Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T01:53:39.282Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Psychometric Assessment of a Human Resources Practice Measure for Temporary Agency Workers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 April 2019

Filipa Sobral Open the ORCID record for Filipa Sobral [Opens in a new window] ,
Maria José Chambel ,
Filipa Castanheira  and
Francisco Cesário
Filipa Sobral*
Affiliation:
Universidade Católica Portuguesa (Portugal)
Maria José Chambel
Affiliation:
Universidade de Lisboa (Portugal)
Filipa Castanheira
Affiliation:
Universidade Nova de Lisboa (Portugal)
Francisco Cesário
Affiliation:
APPsyCI/ISPA (Portugal)
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Filipa Sobral. Universidade Católica Portuguesa, Centro Regional do Porto, Faculdade de Psicologia e Educação, Research Centre for Human Development (CEDH). Rua de Diogo Botelho, 1327 4169–005 Porto (Portugal). E-mail: fsobral@porto.ucp.pt
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Studies have proposed and validated several measures that evaluate employee’s perceptions of the human resources practices (HRP). However, given the changes occurring in the labor market, there is a need to develop a measure specially adapted to the contingent workers specific employment relationship. Thus, this study assesses an HRP system scale that was administered to temporary agency workers (TAW) to examine the scale’s response process, internal structure and relation to other variables (i.e., affective commitment). The measure was administered to 4,551 Portuguese TAW. The Messick’s validation framework (1995) was use and two sectors were compared. Descriptive analyses, scale reliabilities, item characteristics, exploratory, confirmatory, and multiple group analyses demonstrated that the measure had good psychometric properties. Moreover, there were positive correlations between the HRP scale and affective commitment. The results contribute to a better understanding of managing TAW’s in agencies and client companies. HRP are a valuable method for “communicating” with these workers, who are then able to recognize and respond to the investment. This is the first study to develop and assess the psychometric properties of an HRP system measure for TAW and to cross-validate it with workers’ affective commitment towards both companies that are involved in this employment relation.

Keywords

affective commitmentcontingent workhuman resource practicespsychometric assessmenttemporary agency workers
Type
Research Article
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 22 , 2019 , E16
Copyright
Copyright © Universidad Complutense de Madrid and Colegio Oficial de Psicólogos de Madrid 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (Grant/Award Number: PTDC/MHC-PSO/ 4399/2012).

How to cite this article:

Sobral, F., Chambel, M. J., Castanheira, F., & Cesário, F. (2019). A psychometric assessment of a human resources practice measure for temporary agency workers. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 22. e16. Doi:10.1017/sjp.2019.18

References

Arbuckle, J. L. (2003). Amos 5.0 update to the Amos user’s guide. Chicago, IL: SmallWaters.Google Scholar
Armstrong, M. (2014). A handbook of human resource management practice (13th Ed.). London, UK: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
Ashforth, B. K., & Saks, A. M. (1996). Socialization tactics: Longitudinal effects on newcomer adjustment. Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 149–178. https://doi.org/10.5465/256634Google Scholar
Batistič, S. (2018). Looking beyond - socialization tactics: The role of human resource systems in the socialization process. Human Resource Management Review, 28, 220–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2017.06.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blau, P. (1964). Power and exchange in social life. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Bonet, R., Cappelli, P., & Hamori, M. (2013). Labor market intermediaries and the new paradigm for human resources. The Academy of Management Annals, 7(1), 341–392. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2013.774213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowen, D. E., & Ostroff, C. (2004). Understanding HRP-firm performance linkages: The role of ‘strength’ of the HRM system. Academy of Management Review, 29(2), 203–221.Google Scholar
Boxall, P., & Purcell, J. (2011). Strategy and human resource management (3rd Ed.). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Buch, R., Kuvaas, B., & Dysvik, A. (2010). Dual support in contract workers’ triangular employment relationships. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 77(1), 93–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2010.02.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cagliano, R., Caniato, F., Longoni, A., & Spina, G. (2014). Alternative uses of temporary work and new forms of work organization. Production Planning & Control, 25(9), 762–782. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2012.750387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambel, M. J., & Sobral, F. (2011). Training is an investment with return in temporary workers: A social exchange perspective. Career Development International, 16(2), 161–177. https://doi.org/10.1108/13620431111115613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambel, M. J., Castanheira, F., & Sobral, F. (2016). Temporary agency versus permanent workers: A multigroup analysis of associations between human resource management, work engagement and affective commitment. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 37(4), 665–689. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143831X14550695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Cuyper, N., De Witte, H., & van Emmerik, H. (2011). Temporary employment: Costs and benefits for (the careers of) employees and organizations. Career Development International, 16(2), 104–113. https://doi.org/10.1108/13620431111115587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Jong, J. (2014). Externalization motives and temporary versus permanent employee psychological well-being: A multilevel analysis. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 23(6), 803–815. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432x.2013.818217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Den Hartog, D. N., Boon, C., Verburg, R. M., & Croon, M. A. (2013). HRM, communication, satisfaction, and perceived performance: A cross-level test. Journal of Management, 39(6), 1637–1665. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206312440118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downing, S. M. (2003). Validity: On the meaningful interpretation of assessment data. Medical Education, 37(9), 830–837. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2923.2003.01594.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eurostat (2019). General and regional statistics: Temporary employees as percentage of the total number of employees. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-datasets/-/tesem110Google Scholar
Field, A. P. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics (4th Ed.). London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
George, E., Levenson, A., Finegold, D., & Chattopadhyay, P. (2010). Extra-role behaviors among temporary workers: How firms create relational wealth in the United States of America. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 21(4), 530–550. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585191003612034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerbing, D. W., & Hamilton, J. G. (1996). Viability of exploratory factor analysis as a precursor to confirmatory factor analysis. Structural Equation Modeling, 3(1), 62–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519609540030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guest, D. (2017). Human resource management and employee well-being: Towards a new analytic framework. Human Resource Management Journal, 27(1), 22–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halbesleben, J. R. B., & Clark, S. K. (2010). The experience of alienation among temporary workers in high-skill jobs: A qualitative analysis of temporary firefighters. Journal of Managerial Issues, 22(4) 531–545.Google Scholar
Höge, T., Sora, B., Weber, W. G., Peiró, J. M., & Caballer, A. (2015). Job insecurity, worries about the future, and somatic complaints in two economic and cultural contexts: A study in Spain and Austria. International Journal of Stress Management, 22(3), 223–242. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, J., & Wang, R. (2018). Want engaged temporary agency workers? Think beyond the money. Social Behavior Personality, 46(6), 1029–1042. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.7067CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jöreskog, K. G. (2007). Factor analysis and its extensions. In Cydeck, R. & MacCallum, R. C. (Eds.), Factor analysis at 100. Historical developments and future directions (pp. 47–77). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.Google Scholar
Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from person’s responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50(9), 741–749. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.50.9.741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., & Smith, C. A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and occupations: Extension and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(4), 538–551. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.4.538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nishii, L. H., & Wright, P. M. (2008). Variability within organizations: Implications for strategic human resources management. In Smith, D. B. (Ed.), LEA’s organization and management series. The people make the place: Dynamic linkages between individuals and organizations (pp. 225–248). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis Group/Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
OECD (2018), OECD Employment Outlook 2018, OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/empl_outlook-2018-enGoogle Scholar
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sobral, F., Chambel, M. J., & Castanheira, F. (2016). Managing motivation in the contact center: The employment relation of outsourcing and temporary agency workers. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143831X16648386Google Scholar
Sobral, F., Lopes, S., Chambel, M. J., & Castanheira, F. (2015). A motivation profile analysis: The case of temporary agency work. In Chambel, M. J. (Ed.), The self-determination theory applied to the new work arrangements (pp. 23–56). New York, NY: Nova Publishers.Google Scholar
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
Takeuchi, R., Lepak, D. P., Wang, H., & Takeuchi, K. (2007). An empirical examination of the mechanisms mediating between high performance work systems and the performance of Japanese organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 1069–1083. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.1069CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ulrich, D., Younger, J., & Brockbank, W. (2008). The twenty-first-century HR organization. Human Resource Management, 47(4), 829–850. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
World Employment Confederation (WEC) (2018). Economic Report 2018 Edition. Brussels, Belgium: Author.Google Scholar
Zacharatos, A., Barling, J., & Iverson, R. D. (2005). High-performance work systems and occupational safety. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(1), 77–93. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.1.77CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zimmerman, T., Gavrilova-Aguilar, M., & Cullum, P. (2013). Rethinking human resource strategies: A shift in the treatment of contingent workers. International Journal of Business and Management, 8(7), 28–34. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v8n7p28CrossRefGoogle Scholar