Case Study 4

Ahmed Mohammed Sayed

Mostafa is lecturer of management

in the School of Economics, Finance and

Management, University of Bristol. He

received his doctorate from Cardiff Business

School in the United Kingdom. His research

interests include high-performance human

resource practices, public service motivation,

and person–environment fi t. His work has

been published in journals such as Journal

of Public Administration Research

and Theory, Public Administration,

and International Journal of Human

Resource Management.

E-mail: [email protected]

Julian Seymour Gould-Williams

is Reader in human resource manage-

ment at Cardiff Business School, United

Kingdom. His research interests are in the

fi elds of human resource management,

leadership, public service motivation, and

employee performance and well-being.

He has published in Journal of Applied

Psychology, International Journal

of Human Resource Management,

Industrial and Labor Relations Review,

British Journal of Industrial Relations,

Journal of Public Administration

Research and Theory, and Public

Administration.

E-mail: [email protected]

Paul Bottomley is professor of quantita-

tive methods at Cardiff Business School. His

research interests focus on marketing issues

with an organizational twist. He has pub-

lished his work in journals such as Journal

of Marketing Research, Marketing

Science, Organizational Behavior and

Human Decision Processes, Journal of

Public Administration Research and

Theory, and Public Administration.

E-mail: [email protected]

High-Performance Human Resource Practices and Employee Outcomes: The Mediating Role of Public Service Motivation 747

Public Administration Review,

Vol. 75, Iss. 5, pp. 747–757. © 2015 by

The American Society for Public Administration.

DOI: 10.1111/puar.12354.

Ahmed Mohammed Sayed Mostafa University of Bristol, United Kingdom

Julian Seymour Gould-Williams Paul Bottomley

Cardiff University, United Kingdom

Abstract: Th is article responds to recent calls for research examining the mechanisms through which high-performance human resource practices (HPHRPs) aff ect employee outcomes. Using the theoretical lens of social exchange and process theories, the authors examine one such mechanism, public service motivation, through which HPHRPs infl uence employees’ aff ective commitment and organizational citizenship behaviors in public sector organizations. A sample of professionals in the Egyptian health and higher education sectors was used to test a partial mediation model using structural equation modeling. Findings show that public service motivation partially mediated the relationship between HPHRPs and employees’ aff ective commitment and organizational citizenship behaviors. Similar results were achieved when the system of HPHRPs was disaggregated to consider the individual eff ects of fi ve human resource practices.

Practitioner Points • Managers should endeavor to ensure that suffi cient resources are allocated to implement human resource

practices. • Investments in human resource systems may provide employees with the impetus needed to remain moti-

vated when their desire to serve the public, their commitment to the organization, or their willingness to exert discretionary eff ort at work ebbs.

• Investment in a single human resource practice rather than a collective system may result in undermining certain desired employee outcomes.

by which HPHRPs aff ect employees’ attitudes and behaviors remain poorly understood (Messersmith et al. 2011; Takeuchi, Chen, and Lepak 2009). Our research examines a salient mechanism through which HPHRPs might aff ect employee outcomes in public sector organizations, namely, public service motiva- tion (PSM).

Perry, Hondeghem, and Wise defi ne PSM as “a par- ticular form of altruism or prosocial motivation that is animated by specifi c dispositions and values arising from public institutions and [their] missions” (2010, 682). Researchers have noted the organizational antecedents of PSM, such as red tape, leader–member relationships, and coworker or supervisor infl uence (Camilleri 2007; Moynihan and Pandey 2007; Park and Rainey 2008; Taylor 2008; Wright, Moynihan, and Pandey 2011), along with the employee outcomes of PSM, such as job satisfaction, organizational com- mitment, and organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs) (Anderfuhren-Biget et al. 2010; Leisink and Steijn 2009; Naff and Crum 1999; Vandenabeele 2009). Only one study, however, has combined the two streams of research to consider the mediating role

High-Performance Human Resource Practices and Employee Outcomes: Th e Mediating

Role of Public Service Motivation

Management scholars have long advocated the adoption of strategically driven human resource (HR) activities for improving the functioning of organizations (Perry 1993). More recently, such activities have been referred to as “high- performance” human resource practices (HPHRPs), and they are typically viewed as a group of coher- ent, interrelated HR practices designed to promote employee motivation and commitment (Kehoe and Wright 2013; Messersmith et al. 2011). Scholars have assembled a convincing body of empirical evidence supporting the HPHRP–performance relationship based on the experiences of both private (Combs et al. 2006; Wright et al. 2005) and public sector organiza- tions (Messersmith et al. 2011). However, limited evidence exists across both sectors on the eff ects of HPHRPs on more proximal outcomes, namely, employee attitudes and behaviors, as most studies have considered distal organizational outcomes (e.g., fi nancial returns, profi tability, and service perfor- mance; see Kehoe and Wright 2013). Th us, while human resource management (HRM) commentators acknowledge that superior organizational performance is achieved through the workforce, the mechanisms

748 Public Administration Review • September | October 2015

HPHRPs and Social Exchange Relationships between employers and employees are predominantly based on social and economic exchanges (Kehoe and Wright 2013). Economic exchanges specify contractual arrangements, such as pay, working hours, and holiday entitlements. Th ese contractual obliga- tions are clearly defi ned and enforceable through legal sanctions (Gould-Williams 2007). Relationships developed on the basis of economic exchanges are typifi ed by discrete, fi nancially oriented interactions with no explicit expectation that performance will go beyond the terms of the contract (Shore et al. 2006). Social exchanges, on the other hand, involve the development of interde- pendent relationships in which unspecifi ed bidirectional transactions occur. In other words, “something” desirable is given by the “donor,” and at some future point in time, “something” desirable is returned by the “recipient” (Gould-Williams 2007). Such interdependence is based on “normative rules” of reciprocity (Gouldner 1960), which are the “defi ning characteristic” of social exchange relationships (Cropanzano and Mitchell 2005, 876). Because of the temporal gap between what is given and what is returned, successful social exchange relationships are characterized by high degrees of loyalty and trust between donor and recipient (Gould-Williams 2007).

Social exchange theory has been used extensively as a framework by both HRM (Kehoe and Wright 2013) and, to a lesser extent, public administration scholars (Gould-Williams 2007; Gould-Williams and Davies 2005) to explain the relationship between HPHRPs and employee outcomes. HPHRPs are typically conceived as a group of carefully designed combinations of HR practices meant to improve performance (Boselie, Dietz, and Boon 2005). Th e implementation of HPHRPs is premised on the assumption that organizations want to promote workforce commitment by investing in employees (the resource-based or “soft” approach to HRM; see Gould-Williams 2007). Th is is distinct from the control-based approach, in which employees are closely monitored and directed (the “hard” approach to HRM).

When organizations invest in HPHRPs, employees are assumed to view this as an expression of the organization’s trust and commit- ment to them, an appreciation of their work, and a desire to engage in a long-term relationship (Shore and Shore 1995; Sun, Aryee, and Law 2007). For instance, allowing employees to plan their work may signal that the organization trusts them. Personalized training and development programs can signal that organizations value employees, as they are prepared to invest in their careers and future prospects. Opportunities for promotion and job security may similarly signal the organization’s appreciation and recognition of employees’ long-term worth. Th erefore, in combination, HPHRPs should promote the view that organizations are desirous of form- ing a long-term social rather than a short-term economic exchange relationship with employees (Kehoe and Wright 2013).

Signals sent by organizations through HPHRPs are not always per- ceived by employees as intended. “All HRM practices communicate messages constantly and in unintended ways, . . . [thus] messages can be understood idiosyncratically” (Bowen and Ostroff 2004, 206; emphasis added). Two employees may have diff erent perceptions of the same set of HPHRPs. Th erefore, we will focus on employees’ “experiential-based perceptions” of HPHRPs rather than managers’ assessments of “intended” HR policy (Liao et al. 2009, 374). Also,

of civic duty, a component of PSM (Gould-Williams et al. 2014). Th is article aims to establish whether PSM acts as motivational mechanism that explains the relationship between HPHRPs and aff ective organizational commitment and OCBs.

We draw primarily on social exchange theory to explain why PSM may act as a mediator, an idea that is consistent with the prevailing view of both HRM (Kehoe and Wright 2013) and public adminis- tration scholars (Gould-Williams 2007; Gould-Williams and Davies 2005). According to Cropanzano and Mitchell, “Social exchange comprises actions contingent on the rewarding reactions of others, which over time provide for mutually and rewarding transactions and relationships” (2005, 890). Th e general idea of exchange is not new, having been fi rst discussed more than 70 years ago by Barnard (1938) and later developed by March and Simon (1958), who proposed that exchanges are based on organizational inducements invoking corresponding employee contributions. In our case, an organization’s investments in HPHRPs are considered the “induce- ments” or “initiating actions” of the exchange relationship, with employee attitudes and behavioral responses being the “contribut- ing” or “rewarding reactions.” We anticipate that such investments should promote feelings of self-effi cacy and encourage alignment of employee and organizational values, as evidenced by a heightened desire to serve the public.

We also draw on Perry’s (2000) process theory, which is often used by public administration scholars to explain the relationship between the organizational environment, PSM, and employee out- comes, including aff ective commitment and OCBs (Gould-Williams et al. 2014; Kim 2006; Leisink and Steijn 2009). According to pro- cess theory, the organizational environment infl uences PSM through socialization, eff ective job design, and performance feedback (see also Paarlberg, Perry, and Hondeghem 2008). In turn, PSM is pre- dicted to lead to desirable employee and organizational outcomes. In this way, we anticipate that from both a social exchange theory and a process theory perspective, PSM may mediate the HPHRP– employee outcomes relationship.

Our choice of employee outcomes is based on the following reason- ing. First, aff ective commitment and OCBs are central and promi- nent responses to positive social exchange relationships. According to Kehoe and Wright (2013), aff ective commitment refl ects the bond between the employee and organization, while OCBs are a logical consequence of such aff ectivity. Second, OCBs are conven- tionally considered “discretionary behaviors” that do not form part of the formal employment contract but are a refl ection of positive social exchanges. Th ird, both aff ective commitment and OCBs have been linked with enhanced organizational performance and thus have implications that extend beyond the individual (Messersmith et al. 2011).

Th is article is structured as follows. First, we use social exchange the- ory as our primary theoretical lens to explain the direct association between HPHRPs and employee attitudes and behaviors. Th ereafter, we draw on both social exchange theory and process theory to explain why PSM mediates this relationship. Following a description of our methodology, we present structural equation modeling results based on a sample of Egyptian public sector workers, and then we discuss the implications of our fi ndings for both theory and practice.

High-Performance Human Resource Practices and Employee Outcomes: The Mediating Role of Public Service Motivation 749

Hypothesis 1: HPHRPs will be positively related to employ- ees’ (a) aff ective commitment and (b) OCBs.

The Indirect Effect: The HPHRP–PSM Link Within the public sector, an additional outcome of the social exchange relationship is public service motivation, which we predict will mediate the link between HPHRPs and employee outcomes. Before discussing this relationship, we fi rst defi ne and demonstrate how PSM diff ers conceptually from employee outcomes.

PSM is defi ned as a person’s predisposition to respond to motives that are mainly or distinctly grounded in public institutions (Perry and Wise 1990). It also refers to the beliefs, values, and attitudes that go beyond self- and organizational interest and motivate individuals to participate in behaviors that are benefi cial to the community or to society in general (Vandenabeele 2007). Th ese same values are encap- sulated in the missions of many public organizations. Th us, PSM can be viewed as a prosocial value that encourages employees to engage in behaviors that are benefi cial to the community.

Conceptually, PSM diff ers from employee outcomes in “subtle, but theoretically important ways” (Gould-Williams et al. 2014, 939). Here we focus on three distinctions: its focus, proximity, and stability. As a concept, PSM captures the degree to which employees are committed to serving the public or the community at large. As such, the principal benefi ciary of employees’ motivation lies outside the organization. In contrast, employee outcomes relate directly to

employees’ work or job environment (e.g., job satisfaction, organizational commit- ment, organizational citizenship behaviors). Nevertheless, both PSM and employee outcomes independently aff ect organizational performance in the public sector (Kim 2005).

Second, with regard to the proximity of PSM to HPHRPs, we refer to process theory (Perry 2000). According to Perry, sociohis- torical context (an individual’s education, religious affi liation, and parental infl uence)

aff ects the extent to which an individual is public service motivated. Th us, sociohistorical factors shape an individual’s PSM before he or she enters the organization. In contrast, aff ective commitment and OCBs (along with other employee outcomes) are shaped and developed within the work context. Th erefore, employee outcomes can only become evident after an employee enters the organization, whereas PSM is already apparent prior to entry. Nevertheless, process theory predicts that the same workplace context that infl uences employee outcomes may also infl uence employees’ PSM.

Th ird, PSM has been conceptualized as a relatively stable variable that changes slowly over time (Wright and Grant 2010). Although there is limited evidence as to whether PSM should be regarded as trait- or state-like, it appears that as a value, PSM is more stable than employee outcomes (attitudinal and behavioral responses such as job satisfaction and OCBs), which may fl uctuate daily depending on employees’ work experiences. For instance, Ilies, Scott, and Judge describe OCBs as “episodic behavior” in which in-role behaviors are “punctuated by occasions when people do something that makes a diff erence” (2006, 561). Th erefore, while employee outcomes largely

employees’ perceptions of HR practices are more likely to be aligned with their work-related attitudes and behaviors. Moreover, we focus on the overall eff ect of a group or system of interrelated HR prac- tices rather than any single practice, as the eff ectiveness of individual practices is often dependent on complementary HR practices. For example, investments in employee training and skill development may only be eff ective when employees are provided with opportuni- ties to use their newly acquired skills through, among other things, autonomous work design. Th is approach is consistent with the general HRM literature and the social exchange view in that it is the combined eff ect of HR practices that infl uences employees’ percep- tions of the organization’s investment in them and, thus, the state of the social exchange relationship (see Jiang et al. 2012; Sun, Aryee, and Law 2007).

The Direct Effect of HPHRPs on Employee Outcomes According to social exchange theory, when employees perceive HPHRPs as indicative of the organization’s investment in them, they are likely to respond with positive attitudes (aff ective com- mitment) and behaviors (OCBs). Aff ective commitment refers to an employee’s emotional attachment to the organization, and it represents one of Allen and Meyer’s (1990) three dimensions of organizational commitment. Employees who are aff ectively com- mitted or emotionally attached to the organization will stay with their organization because they want to, not because they have to (continuance) or feel they ought to (normative). In doing so, Kehoe and Wright contend, aff ectively committed employees will have “a sense of pride at being part of the organiza- tion” (2013, 371). Th us, when employees per- ceive HPHRPs as signaling a supportive work environment, they will feel motivated to work toward organizational goals and thus develop an aff ective bond with the organization. In other words, if the organization is commit- ted to them, they will commit to it (Shore et al. 2006). Similarly, from a process theory perspective, when the work environment promotes collaboration between employees through teamwork, training, and eff ective communication, the social interactions will provide opportunities for employee bonding and increased identifi cation and commitment to the organization (Perry 2000).

On the basis of social exchange theory, Kehoe and Wright (2013) suggest it is unlikely that employees’ aff ective commitment alone will be suffi cient to “balance the scales” given the high investments made by the organization in HPHRPs. Accordingly, employees may feel compelled to make “further contributions . . . to level the fi eld” (Kehoe and Wright 2013, 372) by displaying positive work-related behaviors, such as OCBs. OCBs have been defi ned as “individual behaviors that are discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system and that in the aggregate promote the eff ective functioning of the organization” (Organ 1988, 4). As such, OCBs go beyond task performance by capturing activities that are not contractually specifi ed and hence epitomize behaviors associ- ated with positive social exchanges. Public sector studies by Gould- Williams (2007), Boselie (2010), Gould-Williams et al. (2014), and Messersmith et al. (2011) support these claims. Th us, we hypoth- esize the following:

When employees perceive HPHRPs as signaling a support- ive work environment, they will feel motivated to work toward organizational goals and thus

develop an aff ective bond with the organization.

750 Public Administration Review • September | October 2015

Th ey will then be desirous of displaying attitudes and behaviors of benefi t to the organization, as evidenced by their aff ective com- mitment and displays of OCBs (Gould-Williams et al. 2014; Kim 2006, 2012; Leisink and Steijn 2009). HPHRPs are likely to promote such an environment as managers permit employees to

engage in autonomous work design, as well as listen to and communicate relevant issues with employees. Th erefore, we anticipate that HPHRPs will also have an indirect eff ect (through PSM) on employee outcomes as employees’ attitudes and behaviors will be consistent with their self-concepts. On the basis of process theory, we propose the follow- ing two hypotheses:

Hypothesis 3: PSM will be positively related to employees’ (a) aff ective commitment and (b) OCBs.

Hypothesis 4: PSM will mediate the relationship between HPHRPs and employees’ (a) aff ective commitment and (b) OCBs.

Method Research Setting Our sample included academics, administrators, physicians, nurses, and pharmacists from public sector organizations in Egypt. Access to organizations was obtained through personal contacts of a research team member in the area. Data were then collected from a convenience sample of employees within each organization. To reduce social desirability response bias, pen-and-paper question- naires were distributed during January 2012 by a member of the research team to individuals on a face-to-face basis during work- ing hours. Participants were reassured that all responses would be treated anonymously (Miao et al. 2013). Th e researcher returned to collect the completed questionnaires the following day and on two other occasions. Th e English-language questionnaire was back-trans- lated into Arabic and pre-tested with a group of Egyptian health and education professionals (Brislin 1970).

Sample Characteristics Of the 1,000 questionnaires distributed, 671 were returned, for a 67 percent response rate. Just over half the respondents were male (53.5 percent); 51 percent were aged 20–30, 22 percent were 31–40, and 27 percent were older than 40. With regard to educational back- ground, 31 percent had a doctorate, 21 percent a master’s degree, and 42 percent a bachelor’s degree, while 6 percent had vocational qualifi cations. In addition, 37 percent of respondents had worked for their current employer for less than 5 years, 25 percent between 5 and 10 years, and 38 percent more than 10 years.

refl ect situational infl uences at work, PSM is a more enduring indi- vidual value that is linked to the well-being of others. Nevertheless, we acknowledge that employees’ PSM is not impervious to mana- gerial infl uences, or benefi ciary contact, and thus has state-like characteristics (see Bellé 2013; Grant 2007).

From a social exchange theory perspective, we anticipate that employees reciprocate organizational investments in HPHRPs by becoming more empathetic toward the organization’s mission and more desirous of the organization being successful, as evident in increased PSM. In other words, we propose that investments in HPHRPs will result in the organization’s mission to serve the public becoming more salient to employees as their indebtedness increases.

Likewise, from a process theory perspective, the work environ- ment will infl uence employees’ PSM through HPHRPs in that training and development programs will not only equip employees with the skills needed to perform tasks, thus increasing their perceptions of self-effi cacy, but also provide organizations with oppor- tunities to reinforce desired employee values (PSM), attitudes, and behaviors. Eff ective communication systems can reinforce the importance of employees’ job roles and provide direction and feedback as they strive to achieve organi- zational goals. Job security and internal promotion will assist in retaining trained workers whose values, attitudes, and behaviors are consistent with the organization’s mission to serve the community. Although researchers have discussed the potential for HR practices to infl uence PSM (Giauque, Anderfuhren-Biget, and Varone 2013; Vandenabeele 2011), and Gould-Williams et al. (2014) provide evidence for a component of PSM, civic duty, here we empirically test this relationship using a complete measure of PSM.

Hypothesis 2: HPHRP will be positively related to employees’ PSM.

The Indirect Effect: The PSM–Employee Outcomes Link Process theory predicts that PSM will lead to desirable outcomes when employees can express their prosocial motivations to serve the public at work. Th is view is consistent with the self-concept (Shamir 1991), which asserts that individuals have multiple identities (e.g., father, teacher, musician, carer) and derive satisfaction from engag- ing in roles that are consistent with such identities. When individu- als primarily defi ne themselves as givers, they will seek to maintain their prosocial identities as one of the “most important motives, val- ues, and guiding principles in life” (Grant, Dutton, and Rosso 2008, 900). For instance, Gould-Williams et al. (2014) and Vandenabeele (2009) allude to the importance of the self-concept when they assert that PSM will be associated with positive attitudes and behaviors if organizations provide opportunities for employees to engage in meaningful public service. Th is can be achieved through employ- ees’ direct contact with service benefi ciaries or by receiving positive feedback relating to their role in the service delivery chain.

If we assume that public sector organizations are more likely to pro- vide work that is consistent with the prosocial identities of public service employees, then employees’ self-identities are reinforced.

HPHRPs PSM

Affective commitment

OCBs

Figure 1 Conceptual Model

Eff ective communication sys- tems can reinforce the impor- tance of employees’ job roles

and provide direction and feed- back as they strive to achieve

organizational goals.

High-Performance Human Resource Practices and Employee Outcomes: The Mediating Role of Public Service Motivation 751

Analysis Structural equation modeling was undertaken with AMOS18. We followed Anderson and Gerbing’s (1988) two-step approach, fi rst estimating the measurement model before considering the struc- tural model. Although the items were broadly normally distributed, to minimize type I error, models were estimated using maximum likelihood with bootstrapped standard errors based on 1,000 resa- mplings. Here, the resampled coeffi cient estimates served as a proxy for the sampling distribution of the population parameters (Im and Workman 2004). Confi rmatory factor analysis (CFA) assessed the factor structure, reliability, and validity of the four focal latent vari- ables. Before presenting the overall measurement model and testing for common method bias, separate models established the appropri- ateness of the two higher-order constructs for HPHRPs and PSM.

Measurement Validation Treating HPHRPs as a more general, superordinate concept that is manifest through individual HR practice subdimensions is justifi - able theoretically (Jiang et al. 2012). To determine empirically whether our fi ve HR practices refl ected such a higher-order con- struct, a second-order factor model was estimated. Th e model exhib- ited a satisfactory fi t (χ2165 = 851.255, p < .001; CFI [comparative fi x index] = 0.918, RMSEA [root mean square error of approximation] = 0.079, SRMR [standardized root mean square residual] = 0.059). All the standardized fi rst-order loadings were positive, substantial, and statistically signifi cant (not shown), suggesting that each HR practice was well defi ned, but more importantly, the second-order loadings were associated with the higher factor: training (0.851), promotion (0.858), job security (0.674), communication (0.860), and work design (0.751, p < .001).

With regard to PSM, one item was dropped from the attraction to policy making factor because it loaded weakly (0.22), and another was dropped from the commitment to public interest factor because of serious cross-loading. Th ereafter, the second-order measurement model exhibited a good fi t (χ240 = 172.323, p < .001; CFI = 0.955, RMSEA = 0.070, SRMR = 0.043). Again, all standardized second- order loadings were substantial and signifi cant: self-sacrifi ce (0.827), compassion (0.674), commitment to public interest (0.990), and attraction to policy making (0.436, p < .001). Th us, PSM was also treated at the more general, abstract, second-order level in the subse- quent structural model.

Overall Measurement Model Th e four focal constructs, comprising two fi rst-order (OCB and aff ective commitment) and two second-order factors (HPHRPs and PSM), were entered into a CFA to assess their psychometric properties. Results revealed a satisfactory fi t (χ2614 = 1154.612, p < .001; CFI = 0.913, RMSEA = 0.052, SRMR = 0.062), with

Measures Constructs were measured using multi-item scales derived from existing studies whenever possible (see appendix). All items were measured on Likert scales with the endpoints “strongly disagree” (1) and “strongly agree” (7).

HPHRPs Twenty items were selected from existing studies to measure our fi ve HPHRPs, which were consistent with social exchange theory. Th e practices are generally referred to as “soft” or “developmen- tal” in that their implementation is designed to promote worker well-being and enhanced commitment (Gould-Williams 2007). We were careful to avoid HR practices that emphasize economic rather than social exchanges (such as wages and performance- related pay). Our practices included (1) training and development, (2) job security, (3) autonomous work design, (4) communica- tion, and (5) promotion (Boon et al. 2011; Boselie 2010; Kehoe and Wright 2013; Morgeson and Humphrey 2006). Sample items included, “My organization off ers opportunities for training and development” (training); “Employees in this job can be expected to stay with this organization for as long as they wish” (job security); “My organization allows me to plan how I do my work” (autono- mous work design); “Th e communication between me and other employees at work is good” (communication); and “I have good opportunities of being promoted within this organization” (promo- tion). Cronbach’s alpha for these HPHRP factors ranged between 0.77 and 0.92.

PSM PSM was measured using a 13-item scale comprising four fi rst-order factors developed by Perry (1996) and refi ned by Giauque et al. (2011). A pre-test confi rmed its suitability for the Egyptian context. Attraction to public policy making (e.g., “I am very interested in politics”), compassion (“It is diffi cult for me to contain my feelings when I see people in distress”), and commitment to the public inter- est (“I unselfi shly contribute to my society”) were each measured with three items, while self-sacrifi ce (“I am prepared to make enor- mous sacrifi ces for the good of the society”) comprised four items. Cronbach’s alphas ranged from 0.65 to 0.82.

Affective Commitment Aff ective commitment was measured using an abridged three-item version of Meyer, Allen, and Smith’s (1993) scale. A sample item is “I feel emotionally attached to this organization” (α = 0.89).

OCBs Citizenship was also measured using an abridged three-item version of Lee and Allen’s (2002) scale. A sample item is “I off er ideas to improve the functioning of the organization” (α = 0.77).

Controls Initially, we controlled for the eff ects of employees’ age, gender, education, and tenure on PSM and outcome variables (OCBs and organizational commitment; see Messersmith et al. 2011; Meyer, Allen, and Smith 1993; Moynihan and Pandey 2007). Our results were highly consistent with and without their inclusion. Consequently, in the interest of precision and parsimony, and con- sistent with recent recommendations of Williams, Vandenberg, and Edwards (2009), we report the results “control free.”

Table 1 Intercorrelations and Reliability Estimates

Construct 1 2 3 4

1. HPHRPs 0.72 (0.84)* 2. PSM 0.30** 0.84 (0.76) 3. OCBs 0.61 0.62 0.73 (0.77) 4. Affective commitment 0.55 0.57 0.657 0.83 (0.87)

*Subdiagonal entries are the latent construct intercorrelations. The diagonal shows the square root of the AVE with composite reliability in parentheses. **All correlations above 0.2 are signifi cant at p < .001.

752 Public Administration Review • September | October 2015

was positively related to both OCBs and aff ective commitment (β = 0. 483 and β = 0.452, respectively, p < .001). Th us, consist- ent with hypotheses 3a and 3b, PSM was associated with positive work-related attitudes and behaviors. Together, the individual path coeffi cients provide prima facie evidence that PSM mediated the relationship between HPHRPs and employee outcomes.

Next, mediation tests of the indirect relationship between HPHRPs and each employee outcome were conducted using the Preacher- Hayes (2004) bootstrapped approach. Th e coeffi cient associated with the indirect path is labelled a * b, where a is the standardized path coeffi cient from HPHRPs to PSM and b is the standardized path from PSM to the respective employee outcome (see fi gure 2). For instance, the indirect eff ect of HPHRPs through PSM to OCBs was 0.144 (0.299 × 0.483). It was signifi cantly diff erent from zero (Sobel test = 3.71, p < .001). Th us, PSM mediated the relationship between HPHRPs and OCBs. Repeating the test for aff ective com- mitment (β = 0.135, Sobel test = 3.66, p < .001) revealed a similar conclusion in support of hypothesis 4. Nevertheless, the direct paths from HPHRPs to employee outcome remained statistically signifi - cant after accounting for PSM, indicating that PSM only acted as a partial mediator of this process and, by inference, that other media- tors await discovery (see the Discussion section).

Robustness Tests To examine the eff ect of each individual high-performance HR practice, we repeated the analysis fi ve times, replacing the second- order (HPHRP) factor with a fi rst-order practice factor. Model fi ts were good (see table 2), but, more importantly, each HR practice was positively related to PSM, which, in turn, was positively related to both organizational commitment and OCBs. Moreover, the Preacher-Hayes Sobel tests indicated that all indirect eff ects (5 practices * 2 employee outcomes) were signifi cant (p < .05). Th us, the individual practices “behaved” consistently, with PSM partially mediating these relations.

Finally, we determined the total eff ect of each HR practice on each employee outcome. Th e total eff ect is simply the sum of the direct and indirect standardized path coeffi cients [c´+ (a * b)]. For instance, the total eff ect of training on commitment was 0.487 [0.315 + (0.215 * 0.515)]. Examining the results from a practice- by-practice perspective revealed that training (0.487 versus 0.426), promotion (0.426 versus 0.396), and communication (0.606 versus 0.487) had a greater association with OCBs than organizational commitment. Conversely, job security (0.269 versus 0.210) and autonomous work design (0.396 versus 0.292) had a greater asso- ciation with organizational commitment than OCBs. Examining these results from an outcome-by-outcome perspective revealed that communication was the most important and job security the least important practice for promoting both OCBs and commitment.

Discussion Overall, our fi ndings are consistent with our hypotheses: employee perceptions of HPHRP are positively associated with PSM, aff ective commitment, and OCBs. Furthermore, PSM partially mediates the HPHRP–employee outcome relationship. Th us, according to social exchange theory, when organizations signal their desire to engage in social exchange relationships by investing in systems of HPHRPs, employees respond by becoming more empathetic toward the

all fi rst- and second-order loadings signifi cant (p < .001). For each latent variable, composite reliability was greater than 0.70, and aver- age variance extracted exceeded 0.50, indicating that each construct possessed high internal consistency. In addition, all constructs achieved discriminant validity based on Fornell and Larcker’s (1981) approach, as the square root of their average variance extracted estimates exceeded their corresponding interconstruct correlations (see table 1).

Common Method Variance Defi ned as artifi cial correlation among the constructs attributable to the measurement method employed (Podsakoff et al. 2003), com- mon method variance can bias survey-based results. As all variables were collected from the same respondents at the same time, the eff ects of common method variance were assessed using Harman’s test and the more stringent latent method factor approach (see Chang, Van Witteloostuijn, and Eden 2010). In the latter, each item loaded on its theoretical construct and the latent common method factor (Podsakoff et al. 2003). Th e impact on the intercorrelations (table 1) was negligible; all remained signifi cant. Moreover, the aver- age variance extracted by the common method factor was 0.21, well below the 0.50 threshold that Fornell and Larcker (1981) associated with a substantive construct. Th us, common method bias was not unduly problematic.

Structural Model To account for the association between OCBs and aff ective com- mitment, the assumption of independence between these latent variables’ residual errors was relaxed, and disturbances were allowed to correlate (see Im and Workman 2004). To test the mediating role of PSM, the signifi cance of individual path coeffi cients fi rst was assessed, and then the combined indirect eff ect was gauged using Preacher and Hayes’s (2004) bootstrapped variant of the Sobel test. Results are presented initially treating HPHRPs as a system of prac- tices (second-order factor), followed by practice-by-practice analyses.

Th e proposed structural model provided an adequate fi t to the data (χ2614 = 1154.612, p < .001; CFI = 0.913, RMSEA = 0.052, SRMR = 0.062). Together, HPHRPs and PSM explained 58.8 percent of the variance (R2 = 0.588) in OCBs and 48.4 percent in aff ective commit- ment. In addition, HPHRPs accounted for a modest 8.9 percent of the variance in PSM. As shown in fi gure 2, HPHRP had signifi cant positive eff ects on OCBs (β = 0.468, p < .001), aff ective commitment (β = 0.410, p < .001), and PSM (β = 0.299, p < .001). Th us, hypoth- eses 1a, 1b, and 2 were supported, as HPHRP enhanced employee work-related attitudes and desire to serve the public. Likewise, PSM

OCBs [c´] .483***

.299*** HPHRPs PSM

Affective commitment

.468***

.452***

.410***

[c´]

[a]

[b]

[b]

Figure 2 Structural Model Results (standardized coeffi cients)

High-Performance Human Resource Practices and Employee Outcomes: The Mediating Role of Public Service Motivation 753

desirable employee outcomes, managers should endeavor to ensure that suffi cient resources are allocated to implement HR practices. Further, the costs associated with HR practices not only involve fi nancial investments (e.g., in paying for training programs and eff ective communication systems) but workforce investments, too (e.g., retaining staff to promote job security and identifying quali- fi ed individuals for promotion). Such investments can signal the organization’s long-term commitment to the workforce.

Also, it is possible that managers’ adoption and ongoing invest- ments in HR systems may provide employees with the impetus needed to remain motivated when their desire to serve the public, their commitment to the organization, or their willingness to exert

discretionary eff ort at work ebbs. Meaningful communication may not only reassure employees that their contributions are valued but also reinforce the importance of their job and services off ered to the public. Investments in training and development programs should not only equip employees with job-related skills and the confi dence to deliver (increase their self-effi cacy) but also provide them the competencies needed to fulfi l their career aspi-

rations. However, investing in systems of HR practices is likely to pose a substantial challenge to managers in today’s effi ciency-driven climate. At the very least, our fi ndings will assist managers in mak- ing informed decisions, aware that their investments (or lack of ) in HR systems will aff ect workforce performance in important ways.

Finally, while the overall system of HPHRPs is positively associ- ated with PSM and employee outcomes, individual HR practices had diff erential eff ects. For instance, perceptions of job security were an important driver of PSM but had a much reduced eff ect on aff ective commitment and OCBs. In contrast, both communication and training and development programs were important drivers of aff ective commitment and OCBs but not PSM. Th erefore, although managers may opt to invest in a single HR practice rather than a collective system, we suggest that such selectivity may unintention- ally result in undermining a desired employee outcome.

Conclusion Identifying the mechanisms through which high-performance human resource practices aff ect employee outcomes has become of central importance to scholars in the HRM fi eld. Our article

organization’s mission and reciprocate with attitudes and behaviors of benefi t to the organization. In addition, all fi ve HR practices used in our system had positive eff ects on PSM, organizational commitment, and OCBs. However, the relative association of each HR practice diff ered across the employee outcomes and PSM (see table 2). Th is suggests that PSM is both conceptually and empiri- cally diff erent from the employee outcomes.

While prior public sector research has alluded to the importance of HR practices in promoting PSM and employee outcomes (Giauque, Anderfuhren-Biget, and Varone 2013; Vandenabeele 2011), our study empirically confi rms that employees’ percep- tions of HR practice aff ect these outcomes. Our results are consistent with previous research that has examined either organizational antecedents (Camilleri 2007; Moynihan and Pandey 2007; Vandenabeele 2011) or employee outcomes (Kim 2005; Naff and Crum 1999; Vandenabeele 2009) of PSM. Specifi cally, we demonstrate that after entry, an organization’s HPHRPs can infl uence employees’ PSM, which, in turn, is associated with desirable employee outcomes. However, the eff ect size of HPHRPs on PSM is relatively small (R2 = 0.08) but nevertheless consistent with Gould-Williams et al.’s (2014) study of Welsh civil servants. As we have considered just one of many possible “insti- tutional shapers of individual beliefs and behavior” (Moynihan and Pandey 2007, 41), we anticipate that the eff ects of HPHRPs in combination with other “institutional shapers” will be more substantial (Perry and Vandenabeele 2008).

Our study, using the full four-component measure of PSM, extends and confi rms research reported by Gould-Williams and colleagues (2014) based on a narrower single-component measure, civic duty. Similarly, our system of HR practices is guided by social exchange theory, which emphasizes socialization and adaptation, whereas Gould-Williams et al.’s study was based on recruitment, selection, and attrition criteria (Jiang et al. 2012; Wright and Grant 2010). Nevertheless, despite adopting a diff erent theoretical lens and meas- ures, our conclusions are consistent.

Th ese results have implications for managers who are interested in improving social exchanges in public sector organizations. As investments in HPHRPs are positively associated with PSM and

Table 2 Results of Individual HR Practice Models

Path Training Promotion Work Design Job Security Communication

HR practice → PSM 0.215*** 0.231*** 0.158** 0.270*** 0.267*** HR practice → Commitment 0.315*** 0.276*** 0.223*** 0.120** 0.357*** PSM → Commitment 0.515*** 0.519*** 0.548*** 0.551*** 0.487*** Sobel test 3.904*** 2.895** 3.550*** 3.770*** 3.731*** HR practice → OCBs 0.367*** 0.294*** 0.196*** 0.040 0.471*** PSM → OCBs 0.550*** 0.570*** 0.609*** 0.630*** 0.506*** Sobel test 3.937*** 2.929** 3.475*** 3.629*** 3.757*** Model fi t statistics χ2

(161) 296.563 312.552 290.573 275.560 314.312

RMSEA 0.051 0.053 0.049 0.046 0.054 CFI 0.959 0.947 0.958 0.958 0.947 SRMR 0.049 0.049 0.055 0.051 0.051

*p < 0.05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.

Meaningful communication may not only reassure employ- ees that their contributions are valued but also reinforce the importance of their job and

services off ered to the public.

754 Public Administration Review • September | October 2015

work on benefi ciaries. From a social exchange theory perspective, as organizations invest in HPHRPs, they may not only signal to their employees the extent to which they are valued but also help them understand how their work benefi ts others and, in so doing, enhance employee attitudes and behaviors (Grant 2007).

Finally, the generalizability of our fi ndings remains unknown. Th e data comprised a convenience sample collected from Egyptian higher education and health sector professionals. Nevertheless, our results are consistent with prior studies exploring either antecedents or consequences of PSM in both individualistic and collectivistic cultures (Gould-Williams et al. 2014; Kim 2012; Leisink and Steijn 2009). Th us, we are optimistic that future studies across diff er- ent cultures and public service settings will confi rm these results. In spite of these limitations, we have shown that PSM is a nota- ble mechanism by which HPHRPs are associated with desirable employee outcomes in public sector organizations.

References Allen, Natalie J., and John P. Meyer. 1990. Th e Measurement and Antecedents of

Aff ective, Continuance and Normative Commitment to the Organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology 63(1): 1–18.

Anderfuhren-Biget, Simon, Frédéric Varone, David Giauque, and Adrian Ritz. 2010. Motivating Employees of the Public Sector: Does Public Service Motivation Matter? International Public Management Journal 13(3): 213–46.

An derson, James C., and David D. Gerbing. 1988. Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach. Psychological Bulletin 103(3): 411–23.

Angle, Harold L., and James L. Perry 1983. Organizational Commitment: Individual and Organizational Infl uences. Work and Occupations 10(2): 123–46.

Barnard, Chester I. 1938. Functions of the Executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Bellé, Nicola. 2013. Experimental Evidence on the Relationship between Public Service Motivation and Job Performance. Public Administration Review 73(1): 143–53.

Boon, Corine, Deanne N. Den Hartog, Paul Boselie, and Jaap Paauwe. 2011. Th e Relationship between Perceptions of HR Practices and Employee Outcomes: Examining the Role of Person–Organization and Person–Job Fit. International Journal of Human Resource Management 22(1): 138–62.

Boselie, Paul. 2010. High Performance Work Practices in the Health Care Sector: A Dutch Case Study. International Journal of Manpower 31(1): 42–58.

Boselie, Paul, Graham Dietz, and Corine Boon. 2005. Commonalities and Contradictions in HRM and Performance Research. Human Resource Management Journal 15(3): 67–94.

Bowen, David E., and Cheri Ostroff . 2004. Understanding HRM–Firm Performance Linkages: Th e Role of “Strength” of the HRM System. Academy of Management Review 29(2): 203–21.

Brislin, Richard W. 1970. Back-Translation for Cross-Cultural Research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 1(3): 185–216.

Camilleri, Emanuel. 2007. Antecedents Aff ecting Public Service Motivation. Personnel Review 36(3): 356–77.

Chang, Sea-Jin, Arjen van Witteloostuijn, and Lorraine Eden. 2010. From the Editors: Common Method Variance in International Business Research. Journal of International Business Studies 41(2): 178–84.

Combs, James, Yongmei Liu, Angela Hall, and David Ketchen. 2006. How Much Do High-Performance Work Practices Matter? A Meta-Analysis of Th eir Eff ects on Organizational Performance. Personnel Psychology 59(3): 501–28.

Cropanzano, Russell, and Marie S. Mitchell. 2005. Social Exchange Th eory: An Interdisciplinary Review. Journal of Management 31(6): 874–900.

contributes to this literature by considering a mechanism of rel- evance to public sector organizations, PSM. Although prior research has evaluated the eff ects of organizational factors on PSM and, in turn, PSM on employee outcomes, we link the two streams of research together to show that PSM is a motivational mechanism through which HPHRPs infl uence aff ective commitment and OCBs.

As always, results must be discussed within the boundaries of the study’s limitations, which suggest interesting avenues for future research. First, the research design was cross-sectional, precluding casual inference. For instance, it is possible that employees who are highly committed to the organization are more likely to endorse its mission, goals, and values (encapsulated in PSM), given their attachment to and desire for the organization to succeed. Likewise, it is possible that as employee and organizational values align, perceptions of HPHRPs will be more favorable.

Second, social exchange relations have been analyzed from a static rather than dynamic perspective. Yet HR practices continuously send signals that employees may interpret in idiosyncratic and unintended ways (Bowen and Ostroff 2004). For instance, two employees may have similar perceptions of an individual HR prac- tice (or overall system) today. To one employee, this may constitute an improvement compared with “last quarter,” thereby signaling greater organizational support, while to another, this may be a dete- rioration, signaling less organizational support. Longitudinal data will enable the unique contribution of levels and changes in HR practice perceptions to be identifi ed and issues of casual inference addressed.

Th ird, the use of self-reported measures of OCBs, while consist- ent with other recent public sector studies (e.g., Taylor 2013), may have inadvertently infl ated observed correlations. To allay problems of common method bias (Podsakoff et al. 2003) and overreliance on weak post hoc statistical test procedures (Chang, Van Witteloostuijn, and Eden 2010), collecting data from multiple informants, such as supervisory ratings of employees’ OCBs and aff ective commitment, would be desirable. Nevertheless, PSM and HR practice perceptions would remain same-sourced. Alternatively, employee and managerial perspectives could be contrasted.

Fourth, the relationships between our focal constructs, as presented in fi gure 1, are premised on the norms of reciprocity. Th is asserts people will want to reciprocate past good deeds with positive future actions (Angle and Perry 1983). However, the empirical evidence suggests that indebtedness is a highly heterogeneous individual characteristic (Shore and Coyle-Shapiro 2003). When felt obliga- tion is high, individuals are likely to reciprocate strongly in the form of desirable employee outcomes. When felt obligation is lower, responses will be diminished. Research assessing the moderating role of employees’ perceived indebtedness should provide a more complete and nuanced understanding of our model’s relations.

Fifth, as PSM only partially mediates the HPHRP–employee outcomes relationship, other mediators await discovery. An interest- ing candidate is prosocial impact, a construct of central relevance to the public sector (Grant 2007). Prosocial impact captures employees’ perceptions of the importance and impact of their

High-Performance Human Resource Practices and Employee Outcomes: The Mediating Role of Public Service Motivation 755

March, James G., and Herbert A. Simon. 1958. Organizations. New York: Wiley. Messersmith, Jake G., Pankaj C. Patel, David P. Lepak, and Julian S. Gould-Williams.

2011. Unlocking the Black Box: Exploring the Link between High-Performance Work Systems and Performance. Journal of Applied Psychology 96(6): 1105–18.

Meyer, John P., Natalie J. Allen, and Catherine A. Smith. 1993. Commitment to Organizations and Occupations: Extension and Test of a Th ree-Component Conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology 78(4): 538–51.

Miao, Qing, Alexander Newman, Gary Schwarz, and Lin Xu. 2013. Participative Leadership and the Organizational Commitment of Civil Servants in China: Th e Mediating Eff ects of Trust in Supervisor. Supplement 1, British Journal of Management 24: S76–92.

Morgeson, Frederick P., and Stephen E. Humphrey. 2006. Th e Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ): Developing and Validating a Comprehensive Measure for Assessing Job Design and the Nature of Work. Journal of Applied Psychology 91(6): 1321–39.

Moynihan, Donald P., and Sanjay K. Pandey. 2007. Th e Role of Organizations in Fostering Public Service Motivation. Public Administration Review 67(1): 40–53.

Naff , Katherine C., and John Crum. 1999. Working for America: Does Public Service Motivation Make a Diff erence? Review of Public Personnel Administration 19(4): 5–16.

Organ, Dennis W. 1988. Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Th e Good Soldier Syndrome. Lexington, MA: Heath.

Paarlberg, Laurie E., James L. Perry, and Annie Hondeghem. 2008. From Th eory to Practice: Strategies for Applying Public Service Motivation. In Motivation in Public Management: Th e Call of Public Service, edited by James L. Perry and Annie Hondeghem, 268–93. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Park, Sung Min, and Hal G. Rainey. 2008. Leadership and Public Service Motivation in U.S. Federal Agencies. International Public Management Journal 11(1): 109–42.

Perry, James L. 1993. Strategic Human Resource Management. Review of Public Personnel Administration 13(4): 59–71.

———. 1996. Measuring Public Service Motivation: An Assessment of Construct Reliability and Validity. Journal of Public Administration Research and Th eory 6(1): 5–23.

———. 2000. Bringing Society In: Toward a Th eory of Public-Service Motivation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Th eory 10(2): 471–88.

Perry, James L., Annie Hondeghem, and Lois Recascino Wise. 2010. Revisiting the Motivational Bases of Public Service: Twenty Years of Research and an Agenda for the Future. Public Administration Review 70(5): 681–90.

Perry, James L., and Wouter Vandenabeele. 2008. Behavioral Dynamics: Institutions, Identities, and Self-Regulation. In Motivation in Public Management: Th e Call of Public Service, edited by James L. Perry and Annie Hondeghem, 56–79. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Perry, James L., and Lois Recascino Wise. 1990. Th e Motivational Bases of Public Service. Public Administration Review 50(3): 367–73.

Podsakoff , Philip M., Scott B. MacKenzie, Jeong-Yeon Lee, and Nathan P. Podsakoff . 2003. Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology 88(5): 879–903.

Preache r, Kristopher J., and Andrew F. Hayes. 2004. SPSS and SAS Procedures for Estimating Indirect Eff ects in Simple Mediation Models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 36(4): 717–31.

Shamir, Boas. 1991. Meaning, Self and Motivation in Organizations. Organization Studies 12(3): 405–24.

Shore, Lynn M., Lois E. Tetrick, Patricia Lynch, and Kevin Barksdale. 2006. Social and Economic Exchange: Construct Development and Validation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 36(4): 837–67.

Shore, Lynn M., and Jacqueline A-M. Coyle-Shapiro. 2003. New Developments in the Employee–Organization Relationship. Journal of Organizational Behavior 24(5): 443–50.

Fornell, Claes, and David F. Larcker. 1981. Structural Equation Models with Unobserved Variables and Measurement Error: Algebra and Statistics. Journal of Marketing Research 18(3): 382–88.

Giauque, David, Simon Anderfuhren-Biget, and Frédéric Varone. 2013. HRM Practices, Intrinsic Motivators, and Organizational Performance in the Public Sector. Public Personnel Management 42(2): 123–50.

Giauque, David, Adrian Ritz, Frédéric Varone, Simon Anderfuhren-Biget, and Christian Waldner. 2011. Putting Public Service Motivation into Context: A Balance between Universalism and Particularism. International Review of Administrative Sciences 77(2): 227–53.

Gouldner, Alvin W. 1960. Th e Norm of Reciprocity: A Preliminary Statement. American Sociological Review 25(2): 161–78.

Gould-Williams, Julian S. 2007. HR Practices, Organizational Climate and Employee Outcomes: Evaluating Social Exchange Relationships in Local Government. International Journal of Human Resource Management 18(9): 1627–47.

Gould-Williams, Julian S., Paul Bottomley, Tom Redman, Ed Snape, David J. Bishop, Th anawut Limpanitgu, and Ahmed Mohammed Sayed Mostafa. 2014. Civic Duty and Employee Outcomes: Do High Commitment HR Practices and Work Overload Matter? Public Administration 92(4): 937–53.

Gould-Williams, Julian S., and Fiona Davies. 2005. Using Social Exchange Th eory to Predict the Eff ects of HRM Practice on Employee Outcomes: An Analysis of Public Sector Workers. Public Management Review 7(1): 25–47.

Grant, Adam M. 2007. Relational Job Design and the Motivation to Make a Prosocial Diff erence. Academy of Management Review 32(2): 393–417.

Grant, Adam M., Jane E. Dutton, and Brent D. Rosso. 2008. Giving Commitment: Employee Support Programs and the Prosocial Sensemaking Process. Academy of Management Journal 51(5): 898–918.

Ilies, Remus, Brent A. Scott, and Timothy A. Judge. 2006. Th e Interactive Eff ects of Personal Traits and Experienced States on Intraindividual Patterns of Citizenship Behavior. Academy of Management Journal 49(3): 561–75.

Im, Subin, and John P. Workman, Jr. 2004. Market Orientation, Creativity, and New Product Performance in High-Technology Firms. Journal of Marketing 68(2): 114–32.

Jiang, Kaifeng, David P. Lepak, Jia Hu, and Judith C. Baer. 2012. How Does Human Resource Management Infl uence Organizational Outcomes? A Meta-Analytic Investigation of Mediating Mechanisms. Academy of Management Journal 55(6): 1264–94.

Kehoe, Rebecca R., and Patrick M. Wright. 2013. Th e Impact of High-Performance Human Resource Practices on Employees’ Attitudes and Behaviors. Journal of Management 39(2): 366–91.

Kim, Sangmook. 2005. Individual-Level Factors and Organizational Performance in Government Organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Th eory 15(2): 245–61.

———. 2006. Public Service Motivation and Organizational Citizenship Behavior in Korea. International Journal of Manpower 27(8): 722–40.

———. 2012. Does Person–Organization Fit Matter in the Public Sector? Testing the Mediating Eff ect of Person–Organization Fit in the Relationship between Public Service Motivation and Work Attitudes. Public Administration Review 72(6): 830–40.

Lee, Kibeom, and Natalie J. Allen. 2002. Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Workplace Deviance: Th e Role of Aff ect and Cognitions. Journal of Applied Psychology 87(1): 131–42.

Leisink, Peter, and Bram Steijn. 2009. Public Service Motivation and Job Performance of Public Sector Employees in the Netherlands. International Review of Administrative Sciences 75(1): 35–52.

Liao, Hui, Keiko Toya, David P. Lepak, and Ying Hong. 2009. Do Th ey See Eye to Eye? Management and Employee Perspectives of High-Performance Work Systems and Infl uence Processes on Service Quality. Journal of Applied Psychology 94(2): 371–91.

756 Public Administration Review • September | October 2015

Shore, Lynn McFarlane, and Ted H. Shore. 1995. Perceived Organizational Support and Organizational Justice. In Organizational Politics, Justice, and Support: Managing the Social Climate of the Workplace, edited by Russell S. Cropanzano and K. Michele Kacmar, 149–64. Westport, CT: Quorum.

Sun, Li-Yun, Samuel Aryee, and Kenneth S. Law. 2007. High-Performance Human Resource Practices, Citizenship Behavior and Organizational Performance: A Relational Perspective. Academy of Management Journal 50(3): 558–77.

Takeuchi, Riki, Gilad Chen, and David P. Lepak. 2009. Th rough the Looking Glass of a Social System: Cross-Level Eff ects of High-Performance Work Systems on Employees’ Attitudes. Personnel Psychology 62(1): 1–29.

Taylor, Jeannette. 2008. Organizational Infl uences, Public Service Motivation and Work Outcomes: An Australian Study. International Public Management Journal 11(1): 67–88.

———. 2013. Goal Setting in the Australian Public Service: Eff ects on Psychological Empowerment and Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Public Administration Review 73(3): 453–64.

Vandenabeele, Wouter. 2007. Toward a Public Administration Th eory of Public Service Motivation: An Institutional Approach. Public Management Review 9(4): 545–56.

———. 2009. Th e Mediating Eff ect of Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment on Self-Reported Performance: More Robust Evidence of the PSM–Performance Relationship. International Review of Administrative Sciences 75(1): 11–34.

———. 2011. Who Wants to Deliver Public Service? Do Institutional Antecedents of Public Service Motivation Provide an Answer? Review of Public Personnel Administration 31(1): 87–107.

Williams, Larry J., Robert J. Vandenberg, and Jeff rey R. Edwards. 2009. Structural Equation Modeling in Management Research: A Guide for Improved Analysis. Academy of Management Annals 3(1): 543–604.

Wright, Bradley E., and Adam M. Grant. 2010. Unanswered Questions about Public Service Motivation: Designing Research to Address Key Issues of Emergence and Eff ects. Public Administration Review 70(5): 691–700.

Wright, Bradley E., Donald P. Moynihan, and Sanjay K. Pandey. 2011. Pulling the Levers: Transformational Leadership, Public Service Motivation, and Mission Valence. Public Administration Review 72(2): 206–15.

Wright, Patrick M., Timothy M. Gardner, Lisa M. Moynihan, and Mathew R. Allen. 2005. Th e Relationship between HR Practices and Firm Performance: Examining Causal Order. Personnel Psychology 58(2): 409–46.

High-Performance Human Resource Practices and Employee Outcomes: The Mediating Role of Public Service Motivation 757

Appendix Questionnaire Items and Statistics

Constructs and Items Mean SD Factor Loadings

High Performance Human Resource Practices

Training and development

“My organization offers opportunities for training and development.” 3.642 2.000 0.810 “In my opinion, the number of training programs provided for employees by my organization is suffi cient.” 3.150 1.806 0.833 “When my job involves new tasks, I am properly trained.” 3.323 1.818 0.869 “My organization provides excellent opportunities for personal skills development.” 3.178 1.844 0.839

Job security

“Employees in this job can be expected to stay with this organization for as long as they wish.” 4.813 1.774 0.713 “Job security is almost guaranteed to employees in this organization.” 4.637 1.956 0.818 “If the organization was facing economic problems, employees would be the last to get downsized.” 4.730 1.803 0.582 “I am certain of keeping my job.” 5.166 1.717 0.653

Work design

“My organization allows me to plan how I do my work.” 3.308 1.918 0.729 “My organization allows me to make a lot of job decisions on my own.” 3.311 1.936 0.913 “My organization allows me to decide on my own how to go about doing my work.” 3.558 1.967 0.849 “My organization gives me considerable opportunity for independence and freedom in how I do the work.” 4.068 1.942 0.631

Communication

“The communication between me and other employees at work is good.” 3.566 1.815 0.775 “Management keeps me well informed of how well the organization is doing.” 5.490 1.250 0.629 “The communication between me and the managers/supervisors at work is good.” 5.108 1.562 0.716 “Employees in my organization regularly receive formal communication regarding company goals and objectives.” 3.877 1.760 0.659

Promotion

“I have good opportunities of being promoted within this organization.” 4.406 1.966 0.604 “The promotion process used by my organization is fair for all employees.” 4.003 1.990 0.753 “Employees who desire promotion in this organization have more than one potential position they could be promoted to.” 3.526 1.824 0.741 “Qualifi ed employees in this job have the opportunity to be promoted to positions of greater pay and/or responsibility within

the organization.” 3.792 1.869 0.719

Public Service Motivation

Attraction to public policy making

“I am very interested in politics.” 5.147 1.541 0.967 “I like to discuss political issues with others.” 5.189 1.537 0.872 “I don’t care much for politicians.” (Reverse-coded)* 4.712 1.831 —

Commitment to public interest

“I unselfi shly contribute to my society.” 5.928 0.945 0.823 “I would prefer seeing public offi cials do what is best for the society even if it harmed my interest.” 5.717 1.328 0.765 “I am very interested in what is happening in my society.”* 6.076 0.977 —

Compassion

“It is diffi cult for me to contain my feelings when I see people in distress.” 5.776 1.295 0.634 “I am often moved by the plight of the underprivileged.” 6.244 0.833 0.844 “I am often reminded by daily events about how dependent we are on one another.” 5.864 1.016 0.559

Self-sacrifi ce

“I am prepared to make enormous sacrifi ces for the good of the society.” 5.761 1.124 0.768 “Serving citizens would give me a good feeling even if no one paid me for it.” 6.035 1.120 0.698 “It is defi nitely more important to me to do good deeds than doing well fi nancially.” 5.925 1.168 0.676 “Making a difference in society means more to me than personal achievements.” 5.807 1.231 0.803

Organizational Commitment

“I feel emotionally attached to this organization.” 4.824 1.767 0.774 “I really feel as if this organization’s problems are my own.” 4.801 1.946 0.852 “I feel a strong sense of belonging to my organization.” 4.773 1.895 0.848

OCBs

“I offer ideas to improve the functioning of the organization.” 4.935 1.637 0.668 “I defend the organization when other employees criticize it.” 4.891 1.703 0.762 “I demonstrate concern about the image of the organization.” 5.909 1.332 0.759

*These items were deleted from the fi nal analysis.

Copyright of Public Administration Review is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.