Volume 35, Issue 1 (Spring 2022)
JMDP 2022, 35(1): 81-115 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Mokhtarpour Asl H, Kameli M. A Model for Evaluating the Sustainable Performance of Human Resources. JMDP 2022; 35 (1) :81-115
URL: http://jmdp.ir/article-1-4360-en.html
URL: http://jmdp.ir/article-1-4360-en.html
1- Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Management and Accounting, Qazvin Branch, Qazvin, Islamic Azad University, Iran.
2- Department of Public Administration, Amin Police University, Tehran, Iran. , p.h.d.kameli@gmail.com
2- Department of Public Administration, Amin Police University, Tehran, Iran. , p.h.d.kameli@gmail.com
Abstract: (1926 Views)
Purpose: This research tries to reach an evaluation model for sustainable performance of employees in Mostazafeen Foundation Properties and Lands Organization.
Methodology: The research method was both quantitative and qualitative. The statistical population in the qualitative section included texts and themes, as well as organizational and academic experts. By applying snowball method as a sampling technique for in-depth interviews, seven organizational experts and seven academic experts were selected. The statistical population in the quantitative part included all employees and managers of this organization, from among of whom 152 individuals were selected as the statistical sample using Krejcie and Morgan table. Also, using Fuzzy Delphi technique, the statistical sample in the validation section of the identified components consisted of 10 academic experts who were selected by purposive judgment method. Then by using confirmatory factor analysis, prioritization of dimensions, components and indicators of the model were tested.
Findings: The proposed model contains three dimensions, eight components and twenty one indicators, which can be used as a proper framework for evaluating the sustainable performance of human resources. Besides, the model shows that the highest to the lowest ranks among the dimensions are respectively job quality, success, and sustainable behavior.
Originality: The presented model can help develop the existing literature and to identify the characteristics of employees' sustainable performance.
Implications: Testing the model showed that among the three main dimensions, sustainable behaviors including citizenship behavior and green behavior of employees have the lowest ranking. Therefore, it is suggested that the managers of the organization make plans to solve this problem.
Methodology: The research method was both quantitative and qualitative. The statistical population in the qualitative section included texts and themes, as well as organizational and academic experts. By applying snowball method as a sampling technique for in-depth interviews, seven organizational experts and seven academic experts were selected. The statistical population in the quantitative part included all employees and managers of this organization, from among of whom 152 individuals were selected as the statistical sample using Krejcie and Morgan table. Also, using Fuzzy Delphi technique, the statistical sample in the validation section of the identified components consisted of 10 academic experts who were selected by purposive judgment method. Then by using confirmatory factor analysis, prioritization of dimensions, components and indicators of the model were tested.
Findings: The proposed model contains three dimensions, eight components and twenty one indicators, which can be used as a proper framework for evaluating the sustainable performance of human resources. Besides, the model shows that the highest to the lowest ranks among the dimensions are respectively job quality, success, and sustainable behavior.
Originality: The presented model can help develop the existing literature and to identify the characteristics of employees' sustainable performance.
Implications: Testing the model showed that among the three main dimensions, sustainable behaviors including citizenship behavior and green behavior of employees have the lowest ranking. Therefore, it is suggested that the managers of the organization make plans to solve this problem.
Keywords: Sustainable Human Resource Performance, Themes Analysis, Fazzy Delphi, PLS, Mostazafeen Foundation Properties and Lands Organization.
Type of Study: Research |
Received: Nov 25 2021 | Accepted: Jun 12 2022 | ePublished: Nov 09 2022
Received: Nov 25 2021 | Accepted: Jun 12 2022 | ePublished: Nov 09 2022
References
1. Abid, G., Contreras, F., Ahmed, S., & Qazi, T. (2019). Contextual Factors and Organizational Commitment: Examining the Mediating Role of Thriving at Work. Sustainability, 11(17), 4686. [DOI:10.3390/su11174686]
2. Antón, J.-I., Fernández-Macías, E., & Muñoz de Bastillo, R. (2012). Identifying Bad-Quality Jobs across Europe. Are Bad Jobs Inevitable, 25-44. [DOI:10.1007/978-0-230-37023-4_2] [PMID]
3. Armstrong, M., & Taylor, S. (2020). Armstrong's Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice: Kogan Page Publishers.
4. Bozionelos, N., & Singh, S. K. (2017). The Relationship of Emotional Intelligence with Task and Contextual Performance: More Than It Meets the Linear Eye. Personality and Individual Differences, 116(1), 206-211. [DOI:10.1016/j.paid.2017.04.059]
5. Breaugh, J. A. (1999). Further Investigation of the Work Autonomy Scales: Two Studies. Journal of Business and Psychology, 13(3), 357-373. [DOI:10.1023/A:1022926416628]
6. Brumback, G. B. (1993). 16 Elephants Can't Do What a Change in Law Could. Public Personnel Management, 22(2), 237-242. [DOI:10.1177/009102609302200204]
7. Burkett, H. (2013). Sustainable Performance: The New Agenda for Adding Value. Performance Improvement, 52(4), 6-10. [DOI:10.1002/pfi.21338]
8. Chillakuri, B., & Vanka, S. (2020). Understanding the Effects of Perceived Organizational Support and High-Performance Work Systems on Health Harm through Sustainable HRM Lens: A Moderated Mediated Examination. Employee Relations: The International Journal, 44(3), 629-649. [DOI:10.1108/ER-01-2019-0046]
9. Choi, Y., Yoon, D. J., & Kim, D. (2020). Leader Behavioral Integrity and Employee In-Role Performance: The Roles of Coworker Support and Job Autonomy. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(12), 4303. [DOI:10.3390/ijerph17124303] [PMID] [PMCID]
10. Clark, A., & Postel-Vinay, F. (2005). Job Security and Job Protection, IZA Discussion Paper No. 1489. [DOI:10.2139/ssrn.670182]
11. Damghanian, H., Keshavarz, M., Ebrahimi, S. A., & Rastgar, A. (2020). The Role of Identity, Environmental Attitudes and Green Psychological Climate in Creating Environmental Citizenship Behavior. Journal of Environmental Science Studies, 5(2), 2597-2607. [http://www.jess.ir/article_107668.html]
12. De Croon, E. M., Blonk, R. W., De Zwart, B. C., Frings-Dresen, M. H., & Broersen, J. P. (2002). Job Stress, Fatigue, and Job Dissatisfaction in Dutch Lorry Drivers: Towards an Occupation Specific Model of Job Demands and Control. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 59(6), 356-361. [DOI:10.1136/oem.59.6.356] [PMID] [PMCID]
13. De Jonge, J., & Peeters, M. C. (2019). The Vital Worker: Towards Sustainable Performance at Work. In (Vol. 16, pp. 910): MDPI. [DOI:10.3390/ijerph16060910] [PMID] [PMCID]
14. De Spiegelaere, S., Van Gyes, G., & Van Hootegem, G. (2016). Not All Autonomy Is the Same. Different Dimensions of Job Autonomy and Their Relation to Work Engagement & Innovative Work Behavior. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 26(4), 515-527. [DOI:10.1002/hfm.20666]
15. Docherty, P., Kira, M., & Shani, A. R. (2008). What the World Needs Now is Sustainable Work Systems. In Creating sustainable Work Systems (pp. 27-48): Routledge. [DOI:10.4324/9780203890028-7]
16. Dorenbosch, L. (2014). Striking a Balance between Work Effort and Resource Regeneration. In Sustainability and Human Resource Management (pp. 155-180): Springer. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-642-37524-8_7]
17. Esser, I., & Olsen, K. M. (2012). Perceived Job Quality: Autonomy and Job Security within a Multi-Level Framework. European Sociological Review, 28(4), 443-454. [DOI:10.1093/esr/jcr009]
18. Gallie, D. (2007). Employment Regimes and the Quality of Work: OUP Oxford. [DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199230105.001.0001]
19. Golden, L., Wiens-Tuers, B., Lambert, S. J., & Henly, J. R. (2011). Working Time in the Employment Relationship: Working Time, Perceived Control and Work-Life Balance. In Research Handbook on the Future of Work and Employment Relations: Edward Elgar Publishing.
20. Haddadi, T., Salimi, M., & Jahanian, R. (2020). Providing a Conceptual Model for Performance Development of Human Resource with a Futurology Approach (Case Study of Mostazafan Foundation). The Journal of Modern Thoughts in Education, 16(1), 1-21. https://jmte.riau.ac.ir/article_1829.html
21. Hauff, S., & Kirchner, S. (2014). Cross-National Differences and Trends in Job Quality. Diskussionspapiere des Schwerpunktes Unternehmensführung am Fachbereich BWL der Universität Hamburg, 13(1), 1-15.
22. Horowitz, J. (2016). Dimensions of Job Quality, Mechanisms, and Subjective Well‐Being in the United States. Sociological Forum, 31(2), 419-440. [DOI:10.1111/socf.12251]
23. Hulland, J. (1999). Use of Partial Least Squares (PLS) in Strategic Management Research: A Review of Four Recent Studies. Strategic Management Journal, 20(2), 195-204. [DOI:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199902)20:23.0.CO;2-7]
24. Iqbal, Q., Ahmad, N. H., Nasim, A., & Khan, S. A. R. (2020). A Moderated-Mediation Analysis of Psychological Empowerment: Sustainable Leadership and Sustainable Performance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 262(1), 121429. [DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121429]
25. Jiang, W., Zhao, X., & Ni, J. (2017). The Impact of Transformational Leadership on Employee Sustainable Performance: The Mediating Role of Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Sustainability, 9(9), 1567. [DOI:10.3390/su9091567]
26. Khordehgir, S., Askari, A., & Ranjbar, M. (2017). The Investigation of Human Resource Development and Its Impact on the Effectiveness of Employees Performance in Awqaf and Charity Administration at Fars Province. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Administration, 8(30), 245-262. [http://jedu.miau.ac.ir/article_2406.html]
27. Khoreva, V., & Wechtler, H. (2018). HR Practices and Employee Performance: The Mediating Role of Well-Being. Employee Relations, 40(2), 227-243. [DOI:10.1108/ER-08-2017-0191]
28. Kira, M., & Lifvergren, S. (2014). Sowing Seeds for Sustainability in Work Systems. In Sustainability and Human Resource Management (pp. 57-81): Springer. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-642-37524-8_3]
29. Krausert, A. (2009). Performance Management for Different Employee Groups: A Contribution to Employment Systems Theory: Springer. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-7908-2197-0] [PMID] [PMCID]
30. Maley, J. F., Dabic, M., & Moeller, M. (2020). Employee Performance Management: Charting the Field from 1998 to 2018. International Journal of Manpower, 42(1), 131-149. [DOI:10.1108/IJM-10-2019-0483]
31. Manzoor, F., Wei, L., Bányai, T., Nurunnabi, M., & Subhan, Q. A. (2019). An Examination of Sustainable HRM Practices on Job Performance: An Application of Training as a Moderator. Sustainability, 11(8), 2263. [DOI:10.3390/su11082263]
32. Mirzaei Alamooty, V., Ataei, M., & Moghaddas, Z. (2020). An Explanatory Model for Individual Performance Based on a Commitment Human Resource Approach. Management and Development Process, 33(1), 3-26. [http://jmdp.ir/article-1-3544-fa.html] [DOI:10.29252/jmdp.33.1.3]
33. Nielsen, T. M., Hrivnak, G. A., & Shaw, M. (2009). Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Performance: A Meta-Analysis of Group-Level Research. Small Group Research, 40(5), 555-577. [DOI:10.1177/1046496409339630]
34. Papoutsi, A., & Sodhi, M. S. (2020). Does Disclosure in Sustainability Reports Indicate Actual Sustainability Performance? Journal of Cleaner Production, 260(1), 121049. [DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121049]
35. Peeters, M. C. W., Taris, T. W., & De Jonge, J. (2014). Introduction: People at Work. In M. C. W. Peeters, J. De Jonge, & T. W. Taris (Eds.), An Introduction to Contemporary Work Psychology (pp. 3-30). Wiley Blackwell.
36. Porath, C., Spreitzer, G., Gibson, C., & Garnett, F. G. (2012). Thriving at Work: Toward Its Measurement, Construct Validation, and Theoretical Refinement. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(2), 250-275. [DOI:10.1002/job.756]
37. Rafferty, Y., Friend, R., & Landsbergis, P. A. (2001). The Association between Job Skill Discretion, Decision Authority and Burnout. Work & Stress, 15(1), 73-85. [DOI:10.1080/02678370120791]
38. Rahmatinia, R., Salajegheh, S., & Mojibi, T. (2019). The Validity Assessment of the Performance Management Model of Security Organizations' Employees. Protective & Security Researches, 8(29), 151-184. [https://jpas.ihu.ac.ir/article_204904.html]
39. Rasool, S. F., Wang, M., Zhang, Y., & Samma, M. (2020). Sustainable Work Performance: The Roles of Workplace Violence and Occupational Stress. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(3), 912. [DOI:10.3390/ijerph17030912] [PMID] [PMCID]
40. Rehman, M. A., Seth, D., & Shrivastava, R. (2016). Impact of Green Manufacturing Practices on Organisational Performance in Indian Context: An Empirical Study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 137(1), 427-448. [DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.07.106]
41. Robertson, J. L., & Barling, J. (2017). Toward a New Measure of Organizational Environmental Citizenship Behavior. Journal of Business Research, 75(1), 57-66. [DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.02.007]
42. Roscoe, S., Subramanian, N., Jabbour, C. J., & Chong, T. (2019). Green Human Resource Management and the Enablers of Green Organisational Culture: Enhancing a Firm's Environmental Performance for Sustainable Development. Business Strategy and the Environment, 28(5), 737-749. [DOI:10.1002/bse.2277]
43. Sale, J. E., & Kerr, M. S. (2002). The Psychometric Properties of Karasek's Demand and Control Scales within a Single Sector: Data from a Large Teaching Hospital. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 75(3), 145-152. [DOI:10.1007/s004200100289] [PMID]
44. Sapta, I. K. S., Sudja, I. N., Landra, I. N., & Rustiarini, N. W. (2021). Sustainability Performance of Organization: Mediating Role of Knowledge Management. Economies, 9(3), 97. [DOI:10.3390/economies9030097]
45. Saragih, S. (2015). The Effects of Job Autonomy on Work Outcomes: Self Efficacy as an Intervening Variable. International Research Journal of Business Studies, 4(3), 203-215. [DOI:10.21632/irjbs.4.3.203-215]
46. Sebhatu, S. P. (2009). The Role of Change Agents in Creating Sustainable Business and Responsible Management: Case Study of Miljöcentrum. Paper Presented at the 12th QMOD and ICQSS Conference, Verona, Italy.
47. Spreitzer, G., Porath, C. L., & Gibson, C. B. (2012). Toward Human Sustainability: How to Enable More Thriving at Work. Organizational Dynamics, 41(2), 155-162. [DOI:10.1016/j.orgdyn.2012.01.009]
48. Stanciu, A.-C., Constandache, M., & Condrea, E. (2014). Concerns about the Sustainable Performance of Firm in the Context of Quality Management Systems Implementation. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 131(1), 340-344. [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.04.127]
49. Taamneh, M., & AL-Gharaibeh, M. (2014). The Impact of Job Security Elements on the Work Alienation at Private Universities in Jordan (A Field Study from Employees Perspective). European Journal of Business and Management, 6(23), 56-68.
50. Tuan, L. T. (2019). Catalyzing Employee OCBE in Tour Companies: The Role of Environmentally Specific Charismatic Leadership and Organizational Justice for Pro-Environmental Behaviors. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 43(5), 682-711. [DOI:10.1177/1096348018817582]
51. UNESCO (1997). Educating for a Sustainable Future. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. [http://specialcollections.nust.na:8080/greenstone3/library/collection/unesco/document.]
52. Van Dijk, D., & Schodl, M. M. (2015). Performance Appraisal and Evaluation. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences: Second Edition (pp. 716-721): Elsevier Inc. [DOI:10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.22034-5]
53. Van Scheppingen, A. R., De Vroome, E. M., Ten Have, K. C., Zwetsloot, G. I., Wiezer, N., & van Mechelen, W. (2015). Vitality at Work and Its Associations with Lifestyle, self-Determination, Organizational Culture, and with Employees' Performance and Sustainable Employability. Work, 52(1), 45-55. [DOI:10.3233/WOR-141947] [PMID]
54. Van Tiem, D., Moseley, J. L., & Dessinger, J. C. (2012). Fundamentals of Performance Improvement: Optimizing Results through People, Process, and Organizations (Vol. 13): John Wiley & Sons.
55. Warhurst, C., Wright, S., & Lyonette, C. (2017). Understanding and Measuring Job Quality: Part 1-Thematic literature Review. London: CIPD.
56. Wikhamn, W. (2019). Innovation, Sustainable HRM and Customer Satisfaction. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 76(1), 102-110. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.04.009]
57. Wilczyńska, A., Batorski, D., & Sellens, J. T. (2016). Employment Flexibility and Job Security as Determinants of Job Satisfaction: The Case of Polish Knowledge Workers. Social Indicators Research, 126(2), 633-656. [DOI:10.1007/s11205-015-0909-6]
58. Zablah, A. R., Bellenger, D. N., Straub, D. W., & Johnston, W. J. (2012). Performance Implications of CRM Technology Use: A Multilevel Field Study of Business Customers and Their Providers in the Telecommunications Industry. Information Systems Research, 23(2), 418-435. [DOI:10.1287/isre.1120.0419]
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. |
