Line managers as implementers of HRM : the effect of line managers’ limitations on their HRM implementation effectiveness

Rationale Two aspects which are critical for HRM to be successful are the presence of HRM practices and the effectiveness of HRM implementation. Line managers are responsible for HRM implementation in an organization since they have to execute the HRM practices on the work floor. Nevertheless, research has indicated that line managers find implementing HRM practices difficult because of several limitations they experience in implementing HRM. HRM practices can be developed properly, but if line managers fail to implement them successfully on the work floor they are still not effective. Research objective and questions This research aims to measure to what extent line managers perceive the suggested limitations as hindering and whether their employees perceive their HRM implementation as effective. Furthermore, it aims to examine to what extent line managers’ limitations influence their effectiveness in HRM (according to their employees). This research objective leads to the following research questions: 1) To what extent can line managers implement HRM practices effectively? and 2) What is the influence of the limitations that line managers experience in implementing HRM on their HRM implementation effectiveness? Line managers’ limitations in implementing HRM Many researchers expressed concern about line managers’ performance due to a number of limitations. First of all, line managers have a lack of desire to implement HRM. However, willingness is essential for someone to perform effectively. Furthermore, line managers do not have capacity to implement HRM, since they have other, more pressing, short term operational responsibilities. This short-range focus may result in people management that is generally less effective. Besides, line managers have limited skills and competences in HRM due to a lack of training. It is suggested that these low competences are a significant constrain on the effective devolution of HRM responsibilities to line managers. Line managers are also hindered by a lack of support from the HR department and it is argued that line managers cannot perform their HR tasks effectively without the assistance of HR professionals. Lastly, line managers rely on clear policies and procedures on what their HR responsibilities imply and on how to execute HRM practices. Without these policies & procedures, their HRM implementation effectiveness is likely to suffer. Based on this literature, I developed the following (positively formulated) hypotheses: Hypotheses 1: The more desire line managers have to perform HR tasks, the more effectively they will implement them on the work floor. 2: The more capacity line managers have to execute HR tasks next to their operational tasks, the more effectively they will implement them on the work floor. 3: The more competent line managers perceive themselves to perform HR tasks, the more effectively they will 5 implement them on the work floor. 4: The more HR support line managers perceive to receive from HR professionals in performing their HR tasks, the more effectively they will implement them on the work floor. 5: The more policies and procedures line managers have on their HR responsibilities and on how to execute HRM practices, the more effectively they will implement HR tasks on the work floor Methodology l performed statistical data analysis to answer the research questions. Nehles (2006) developed a research instrument based on non-HRM literature to measure the limitations that line managers experience in HRM. Line managers’ HRM implementation effectiveness is measured by asking their subordinates’ opinion of their HR performance on five HRM practices. Nehles (2007-2008) collected data by means of questionnaires in two case organizations; an international naval defence company and a construction company. For measuring line managers’ limitations in implementing HRM, the research population was line managers at various levels of an organization responsible for the supervision of a team of employees. For measuring line managers’ HRM implementation effectiveness, the research population was line managers’ subordinates. Results & conclusions Contrary to earlier research, I found that line managers perceive themselves as effective as they do not perceive limitations in implementing HRM and they are also perceived as effective by their subordinates. Thus, line managers have found a way to perform their HR role to their own satisfaction as well as to the satisfaction of their subordinates. In order to investigate whether the limitations have an effect on line managers’ effectiveness in implementing HRM practices, I performed a multiple regression analysis to test the hypotheses. I performed three regression models (1) without control variables, (2) with demographic control variables, and (3) with demographic and organizational control variables. Without controlling for the organization in which the research was performed, I can conclude that the more capacity line managers have to apply HRM practices, the more HR competences they have and the better they get supported by HR professionals, the more effectively they implement HRM practices on the work floor. Therefore, I support hypotheses 2, 3 and 4. However, when controlling for the organization, only line managers HR competences are significantly positively related to their effectiveness in implementing HRM. Policies and procedures available for line managers have no relation with their HRM implementation effectiveness and therefore hypothesis 5 is rejected. Line managers’ desire to implement HRM has a negative effect on their HRM implementation effectiveness and therefore hypothesis 1 is rejected. This remarkable finding can be explained by the fact that for employees it does not matter whether their line manager believes in HRM practices, since employees themselves might not see the added value of certain HRM practices. Employees might not value standardized procedures and depersonalized instruments but prefer a personal approach with individual decisions.