1452 K. Jiang et al.contributions i

1452 K. Jiang et al.

contributions in an employee–organization relationship (Tsui et al., 1997). According to the norm of reciprocity (Gouldner, 1960) and social exchange perspective (Blau, 1964), when organizations value employees’ contribution and care about their well-being via investment in HR systems, employees are expected to reciprocate by exerting positive work attitudes and behaviours towards organizations. In line with this rationale, Takeuchi et al. (2007) found that social exchange quality between employees and organi-zations mediated the relationship between high performance work systems and organizational performance in addition to the mediating role of collective human capital. Other scholars have also found that HR systems fostered aggregate perceived organizational support and affective commitment which further related to in-role and extra-role behaviours and organizational outcomes (e.g., Chuang and Liao, 2010; Gong et al., 2009; Guest, 2001; Messersmith et al., 2011; Sun et al., 2007; Wright et al., 2003).

Several recent studies have also used the AMO framework to examine the mediation process between HR systems and firm performance. As a variation of several of these perspectives, the AMO model suggests that employees’ ability, motivation, and oppor-tunity to perform are three elements of employee performance and HR systems can be associated with firm performance through its influence on these three elements (Appelbaum et al., 2000; Becker and Huselid, 1998; Delery and Shaw, 2001; Gerhart, 2007; Guest, 1997; Jiang et al., 2012a; Lepak et al., 2006). In a recent meta-analytic review, Jiang et al. (2012b) drew upon the AMO model to classify HR practices into three dimensions corresponding to the three elements of employee performance and found that human capital and employee motivation partially mediated the impact of three HR dimensions on operational and financial performance. They did not include employees’ opportunity to contribute as a mediator due to the scant research on the mediating role of this variable.

In addition to the mediating mechanisms through employee outcomes, researchers have also explored the mediating role of organizational capabilities. A specific type of organizational capability that has recently attracted researchers’ attention is the dynamic capability of organizations. Dynamic capabilities refer to a set of capabilities which enable the firm to ‘integrate, build, and reconfigure internal and external competences to address rapidly changing environments’ (Teece et al., 1997, p. 516). As an extension of the resource-based view, the dynamic capabilities view emphasizes how an organiza-tion adapts to environmental change by developing and exploiting its capabilities (Leiblein, 2011). Strategic HRM research has examined the mediating role of several dynamic capabilities, such as knowledge integration (Collins and Smith, 2006), adaptive capability (Wei and Lau, 2010), absorptive capacity (Chang et al., 2013), organizational ambidexterity (Patel et al., 2013), and HR flexibility (Beltrán-Martín et al., 2008).

Combined, unit-level strategic HRM research has heavily relied on the resource-based view of the firm (Barney, 1991) and the behavioural perspective of HRM (Jackson et al., 1989; Schuler and Jackson, 1987) to understand ‘why’ and ‘how’ a bundle of HR practices or HR systems can be related to organizational performance. Consistent with these two perspectives, researchers on the mediating mechanisms of the HR systems–performance relationship at the unit-level analysis have explored the mediating role of both organizational capability and collective employee outcomes (e.g., human capital, employee attitudes and behaviours). When examining the mediating effect through

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1:

1452 K. Jiang et al.kontribusi dalam hubungan karyawan – organisasi (Tsui et al., 1997). Menurut norma timbal balik (Gouldner, 1960) dan pertukaran sosial perspektif (Blau, 1964), ketika organisasi nilai karyawan kontribusi dan peduli tentang mereka kesejahteraan melalui investasi dalam sistem HR, karyawan diharapkan untuk membalas dengan mengerahkan kerja positif sikap dan perilaku terhadap organisasi. Dengan alasan ini, Takeuchi et al. (2007) menemukan bahwa pertukaran sosial kualitas antara karyawan dan pengelolaan dimediasi hubungan antara sistem kerja kinerja tinggi dan kinerja organisasi selain peran mediasi kolektif modal manusia. Ulama lain juga menemukan bahwa sistem HR dipupuk agregat dirasakan organisasi dan afektif komitmen yang lebih lanjut terkait dengan perilaku dalam peran dan ekstra-peran dan hasil organisasi (misalnya, Chuang dan Liao, 2010; Gong et al., 2009; Tamu, 2001; Messersmith et al., 2011; Sun et al., 2007; Wright et al., 2003).Beberapa penelitian terbaru juga digunakan AMO kerangka untuk memeriksa proses Mediasi antara sistem HR dan kinerja perusahaan. Sebagai variasi beberapa perspektif ini, AMO model menunjukkan bahwa kemampuan karyawan, motivasi, dan dibahas-tunity untuk melakukan tiga unsur dari kinerja karyawan dan sistem HR dapat dikaitkan dengan kinerja perusahaan melalui pengaruhnya pada tiga elemen ini (Appelbaum et al., 2000; Becker dan Huselid, 1998; Delery dan Shaw, 2001; Gerhart, 2007; Tamu, 1997; Jiang et al., 2012a; Lepak et al., 2006). Dalam review baru-baru meta analitik, Jiang et al. (2012b) menarik berdasarkan model AMO untuk mengklasifikasikan HR praktik ke tiga dimensi sesuai dengan tiga elemen dari kinerja karyawan dan menemukan bahwa motivasi karyawan dan modal manusia sebagian dimediasi dampak dari HR tiga dimensi pada kinerja operasional dan keuangan. Mereka tidak termasuk karyawan kesempatan untuk berkontribusi sebagai mediator karena penelitian kurang peran mediasi variabel ini.Selain mekanisme mediasi melalui hasil karyawan, peneliti juga telah dieksplorasi peran mediasi kemampuan organisasi. Jenis tertentu dari kemampuan organisasi yang baru-baru ini telah menarik perhatian para peneliti adalah kemampuan dinamis organisasi. Kemampuan dinamis merujuk pada serangkaian kemampuan yang memungkinkan perusahaan untuk 'mengintegrasikan, membangun, dan mengkonfigurasi kompetensi internal dan eksternal ke alamat yang cepat berubah lingkungan' (Teece et al., 1997, ms 516). Sebagai perpanjangan dari tampilan sumber daya berbasis, tampilan kemampuan dinamis menekankan bagaimana International Rescue Committee-tion menyesuaikan dengan perubahan lingkungan dengan mengembangkan dan mengeksploitasi kemampuan (Leiblein, 2011). Strategis HRM penelitian telah meneliti peran mediasi beberapa kemampuan yang dinamis, seperti pengetahuan integrasi (Collins dan Smith, 2006), kemampuan untuk beradaptasi (Wei dan Lau, 2010), absorptive kapasitas (Chang et al., 2013), organisasi ambidexterity (Patel et al., 2013), dan fleksibilitas HR (Beltrán-Martín et al., 2008).Combined, unit-level strategic HRM research has heavily relied on the resource-based view of the firm (Barney, 1991) and the behavioural perspective of HRM (Jackson et al., 1989; Schuler and Jackson, 1987) to understand ‘why’ and ‘how’ a bundle of HR practices or HR systems can be related to organizational performance. Consistent with these two perspectives, researchers on the mediating mechanisms of the HR systems–performance relationship at the unit-level analysis have explored the mediating role of both organizational capability and collective employee outcomes (e.g., human capital, employee attitudes and behaviours). When examining the mediating effect through