavioural research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 88:879-903.
  • Priem R.L., Butler J.E. Tautology in the resource-based view and the implications of externally determined resource value: further comments. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2001, 26(1):57-66.
  • Rao H., Henrich R.G., Davis G.F. Fool' gold social proof in the initiation and discontinuation coverage by Wall Street analysts. Admin. Sci. Q. 2001, 46:502-526.
  • Rothenberg S. Environmental managers as institutional entrepreneurs: the influence of institutional and technical pressures on waste management. J. Bus. Res. 2007, 60:749-757.
  • Ruef M., Scott W.R. A multidimensional model of organizational legitimacy: hospital survival in changing institutional environments. Admin. Sci. Q. 1998, 43:877-904.
  • Satorra A., Bentler P.M. Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis. Latent Variables Analysis: Applications for Developmental Research 1994, 399-419. A.V. Eye, C.C. Clogg (Eds.).
  • Scott W.R. Institutions and Organizations 2001, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. 2nd ed.
  • Som A. What drives adoption of innovative SHRM practices in Indian organizations?. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2007, 18(5):808-828.
  • Stavrou E.T., Brewster C. The configurational approach to linking strategic human resource management bundles with business performance: myth or reality?. Manag. Rev. 2005, 16:186-201.
  • Stirpe L., Trullen J., Bonache J. Factors helping the HR function gain greater acceptance for its proposals and innovations: evidence from Spain. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2013, 10.1080/09585192-2013-778320.
  • Storey D.J. Exploring the link, among small firms, between management training and firm performance: A comparison between the UK an other OECD countries. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2004, 15(1):112-130.
  • Suchman M. Managing legitimacy: strategic and institutional approaches. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1995, 20:571-610.
  • Teo H.H., Wei K.K., Benbasat I. Predicting intention to adopt interorganizational linkages: an institutional perspective. MIS Q. 2003, 27:19-49.
  • Tharenou P., Saks A.M., Moore C. A review and critique of research of training and organizational-level outcomes. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2007, 17:251-273.
  • Thomas T.E. Are business students buying it? A theoretical framework for measuring attitudes toward the legitimacy of environmental sustainability. Bus. Strat. Environ. 2005, 14(3):186-197.
  • Tolbert P.S., Zucker L.G. Institutional sources of change in the formal structure of organizations: the diffusion of civil service reform, 1880-1935. Admin. Sci. Q. 1983, 28:22-39.
  • Úbeda M. Training and business performance: the Spanish case. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2005, 16(9):1691-1710.
  • Van Eerde W., Simon K.C., Talbot G. The mediating role of training utility in the relationship between training needs assessment and organizational effectiveness. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2008, 19:63-73.
  • Vlachos I. The effect of human resource practices on organizational performance: evidence from Greece. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2008, 19:74-97.
  • West S.G., Finch J.F., Curran P.J. Structural equation models with non-normal variables: problems and remedies. Structural Equation Modelling: Concepts, Issues and Applications 1995, Sage Publications. R.H. Hoyle (Ed.).
  • Westphal D., Gulati R., Shortell S.M. Customization or conformity? An institutional and network perspective on the content and consequences of TQM adoption. Admin. Sci. Q. 1997, 42(2):366-394.
  • Wright P., MacMahan G. Theoretical perspectives for strategic human resource management. J. Manag. 1992, 18(2):295-320.
  • Wright P.M., Gardner T.M., Moynihan L.M., Allen M.R. The relationship between HR practices and firm performance: examining causal order. Person. Psychol. 2005, 58:409-446.
  • Wright P.M., McMahan G.C., McWilliams S.A. Human resources and sustained competitive advantage: a resource-based perspective. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 1994, 5(2):301-326.
  • Zheng C., Morrison M., O'Neill G. An empirical study of high performance HRM practices in Chinese SMEs. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2006, 17:1772-1803.
  • Zwick T. The impact of training intensity on establishment productivity. Ind. Relat. 2006, 45:1-23.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet