S. Thomas Foster
Boise State University
Direct all correspondence to: Larry W. Howard, Middle Tennessee State University, Dept. of Management, Mur-
freesboro, TN 37132.
Journal of Quality IVIanagement, Vol. 4, No. l, pp. 5-22 ISSN: 1084-8586
Copyright 1999 by Elsevier Science Inc. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved
6 HOWARD&FOSTER
Traditionally, responsibility for monitoring and influencing employee attitudes
has fallen to human resource (HR) managers. Although various models of quality
management processes include aspects of HR (e.g., Anderson, Rungtusanatham, &
Schroeder, 1994; Flynn, Schroeder, & Sakakibara, 1996), surprisingly little research
has been conducted to examine the impact of human resource practices (HRP) on
quality management (Riordan & Gatewood, 1996). We propose a conceptual model,
presented in Figure 1, relating HRP with employee perceptions of top management
commitment to quality.
This model implies that certain HRP help to establish a platform from which to
launch initiatives to develop positive employee attitudes. This foundation consists of
traditional HRP involving such issues as job security, performance feedback, and
equal opportunity. These are strategically oriented to reduce employee concerns for
contextual issues and to enable them to concentrate on quality issues. Building on
this foundation, the model then suggests thatwe provide the technical information
and the sociopolitical support necessary for employees to feel confident in their
abilities to influence organizational outcomes. Thus, employees will feel empow-
ered to affect improved quality in their work. Acting in a workplace climate that
reflects concern for the quality of their work lives, they will be more likely to per-
ceive that the organization and its leaders are committed to quality. Although no
overarching theoretical basis for the overall model has yet been proposed, as we
explore in the next section, there are several theoretical and empirical sources for
proposing the structural relationships.
I MANAGEMENT
PERCEIVED I
COMMITMENT
TO QUALITY
/ "-,.
EMVLOYEE [ I REsPEcTFR
PSYCHOLOGICAL I I EMPLOYEE
l-<..I I
SOCIO-POLITICAL cc .ss o
SUPPORT
FEEDBACK/ [ CAREER
EEO
COMPLIANCE RECOGNITION SECURITY
Psychological Empowerment
Most definitions of empowerment refer to some aspect of control---control over
decision making (Parker & Price, 1994), control over work processes (Pfeffer,
1994), control over performance goals and measurement (Beer, 1991), and/or con-
trol over other people (Fulford & Enz, 1995; Keller & Dansereau, 1995). Recent
research supports the notion of empowerment as a psychological construct, such
that empowerment exists when people feel that they exercise some control over their
work lives (Spreitzer, 1995, 1996). According to Thomas & Velthouse (1990), psy-
chological empowerment includes four elements: (1) a sense of self-determination,
(2) personal meaning, (3) a sense of competence, and (4) perceived impact. Each of
these elements, of course, could affect an individual's experience of control over some-
thing. We propose that the HR empowerment structure enables self-determination by
reducing threats of capricious external control, and provides personal meaning
by helping to align personal and organizational values. Thus, the HR empowerment
structure establishes the first two elements of psychological empowerment.
access to technical information and sociopolitical support combine with the HRP
empowerment structure to affect employee perceptions of empowerment.
1-13: The extent to which employees perceive (a) access to technical informa-
tion and (b) sociopolitical support will be directly related to the extent they
feel empowered.
1t4: The extent to which employees feel empowered will "be directly related
to the extent they perceive top management is committed to quality.
METHODS
Sample
Measures
The measures we used were developed post-hoc. Based on the content of com-
munications with company executives regarding previous validation, we first devel-
oped a group of relevant concepts tapped by the survey. Then, we conducted
exploratory factor analyses. The eigenvalue criterion and screen plot indicated that
between 5 and 10 factors were associated with the items. We selected those factors
consisting of survey items most consistent with definitions of the concepts identified
previously, and repeated the factor analysis specifying eight factors, which
explained more than 70% of the variance in the item scores. We then eliminated
some items that either loaded highly on more than one factor or failed to load sub-
stantially on any factor, thus, also failing to either converge on or discriminate
among the concepts. Finally, we used structural equation modeling to confirm the
latent factor structures of selected items, and conducted reliability analyses for
the various scales.
Rather than conducting exploratory analyses on a subset of the data and con-
firming scales with the rest, we used the entire data set for scale development for
two reasons. First, several observations with missing data on some items would
have compromised our confidence in analyses from smaller subsets. Second,
because all items were self-reported, Likert-scaled 1 = "strongly agree" to 5 =
"strongly disagree," we wanted to ensure that the data were not biased by common
method variance. Results of the exploratory factor analysis provided this assurance.
We derived eight scales for this study: (1) EEO/compliance, (2) career security,
(3) feedback/recognition, (4) psychological empowerment, (5) sociopolitical sup-
port, (6) access to technical information, (7) respect for employee rights and needs,
and (8) perceived management commitment to quality. Confirmatory factor analysis
fit indices and Cronbach's coefficient a indices of internal consistency are reported
in Table 2. These indices provide support for both the validity and reliability of the
scales (Nunnally, 1978). All items used are listed in the appendix.
Analyses
Sample size affects certain indices of fit in structural equation modeling. Some
people recommend at least 10 observations per item (Bentler & Chou, 1987), imply-
ing about 480 observations for the present study. Others, however, argue that sam-
ples in excess of 200 make maximum likelihood estimation "too sensitive," thereby,
making all goodness-of-fit measures indicate poor fit (Hoelter, 1983). We conducted
two separate analyses, one employing the full sample of 529, and the other reduced
by listwise deletion for missing data on key variables to a sample of 214. Results
were virtually identical, so, we report the analyses from the full sample.
We used multi-stage analyses of structural equation models in SAS-Calis (SAS
Institute, 1990), analyzing covariance matrices as done in LISREL and EQS. When
measures are of uncertain validity and theory is tentative, multi-stage analyses are
recommended in structural equation modeling to avoid confounding the measure-
ment and structural models (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988, 1990). Although our mea-
sures demonstrated acceptable reliabilities and convergent validities, they are
nonetheless exploratory and lack a body of validation evidence. Similarly, while the
empirical evidence we base our model on is reasonably strong, the theoretical ratio-
nale is not. Indeed, we are building theory more than testing it. Although we are
interested in the measurement models--i.e., the degree of accuracy in capturing the
variable constructs--our primary concern is with the structural models, the relation-
ships among constructs. Therefore, we first fit the data to our lower-order factor
models and, subsequently, fixed those parameters derived for estimating the fit to
higher-order factor models. Likewise, we used summated scale scores as opposed
to item scores for estimating the fit to path models, as in previous research (e.g.,
Spreitzer, 1996).
RESULTS
Hypothesis 1
After fitting the data to the separate first-order factors, as reported in Table 2,
Stage 1 of our analyses examined the viability of the construct, "HR empowerment
structure." First, we fixed indicator variable parameters to the values derived in their
respective factor analyses for the "EEO/legal compliance," "feedback/recognition,"
and "career planning/security" scales. Then, we conducted a second-order factor
analysis, the latent second-order factor representing the HR empowerment structure.
The data fit the model acceptably (GFI = 0.89, NFI = 0.90, CFI = 0.92). Figure 2
contains the standardized maximum likelihood parameter estimates. In additional
analyses, we included other first-order factors, but the fit of the model was consis-
tently reduced, indicating that the second-order factor was not solely the result of
common method variance. Hypothesis l was supported.
Hypotheses 2 and 3
Hypothesis 4
>
t"
>
Z
>
m
T a b l e 3. Descriptive statistics and intercorrelations for all variables
Z
Variable Mean a S.D. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
<
1. Access to technical information 2.35 0.73 (.81)
2. Sociopolitical support 2.27 0.64 .46 (.82)
Z 3. Feedback and recognition 2.42 0.78 .39 .73 (.82)
.Q >
4. Psychological empowerment 2.25 0.62 .54 .79 .71 (.81)
5. Equal employment opportunity 1.92 0.70 .37 .45 .39 .48 (.94)
6. Respect for employee rights and needs 2.60 0.66 .49 .71 .64 .74 .45 (.82)
7. Management commitment to quality 2.41 0.78 .50 .75 .61 .76 .44 .71 (.77)
8. Career planning and security 2.40 0.77 .43 .56 .56 .60 .31 .51 m
.46 (.78)
Note: Coefficient ot's are in parentheses on the diagonal. All correlations are significant a t p < .001. N = 529.
aLow scores indicate high levels of the variable, scaled 1-5.
INFLUENCE ON H U M A N RESOURCE PRACTICES 15
HUMAN RESOURCE
EMPOWERMENT
STRUCTURE
Y .75 .54
.52
.66 CAREER
FEEDBACK/ SECURITY
EEO
.63 .77
.78
a workplace climate reflecting respect for employee rights and needs. We tested the
hypothesis with structural equations for all variables as illustrated in the conceptual
model of Figure 1, and fitting the data to this model. None of the fit indices indi-
cated that this model accurately represented the empirical relationships. We then
conducted a simple regression of perceived leadership commitment over psycholog-
ical empowerment and employee respect, which explained nearly 69% of the vari-
ance in leadership commitment to quality (F = 232.14, p < .0001). The
standardized regression coefficients for empowerment and respect were [3 = .69 and
[3 = .38, respectively. These results seemed contradictory to the lack of fit.
In order to examine alternative explanations, we then transformed our mea-
sures of the variables comprising the HR empowerment structure to a single scale
score, thereby eliminating the latent factor. Then, we repeated regressions of the
dependent variable over all other variables, and compared direct and indirect path
coefficients. These results suggested that the conceptual model fit the data poorly
because of multi-collinearity. This analysis included significant relationships that
existed but were not specified in the structural equation model. In particular, socio-
political support had both direct and indirect effects on respect for employees. Sim-
PERCEIVED
MANAGEMENT
COMMITMENT
TO QUALITY
soc,o_ i i
POLITICAL
SUPPORT
INFORMATION i EMPOWE1LMENT
STRUCTURE
4, even though the data did not fit the structural model specifying constrained,
causal relationships among variables well.
DISCUSSION
This study helps provides insights concerning the leadership role as it relates
to leaders developing employees' commitment to quality by empowering them to
enact quality initiatives. We conclude that certain traditional HRP--complying with
equal employment opportunity principles, providing feedback and recognition for
quality achievements, and providing career planning and security---combine to
establish a foundation for empowering employees by enabling them to focus on
quality initiatives rather than their employment situation. This linkage helps to
bridge the gap between the quality management and HR management domains.
These results also suggest that there may be other processes mediating the
effects of HRP on organizational outcomes. HRP are targeted to directly achieve
acquisition or development of human and social capital, influence motivation of par-
ticular behaviors, or shape employee attitudes. These, then, are the products of HRP.
We are more likely to identify the effects of HRP on organizational outcomes by
examining the direct effects of HRP on these products and the sequential effects of
these products on organizational outcomes, including quality management out-
comes. In this case, particular HRP helped to create higher levels of psychological
empowerment, and those perceptions of empowerment were directly related to
higher levels of perceived management commitment to quality.
This study adds support to the growing body of evidence surrounding the psy-
chological empowerment construct. We found three components combining to en-
hance employees' sense of empowerment: the HR empowerment structure, access to
technical information, and sociopolitical support. The fact that these elements reflect
structural, technical, and social dynamics serves notice that as multi-dimensional
constructs, both empowerment and effective quality management require a compre-
hensive perspective, perhaps only apparent at the highest levels of organization
leadership.
These results also suggest that consideration for employee rights and needs
contributes to the kind of workplace climate that is consistent with garnering
employee commitment. Although we made no specific hypotheses regarding this
concept, its strong relationships with several other variables suggests potential for
future research. Since respect for employee rights is fundamental to what is known
in the HR field as "quality of work life," this issue presents additional opportunities
for empirically linking the HR area with a quality management philosophy.
There are several limitations to this study. First, the survey items were gener-
ated internally without a theoretical grounding, and our post post-hoc construction
of scales from these items is open to questions of validity. Nonetheless, the iterative
process undertaken by diverse focus groups in the company to produce and repeat-
edly refine items supports their face validity, our exploratory factor analyses suggest
scale discriminant validity, and our confirmatory factor analyses suggest convergent
validity for our scale construction. Second, all of our measures were self-reported
APPENDIX
Feedback/recognition
yl My immediate supervisor gives me regular feedback on my performance.
y2 Individual contributions are recognized.
y3 Team contributions receive recognition.
y4 I have received recognition. EEO/compliance
y5 Management actively supports workforce diversity.
y6 Employees in my work group are treated equally regardless of gender.
y7 Employees in my work group are treated equally regardless of race.
y8 Employees in my work group are treated equally regardless of religion.
y9 Employees in my work group are treated equally regardless of age.
yl0 Employees in my work group are treated equally regardless of sexual
orientation.
yll Employees in my work group are treated equally regardless of disability.
Career security
y12 I am aware that development and training classes are available for me to take.
y13 I have the opportunity to be involved in activities that promote my
professional development.
y14 I have access to information for my career planning.
Sociopolitical support
y22a My section manager exhibits the kind of leadership I expect and desire.
y22b My immediate supervisor is accessible.
y23 My immediate supervisor is approachable.
y24 I have a clear understanding of what is expected of me on the job.
y25 Employees can express their opinions openly and freely without fear of
reprisal.
y26 My work group has planned team-building activities.
y27 Team-building activities have a beneficial effect.
y28 It is safe to use the Open Door P o l i c y . . .
y29 My input is considered in decision making.
Psychological empowerment
y30 I receive enough information about [the company] vision and objectives.
y31 I feel my immediate supervisor values my contribution to the company.
y32 I feel free to discuss my concerns with someone in management other than
my immediate supervisor.
y33 I feel that management will act on the issues raised by this survey.
y34 I receive the training necessary to do my job.
y35 I feel that I am valued by management.
y36 I am empowered to fulfill reasonable customer expectations.
y37 I feel effective in solving the customer problems.
REFERENCES
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. 1988. Structural equation modeling in practice: A review
and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103:411-423.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. 1990. Assumptions and comparative strengths of the two-
step approach: Comment on Fomell and Yi. Sociological Methods and Research, 20:
321-333.
Anderson, J. C., Rungtusanatham, M., & Schroeder, R. G. 1994. A theory of quality manage-
ment underlying the Deming management method. Academy of Management Review,
19: 472-509.
Ashford, S. J., & Tsui, A. S. 1992. Self-regulation for managerial effectiveness: The role of
active feedback seeking. Academy of Management Journal, 34:251-280.
Banker, R. D., Lee, S.-Y., Potter, G., & Srinivasan, D. 1996. Contextual analysis of perfor-
mance impacts of outcome-based incentive compensation. Academy of Management
Journal, 39: 920-948.
Beer, V. 1991. Guerilla tactics for employee empowerment. Performance Improvement Quar-
terly, 4 (4): 62-70.
Benson, G., Saraph, J., & Schroeder, R. 1991. The effects of organizational quality context on
quality management. Management Science, 9 (37): 1107-1124.
Bentler, P. M., & Chou, C. 1987. Practical issues in structural modeling. Sociological Methods
and Research, 16:78-117.
Blackburn, R., & Rosen, B. 1996. Human resource management practices and total quality
management. In D. B. Fedor & S. Ghosh (Eds.), Advances in the management of orga-
nizational quality, Vol. 1: 245-298. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Chiles, A. M., & Zorn, T. E. 1995. Empowerment in organizations: Employees' perceptions of
the influences on empowerment. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 23: 1-25.
Crosby, P. B. 1980. Quality is free. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Delaney, J. T., & Huselid, M. A. 1996. The impact of human resource practices on perceptions
of organizational performance. Academy of Management Journal, 39: 949-969.
Delery, J. E., & Doty, D. H. 1996. Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource manage-
ment: Tests of universalistic, contingency, and configurational performance predic-
tions. Academy of Management Journal, 39: 802-835.
Deming, W. E. 1982. Quality, productivity, and competitive position. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Efraty, D., Sirgy, M. J., & Claiborne, C. B. 1991. The effects of personal alienation on organi-
zational identification: A quality-of-work-life model. Journal of Business and Psychol-
ogy, 6: 57-78.
Fields, M. W., & Thacker, J. W. 1992. Influence of quality of work life on company and union
commitment. Academy of Management Journal, 35: 439-450.
Flynn, B. B., Schroeder, R. G., & Sakakibara, S. 1996. The relationship between quality man-
agement practices and performance: Synthesis of findings from the world class manu-
facturing project. In D. B. Fedor & S. Ghosh (Eds.), Advances in the management of
organizational quality, Vol. 1: 141-185. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Fulford, M. D., & Enz, C. A. 1995. The impact of empowerment on service employees. Journal
of Managerial Issues, 7 (2): 161-175.
Gerhart, B., Trevor, C. O., & Graham, M. E. 1996. New directions in compensation research:
Synergies, risk, and survival. In G. R. Ferris (Ed.), Research in personnel and human
resources management, Vol. 14: 143-203. Greenwich, CT: JAI press.
Gorden, W. I., Anderson, C. M., & Bruning, S. D. 1992. Employee perceptions of corporate
partnership: An affective-moral quid pro quo. Employee Responsibilities and Rights
Journal, 5: 75-85.
Gorden, W. I., Infante, D. A., & Graham, E. E. 1988. Corporate conditions conducive to
employee voice: A subordinate perspective. Employee Responsibilities and Rights
Journal, 1: 101-111.
Herzberg, F. 1966. Work and the nature of man. Cleveland: World.
Hoelter, J. W. 1983. The analysis of covariance structures: Goodness-of-fit indices. Sociologi-
cal Methods and Research, 11: 325-344.
Huselid, M. A. 1995. The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, pro-
ductivity, and corporate financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 38:
635-672.
Ichniowski, C., Shaw, K., & Prennushi, G. 1994. The effects of human resource management
practices on productivity. Working paper, Columbia University, New York.
Ittner, C. D., & Larcker, D. F. 1996. Measuring the impact of quality initiatives on firm finan-
cial performance. In D. B. Fedor & S. Ghosh (Eds.), Advances in the management of
organizational quality, Vol. 1: 1-37. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Jones, A. P., Glaman, J. M., & Johnson, D.S. 1993. Perceptions of a quality program and rela-
tionships with work perceptions and job attitudes. Psychological Reports, 72: 619-624.
Keller, T., & Dansereau, F. 1995. Leadership and empowerment: A social exchange perspec-
tive. Human Relations, 48: 127-146.
Levine, D. I. 1995. Reinventing the workplace: How business and employees can both win.
Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
Liden, R. C., & Arad, S. 1996. A power perspective of empowerment and work groups: Impli-
cations for human resources management research. In G. R. Ferris (Ed.), Research in
personnel and human resources management, Vol. 14: 205-252. Greenwich, CT: JAI
Press.
London, M. 1993. Relationships between career motivation, empowerment and support for
career development. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 66: 55-69.
MacDuffie, J. P. 1995. Human resource bundles and manufacturing performance: Flexible pro-
duction systems in the world auto industry. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 48:
197-221.
Nunnally, J. C. 1978. Psychometric theory, 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Parker, L. E., & Price, R. H. 1994. Empowered managers and empowered workers: The effects
of managerial support and managerial perceived control on workers' sense of control
over decision making. Human Relations, 47:911-928.
Pasmore, W. A. 1985. A comprehensive approach to planning an OD/QWL strategy. In D. D.
Warrick (Ed.), Contemporary organization development: current thinking and applica-
tions. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
Pfeffer, J. 1994. Competitive advantage through people. Boston: Harvard Business School
Press.
Reeves, C., & Hoy, F. 1993. Employee perceptions of management commitment and customer
evaluations of quality service in independent firms. Journal of Small Business Manage-
ment, 31: 52-59.
Riordan, C. M., & Gatewood, R. D. 1996. Putting the "E" (employee) into quality efforts: A