外文翻譯--與薪酬策略相匹配的創(chuàng)新戰(zhàn)略能提高企業(yè)績(jī)效嗎？(已修改)
2025-06-01 08:17 本頁(yè)面
【正文】 中文 3827 字 本科畢業(yè)論文（設(shè)計(jì)） 外文翻譯 外文出處 Personnel Review, 2020（ 3） :300316 外文作者 KuenHung Tsai， Christine Chou， MingYi Chen 原文 Does matching pay policy with innovation strategy really improve firm performance? Introduction In a fastmoving and globalized world, a firm must maintain its petitive advantage to constantly improve its performance and pete with its petitors. The petitive advantage concept includes the capabilities, resources, relationships, and decisions that permit a firm to capitalize on opportunities and avoid threats within its industry (Hofer and Schendel, 1978). Porter (1985) argued that human resourcemanagement (HRM) helps a firm obtain a petitive advantage by lowering costs, increasing product sourcing and service differentiation, or both. However, achieving a petitive advantage through human resources requires a strategic management perspective (Jackson and Schuler, 1995). This is the basic rationale of strategic human resource management (SHRM). Recent studies have examined SHRM as a means of enhancing organizational petitive advantage, which improves overall firm performance (Arthur, 1994。 Huselid, 1995。 MacDuffie, 1995) Previous authors have described SHRM as the process of linking HR practices to business strategy (Ulrich and Lake, 1991). Human resource managers have long regarded pensation as a crucial lever to move employees toward the desired goals of an organization (McLagan and Nel, 1995). Examining the effects of pay policy on an enterprise has bee a very important issue in the HRM field as managers increasingly emphasize SHRM. Prior research has contributed, at the individual level, to the nexus between pay policy and several important constructs by examining issues such as satisfaction (Dyer and Theriault, 1976。 Rice et al., 1990), retention (Holzer, 1990。Barber and Bretz, 2020), and performance (Neal, 1993。 Levine, 1993。 Trevor et al., 1997).At the firm level, several studies argue that matching pay policy with business strategy may increase organizational performance (Miles and Snow, 1984。 Carroll,1987). In addition, a few recent studies discuss the impact of business strategy on pensation (Singh and Agarwal, 1999。 Yanadori and Marler, 2020). Although previous studies address the strategic perspective of pay policy, only a few empirical investigations were conducted (. Balkin and GomezMejia, 1990。Montemayor, 1996). These studies provide a solid foundation for subsequent research , but challenges must still be addressed in terms of their methodology and interpretation of results. For example, previous analyses were grounded in small sample sizes and scarcely controlled for extraneous factor effects such as firm size and industry characteristics. Therefore, the effect which pay policy bined with business strategy has on firm performance remains to be fully examined. Even though pay policy is regarded as a crucial HR lever to influence employee behavior and enhance firm performance (McLagan and Nel, 1995。 Song et al., 2020), some HR scholars argue that pay may be valuable in recruiting and retaining employees but is typically unrelated to productivity (Rosenbloom and Hallman, 1981。 Hills, 1987). Other authors note that individual incentive pay may undermine teamwork and encourage a shortterm focus, which often decreases organizational performance (Pfeffer, 2020). A pay increase may also lead to rising firm costs (Becker and Gerhart, 1996). Disputes regarding the role of pay which the strategic pensation viewpoint emphasizes necessitate a further examination of this perspective. This study draws on a large dataset to support a developed conceptual fram
畢業(yè)設(shè)計(jì)相關(guān)推薦
鄂ICP備17016276號(hào)-1