High-performance work practices versus work-role ambiguity

Abstract

The intent of this empirical assessment was to investigate whether or not high-performance work practices (HPWPs) mitigate work-role ambiguity in business enterprises and other societal human organizations. Data were collected from 245 respondents from service sector organizations, operating in Pakistan, via a voluntary cross-sectional online survey. Pearson correlation and regression analyses test the study’s hypotheses and deduce its results. All HPWPs, i.e., i) selective staffing, ii) extensive training, iii) career development, iv) extensive compensation, v) performance appraisal and vi) employee participation, were found negatively associated with work-role ambiguity perceptions, thereby implying that high-performance work practices can reduce work-role ambiguity. Despite its qualifications, the empirical assessment offers theoretical implications and future-research directions, along with important policymaking implications for practitioners.

Keywords

High performance work practices (HPWPs)role ambiguity service sector Pakistan

Kamran Naeem, Ph.D. Candidate, at School of Management Harbin Institute of Technology (HIT) and working as Assistant Manager at Pakistan International Airlines, Quetta, Pakistan. His main research interests are human development and organizational learning.

Liang Dapeng, Professor, Associate Dean, School of Management, Harbin Institute of Technology. Main research interests are environmental science, low carbon development model, climate change, energy policy, corporate behavior, independent innovation strategy and high tech investment decision making.

Dilawar Khan Durrani, Ph.D. Candidate at Harbin Institute of Technology (HIT) and Lecturer at University of Balochistan, Quetta Pakistan. His main research interests are Organizational Behavior, Strategic Management, Leadership, Decision Making, Conflict Management and Cross Cultural differences in Business Organizations.

Muhammad Adeel Anjum is a Ph.D. candidate at School of Management, Harbin Institute of Technology, China, and Assistant Professor at Department of Management Sciences, Balochistan University of Information Technology, Engineering and Management Sciences (BUITEMS), Quetta-Pakistan. His areas of interests are Human Development Resource Management, Conflict Management, Organizational Behavior and Organizational Development.

1 Introduction

Fierce competition, rapid technical advancements, knowledge-intensive work and a dynamic business environment make a manager’s job most critical. Some managers today have therefore become very keen for ‘doing the right things’ and ‘doing things right’. It can be intuitively argued that the efforts to ‘doing the right things’ and ‘doing things right’ may succeed when all members of the organizations clearly know what role they have to perform and how. To be specific, pressurizing employees to do the right things without providing proper guidelines and without role clarity may not yield the desired level of success. For having unambiguous roles for all members of organization, broad policies and procedural steps are usually required. Researchers argue that role clarity is an important determinant of employee performance. Researchers further state that the clearer the roles, the better will be the performance and vice versa [1]. Therefore, organization should adopt the procedures that allow organizations self-development through its own practices.

Ambiguity, either individually, i.e., employee role ambiguity, or in any other form, i.e., organizationally, often leads to rather tough problematic situations. Under such uncertain situations, both individual and organizational performance is not as good as it would otherwise be. To help improvise both individual and organizational performance, it is therefore important to investigate the factors that could possibly mitigate ‘ambiguity’. Plethora of research has been conducted on myriad aspects of ambiguity [2 –12]. However, no empirical investigation to the best of our knowledge has undertaken to ascertain whether or not high performance work practices play any part in mitigating role ambiguity. Hence, the pivotal intension of this study is to fill this gap and investigate the connections between HPWPs and employee perceived role ambiguity so that the organization could know the importance of HRWPs that may lead them towards error correction and self-development state for efficient and effective functioning. However, while exploring these connections, it is important to mention that this study has some limitations that are listed in the concluding section.

Numerous benefits of HPWPs have been reported. For instance, it has been found that HPWPs can improve: performance including both financial and non-financial performance of organization by improving individual performance [13 –20], motivation [21, 22], innovation [23], commitment [24], employee effectiveness [25], quality outcomes [26], efficiency and effectiveness, performance, practices [27, 28] and reduces turn over intentions [29, 30]. Based on these evidences, we anticipate that HPWPs will be negatively associated with employee role ambiguity perceptions.

2 Literature review and hypotheses

2.1 High performance work practices

In the 21st century, the economy is becoming increasingly knowledge based, focusing on human beings and our self-development for increased performance; equipping us with required business data, professional skills and information to perform well. High performance work practices-HPWPs are set of practices that stimulate employee performance. HPWPs try to ensure that the employees are provided with improved working environment, teamwork, trainings, involvement along with improved compensation. Such practices also try to focus on employee satisfaction, lesser conflict and providing them the opportunity for self-development. Literature outlines “bundles” of HPWPs [31]. These practices or bundle of practices typically include teamwork, job flexibility, employee participation, self-managed teams, continuing education, employee involvement in the process of strategy formulation, performance based pay and communication. However, Fu and colleagues (2013) have grouped them into following categories [32]:

Selective Staffing

Intensive Training

Career Development

Extensive Compensation

Performance Appraisal

Employee participation

2.2 Role ambiguity

Kahn and colleagues first introduced the concept of role ambiguity in 1964 to investigate the mental health of individuals within the organizations and slow process of users’ adaptability against the changes in technology [33]. According to them, employees must know the behaviors that are satisfying or frustrating for their personal needs and values. They further elaborate that the employees must know following things to perform his job adequately. First, they should know their roles, rights, duties and responsibilities. Second, they should know what kinds of activities would fulfill those responsibilities. Lastly, they should also know the possible consequences of role performance or non-performance for themselves. It is mainly the responsibility of managers and organizations for giving above details to their employees in an organized manner. Role ambiguity may be defined as employee’s uncertainty about the ‘expectations’ on the job [34, 35]. According to Verbeke [36] role ambiguity is, “when the employees do not exactly know what they are expected to do during the job and what are their duties and authorities”. Role ambiguity can also be interpreted in terms of the outcomes expected from the individuals and their behavioral requirements associated with those outcomes [37]. Ilgen and Hollenbeck (2005) defined it as “the level of uncertainty or the lack of clarity surrounding expectations about a single role” [38].

3 Theoretical framework

3.1 Selective staffing and role ambiguity

In its literal meanings, the term staffing refers to a process that concerns hiring right people for the right job at the right time. Selective staffing is all about bringing in the workforce that is beyond ‘average’ to deliver better-than-average work performance [39]. In technologically advanced world, humans are the one who make organizations achieve their targets. That is why, organizations always try to attract and retain qualified personnel who could effectively contribute for organizational success. Therefore, due attention should be paid to the staffing process because a poor staffing decision could cost the organization an amount equals to 30 percent of the employee’s first year earnings along with several disadvantages such as lower productivity, and potential loss of clients [40]. Because of the selective staffing processes, (e.g.; advertisement and realistic job preview), the chances of role ambiguity may reduce. Therefore, we expect that;

Hypothesis 1: Selective staffing will be negatively related to employee’s perceptions of role ambiguity.

3.2 Career development and role ambiguity

Employee’s career development is an integral part of the human development activities and can be directly related to the future of every organization [41]. It is all about the development of individuals at different stages of their careers [42]. Career development not only fulfills employee growth and the developmental needs but also helps organizations achieve their future targets through developed employees [43, 44]. An effective career development process implies that the organizations are cognizant of employee developmental and growth needs and organization express that they care for their employees and their growth need. It has been documented that a proper career development process within the organizations may increase employee job satisfaction, decrease their turnover intentions, improve performance and enhance their commitment to the organization. These desirable outcomes imply that all processes within the organization are thoughtful and the human development policies in action are deliberate one. Hence, it can be assumed that role ambiguity at such workplaces would be low. Therefore, we expect;

Hypothesis 2: Career development will be negatively related to employee’s perceptions of role ambiguity.

3.3 Intensive training and role ambiguity

Trainings are inevitable within the organizations as they are a major source of employee skill enhancement. Training programs are not always tailored to improve the employee skill sets or to provide the job/industry specific knowledge, but may also be organized to familiarize employees with the rules, regulations, policies, procedures and various in vogue practices with in organizations [45]. Irrespective of their types, nature and contents, trainings equip ‘employees’ with the knowledge and the information that they must have. Employees utilize this knowledge and information to interpret the nature of their tasks and duties to perform well [46]. Hence, we propose;

Hypothesis 3: Intensive training will be negatively related to employee’s perceptions of role ambiguity.

3.4 Extensive compensation and role ambiguity

Compensation refers to the sum totality of reward that employees receive in exchange of their services for the organizations [47]. Financial compensation within the organization may either be direct (wages and salaries) and indirect payments (allowances etc) [48]. Organizations also use their compensation plans to develop their brand image in the market to attract highly skilled candidates and high performers of the industry. Extensive compensation (the combination of extrinsic and intrinsic rewards) keeps their employees motivated and to boost their performance [49 –52]. Through the segregation of various forms of compensation, especially the indirect compensation (various allowances), as well as the compensation scheme (e.g.; merit based), organizations make their employees aware of ‘for what’ they are being compensated. Therefore, employees should know what activities and tasks they have to perform in order to receive particular compensation or reward. Hence, we postulate;

Hypothesis 4: Extensive compensation will be negatively related to employee’s perceptions of role ambiguity.

3.5 Performance appraisal and role ambiguity

Performance appraisal is a method of evaluating job performance of employee [53]. Feedback is an important component of performance appraisal process. Scholars note that performance appraisal process is a good source for providing adequate feedback to the employees regarding their performance in a given role and identifying their developmental needs [54]. The feedback that employees receive after their appraisals helps them improve their performance in given roles, behavior at work and the self-development. Therefore, we expect;

Hypothesis 5: Performance appraisal will be negatively related to employee’s perceptions of role ambiguity.

3.6 Employee participation and role ambiguity

Employee participation is one of the most important factors for employee satisfaction. The chances to participate in the decision-making and other processes within an organization may enhance employee sense of belongingness to the organization that thereby elevates their motivation and satisfaction. Studies show that the employee participation improves role clarity because participation gives employees ample chances to communicate with their high ups and clarify ambiguities of any kind [55, 56]. Organizations that believe in ‘employee participation’ foster an open communication climate where employees can freely interact with their supervisors and peers and receive feedback concerning their tasks and duties [57]. Therefore, it is logical to expect that the employee participation helps reduce role ambiguity. So we propose;

Hypothesis 6: Employee participation will be negatively related to employee’s perceptions of role ambiguity.

Based on the arguments regarding the relation between high performance work practices and role ambiguity, following framework is proposed shown in Fig. 1:

Fig.1

Research conceptual framework.

4 Methodology

This research uses correlational design to ascertain the relation between HPWPs (Selective Staffing Intensive Training, Extensive Compensation, Career Development, Performance Appraisal and employee participation) and role ambiguity. The data for this study were collected from the employees of service based during the first quarter of 2018 (January to March) via an online survey. All the variables were measured by using previously developed, reliable and valid scales. 5 point Likert scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree, to 5 = strongly agree was used to record respondents’ perceptions about study variables. Following scales were used to measure the variables.

4.1 High performance work practices

A 29 items scale of HPWPs (four items for selective staffing, five items for intensive training, four items for career development, four items for extensive compensation, five items for performance appraisal, and seven items for employee participation) redefined by Pittino et al 2016 was used to measure respondents’ perception about HPWPs in their respective organizations [58]. The sample items of the scale are; “The selection of new staff follows a structured process (selective staffing)”, “The Company offers different kinds of formal training to existing staff (Intensive training)”, “The company offers non-management staff the possibility of a promotion (career development)” “Salaries and wages partly depend on individual performance or merit (extensive compensation)”, “The Company regularly conducts formal performance appraisals with its employees (performance appraisal)”, and “Employees can influence management decisions on investments, work flows, product development, and productivity monitoring (employee participation)”. Cronbach’s Alpha levels of the scales are 0.8222. 0.836, 0.776, 0.698, 0.835 and 0.786 respectively.

4.2 Role ambiguity

For role ambiguity, six items scale of C. David Shepherd and Leslie M. Fine (1994) was used [59]. The sample items are, “I know that I have divided my time properly” and “I know what my responsibilities are”. Cronbach’s Alpha level of the scales is 0.9.

5 Analysis and results

Data were analyzed by using SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) version 21. Demographic details of the respondents are shown in Table 1.

Table 1
Sample demographics

Demographics Number of respondents Percentage

Gender

Male 212 86.5

Female 33 13.5

Education

High school 7 2.9

Bachelor 24 9.8

Masters 206 84.1

Ph.D. 8 3.3

Job Tenure

1 to 5 years 46 18.8

6 to 10 years 118 48.2

11 to 15 years 55 22.4

16 to 20 years 17 6.9

20 years and above 9 3.7

Age

Less than 25 years 8 3.3

26 to 30 years 38 15.5

31 to 35 years 131 53.5

36 to 40 years 50 20.4

40 years and above 18 7.3

Demographics	Number of respondents	Percentage
Gender
Male	212	86.5
Female	33	13.5
Education
High school	7	2.9
Bachelor	24	9.8
Masters	206	84.1
Ph.D.	8	3.3
Job Tenure
1 to 5 years	46	18.8
6 to 10 years	118	48.2
11 to 15 years	55	22.4
16 to 20 years	17	6.9
20 years and above	9	3.7
Age
Less than 25 years	8	3.3
26 to 30 years	38	15.5
31 to 35 years	131	53.5
36 to 40 years	50	20.4
40 years and above	18	7.3

Mean, standard deviation, inter construct correlations, and reliability coefficients are summarized in Table 2. All HPWPs were found negatively associated with role ambiguity [(selective staffing and role ambiguity, r = –0.64, p < #x003C;< #x200A;0.01), (intensive training and role ambiguity r = –0.62, p < #x003C;< #x200A;0.01), (career development and role ambiguity r = –0.61, p < #x003C;< #x200A;0.01), (extensive compensation and role ambiguity r = –0.62, p < #x003C;< #x200A;0.01), (performance appraisal and role ambiguity r = –0.63, p < #x003C;< #x200A;0.01) and (employee participation and role ambiguity r = –0.68, p < #x003C;< #x200A;0.01)].

Note: SS = Selective Staffing, IT = Intensive Trainings, CD = Career Development, EC = Extensive Compensation, PA = Performance Appraisal, EP = Employee Participation and RA = Role ambiguity.

Table 2

Correlations, Descriptive statistics and reliability

	1 (SS)	2 (IT)	3 (CD)	4 (EC)	5 (PA)	6 (EP)	7 (RA)
1. Selective Staffing (SS)	0.897
2. Intensive Training (IT)	0.761^**	0.905
3. Career Development (CD)	0.620^**	0.756^**	0.824
4. Extensive Compensation (EC)	0.606^**	0.703^**	0.705^**	0.880
5. Performance Appraisal (PA)	0.621^**	0.743^**	0.728^**	0.825^**	0.915
6. Employee Participation (EP)	0.580^**	0.702^**	0.734^**	0.810^**	0.811^**	0.920
7. Role Ambiguity (RA)	–0.643^**	–0.627^**	–0.616^**	–0.626^**	–0.639^**	–0.683^**	0.934
Means	3.485	3.155	2.961	2.552	2.938	2.698	2.479
Standard Deviations	0.986	1.067	0.960	1.172	1.105	1.009	0.985

Note. ^**p < #x003C;< #x200A;0.01; Cronbach’s Alpha values are given in bold diagonally.

Regression analyses used to test hypotheses, and its results are summarized in Table 3.

Table 3

Results from the regression analysis

Hypothesis	β	t-statistics	Significance Level (β)	R²	F	Significance Level (F)
1	–0.643^**	–13.101	0.000	0.414	171.635^**	0.000
2	–0.579^**	–12.560	0.000	0.394	157.746^**	0.000
3	–0.632^**	–12.196	0.000	0.380	148.738^**	0.000
4	–0.526^**	–12.506	0.000	0.392	156.411^**	0.000
5	–0.570^**	–12.942	0.000	0.408	167.488^**	0.000
6	–0.667^**	–14.589	0.000	0.467	212.852^**	0.000

Note. ^**p < #x003C;< #x200A;0.01.

Table 2 shows that all predictor variables: i) selective staffing (β= –0.643, t = –13.101, R² = 0.414), ii) intensive training (β= –0.627, t = –12.560, R² = 0.394), iii) career development (β= –0.616, t = –12.196, R² = 0.380), iv) extensive compensation (β= –0.626, t = –12.506, R² = 0.392), v) performance appraisal (β= –0.639, t = –12.942, R² = 0.408) and, vi) employee participation (β= –0.683, t = –14.589, R² = 0.467) have significant negative associations with role ambiguity, hence providing sufficient empirical support for H₁, H₂, H₃, H₄, H₅ and H₆.

6 Discussion and conclusion

This study sought to test the relation between HPWPs and role ambiguity. As hypothesized, results of the study provided strong evidences for articulated hypothesis. Our findings suggest that high performance work practices help decrease employee role ambiguity. We in H1 postulated that selective staffing would be negatively associated with role ambiguity and results supported this hypothesis. The research unveiling the relation between the two is limited, this study, to the best of our knowledge, is the pioneer to investigate how selective staffing might mitigate employee ambiguity perceptions regarding their jobs and the roles that they perform within their organizations. Hence, we recommend organizations to follow ‘selective staffing’. Results also indicated a significant negative relation between extensive training and role ambiguity, implying that a rigorous training may help reduce employee ambiguities not only about their roles but also about their duties and the tasks. High performance work practices, when implemented in the true letter and spirit; not only help mitigate role ambiguity but also foster conducive environment that leads to further positive outcomes. High performance work practices may enhance the capacity of removing the errors and inaccuracies that prevail in the organizations, either due to dysfunctional models or due to management negligence towards those issues.

Likewise, the considerable evidence was received regarding the negative relations between other high performance work practices (career development, extensive compensation, performance appraisal, and employee participation) and role ambiguity. The significant negative association between these high performance work practices supports our stance that the HPWPs could be a source of combating with detrimental attitudes such as ‘role ambiguity’.

7 Limitations, recommendation and implications

Like every other study, this study also has some limitations. First, the data were collected through cross sectional survey so causality cannot be fully established but only implied. Second, the data were collected from only service sector employees working in Pakistan so the generalizability of the findings to other sectors and geographical locations cannot be fully guaranteed. Finally, there may be other mediating or moderating factors influencing the proposed relations among variables that are not explored by current study. Future studies may focus on exploring such other factors that can influence the relations under consideration.

Despite its limitations, the current study adds to the existing body of knowledge by empirically exploring the relations of HPWPs with role ambiguity. In the age of exponentially expending technologies and increasingly dynamic environment, it becomes very necessary to reduce the level of uncertainty faced not only by the organizations but also by the employees. In order to do so, organizations need leaders with clear vision and employees with synchronized efforts. The uncertainty of individual employees can be reduced by increasing role clarity or in other words, by reducing role ambiguity. The findings from this study have given us a new perspective that along with all the other measures to reduce uncertainty, HPWPs can be very effective as well. Therefore, we recommend that the organizations should actively encourage implementation of HPWPs to help reduce uncertainty and ambiguity at individual performance in dynamically changing environment.

References

Onyemah

. Role ambiguity, role conflict, and performance: Empirical evidence of an inverted-U relationship. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management. 2008;28(3):299–313.

Mohammadi

. The relationship of role ambiguity with job satisfaction and job performance mediated by proactive behavior. Journal of Ergonomics. 2016;4(1):20–7.

Faucett

, Corwyn

, Poling

. Clergy role stress: Interactive effects of role ambiguity and role conflict on intrinsic job satisfaction. Pastoral Psychology. 2013;62(3):291–304.

Madlock

, Chory

. Socialization as a predictor of employee outcomes. Communication Studies. 2013;65(1):56–71.

Moura

, Orgambidezramos

, Goncalves

. Role stress and work engagement as antecedents of job satisfaction: Results from portugal. Europe’s Journal of Psychology. 2014;10(2):291–300.

Yürür

, Sarikaya

. The effects of workload, role ambiguity, and social support on burnout among social workers in turkey. Administration in Social Work. 2012;36(5):457–78.

Yun

, Takeuchi

, Liu

. Employee self-enhancement motives and job performance behaviors: Investigating the moderating effects of employee role ambiguity and managerial perceptions of employee commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2007;92(3):745–56.

Burney

, Widener

. Strategic performance measurement systems, job-relevant information, and managerial behavioral responses—role stress and performance. Behavioral Research in Accounting. 2007;19(1):43–69.

Hussein

. Examining the mediating effects of role ambiguity on relationship between the job characteristics and intention to quit. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences. 2015;5(12):24–38.

10.

Tharmalingam

. Work-family conflict: An investigation on job involvement, role ambiguity and job demand: Moderated by social support. Journal of Human Resource Management. 2014;2(3):52–62.

11.

Soltani

, Hajatpour

, Khorram

, Nejati

. Investigating the effect of role conflict and role ambiguity on employees’ job stress: Articulating the role of work-family conflict. Management Science Letters. 2013;3(7):1927–36.

12.

Schmidt

, Roesler

, Kusserow

, Rau

. Uncertainty in the workplace: Examining role ambiguity and role conflict, and their link to depression—a meta-analysis. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology. 2012;23(1):91–106.

13.

Gittell

, Seidner

, Wimbush

. A relational model of how high-performance work systems work. Organization Science. 2010;21(2):490–506.

14.

Huselid

. The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity, and corporate financial performance. Academy Of Management Journal. 1995;38(3):635–72.

15.

Becker

, Gerhart

. The impact of human resource management on organizational performance: Progress and prospects. Academy Of Management Journal. 1996;39(4):779–801.

16.

Ramsay

, Scholarios

, Harley

. Employees and high-performance work systems: Testing inside the black box. British Journal of Industrial Relations. 2000;38(4):501–31.

17.

Bailey

, Berg

, Sandy

. The effect of high-performance work practices on employee earnings in the steel, apparel, and medical electronics and imaging industries. Industrial and Labor Relations Review. 2001;54(2):525–43.

18.

Shaw

, Delery

, Abdulla

. Organizational commitment and performance among guest workers and citizens of an Arab country. Journal of Business Research. 2003;56(12):1021–30.

19.

Richard

, Johnson

. High performance work practices and human resource management effectiveness: Substitutes or complements? Journal of Business Strategies. 2004;21(2):133–48.

20.

Christopher

, Kevin

. Strategic human resource practices, top management team social networks, and firm performance: The role of human resource practices in creating organizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Journal. 2003;46(6):740–51.

21.

Bowen

, David . Understanding HRM-firm performance linkages: The role of the “Strength” of the HRM System. Academy of Management Review. 2004;29(2):203–21.

22.

Flood

, Guthrie

. Partnership, high performance work systems and organizational effectiveness. LInK Working Paper Series. 2008;2(08):1–18.

23.

, Flood

, Bosak

, Rousseau

, Morris

, Oregan

. High-performance work systems in professional service firms: Examining the practices-resources-uses-performance linkage. Human Resource Management. 2017;56(2):329–52.

24.

Whitener

. Do “high commitment” human resource practices affect employee commitment? A cross-level analysis using hierarchical linear modeling. Journal of Management. 2001;27(5):515–35.

25.

Pfeffer

, Veiga

. Putting people first for organizational success. Academy of Management Perspectives. 1999;13(2):37–48.

26.

West

. Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups. Applied Psychology. 2002;51(3):355–87.

27.

Jensen

, Patel

, Messersmith

. High-performance work systems and job control: Consequences for anxiety, role overload, and turnover intentions. Journal of Management. 2013;39(6):1699–724.

28.

Tregaskis

, Daniels

, Glover

, Butler

, Meyer

. High performance work practices and firm performance: A longitudinal case study. British Journal of Management. 2013;24(2):225–44.

29.

Karatepe

, Vatankhah

. High-performance work practices, career satisfaction and service recovery performance: A study of flight attendants. Tourism Review. 2015;70(1):56–71.

30.

Juhdi

, Pawan

, Hansaram

. HR practices and turnover intention: The mediating roles of organizational commitment and organizational engagement in a selected region in Malaysia. International Journal of Human Resource Management. 2013;24(15):3002–19.

31.

Becker

, Huselid

. Overview: Strategic human resource management in five leading firms. Human Resource Management. 1999;34(4):287–301.

32.

Kahn

, Wolfe

, Quinn

, Snoek

, Rosenthal

. Organizational Stress: Studies in Role Conflict and Ambiguity. New York: Wiley; 1964.

33.

Epie

. Managing time-based conflict across life domains in Nigeria: A decision making perspective. Ife Psychological. 2009;17:194–216.

34.

Baral

, Bhargava

. Work-family enrichment as a mediator between organizational interventions for work-life balance and job outcomes. Journal of Managerial Psychology. 2010;25(3):274–300.

35.

Verbeke

, Dietz

, Verwaal

. Drivers of sales performance: A contemporary meta-analysis. Have salespeople become knowledge brokers?. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 2011;15:407–28.

36.

Rizzo

, House

, Lirtzman

. Role conflict and ambiguity in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly. 1970;15:150–63.

37.

Ellis

, Bell

, Ployhart

, Hollenbeck

, Ilgen

. An evaluation of generic teamwork skills training with action teams: Effects on cognitive and skill-based outcomes. Personnel Psychology. 2005;58(3):641–72.

38.

Kroon

, De Voorde

, Timmers

. High performance work practices in small firms: A resource-poverty and strategic decision-making perspective. Small Business Economics. 2013;41(1):71–91.

39.

Hacker

. The effect of decision aids on work group performance. Virginia Polytechnic and State University. 1997.

40.

Belcourt

, Wright

. Management development: A career management perspective. The International Journal of Career Management. 1994;6(5):3–10.

41.

Schein

. Career Dynamics. United State of America: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company; 1978.

42.

Torrington

, Hall

. Human Resource Management, 4th ed. Hertfordshire: Prentice Hall; 1998.

43.

Greenhaus

, Callanan . Career Management. United State of America: Harcourt Brace College Publishers; 1994.

44.

Tai . Skill-based technological change and wage inequality: Evidence from a plant retooling. The American Journal of Sociology. 2006;107:273–320.

45.

Khalid

, Ashraf

, Azeem

, Ahmed

. Proposing a training evaluation strategy to ensure training transfer in public sector organizations in Pakistan: An exploratory account. International Journal of Human Resource Studies. 2012;2(1):111–21.

46.

Milkovich

, Newman

. Compensation, 9th ed. Irwin: McGraw-Hill; 2008.

47.

Dessler

. Human Resource Management, Upper Saddle River. 8th ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Dickerson; 2000.

48.

Aktar

, Kamruzzaman

, Ali

. The impact of rewards on employee performance in commercial banks of bangladesh: An empirical study. IOSR Journal of Business and Management. 2012;6(2):09–15.

49.

Qureshi

, Sajjad SR . An empirical analysis of the impact of compensation on job performance and work-family conflict in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia-“a correlation model. European Scientific Journal, ESJ. 2015;11(4):170–87.

50.

Gerhart

, Fang

. Pay, intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, performance, and creativity in the workplace: Revisiting long-held beliefs. The Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior. 2015;2:7.1–7.33.

51.

Pearce

, Stevenson

, Perry

. Managerial compensation based on organizational performance: A time series analysis of the effects of merit pay. Academy of Management Journal. 1985;28(2):261–78.

52.

Timothy

, Anthony

. Performance appraisal format: Role clarity and evaluation criteria. Research in Higher Education. 1980;13(3):225–32.

53.

Abdulkadir

, Isiaka

, Adedoyin

. Effects of strategic performance appraisal, career planning and employee participation on organizational commitment: An empirical study. International Business Research. 2012;5(4):124–33.

54.

Gahlan

, Singh

. The effect of role overload and role ambiguity on job performance of IT professionals in india. Journal of Management and Research. 2015;13(1):37–49.

55.

Yurur

, Sarikaya

. The effects of workload, role ambiguity, and social support on burnout among social workers in turkey. Administration in Social Work. 2012;36(5):457–78.

56.

Sawyer

. Goal and process clarity: Specification of multiple constructs of role ambiguity and a structural equation model of their antecedents and consequences. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1992;77(2):130–42.

57.

Pittino

, Visintin

, Lenger

, Sternad

. Are high performance work practices really necessary in family SMEs? An analysis of the impact on employee retention. Journal of Family Business Strategy. 2016;7(2):75–89.

58.

David Shepherd

, Leslie

. Fine scaling and measurement: Role conflict and role ambiguity reconsidered. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management. 1994;14(2):57–65.

59.

Diamandis

, Kotler

. Bold: How to go big, create wealth and impact the world. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster. 2015.