 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| 查看: 2711 | 回復(fù): 11 | ||
[求助]
各位大俠幫幫忙吧
|
|
1. Introduction In recent years, practitioners have been bombarded with exhortations to develop an organizational culture that is focused on external market needs, wants, and demands. This has become known as a market-oriented culture (see e.g.,Webster, 1994; Harris and Piercy, 1997). Paradoxically, at the same time, organizational theorists have extolled the virtue of an internal focus through developing appropriate human resource policies which are consistent with organizational strategy, that which has become known as strategic human resource management (SHRM) (e.g., Schuler and Jackson, 1987; Wright and McMahan, 1992; Lado and Wilson, 1994). Interestingly, both market orientation and SHRM have been (separately) linked to increased organizational performance (e.g., Jaworski and Kohli, 1993; Huselid, 1995; Pittet al., 1996; Guest, 1997). While the links between marketorientation and performance and between SHRM and performance have been examined in isolation of each other, both practices are founded on the management of organizational culture. In the case of market orientation,high levels of market orientation are argued to be dependent on the establishment of an organizational culture dominated by a focus on the market (Harris, 1998).Similarly, developing SHRM requires the nurturing of core organizational values and ensuring that these are consistent with the strategic direction of the business (Gennard and Kelly, 1994; Huselid, 1995). Surprisingly, despite similar underpinnings, no existing study has examined the association between the two or the impact that such an association may have on performance. 4. Conclusions and implications In summary, a review of existing literature finds that Strategic HRM and market orientation are both developed concepts which have been linked to organizational performance (see e.g., Jaworski and Kohli, 1993; MacDuffie, 1995). However, a review of literature pertaining to organizational culture (e.g., Ogbonna, 1992) and literature on the barriers to market orientation (e.g., Harris, 1998) finds that strategic HRM centers on managing organizational culture while market orientation can be facilitated or impeded by cultural barriers. Consequently, this paper theorizes that the association between market orientation and organizational performance is direct while the link between strategic HRM and organizational performance is indirect, being mediated by the extent of market orientation. Briefly,a study designed to investigate these issues demonstrates that strategic HRM and market orientation are both linked to organizational performance although strategic HRM is associated indirectly. The findings of the study lead to a number of interesting implications for both marketing and HRM theorists and practitioners. The first (and rather obvious) implication can be derived from the finding that both strategic HRM and market orientation are related to organizational performance. Consistent with a variety of extant theories and studies,evidence was found to suggest that both strategic HRM and market orientation are linked to the overall performance of an organization. Hence, organizations wishing to improve company performance should focus their attention on the needs, wants, and demands of the market, while paying attention to harnessing its human resource in order to ensure that these are met. More profound implications can be derived from the finding that Strategic HRM is not directly associated with performance but rather is purely indirectly linked to company performance. This finding may provide some justification for the claims of past theorists that the link between strategic HRM and performance is not as clear as is suggested by some authors (as noted by Wright and McMahan,1992; Koch and McGrath, 1996; Guest, 1997). This finding provides some support for the `universalist' perspective on HRM theorizing (Delery and Doty, 1996) in that Strategic HRM is found to be linked to performance (albeit indirectly). However, the findings also support aspects of the `contingency' perspective (Delery and Doty, 1996) through the implication that the success of strategic HRM is dependent on policies being consistent with the needs,wants, and demands of the market. Thus, for Strategic HRM to lead to increased performance, the policies and practices arising from it must not only be internally consistent they must also be focused on generating a market-led organizational culture. The findings demonstrate that the development of market orientation is partially dependent on the appropriate strategic management of the human resource facilitating the development of an appropriate organizational culture. Indeed, an examination of the coefficient of multiple determination (R2) in Table 5 finds that the measure of strategic HRM explains 25% of the variance of market orientation around its mean. Put differently, the level of strategic HRM may predict 25% of the level of market orientation exhibited by an organization. This finding may appear to some to pose an organizational paradox in that the development of an external focus appears to be dependent on an internal orientation. Thus, the avoidance of marketing myopia is contingent on a myopic focus on the organization. This argument would hold if strategic HRM is purely focused on internal dynamics as may have been the case with early research into HRM (see Delery and Doty, 1996). However, recent theorizing in strategic HRM emphasizes both an internal and external focus (see e.g., Huselid et al., 1997). A key issue that emerges is the need for an `appropriately' oriented strategic human resource. A contentious issue in management theory related to the development of sustainable competitive advantage is that the sources of such an advantage should be imperfectly imitable (Fiol, 1991;Reed and DeFillippi, 1990). Hence, Barney (1986; 1991) argues that providing an organizational culture is unique, it may provide a source of sustainable advantage over competitors.A potential implication of the findings of this paper is that a singular focus on discipline-specific sources of competitive advantage (such as market orientation or a flexible human resource policy) may not provide a unique and imperfectly imitable advantage, which may be sustained.However, it is possible to argue that a marketoriented culture developed as the result of a market-focused (strategic) HRM may provide the means to develop a unique and unimitable source of competitive advantage derived from both an internal and an external orientation. The findings, conclusions, and implications of this study are bounded by a series of limitations. These limitations suggest that caution is needed in interpreting parts of this study but they also indicate a number of potentially fruitfully avenues for future research. Firstly, the data presented in this paper was obtained using a cross-sectional methodology that precludes definitive causal claims (although it has been argued that statistical association in combination with extant theory provides adequate evidence to suggest tentatively some level of prediction). Furthermore, while the sample of the study comprises large organizations, the sample is culturally biased in that sample companies were based in the UK, suggesting that future research could examine these issues in alternative contexts. The study is focused on certain aspects of organizational performance, which a number of authors (see Guest, 1997) suggest overlooks other performance indicators (such as employee satisfaction and well-being). Consequently, a recommendation for future research is to broaden measures of performance to evaluate alternative predictors. Finally, this paper argues that valuable insights into the antecedents to market orientation and the strategic HRM-performance link have been gained via the study of such issues from alternative perspectives. Thus, it is suggested that researchers continue to draw upon diverse literatures and perspectives to provide illuminating insights into traditionally narrow disciplines. [ Last edited by lanmozhinian on 2010-3-21 at 21:34 ] |
回復(fù)此樓» 猜你喜歡
311求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有9人回復(fù)
-
302求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有4人回復(fù)
-
被我言中：新模板不強調(diào)格式了，假專家開始管格式了
已經(jīng)有4人回復(fù)
-
303求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有5人回復(fù)
-
考研求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有4人回復(fù)
-
085601專碩，總分342求調(diào)劑，地區(qū)不限
已經(jīng)有4人回復(fù)
-
085601材料工程專碩求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有5人回復(fù)
-
一志愿天津大學(xué)化學(xué)工藝專業(yè)（081702）315分求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有6人回復(fù)
-
能源材料化學(xué)課題組招收碩士研究生8-10名
已經(jīng)有6人回復(fù)
-
296求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有5人回復(fù)
2樓2010-03-21 22:10:54
3樓2010-03-21 22:23:42
sharecool
金蟲 (正式寫手)
- 應(yīng)助: 1 (幼兒園)
- 金幣: 1187.8
- 帖子: 352
- 在線: 40.6小時
- 蟲號: 821677
- 注冊: 2009-08-04
- 專業(yè): 環(huán)境化工
4樓2010-03-22 08:15:46
allan19821123
木蟲 (小有名氣)
- 應(yīng)助: 0 (幼兒園)
- 金幣: 3652.7
- 帖子: 97
- 在線: 48.3小時
- 蟲號: 288038
- 注冊: 2006-10-21
- 性別: GG
- 專業(yè): 生物大分子結(jié)構(gòu)與功能
5樓2010-03-22 08:40:14
6樓2010-03-22 09:38:04
cam967
金蟲 (著名寫手)
- 翻譯EPI: 21
- 應(yīng)助: 0 (幼兒園)
- 金幣: 1146.8
- 散金: 330
- 紅花: 2
- 帖子: 1082
- 在線: 268.7小時
- 蟲號: 549628
- 注冊: 2008-04-21
- 性別: GG
- 專業(yè): 高分子，納米，生物
7樓2010-05-29 19:32:00
wangqi2009
木蟲 (小有名氣)
- 翻譯EPI: 3
- 應(yīng)助: 1 (幼兒園)
- 金幣: 1390.3
- 散金: 7
- 帖子: 135
- 在線: 34.8小時
- 蟲號: 978521
- 注冊: 2010-03-22
- 性別: GG
- 專業(yè): 高分子物理與高分子物理化
8樓2010-05-30 09:52:22
noleg
金蟲 (小有名氣)
- 翻譯EPI: 52
- 應(yīng)助: 0 (幼兒園)
- 貴賓: 0.005
- 金幣: 1423.7
- 帖子: 161
- 在線: 43.9小時
- 蟲號: 932452
- 注冊: 2009-12-23
- 性別: GG
【答案】應(yīng)助回帖
★ ★
wypward(金幣+2):歡迎新蟲，鼓勵下 2010-05-31 23:09:13
wypward(金幣+2):歡迎新蟲，鼓勵下 2010-05-31 23:09:13
|
還是我第一個伸出手吧�？磥泶蠹覜]動力，看看樓主的出手吧。 1. 導(dǎo)論/序言 近年來，開業(yè)者們遭受了連珠炮似地規(guī)勸，要他們培育以外部市場需求為焦點的企業(yè)文化。這就是人所盡知的以市場為導(dǎo)向的文化（參見，如，韋勃斯特,1994；哈里斯和皮厄斯，1997）。自相矛盾的是，與此同時，來自企業(yè)的理論家們卻對聚焦于企業(yè)內(nèi)部的文化大贊其優(yōu)點，（它主張）形成符合企業(yè)戰(zhàn)略的適當?shù)娜肆Y源政策，這就是無人不曉的戰(zhàn)略性人力資源管理（SHRM）（例如，舒勒和杰克遜，1987；賴特和麥克馬漢，1992；拉朵和威爾森，1994）. 有趣的是，市場導(dǎo)向和戰(zhàn)略性人力資源管理兩者都（分別地）與增進企業(yè)業(yè)績表現(xiàn)相聯(lián)系（如，杰沃斯基和考利，1993；胡斯利得，1995；皮蒂特等，1996；蓋斯特，1997）。而市場導(dǎo)向與業(yè)績的聯(lián)系和戰(zhàn)略性人力資源管理與業(yè)績的聯(lián)系兩者都相互獨立地得到檢驗，兩種實踐都以企業(yè)文化管理為基礎(chǔ)。就市場導(dǎo)向而言，高水平的市場導(dǎo)向被認為有賴于市場決定的企業(yè)文化的建立（哈里斯，1998）。相似地，形成戰(zhàn)略性人力資源管理需要培育核心企業(yè)價值觀，并確保它們是與經(jīng)營的戰(zhàn)略方向是一致的（杰那德和凱利，1994；胡斯利，1995）。出人意料的是，盡管基礎(chǔ)相似，尚未有人研究兩者之間的聯(lián)系，以及這種聯(lián)系對業(yè)績的影響。 [ Last edited by noleg on 2010-5-31 at 13:40 ] |
9樓2010-05-31 13:37:50
yulang718
鐵蟲 (初入文壇)
- 應(yīng)助: 0 (幼兒園)
- 金幣: 1
- 帖子: 7
- 在線: 2.1小時
- 蟲號: 972150
- 注冊: 2010-03-15
- 性別: GG
- 專業(yè): 零件加工制造
10樓2010-05-31 22:55:33
相關(guān)版塊跳轉(zhuǎn)
我要訂閱樓主 lanmozhinian 的主題更新
| 最具人氣熱帖推薦 [查看全部] | 作者 | 回/看 | 最后發(fā)表 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 302求調(diào)劑 +4 | 呼呼呼。。。。 2026-03-17 | 4/200 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 考研求調(diào)劑 +3 | 橘頌. 2026-03-17 | 4/200 |
|
|
|
[考研] 能源材料化學(xué)課題組招收碩士研究生8-10名 +3 | 脫穎而出 2026-03-16 | 6/300 |
|
|
|
[考研] 材料，紡織，生物（0856、0710），化學(xué)招生啦 +3 | Eember. 2026-03-17 | 7/350 |
|
|
|
[考研] 301求調(diào)劑 +5 | yy要上岸呀 2026-03-17 | 5/250 |
|
|
|
[考研] 277調(diào)劑 +5 | 自由煎餅果子 2026-03-16 | 6/300 |
|
|
|
[考研] 332求調(diào)劑 +6 | Zz版 2026-03-13 | 6/300 |
|
|
|
[考研] 085600材料與化工求調(diào)劑 +5 | 緒幸與子 2026-03-17 | 5/250 |
|
|
|
[考研] 有沒有道鐵/土木的想調(diào)劑南林，給自己招師弟中～ +3 | TqlXswl 2026-03-16 | 7/350 |
|
|
|
[考研] 304求調(diào)劑 +4 | ahbd 2026-03-14 | 4/200 |
|
|
|
[考研] 070303 總分349求調(diào)劑 +3 | LJY9966 2026-03-15 | 5/250 |
|
|
|
[考研] 085601材料工程315分求調(diào)劑 +3 | yang_0104 2026-03-15 | 3/150 |
|
|
|
[考研] 材料專碩288分求調(diào)劑 一志愿211 +4 | 在家想你 2026-03-11 | 4/200 |
|
|
|
[考研] 一志愿中科院，化學(xué)方向，295求調(diào)劑 +4 | 一氧二氮 2026-03-11 | 4/200 |
|
|
|
[考研] 四川大學(xué)085601材料工程專碩 初試294求調(diào)劑 +4 | 祝我們好在冬天 2026-03-11 | 4/200 |
|
|
|
[考研] （081700）化學(xué)工程與技術(shù)-298分求調(diào)劑 +12 | 11啦啦啦 2026-03-11 | 35/1750 |
|
|
|
[考研] 301求調(diào)劑 +6 | Liyouyumairs 2026-03-11 | 6/300 |
|
|
|
[考研] 工科材料085601 279求調(diào)劑 +8 | 困于星晨 2026-03-12 | 10/500 |
|
|
|
[考研] 289求調(diào)劑 +3 | 李政瑩 2026-03-12 | 3/150 |
|
|
|
[考研] 333求調(diào)劑 +3 | 152697 2026-03-12 | 4/200 |
|