HRM practices and post-promotion managerial performance. Subordinates’ perspective
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/EBHRM-08-2014-0019 |
| Pages | 144-161 |
| Published date | 01 August 2016 |
| Date | 01 August 2016 |
| Author | Vathsala Wickramasinghe,Melanie Samaratunga |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour,Global HRM |
HRM practices and post-promotion
managerial performance
Subordinates’perspective
Vathsala Wickramasinghe and Melanie Samaratunga
Department of Management of Technology,
University of Moratuwa, Moratuwa, Sri Lanka
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship between human resource
management (HRM) practices and post-promotion performance of managers from subordinates’
perspective.
Design/methodology/approach –For the study, survey methodology was used and 391
respondents who fulfilled selection criteria set for the study responded. The hypothesised relationships
were examined by regression analysis.
Findings –It was found that the job description and promotion practices have significant relationship
with post-promotion performance.
Practical implications –The findings imply the importance of promotion practices and the need of
maintaining and using job descriptions in facilitating post-promotion performance.
Originality/value –Several previous studies investigated the post-promotion managerial
performance based on mathematical modelling and single firm case studies. However, it is very
rare to find academic research that investigated the relationship between HRM practices and
post-promotion performance of managers.
Keywords Human resource management (general), Post-promotion performance
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Business organisations world-wide use promotions to assign employees to a higher
level job positions where they can best contribute to organisations’performance.
Promoted employees may experience an increase in earnings and they may receive
opportunities to acquire new capabilities while organisations will be able to retain their
valuable employees (Cobb-Clark and Dunlop, 1999).
However, previous studies (such as Anderson et al., 1999; Fairburn and Malcomson,
2001; Lazear, 2004) provide evidence that employees’post-promotion performance falls
relative to his or her pre-promotion performance. Further, previous studies (e.g. Baker
et al., 1994; Chan, 2006) provide evidence that when competing with the external labour
market, potential new hires have an advantage over incumbents for the higher level job
positions. In a similar vein, it could be assumed that when competing within the
internal labour market, there may be a ceiling for an internal employee once a certain
level of hierarchy is reached. These situations challenge the conventional view that
firm-specific human capital is rare and valuable, and has implications for the career
advancement of employees within the firm.
Therefore, research into human resource management (HRM) practices and post-
promotion performance of managers are important for several reasons. First, the majority
of previous studies on post-promotion performance were based on mathematical modelling
(e.g. Fairburn and Malcomson, 2001; Lazear, 2004) or single firm case studies (e.g. Barmby
et al., 2012) using secondary data. The findings of such studies do not provide sufficient
Evidence-based HRM: a Global
Forum for Empirical Scholarship
Vol. 4 No. 2, 2016
pp. 144-161
©Emerald Group Publishing Limited
2049-3983
DOI 10.1108/EBHRM-08-2014-0019
Received 12 August 2014
Revised 5 January 2015
15 May 2015
30 June 2015
21 August 2015
Accepted 26 August 2015
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/2049-3983.htm
144
EBHRM
4,2
information to make informed decisions across organisations. Hence, more studies are
needed to provide new, rare evidence in order to enhance the understanding of post-
promotion performance. As detailed in the section on sample, we have attempted to
overcome this shortcoming by conducting an empirical study in Sri Lanka.
Second, our extensive review of academic journals in management failed to find
specific empirical studies that investigated the relationship between HRM practices and
post-promotion performance of managers. Therefore, building on the available literature
on post-promotion performance of managers, there is a room to question what is the
relationship between HRM practices and post-promotion performance of managers?
In the above context, the main objective of our study was to investigate the relationship
between HRM practices and post-promotion managerial performance. The literature
identifies subordinates’feedback as one of the main sources of 360 degree or multi-source
performance feedback programmes (Atkins and Wood, 2002; Brutus et al., 1999; DeNisi
and Kluger, 2000; Kets de Vries et al., 2004) and subordinates’ratings serve as a basis for
subsequent selection of development goals of managers (Brutus et al., 1999; Kets de Vries
et al., 2004). Building on such literature, the study investigated the subordinates’
perspective on post-promotion performance of their immediate superiors.
Consistent with the objectives, in the next section, the relevant literature is briefly
reviewed and relevant hypotheses are provided. This is followed by the methodology
adopted. Subsequently, the main findings are presented and discussed. The paper
concludes with a discussion on the implications of the findings and research areas for
further inquiry and understanding.
2. Review of literature
2.1 Promotion
There is an agreement on the meaning of the term “promotion”in the HRM literature
(Iverson and Roy, 1994; Peters et al., 2000; Spilerman and Lunde, 1991). Peters et al.
(2000, p. 274) define promotion as “the advancement of an individual from a particular
position to one higher rank within the organisational hierarchy”. A promotion is almost
always associated with the increases in responsibility, salary, and organisational
benefits (Peters et al., 2000).
These features of promotion distinguish it from job changes due to lateral transfers
such as scheduled non-merit upgrades, task reorganisations or job reclassifications,
which are not necessarily merit driven,usually do not involve substantialchanges in the
compensation, anddo not imply career advancement (Acosta, 2010; Schaefer et al.,1979).
2.2 Post-promotion performance
Peter and Hull (1969b, p. 27) said “assuming the existence of enough ranks in the
hierarchy –each employee rises to, and remains at, his or her level of incompetence”;
this situation may be applicable to all employees in all organisational hierarchies.
Fetzer (2006) showed that an employee climbs up the ladder until he or she reaches a level
within the organisation in which he or she cannot perform competently, and the duties of
the new job are too much for he or she to handle well. Dwan (2000, p. 72) states “for various
reasons a manager may struggle to function in he or she role. […] poor performance is
(will be) the norm. […] staff carrying or covering for an incompetent manager eventually
get to a point when they have had enough. Tolerance will evaporate, replaced by a loss of
job satisfaction, reduced personal performance and a lack of commitment to their role and
the organisation. At which point, experienced staff may decide to leave”.Further,basedon
145
Post-
promotion
managerial
performance
To continue reading
Request your trial