HRM Practices and Organizational Commitment: Test of a Mediation Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study was conducted to examine the mechanisms involved in observed relations between human resource management (HRM) practices and employee commitment. Employees (N = 281) from several organizations completed a survey that included measures of (a) the quality of HRM practices pertaining to performance appraisal, benefits, training, and career development used in their organizations, (b) procedural justice and organizational support, and (c) affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization. Structural equation modeling analyses revealed that relations between employees' evaluations of HRM practices and their affective and normative commitment were largely mediated by perceptions of organizational support and procedural justice. These findings support previous claims that, although HRM practices can be valuable tools in the establishment and maintenance of employee commitment, their effects are neither direct nor unconditional. Résumé Cette étude avait pour but d'examiner certains mécan‐ismes intervenant dans le lien entre les pratiques de ges‐tion des ressources humaines et l'engagement des employés. Des employés (N=281) de plusieurs organisations ont rempli un questionnaire incluant des mesures de: (a) qualité des pratiques de gestion des ressources humaines en matière d'évaluation du rendement, de compensation, deformation et de développement profes‐sionnel, (b) justice en matiere de procedure et soutien organisationnel, et (c) engagement organisationnel affectif, continuation, et normatif. Des analyses basées sur la modélisation d'équations structurelles ont révélé que les liens entre l'évaluation par les employés des pratiques de gestion des ressources humaines et leur engagement affectif et normatif étaient en grande partie médiatisés par leur perception du soutien organisationnel et de justice en matière de procedure. Ces résultats corroborent le fait que malgré l'importance des pratiques de gestion des ressources humaines dans l'étab‐lissement et le maintien de l'engagement des employés, leurs effets ne sont ni directs ni inconditionnels.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.060 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".