↓ Skip to main content

Line Manager Implementation Perceptions as a Mediator of Relations Between High-Performance Work Practices and Employee Outcomes

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Applied Psychology, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Readers on

mendeley
309 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Line Manager Implementation Perceptions as a Mediator of Relations Between High-Performance Work Practices and Employee Outcomes
Published in
Journal of Applied Psychology, January 2015
DOI 10.1037/apl0000024
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Strategic human resources management (SHRM) scholars recently have suggested that high-performance work practices (HPWP) implementation might serve as a critical mediator between HPWP and workplace outcomes. This study proposes and tests a model that positions line managers' perceptions regarding the extent to which they implement their organization's HPWP as a mediator of relations between HPWP and employee attitudes (i.e., turnover intentions and participative decision-making perceptions) and behavior (i.e., job performance). Using data from 507 line managers and 109 matched line manager-subordinate response sets, the results suggest that line managers' HPWP implementation perceptions fully mediate relations between HPWP and employee outcomes. The authors also found that line managers' human resources competency and political skill affect their HPWP implementation perceptions. Overall, these findings contribute to a more informed understanding of relationships between HPWP and work outcomes and suggest that additional SHRM research is needed to better understand whether and how HPWP are implemented. (PsycINFO Database Record

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 309 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Taiwan 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 304 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 72 23%
Student > Master 29 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 26 8%
Lecturer 17 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 12 4%
Other 55 18%
Unknown 98 32%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 144 47%
Psychology 26 8%
Social Sciences 21 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 8 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 <1%
Other 10 3%
Unknown 97 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 September 2016.
All research outputs
#16,046,765
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Applied Psychology
#2,280
of 3,366 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,122
of 359,515 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Applied Psychology
#34
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,366 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.0. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 359,515 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.