Make sure that the performance management (not only measurement) system is closely aligned to the goals of the organization. Starting with those, breaking them down, and looking at the gap that has to be closed between status quo and target state, you will be able to design a taylormade performance management system.
That is a good question and it is hard to answer. A first shot would be: it depends! It depends on your question respectively on the purpose of the measurement. Do you want to measure HPWS existence, their impact on some outcome measure, their distribution (across industries, size classes, regions etc), their diffusion, their impact on the organizational structure (and so on). It depends on the business environment, the firm’s internal structure, its strategy and so on.
This said, there are basically two approaches in the empirical literature to specify HPWSs (at least to my knowledge): Indices and systems. The index-approaches try to bring the HPWS in a single number by adding up the numbers of “innovative HR-practices” or using factor analysis (for example: Huselid 1995, MacDuffie 1995, Hoque 1999, Hartog, Verburg 2004 and many, many more). The resulting index is a variable somewhere between an ordinal and an interval scale.
Within the systems approach the information on HR-Practices is used to define a given and small set of HRM-policy types. For example if there are 5 HR-policy areas, then a firm applying Practices A, B, C, D, E and F would be assigned to the HPWS–type; a firm applying none of these practices might be assigned to the “Traditional HR-System”-group, a firm applying only A,B and C is assigned to type hybrid1 which gets a fancy name finally a firm applying only C, D and E is assigned to type hybrid2 which gets a even fancier name. There are different ways to derive these categories: i) you can generate an index and define some cut off points (Whittington et al. 1999), ii) you can perform some cluster analysis (Arthur 1994, Ichniowski, Shaw, Prennushi 1997) or iii) you could derive your different types theoretically. In the literature these ordinal scaled HRM-system types are then used to perform some statistical exercises.
My favorite approach would be to identify (empirically but theoretically guided) HR-pracitces which are complementary to each other (within a specific firm). The set (or specific sub sets) of complementary practices are then a HPWS. This paper http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.194.7491 is giving an empirical application of this approach, although to totally different issue. Susan Athey might also have also some applications (http://kuznets.fas.harvard.edu/~athey/testcomp0498.pdf ).
thanx to Oliver Ludewig and Elisabeth Kauba for contribute in generate the knowledgeable in high performance work system..
There are various measuring tools of performance . you can use reference about (Common Assessment Framework Model).
There is various methods of performance in organizational and individual level but there is finding only high performance work system. As present context , human resource practice want to accelerated add on in their practice for getting high target / performance.
Work system prefer to build some hardware and software,good and privite office space and excellent instruments belong hard ware ,which can pomote our wok effecient,the friendly work temple and justify distribution are the software,and many top and middle leader s is vital for high perfomce wokd system ,the system need to build in the long time
HPWS as we see in the literature is of best HR practices. Nearly three decades ago, I made an attempt to understand what is work system and what are its dimensions. Of course in a hospital context. A designed work system creates interdependence among those who are involved in such system. I took that as a major dimension and studied types of interdependence and their effects on quality of work experiences
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Methodology
- Research Methodology