Job 2076

Journal of Organizational Behavior, J. Organiz. Behav.
37, 823–844 (2016)

Published online 16 December 2015 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/job.2076
Research Article
Job engagement, perceived organizational support,
high-performance human resource practices, and
cultural value orientations: A cross-level
investigation
LIFENG ZHONG1*, SANDY J. WAYNE2 AND ROBERT C. LIDEN2
1
School of Business, Renmin University of China, Beijing, China
2
College of Business Administration, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.
Summary Drawing on social exchange theory, we developed and tested a cross-level model of organizational-level pre-
dictors of job engagement. Specifically, we examined the impact of high-performance human resource (HR)
practices on employee engagement and work outcomes. Based on a sample of 605 employees, their immedi-
ate supervisors, and HR managers from 130 companies, our results indicated that high-performance HR prac-
tices were directly related to job engagement as well as indirectly related through employees’ perceived
organizational support. In turn, job engagement was positively related to in-role performance and negatively
related to intent to quit. Culture was found to act as a critical contextual factor, as our results also revealed that
the relationship between HR practices and perceived organizational support was stronger when collectivism
was high and when power distance orientation was low. Overall, the findings shed new light on the processes
and conditions through which employee work-related outcomes are enhanced owing to high-performance HR
practices. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Keywords: job engagement; perceived organizational support; high-performance human resource practices;
collectivism; power distance orientation
Organizational researchers have recently shown considerable interest in understanding employee job engagement
(Albrecht, 2010; Gruman & Saks, 2011; Schaufeli, 2012). According to Kahn (1990), job engagement is fundamen-
tally a motivational concept that represents employees’ active harnessing of their personal resources toward tasks at
work. Studies indicate that engaged employees are more committed, motivated, and empowered to perform in-role
and extra-role behaviors (Christian, Garza, & Slaughter, 2011; Rich, LePine, & Crawford, 2010) and are “less often
absent, and they do not intend to leave the organization” (Schaufeli, 2012, p. 5). Therefore, both scholars and prac-
titioners suggest that organizations can leverage employees’ job engagement and create a competitive advantage
(Macey & Schneider, 2008).
However, although extant research has generally demonstrated that job engagement is related to employee work
outcomes, the organizational and individual antecedent factors that influence employee job engagement are still
largely unknown (Crawford, LePine, & Rich, 2010; Saks, 2006). In particular, less theoretical explanation and
empirical work have been devoted to examining organization-level antecedents of employee job engagement, such
as high-performance human resource (HR) practices (Rich et al., 2010; Saks, 2006).
To address this issue, we build on Kahn’s (1990) ethnographic research by investigating the process through
which employee job engagement is influenced by high-performance HR practices and, in turn, related to employee
work outcomes. Our objective was to examine whether employees’ job engagement and relevant work outcomes are
impacted by high-performance HR practices from a cross-level perspective. More specifically, we test whether
*Correspondence to: Lifeng Zhong, School of Business, Renmin University of China, No. 59, Zhongguancun Avenue, Haidian District, Beijing,
100872, China. E-mail: zhonglf@ruc.edu.cn
Received 8 November 2014

Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Revised 30 October 2015, Accepted 19 November 2015
824 L. ZHONG ET AL.
employees’ job engagement is influenced by high-performance HR practices through its impact on perceived orga-
nizational support (POS), and in turn, the effects of job engagement on in-role performance, organizational citizen-
ship behavior (OCB), and intent to quit. In addition, recognizing that HR practices signal implicit values that must be
aligned with values held by individuals (Robert, Probst, Martocchio, Drasgow, & Lawler, 2000), we explore cultural
value orientations, including collectivism and power distance orientation, as moderators of the effects of high-
performance HR practices on POS. The conceptual model tested in the current research is summarized in Figure 1.
We make three important contributions to the job engagement literature by using multilevel modeling to investi-
gate the organizational antecedents of job engagement and its consequences. First, our research extends
previous studies on the antecedents of job engagement (Rich et al., 2010) by examining how an individual-level
factor (e.g., POS) and organization-level factor (e.g., high-performance HR practices) combine to impact job
engagement, addressing the call “to examine other potential influences from the work group and wider organization,
and to further explore the mediating processes involved” (Tuckey, Bakker, & Dollard, 2012, p. 25). Second, this
research is unique by exploring the cross-level indirect effect of high-performance HR practices on job engagement,
advancing our understanding regarding the underlying mechanism that transmits the predictive effects of organiza-
tional factors in the form of HR practices to job engagement. Third, we consider boundary conditions for the rela-
tionship between high-performance HR practices and POS, addressing the call for more research that explores the
moderating factors that play a role in developing POS (Eisenberger & Stinglhamber, 2011). In sum, this study goes
beyond prior research that has focused on individual-level predictors to examine organizational-level antecedents of
job engagement, as well as when and why this linkage occurs.
Theoretical Development and Hypotheses
Perceived organizational support and job engagement

Job engagement was originally defined by Kahn (1990) as the “harnessing of organization members’ selves to their
work roles; in engagement, people employ and express themselves physically, cognitively, and emotionally during
role performances” (p. 694). Later, Schaufeli, Salanova, González-Romá, and Bakker (2002) defined job engage-
ment as “a positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption”
(p. 74). Christian et al. (2011) argued that although operational definitions of “engagement” are often inconsistent
across studies, a common conceptualization of work engagement is that it connotes “high levels of personal invest-
ment in the work tasks performed on a job” (p. 89). Thus, in the current study, we follow Rich et al. (2010) and
define job engagement as
High-performance human
resource practices Organization-level
Collectivism
Individual-level
Power
distance
In-role performance
Perceived
Job OCB
organizational support
engagement Intent to quit
Figure 1. Multilevel model of job engagement, perceived organizational support, high-performance human resource practices,
and employee work-related outcomes
Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 37, 823–844 (2016)
DOI: 10.1002/job
JOB ENGAGEMENT, POS, AND HR PRACTICES 825
the simultaneous employment and expression of a person’s “preferred self” in task behaviors that promote
connections to work and to others, personal presence (physical, cognitive, and emotional), and active, full role
performances (Kahn, 1990, p. 700).
Given that studies have shown that job engagement contributes to employees’ work outcomes (Christian et al.,
2011; Rich et al., 2010), researchers have paid a great deal of attention to identifying antecedent conditions of
engagement. For example, Kahn (1990) described three psychological conditions in which people personally engage
and disengage at work. These conditions include psychological meaningfulness, psychological safety, and psycho-
logical availability. In recent years, scholars have underscored the importance of POS in building job engagement
(Macey & Schneider, 2008; Rich et al., 2010; Saks, 2006). In particular, Eisenberger and Stinglhamber (2011)
argued that the relationship between POS and job engagement currently “warrants much more attention” (p. 182).
POS refers to employees’ general beliefs “concerning the extent to which the organization values their contributions
and cares about their well-being” (Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison, & Sowa, 1986, p. 500). According to social
exchange theory (Blau, 1964), the more desired benefits, guarantees, and resources employees receive from their
work context and organization, the higher their POS, and the more motivated and obliged they are to reciprocate
by being more engaged in performance behaviors (Kahn, 1990; Rich et al., 2010; Saks, 2006). Therefore, we antic-
ipate that employees who perceive higher levels of POS are more engaged in their work roles.
Hypothesis 1: Perceived organizational support is positively related to employee job engagement.
High-performance HR practices and job engagement: POS as a mediator

Researchers have increasingly focused their attention on examining relationships between HR management practices
and POS (Gavino, Wayne, & Erdogan, 2012; Shore & Shore, 1995). However, the majority of studies tend to ad-
dress the effects of two or three individual HR practices on POS, such as developmental experiences and promotions
(Wayne, Shore, & Liden, 1997), goal setting and feedback (Hutchison & Garstka, 1996), inclusion and recognition
(Wayne, Shore, Bommer, & Tetrick, 2002), career development, training opportunities, and performance appraisal
(Kuvaas, 2008), and top-down information, performance feedback, and skills development (Tremblay, Cloutier,
Simard, Chênevert, & Vandenberghe, 2010). Other researchers have concentrated on particular types of HR prac-
tices, such as discretionary and transactional HR practices (Gavino et al., 2012; Shore & Shore, 1995) and support-
ive HR practices (Allen, Shore, & Griffeth, 2003). To date, despite recommendations as early as 1997 by Whitener,
relatively few attempts have been made to investigate the role of HR systems or high-performance HR practices in
forming employees’ POS.
High-performance HR practices refer to a combination of unique but interconnected HR management practices,
such as selective staffing, extensive training, internal mobility, employment security, clear job descriptions,
results-oriented appraisals, incentive rewards, and participation (Sun, Aryee, & Law, 2007). High-performance
HR practices may collectively serve as signals about an organization’s recognition of and investment in employees
and should likely convey a coherent message of organizational support and commitment to them (Allen et al., 2003;
Sun et al., 2007; Takeuchi, Chen, & Lepak, 2009). Applying signaling theory (Sheridan, Slocum, Buda, & Thomp-
son, 1990; Spence, 1973), high-performance HR practices signal to employees that the organization values, cares
about, and supports its employees and thus influence employees’ interpretations of HR practices, fostering their
perceptions of support (Gavino et al., 2012; Takeuchi, Lepak, Wang, & Takeuchi, 2007).
High-performance HR practices, such as selective staffing, extensive skills training, broad career paths, guaran-
teed job security, and extensive and open-ended rewards, reflect different investments organizations purposely make
in their employees (Shaw, Dineen, Fang, & Vellella, 2009; Tsui, Pearce, Porter, & Tripoli, 1997). According to
social exchange theory, the investments and inducements that organizations provide employees as manifested by
HR practices motivate employees to reciprocate by engaging in work-related behaviors that benefit the organization
DOI: 10.1002/job
826 L. ZHONG ET AL.
(Gould-Williams, 2007; Mossholder, Richardson, & Settoon, 2011). We expect that high-performance HR practices
implemented by organizations enhance employee job engagement.
Drawing on social exchange theory and the norm of reciprocity (Gouldner, 1960), Settoon, Bennett, and Liden
(1996) argued that
positive, beneficial actions directed at employees by the organization and /or its representatives contribute to the
establishment of high-quality exchange relationships that create obligations for employees to reciprocate in
positive, beneficial ways (p. 219).
When employees perceive a high level of organizational support, they are more likely to feel obliged to reciprocate for
what their organizations have provided by increasing their efforts to help the organization achieve its goals (Aselage &
Eisenberger, 2003). Thus, based on social exchange theory and extant research (Allen et al., 2003; Wayne et al., 1997),
we propose that high-performance HR practices positively relate to employees’ perceptions of organizational support,
which, in turn, play a mediating role in the relationship between high-performance HR practices and job engagement.
Hypothesis 2: High-performance HR practices are positively related to POS.
Hypothesis 3: High-performance HR practices are positively related to job engagement.
Hypothesis 4: Perceived organizational support mediates the relationship between high-performance HR practices
and job engagement.
Moderating influence of collectivism
Scholars suggest that cultural individual differences, such as collectivism, may alter the influence of organizational prac-
tices on POS, yet such moderating influence has received limited attention (Aselage & Eisenberger, 2003; Eisenberger &
Stinglhamber, 2011). Furthermore, the role of collectivism in affecting employees’ interpretations of organizational expe-
riences needs to be examined, especially in China, where there is empirical evidence of strong collectivism (Chen, 1995;
Xiao & Tsui, 2007). Thus, consistent with the emergent trend of examining individual-level cultural value orientations
(Erdogan & Liden, 2006; Ilies, Wagner, & Morgeson, 2007), we employ a contingency perspective to further examine
the moderating role of collectivism in the relationship between high-performance HR practices and employees’ POS.
At the societal level, collectivism is characterized by
a tight social framework in which people distinguish between in-groups and out-groups; they expect their
in-group (relatives, clan, organizations) to look after them, and in exchange for that they feel they owe absolute
loyalty to it (Hofstede, 1980, p. 45).
At the individual level, collectivism or collectivistic orientation refers to the extent to which the demands and inter-
ests of groups take precedence over individuals’ own personal desires and needs (Ilies et al., 2007; Marcus & Le,
2013). Collectivism involves
a propensity toward forming strong mutual bonds with others, differs in strength from one culture to another and
among the individuals within a culture (Eisenberger & Stinglhamber, 2011, p. 93).
Employees with a collectivist orientation define their identities based on their group memberships. These individuals
strongly identify with their in-group or the organization for which they work (Aselage & Eisenberger, 2003;
Erdogan & Liden, 2006; Francesco & Chen, 2004), have a tendency to “view ingroup outcomes as having personal
relevance” (Eisenberger & Stinglhamber, 2011, p. 94), and thus care more about the interests, performance, and
DOI: 10.1002/job
well-being of the groups or organizations to which they belong, compared with those with individualistic tendencies
(Wagner, 1995). According to social exchange theory, employees’ individual orientations, such as collectivism, may
be associated with employee perceptions and responses to the treatment received from the organization (Rhoades &
Eisenberger, 2002; Shore, Bommer, Rao, & Seo, 2009). Employees who are collectivistic are more likely to view
high-performance HR practices as forms of concern for the welfare of coworkers as well as themselves, conse-
quently influencing the association between high-performance HR practices and POS.
Hypothesis 5: Collectivism moderates the relationship between high-performance HR practices and POS, such
that the relationship is stronger when collectivism is high than when it is low.
Moderating influence of power distance orientation

Power distance is one of the most frequently examined cultural values in a transitional society such as China (Farh,
Hackett, & Liang, 2007). Hui, Wong, and Tjosvold (2007) suggest that cultural individual differences, such as
traditionality, which is conceptually similar to power distance orientation, may affect how employees react to work
experiences and have an impact on “the extent to which individual employees feel supported” (p. 745). Power
distance may influence how employees perceive and react to high-performance work systems, empowerment, and
delegation (Chen & Aryee, 2007; Robert et al., 2000; Wu & Chaturvedi, 2009; Zhang & Begley, 2011). Thus, power
distance may be another potential moderator in the relationship between high-performance HR practices and POS.
At the societal level, power distance refers to “the extent to which a society accepts the fact that power in insti-
tutions and organizations is distributed unequally” (Hofstede, 1980, p. 45). Power distance at the individual level,
sometimes labeled power distance orientation, refers to “the extent to which an individual accepts the unequal
distribution of power in institutions and organizations” (Clugston, Howell, & Dorfman, 2000, p. 9). As one of the
cultural value orientations, power distance orientation deals with an individual’s values regarding status, authority,
and power in organizations (Kirkman, Chen, Farh, Chen, & Lowe, 2009). In an organization, it is typical for
employees high in power distance orientation to accept status differences, behave submissively around managers,
engage in behaviors guided by their role as subordinates, be somewhat resistant to autonomy and empowerment
owing to a general sense of powerlessness, view participation with fear and distrust, and resist engaging in proactive
behavior (Chen & Aryee, 2007; Newman & Nollen, 1996). Employees high in power distance orientation may resist
organizational practices, such as self-management (Kirkman & Shapiro, 2001), and be less likely to consider high-
performance HR practices, such as participation, extensive training, and internal mobility as favorable treatment
received from the organization. On the other hand, employees low in power distance orientation may be receptive
to high-performance HR practices such as selective staffing, extensive training, internal mobility, results-oriented
appraisals, incentive rewards, and participation, as these require high employee involvement and responsibility.
Employees low in power distance are expected to respond favorably to these HR practices and perceive them as sig-
nals that the organization values them, impacting their POS. Therefore, we anticipate that the strength of the effect of
high-performance HR practices on employees’ POS is moderated by individual-level power distance orientation.
Hypothesis 6: Power distance orientation moderates the relationship between high-performance HR practices and
POS, such that the relationship is stronger when power distance orientation is low than when it is high.
Job engagement and employee work-related outcomes

In the current investigation, we treat in-role performance, OCB, and intent to quit as employee outcomes that are
positively or negatively influenced by job engagement. These dependent variables have been (i) identified as key
DOI: 10.1002/job
828 L. ZHONG ET AL.
outcomes of personal engagement (Kahn, 1990) and (ii) shown to affect organization performance (Allen et al.,
2003; Jiang, Lepak, Hu, & Baer, 2012).
In-role performance refers to the “behaviors that are recognized by formal reward systems and are part of the
requirements as described in job descriptions” (Williams & Anderson, 1991, p. 606). OCB has been defined as
individual behavior that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and
that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of the organization (Organ, 1988, p. 4).
Such citizenship behaviors are distinguished from employees’ in-role performance in that they reflect behaviors that
are generally not considered a required and explicit part of their job descriptions but are useful to the organization as
a whole (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, & Bachrach, 2000; Shore & Wayne, 1993). Intent to quit is conceived to be
“a conscious and deliberate willfulness to leave the organization” (Tett & Meyer, 1993, p. 262).
Job engagement consists of being physically, emotionally, and cognitively engrossed in work via a motivational
process through which individuals allocate personal resources intensely and persistently toward their performance
on the job (Rich et al., 2010). In an expanded model of presence and engagement, Kahn (1992) argued that “person-
ally engaging behaviors involve the channeling of personal energies into physical, cognitive, and emotional labors”
(p. 322), such as being physically involved in tasks, cognitively vigilant, and empathically connected to others, all of
which contribute toward effectiveness, including productivity and performance quality, as well as individual and
organizational growth. Moreover, employees who are psychologically captivated by their work, not only invest extra
effort in their tasks (Macey & Schneider, 2008), but likely desire to remain with the organization. According to Kahn
(1990), personal disengagement is “the simultaneous withdrawal and defense of a person’s preferred self in behav-
iors that promote a lack of connections, physical, cognitive, and emotional absence, and passive, incomplete role
performances” (p. 701). Personally disengaging may trigger employees to exhibit an intention to quit. Indeed, stud-
ies have shown that job engagement is positively and significantly related to both in-role performance and OCB
(Bakker & Xanthopoulou, 2009; Rich et al., 2010) and negatively related to intentions to quit (Schaufeli & Bakker,
2004). Thus, we anticipate that employees’ engagement in their work roles improves their in-role performance and
OCB and decreases their intent to quit.
Hypothesis 7: Employee job engagement is positively related to employee (a) in-role performance and (b) OCB
and negatively related to (c) intent to quit.
Method
Sample and procedure

We collected data from 130 companies located in Beijing of the People’s Republic of China to test the proposed
model. Seven hundred full-time employees, their respective 140 immediate supervisors, and 140 HR managers from
their organizations were invited to participate in the study. We sought information collected from three independent
sources representing multiple levels of the organization for the purpose of reducing the potential for same source
common-method bias (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, & Podsakoff, 2012) and to enable the testing of our cross-level
hypotheses. Separate surveys were administered to employees, immediate supervisors, and HR managers in three
different survey packages. Specifically, part-time MBA students of a university located in Beijing, who were work-
ing full time distributed the survey packets in their organizations. The part-time MBA students’ participation was
voluntary and had no bearing on grades. After clearly explaining the purpose, instructions, and anonymous nature
of the data collection at the end of one weekend class, each MBA student was asked to distribute a survey packet
to his or her HR manager, one supervisor, and five immediate subordinates of that supervisor. We asked the
DOI: 10.1002/job
MBA student to randomly select the supervisor and his or her immediate subordinates. We then asked each MBA
student to generate a list of the names of the HR manager, supervisor, and subordinates who were randomly selected
to participate in order to track the distribution and return of the surveys. The HR manager from each participating
company was asked to complete a survey including a measure of high-performance HR practices and questions re-
garding industry characteristics, company type, and company size. Supervisors also completed the high-performance
HR practices measure and rated up to five subordinates on in-role performance and OCB. Subordinates completed a
survey including measures of POS, job engagement, collectivism, power distance orientation, intent to quit, and
demographics. We relied on HR managers’ ratings of high-performance HR practices because of their knowledge
of the practices being assessed and to reduce problems associated with common-method variance (Gong, Law,
Chang, & Xin, 2009).
In the cover letter accompanying the survey, respondents were assured of the confidentiality of their responses and
that, if requested, we would provide feedback on the overall results of the study. Completed surveys were returned,
sealed in envelopes to one of the authors before the next weekend class. There were codes on the envelopes,
enabling us to match HR manager, supervisor, and subordinate surveys. Six hundred and fifty-seven subordinate sur-
veys, 136 supervisor surveys, and 134 HR manager surveys were returned, for response rates of 93.9, 97.1, and 95.7
percent, respectively. After removing incomplete surveys and records with unmatched HR manager–supervisor–
subordinate triads, the final sample for this study consisted of 130 HR managers (one HR manager per company),
130 supervisors (one supervisor per company), and 605 subordinates from the 130 companies.
Of the 605 subordinates, 46.78 percent were male. Respondents reported an average age of 29.84 years; they, on
average, had 3.93 years of work experience at the company. Of the immediate supervisors, 58.46 percent were men;
their average age was 35.57 years; they, on average, had 7.79 years of work experience at the company. As for the
HR managers, 41.54 percent of them were men, they reported an average age of 35.94 years, and they, on average,
had 6.43 years of work experience at the company.
Measures
The high-performance HR practices measure was originally developed in Chinese, but all of the other scales were
constructed in English, so we translated them into Chinese via a standard translation and back-translation procedure
(Brislin, 1986). Unless otherwise indicated, all items were measured on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from strongly
disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).
High-performance HR practices
We used the Chinese version of the 27-item scale developed by Sun et al. (2007), which has been used in China and
shown to have strong psychometric properties. This measure consisted of eight dimensions: selective staffing, exten-
sive training, internal mobility, employment security, clear job descriptions, results-oriented appraisals, incentive
rewards, and participation. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) indicated that the eight-factor model fit the data
well (χ 2 = 487.94, df = 296, CFI = 0.92, IFI = 0.93, RMSEA = 0.07, SRMR = 0.08), which suggested that the items
were reasonable measures of their respective HR practices.
To be consistent with previous research (Becker & Huselid, 1998; Lepak, Liao, Chung, & Harden, 2006; Liao,
Toya, Lepak, & Hong, 2009; Sun et al., 2007), which has focused on the fit of individual HR practices into a
coherent system, we used a unitary index that includes a set of synergistic HR practices to examine the impact of
high-performance HR practices on employee behaviors. Following the subscale aggregation approach used in prior
studies, such as Liao and colleagues (2009) and Zacharatos, Barling, and Iverson (2005), we averaged across all HR
practice items for the score on high-performance HR practices. In the current study, the Cronbach’s α for the sub-
scales, including selective staffing, extensive training, internal mobility, clear job descriptions, results-oriented
appraisals, incentive rewards, and participation, was 0.79, 0.85, 0.71, 0.76, 0.81, 0.74, and 0.81, respectively, which
displayed good internal reliability, except for the subscale of employment security for which Cronbach’s α was 0.67.
DOI: 10.1002/job
830 L. ZHONG ET AL.
The Cronbach’s α for the 27-item scale to measure high-performance HR practices was 0.83. Sample items for each
of the eight dimensions include “Great effort is taken to select the right person,” “There are formal training programs
to teach new hires the skills they need to perform their job,” “Employees have few opportunities for upward
mobility” (reverse coded), “Job security is almost guaranteed to employees in this job,” “The job description for
a position accurately describes all of the duties performed by individual employees,” “Performance is more often
measured with objective quantifiable results,” “Close tie or matching of pay to individual/group performance,”
and “Employees are provided the opportunity to suggest improvements in the way things are done.”
We calculated rwg(j) (James, Demaree, & Wolf, 1984, 1993) to assess the interrater agreement of the HR man-
agers’ and supervisors’ ratings of high-performance HR practices. The mean rwg value was 0.93. We also computed
an ICC1 (i.e., an intraclass correlation that indicates the percentage of variance accounted by between-group differ-
ences) and an ICC2 (i.e., the reliability of the group mean; Bliese, 2000; Kozlowski & Klein, 2000). The ICC1 value
for high-performance HR practices was 0.38, higher than the median value of 0.12 across studies reviewed by James
(1982). The ICC2 value was 0.55. Overall, rwg, ICC1, and ICC2 were comparable with the median or recommended
ICC values reported in the literature (George & Bettenhausen, 1990; Schneider, White, & Paul, 1998), suggesting
that HR managers provided a reliable assessment of high-performance HR practices.
Perceived organizational support

Perceived organizational support was measured with an 8-item scale (α = 0.89) developed by Eisenberger,
Cummings, Armeli, and Lynch (1997). This scale has demonstrated adequate levels of reliability and construct
validity (α = 0.90 in Dulac, Coyle-Shapiro, Henderson, & Wayne, 2008). Respondents indicated the extent of their
agreement with each item on a 7-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree). Two sample
items are “My organization cares about my opinions” and “My organization really cares about my well-being.”
Job engagement
Job engagement was measured with the 18-item scale developed by Rich et al. (2010). This scale consists of three
dimensions—physical engagement, emotional engagement, and cognitive engagement—that were shown to load
onto a higher order global factor, thus legitimizing aggregation of all items to create an overall measure of job
engagement (α = 0.99 in Rich et al., 2010). Two sample items are “I work with intensity on my work” and “I am
enthusiastic in my job.” Consistent with Rich and colleagues (2010), in the current study, we aggregated all items
to assess overall job engagement. Cronbach’s α was 0.92.
Collectivism
Following Ilies et al. (2007), collectivism was measured using three items (α = 0.72) taken from Wagner (1995).
Two sample items are “I prefer to work with others in a group rather than working alone” and “Working with a
group is better than working alone.”
Power distance orientation

Following previous research (e.g., Farh et al., 2007), we assessed power distance orientation with a 6-item
individual-level measure (α = 0.86) developed by Dorfman and Howell (1988). Two sample items are “Managers
should make most decisions without consulting subordinates” and “It is frequently necessary for a manager to use
authority and power when dealing with subordinates.”
In-role performance
We used Williams and Anderson’s (1991) 7-item scale (α = 0.86) to assess employee in-role performance. Two
sample items are “This employee adequately completes assigned duties” and “This employee fulfills responsibilities
specified in job description.”
DOI: 10.1002/job
Organization citizenship behavior

We used Lee and Allen’s (2002) 16-item scale (α = 0.85) to assess employees’ OCB. Two sample items are “Help
others who have been absent” and “Take action to protect the organization from potential problems.”
Intent to quit
Intent to quit was measured with a 5-item scale (α = 0.75) by Wayne et al. (1997). Sample items are “I am actively
looking for a job outside my company” and “As soon as I can find a better job, I’ll leave my company.”
Control variables
The survey respondents represented companies that varied widely in terms of size, industry, and company type.
Given that these characteristics have been shown to influence strategic HR practices (e.g., Datta, Guthrie, & Wright,
2005; Takeuchi et al., 2009), we controlled for industry characteristics, company type, and company size at the
organization level in the analyses. We created three dummy-coded variables to control for the potential effects of
industry characteristics (“Industry Dummy 1” was coded 1 if the industry is Manufacturing and 0 others. Similarly,
“Industry Dummy 2” was coded 1 if the industry is Transportation, Communication, Electric, Gas, Sanitary
Services and 0 others. “Industry Dummy 3” was coded 1 if the industry is Construction and others and 0 others.)
and four dummy-coded variables to control for the potential effects of company type (“Company Type Dummy
1” was coded 1 if the company type is state- and collectively owned and 0 others. “Company Type Dummy 2”
was coded 1 if the company type is privately owned and 0 others. “Company Type Dummy 3” was coded 1 if
the company type is share-holding and 0 others. “Company Type Dummy 4” was code 1 if the company type is
foreign-invested and others and 0 others.). Because filling out a survey can be viewed as a helping behavior, which
is more desirable in women than men (Eagly & Crowley, 1986), the MBA students may have been more likely to
select a woman to fill out the survey. Thus, we also controlled for supervisor sex and HR manager sex as
organization-level predictors in the analyses to eliminate the potential selection bias (Heckman, 1979). At the
individual-level, we controlled for employee age, employee sex, and company tenure, which are typically controlled
in OCB research (LePine, Erez, & Johnson, 2002) or have been demonstrated to be related to job engagement
(e.g., Avery, McKay, & Wilson, 2007; Rothbard, 2001; Sonnentag, 2003). Sex was dummy-coded as 0, male, and 1,
female. Company tenure was measured in years, which reflected how long the employee had worked in his or her
company.
Confirmatory factor analyses and data aggregation
In order to further validate the measures, we first conducted CFAs to examine the distinctiveness of the substantive
measures obtained from employees, including POS, collectivism, power distance orientation, job engagement, and
intent to quit. We constructed parcels for POS and power distance orientation and formed two indicators for each
construct by sequentially averaging its items with the highest and lowest loadings (Little, Cunningham, Shahar, &
Widaman, 2002). Also, following Rich and colleagues (2010), we aggregated across the items of each dimension
(using the mean scores of the three dimensions as three indicators) and loaded the three first-order engagement
dimensions onto a second-order factor, job engagement. The hypothesized five-factor measurement model treated
POS, collectivism, power distance orientation, job engagement, and intent to quit as five distinct factors, for which
we loaded each item or indicator onto its respective higher order factor. First, we compared the hypothesized five-
factor model with a four-factor alternative model, in which the items of collectivism and power distance orientation
loaded on a single factor. Then, we compared the hypothesized five-factor model with a one-factor alternative
model, in which the items or indicators of POS, collectivism, power distance orientation, job engagement, and intent
to quit loaded on a single factor. Results indicated that the hypothesized five-factor measurement model had a better
fit with the data (χ 2 = 446.99, df = 80, CFI = 0.94, IFI = 0.94, RMSEA = 0.09, SRMR = 0. 07) than the four-factor al-
ternative model (χ 2 = 589.27, df = 84, CFI = 0.92, IFI = 0.92, RMSEA = 0.10, SRMR = 0. 09; Δχ 2 = 142.28, Δdf = 4,
DOI: 10.1002/job
832 L. ZHONG ET AL.
р < .001) and one-factor alternative model (χ 2 = 1732.38, df = 90, CFI = 0.73, IFI = 0.73, RMSEA = 0.17, SRMR = 0.
11; Δχ 2 = 1285.39, Δdf = 10, р < .001). These results provided support for the five-factor measurement model of
POS, collectivism, power distance orientation, job engagement, and intent to quit as distinct constructs in the present
study. We also conducted CFAs to examine the distinctiveness of in-role performance and OCB, which were ob-
tained from employees’ supervisors. Results indicated that the hypothesized two-factor measurement model had a
better fit with the data (χ 2 = 239.09, df = 43, CFI = 0.96, IFI = 0.96, RMSEA = 0.09, SRMR = 0. 06) than the one-
factor alternative model (χ 2 = 410.12, df = 44, CFI = 0.93, IFI = 0.93, RMSEA = 0.12, SRMR = 0. 07; Δχ 2 = 171.03,
Δdf = 1, р < .001). These results provided support for the two-factor measurement model of in-role performance
and OCB as distinct constructs.
Data analyses
Our theoretical model is multilevel in nature, consisting of variables at both the organization level (i.e., high-
performance HR practices) and individual level (i.e., job engagement, in-role performance, OCB, intent to quit,
POS, collectivism, and power distance orientation). In testing the hypotheses, we conducted hierarchical linear
modeling (HLM; Raudenbush & Bryk, 2002) analyses because it can account for nesting in data while testing
cross-level direct and moderating effects. We tested all cross-level direct effect hypotheses using intercepts-as-
outcomes and cross-level moderating effects using slopes-as-outcomes models, controlling for industry dummies,
company type dummies, company size, supervisor sex, and HR manager sex at the organization level (i.e., Level
2), and for employee age, sex, and company tenure at the individual level (i.e., Level 1).
Results
The descriptive statistics, including the means, standard deviations, internal consistency reliabilities, and correla-
tions among all study variables, are presented in Table 1.
Prior to testing the hypotheses, we verified that there was enough between-group variance in POS, job engage-
ment, in-role performance, OCB, and intent to quit, as indicated by ICC1. Results of null models revealed that
for POS, ICC1 was 0.34, χ 2 = 404.71, df = 121, р < .001, indicating that 34 percent of the total variance in POS re-
sided between organizations. For job engagement, ICC1 was 0.19, χ 2 = 251.04, df = 121, р < .001, indicating that 19
percent of the total variance in job engagement resided between organizations. For in-role performance, ICC1 was
0.14, χ 2 = 209.88, df = 121, р < .001, indicating that 14 percent of the total variance in in-role performance resided
between organizations. For OCB, ICC1 was 0.22, χ 2 = 281.55, df = 121, р < .001, indicating that 22 percent of the
total variance in OCB resided between organizations. As for intent to quit, ICC1 was 0.17, χ 2 = 230.16, df = 129,
р < .001, indicating that 17 percent of the total variance in intent to quit resided between organizations. These results
revealed that there was significant organization-level variance in POS, job engagement, in-role performance, OCB,
and intent to quit, suggesting that it was meaningful to proceed with the analyses by adding organization-level high-
performance HR practices to explain between-organization variance in individual-level work-related outcomes.
Hypothesis 1 predicted that employees’ POS is positively related to job engagement. We estimated a Level 1
model to test this hypothesis, controlling for employees’ age, sex, and company tenure as Level 1 predictors and
industry characteristics, company type, company size, supervisor sex, and HR manager sex as Level 2 predictors
in the analyses. As shown in Table 2, employees’ POS positively and significantly related to job engagement (Model
1: γ = 0.24, р < .001). Thus, Hypothesis 1 was supported. In order to provide an estimate of the within-firm variance
in job engagement accounted for by POS, we computed the pseudo-R2 (Hofmann, 1997) for job engagement. We
found the pseudo-R2 for job engagement to be 0.1895, indicating that 18.95 percent of the within-firm variance in
job engagement was accounted for by POS.
DOI: 10.1002/job
Table 1. Means, standard deviations, and correlations among study variables.

Variables M SD 1 2 3 4 5
1. Dumindu1 0.22 0.42

2. Dumindu2 0.25 0.44 .31**
3. Dumindu3 0.21 0.41 .27** .30**
4. Dumtype1 0.26 0.44 .06 .19** .22**
5. Dumtype2 0.33 0.47 .19** .11** .23** .42**
6. Dumtype3 0.08 0.28 .05 .11** .05 .18** .21**
7. Dumtype4 0.22 0.42 .37** .15** .01 .32** .38**
8. Company size 1112.27 1558.25 .07 .02 .03 .25** .09*
9. Employee sex 0.53 0.50 .12** .10* .05 .09* .05
10. Employee age 29.84 5.94 .13** .08* .06 .02 .03
11. Company tenure 3.93 4.20 .12** .03 .08 .11* .02
12. HR manager sex 0.60 0.49 .08* .03 .08 .15** .08
13. Supervisor sex 0.42 0.50 .12** .12** .07 .00 .03
14. HPHRP 3.70 0.39 .01 .10* .04 .03 .03
15. POS 4.77 0.98 .07 .12** .02 .07 .09*
16. Power distance 2.30 0.70 .02 .02 .04 .02 .01
17. Collectivism 3.58 0.63 .01 .08 .06 .02 .01
18. Job engagement 3.92 0.49 .05 .05 .03 .01 .01
19. In-role performance 3.59 0.64 .02 .07 .01 .07 .04
20. OCB 3.50 0.54 .03 .11** .07 .01 .04
21. Intent to quit 2.48 0.81 .07 .09* .04 .04 .03
Note: N = 605. (1) Dumindu 1–3 (Industry Dummy 1–3): industry characteristics; (2) Dumtype1–4 (Company Type Dummy 1–4): company
type. High-performance human resource (HR) practices, supervisor sex, and HR manager sex are assigned to individual level.
HPHRP, high-performance HR practices; POS: perceived organizational support; SD, standard deviation; OCB, organizational citizenship
behavior.
*p < .05; **p < .01. Two tailed.
To test Hypothesis 2, which proposed that high-performance HR practices are directly and positively related to
employees’ POS, we used the intercepts-as-outcome HLM model to test the hypothesis, controlling for employee
age, sex, and company tenure as Level 1 predictors and industry characteristics, company type, company size,
supervisor sex, and HR manager sex as Level 2 predictors in the analyses. As shown in Table 2, organization-level
high-performance HR practices positively related to POS (Model 2: γ = 0.29, р < .05). Thus, Hypothesis 2 was also
supported. To obtain information regarding the percentage of variance in POS accounted for by high-performance
HR practices, we computed the pseudo-R2 for POS, and the result indicated that 3.19 percent of the between-firm
variance in POS was accounted for by high-performance HR practices.
Hypothesis 3 proposed that high-performance HR practices are directly and positively related to employees’ job
engagement. We used the intercepts-as-outcome HLM model to test the hypothesis, controlling for employee age,
sex, and company tenure as Level 1 predictors and industry characteristics, company type, company size, supervisor
sex, and HR manager sex as Level 2 predictors in the analyses. As shown in Table 2, organization-level high-
performance HR practices positively related to job engagement (Model 3: γ = 0.20, р < .01). Thus, Hypothesis 3
was supported. For the percentage of variance in job engagement accounted for by high-performance HR practices,
we computed the pseudo-R2 for job engagement. The results indicated that 11.63 percent of the between-firm
variance in job engagement was accounted for by high-performance HR practices.
We followed the four-step procedures for establishing mediation described in Kenny, Kashy, and Bolger (1998) to
test Hypothesis 4. According to Kenny and colleagues, it is necessary to meet the following preconditions to support
a mediation hypothesis: (i) Independent variable is significantly related to the dependent variable; (ii) independent
variable is significantly related to the mediator; (iii) the mediator is significantly related to the dependent variable
after controlling for the independent variable; and (iv) the strength of the relationship between the independent
variable on the dependent is reduced (partial mediation) or disappears (full mediation).
DOI: 10.1002/job
834 L. ZHONG ET AL.
Table 1. (Continued)
Variables 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1. Dumindu1
2. Dumindu2
3. Dumindu3
4. Dumtype1
5. Dumtype2
6. Dumtype3
7. Dumtype4 .16**
8. Company size .06 .04
9. Employee sex .05 .06 .02
10. Employee age .06 .00 .10* .13**
11. Company tenure .07 .11** .17** .02 .62**
12. HR manager sex .01 .04 .01 .00 .08 .05
13. Supervisor sex .09* .05 .02 .21** .10* .03 .02
14. HPHRP .10* .10* .01 .01 .08* .10* .01
15. POS .05 .06 .05 .03 .01 .05 .07
16. Power distance .03 .05 .08 .04 .05 .02 .09*
17. Collectivism .01 .04 .08* .05 .02 .01 .09*
18. Job engagement .03 .01 .05 .05 .02 .01 .02
19. In-role performance .01 .01 .09* .01 .10* .11** .07
20. OCB .03 .02 .05 .02 .08 .07 .05
21. Intent to quit .03 .01 .01 .01 .17** .11* .02
Hypothesis 4 represents one of the cross-level mediation hypotheses, which suggested that employees’ POS
(a Level 1 variable) mediates the effects of high-performance HR practices (a Level 2 variable) on job engagement
(a Level 1 variable). To test this hypothesis, we controlled for employees’ age, sex, and company tenure as Level 1
effects and industry characteristics, company type, company size, supervisor sex, and HR manager sex as Level 2
effects in the analyses. As a first step, high-performance HR practices needed to be related to job engagement. This
step was met in our testing of Hypothesis 3. The results, shown in Table 2, revealed that high-performance HR
practices were positively related to employee job engagement (Model 3). The second step was met in our testing
of Hypothesis 2, which revealed that high-performance HR practices were positively related to employees’ POS
(Model 2). In testing Steps 3 and 4, we included both high-performance HR practices and POS in the HLM analyses.
The results presented in Table 2 indicate that POS was significantly related to job engagement (Model 4: γ = 0.24,
р < .001), but the positive relationship between high-performance HR practices and job engagement was reduced
(Model 4: γ = 0.14, р < .05). These results revealed that POS partially mediated the relationship between high-
performance HR practices and job engagement, supporting Hypothesis 4.
Hypothesis 5 proposed that collectivism moderates the relationship between high-performance HR practices and
POS. We used slopes-as-outcomes HLM regressions to test this hypothesis. Results for testing Hypothesis 5 are
shown in Table 2 (Model 5). As shown in Model 5, the interaction between collectivism and high-performance
HR practices was significant (γ = 0.36, р < .05), controlling for employee age, sex, company tenure, and collectivism
as Level 1 predictors and industry characteristics, company type, company size, supervisor sex, HR manager sex,
and high-performance HR practices as Level 2 predictors. Thus, Hypothesis 5 was supported.
To further explore the nature and form of the significant interaction between collectivism and high-performance
HR practices, we conducted simple slopes analyses and plotted this significant interaction graphically using values
of one standard deviation below the mean and one standard deviation above the mean of collectivism (Aiken &
West, 1991). As displayed in Figure 2, the plot indicated that the positive effect of high-performance HR practices
on POS was stronger when collectivism was high than when it was low, which provided further support for
Hypothesis 5.
DOI: 10.1002/job
Variables 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
1. Dumindu1
2. Dumindu2
3. Dumindu3
4. Dumtype1
5. Dumtype2
6. Dumtype3
7. Dumtype4
8. Company size
9. Employee sex
10. Employee age
11. Company tenure
12. HR manager sex
13. Supervisor sex
14. HPHRP .01 (.83)
15. POS .02 .15** (.89)
16. Power distance .00 .07 .08 (.86)
17. Collectivism .03 .05 .27** .15** (.72)
18. Job engagement .04 .17** .45** .06 .24** (.92)
19. In-role performance .06 .13** .09* .02 .09* .18** (.86)
20. OCB .09* .12** .13** .04 .11** .12** .66** (.85)
21. Intent to quit .05 .05 .56** .22** .21** .39** .12* .14** (.75)
Hypothesis 6 proposed that power distance orientation moderates the relationship between high-performance HR
practices and POS. Supporting Hypothesis 6 (Model 6 in Table 2), the interaction between power distance orienta-
tion and high-performance HR practices was significant (γ = 0.31, р < .05), controlling for employee age, sex,
company tenure, and power distance orientation as Level 1 predictors and industry characteristics, company type,
company size, supervisor sex, HR manager sex, and high-performance HR practices as Level 2 predictors.
Following the same procedure as used for collectivism, we conducted simple slopes analyses and plotted the sig-
nificant interaction between power distance orientation and high-performance HR practices. As shown in Figure 3,
the plot revealed that the positive effect of high-performance HR practices on POS was stronger when power
distance orientation was low than when it was high, which provided further support for Hypothesis 6.
Hypotheses 7a, 7b, and 7c proposed that employee job engagement is positively related to employees’ in-role per-
formance and OCB and negatively related to intent to quit. As reported in Table 2, job engagement was positively
related to in-role performance (Model 7: γ = 0.20, р < .01) and negatively related to intent to quit (Model 9:
γ = 0.27, р < .001), controlling for employee age, sex, company tenure, and POS as Level 1 predictors and industry
characteristics, company type, company size, supervisor sex, HR manager sex, and high-performance HR practices
as Level 2 predictors. Job engagement was not related to OCB as proposed (Model 8: γ = 0.07, р > .05). These results
provided support for Hypotheses 7a and 7c. However, Hypothesis 7b was not supported.
Discussion
The primary goal of this study was to examine how organization-level and individual-level antecedents combine to
motivate and engage employees in behaviors beneficial to the organizations for which they work. We extended the
literature by integrating organization-level antecedents of job engagement and several boundary conditions in our re-
search framework. By drawing on social exchange theory (Blau, 1964) and prior research on POS (Allen et al., 2003;
DOI: 10.1002/job
836 L. ZHONG ET AL.
Table 2. Hierarchical linear modeling results.

Job engagement Job engagement Job engagement
Level and variables (Model 1) POS (Model 2) (Model 3) (Model 4) POS (Model 5)
Level 1
Intercept 3.92*** (0.02) 4.78*** (0.06) 3.93*** (0.03) 3.92*** (0.02) 4.77*** (0.06)
Employee age 0.00 (0.00) 0.00 (0.01) 0.00 (0.00) 0.00 (0.00) 0.00 (0.01)
Employee sex 0.04 (0.04) 0.06 (0.08) 0.05 (0.04) 0.04 (0.04) 0.02 (0.07)
Employee 0.00 (0.01) 0.01 (0.01) 0.00 (0.01) 0.00 (0.01) 0.02 (0.01)
organizational tenure
POS 0.24*** (0.02) 0.24*** (0.02)
Job engagement
Collectivism 0.29*** (0.06)
Collectivism × HPHRP 0.36*(0.16)
Power distance
Power
distance × HPHRP
Level 2
Industry dummy 1 0.05 (0.07) 0.22 (0.18) 0.01 (0.08) 0.05 (0.07) 0.19 (0.17)
Industry dummy 2 0.01 (0.07) 0.18 (0.16) 0.02 (0.07) 0.02 (0.07) 0.15 (0.16)
Industry dummy 3 0.05 (0.07) 0.27 (0.18) 0.02 (0.08) 0.04 (0.07) 0.26 (0.17)
Org. type dummy 1 0.04 (0.10) 0.02 (0.24) 0.02 (0.11) 0.01 (0.10) 0.01 (0.23)
Org. type dummy 2 0.02 (0.09) 0.19 (0.23) 0.04 (0.10) 0.01 (0.09) 0.17 (0.22)
Org. type dummy 3 0.08 (0.12) 0.01 (0.29) 0.04 (0.13) 0.03 (0.12) 0.06 (0.28)
Org. type dummy 4 0.04 (0.10) 0.29 (0.26) 0.01 (0.12) 0.08 (0.10) 0.22 (0.25)
Org. size 0.00 (0.00) 0.00 (0.00) 0.00 (0.00) 0.00 (0.00) 0.00 (0.00)
HR manager sex 0.03 (0.05) 0.06 (0.12) 0.04 (0.05) 0.02 (0.05) 0.01 (0.12)
Supervisor sex 0.05 (0.05) 0.31* (0.12) 0.00 (0.06) 0.07 (0.05) 0.28* (0.12)
HPHRP 0.29* (0.15) 0.20** (0.07) 0.14* (0.06) 0.25† (0.15)
Note: N = 605 individuals (level 1) and N = 130 companies (level 2). Unstandardized estimates are reported, with standard errors in parentheses.
HPHRP, high-performance human resource practices; POS, perceived organizational support; OCB, organizational citizenship behavior.
*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001; †p < .10. Two tailed.
Gavino et al., 2012; Rich et al., 2010; Settoon et al., 1996; Wayne et al., 1997), we proposed that employees’ job
engagement is influenced not only by POS directly but also by high-performance HR practices indirectly through
POS. Furthermore, we argued that the relationship between high-performance HR practices and POS is moderated
by the boundary conditions of collectivism and power distance orientation.
Main findings and theoretical implications

The results largely supported our theoretical framework and offer several implications for job engagement research.
First, we found that employees’ POS was significantly and positively related to their job engagement. This finding
provides further evidence to indicate that POS can be an important source of employee job engagement (Rich et al.,
2010; Saks, 2006). Our findings also extended the work of Rich and colleagues by demonstrating that high-
performance HR practices as rated by HR managers act as an organization-level antecedent of job engagement by
showing that high-performance HR practices positively and indirectly influence employee job engagement.
Second, we found that employees’ POS partially mediated the relationship between high-performance HR prac-
tices and job engagement. We developed and tested a cross-level model to explain how employee job engagement
can be enhanced by an organization’s high-performance HR practices in combination with employees’ POS. As
suggested by Kahn (1990), our results indicate that employee engagement is indeed based on “multiple levels of
DOI: 10.1002/job
In-role performance
Level and variables POS (Model 6) (Model 7) OCB (Model 8) Intent to quit (Model 9)
Level 1
Intercept 4.77*** (0.06) 3.60*** (0.03) 3.50*** (0.03) 2.48*** (0.03)
Employee age 0.00 (0.01) 0.01 (0.01) 0.01 (0.01) 0.02** (0.01)
Employee sex 0.07 (0.08) 0.00 (0.05) 0.01 (0.04) 0.00 (0.05)
Employee organizational tenure 0.01 (0.01) 0.01† (0.01) 0.01 (0.01) 0.01 (0.01)
POS 0.01 (0.03) 0.02 (0.03) 0.42***(0.03)
Job engagement 0.20** (0.06) 0.07 (0.05) 0.27*** (0.06)
Collectivism
Collectivism × HPHRP
Power distance 0.10†(0.05)
Power distance × HPHRP 0.31* (0.14)
Level 2
Industry dummy 1 0.19 (0.18) 0.08 (0.10) 0.10 (0.09) 0.19† (0.11)
Industry dummy 2 0.19 (0.16) 0.10 (0.09) 0.04 (0.08) 0.05 (0.10)
Industry dummy 3 0.26 (0.17) 0.18† (0.09) 0.01 (0.09) 0.06 (0.10)
Org. type dummy 1 0.01 (0.24) 0.03 (0.13) 0.10 (0.12) 0.27† (0.14)
Org. type dummy 2 0.18 (0.23) 0.12 (0.12) 0.05 (0.11) 0.18 (0.14)
Org. type dummy 3 0.02 (0.29) 0.01 (0.15) 0.04 (0.14) 0.15 (0.17)
Org. type dummy 4 0.24 (0.26) 0.02 (0.14) 0.02 (0.13) 0.22 (0.15)
Org. size 0.00 (0.00) 0.00 (0.00) 0.00 (0.00) 0.00 (0.00)
HR manager sex 0.06 (0.12) 0.12† (0.06) 0.07 (0.06) 0.05 (0.07)
Supervisor sex 0.29* (0.12) 0.02 (0.07) 0.08 (0.06) 0.01 (0.07)
HPHRP 0.28† (0.15) 0.22** (0.08) 0.24** (0.08) 0.14 (0.09)
6
Perceived Organizational Support
5.5
5
4.5
4
3.5 Low
Collectivism
3
2.5 High
Collectivism
2
1.5
1
Low HPHRP High HPHRP
Figure 2. Collectivism as a moderator of the relationship between high-performance HR practices (HPHRP) and perceived orga-
nizational support
influence” (p. 718). Researchers have argued that high-performance HR practices might be important for job engage-
ment and that managers can use high-performance HR practices to increase POS, which can in turn enhance
employee engagement (Rich et al., 2010; Saks, 2006). Our study provided empirical evidence for this notion by
showing that POS serves as a cross-level mediating mechanism that transmits the effect of high-performance HR
practices to job engagement. Moreover, this investigation extended extant research on the effects of individual-level
predictors of job engagement, such as employees’ perceptions of high-performance HR practices (Alfes, Shantz,
Truss, & Soane, 2013; Karatepe, 2013), addressing the call to bridge micro and macro domains in strategic HR
DOI: 10.1002/job
838 L. ZHONG ET AL.
Perceived Organizational Support

5.5
5
4.5
4
3.5 Low Power
Distance
3
2.5 High Power
Distance
2
1.5
1
Low HPHRP High HPHRP
Figure 3. Power distance orientation as a moderator of the relationship between high-performance HR practices (HPHRP) and
perceived organizational support
management research (Huselid & Becker, 2011; Wright & Boswell, 2002). Indeed, the results indicated that
individual-level POS merges macro-level and micro-level approaches to strategic HR management.
Third, this study also added to the limited research on dispositional differences that may influence the relationship
between actions by the organization, such as high-performance HR practices, and POS (Eisenberger &
Stinglhamber, 2011). Specifically, our results revealed that collectivism and power distance orientation moderate
the relationship between high-performance HR practices and POS. These findings demonstrate that cultural values,
such as collectivism and power distance orientation, matter when organizations endeavor to develop employees’
POS, job engagement, and work outcomes through implementing high-performance HR practices.
Fourth, although we found that job engagement was significantly and positively related to employees’ in-role
performance and significantly and negatively related to their turnover intentions, which provided additional support
for the effects of job engagement on employee work outcomes (e.g., Christian et al., 2011; Rich et al., 2010; Saks,
2006), there was also one hypothesis that was not supported. Our research results indicated that job engagement was
not related to organizational citizenship behavior as anticipated. One possible explanation for this finding is that
because the conceptualization of engagement is role-related (Kahn, 1990) and “engaged employees tend to prioritize
in-role tasks” (Christian et al., 2011, p. 120), less attention may be paid to extra-role behaviors. However, further
research is needed to explore our explanation for the lack of a significant relationship.
Managerial implications
From a practical perspective, the findings of our study have several managerial implications. First, our results
indicated that organizations may seek to improve employees’ POS in order to impact employee engagement and
work-related outcomes, such as in-role performance and turnover intentions. However, when managers endeavor
to increase employee job engagement using high-performance HR practices, they should not only focus on establish-
ing employees’ POS by signaling consistent information to show that the organization values their contributions and
cares about their well-being (Eisenberger et al., 1986) but also keep employees’ dispositional characteristics in mind.
This is because the effect of high-performance HR practices on POS can be influenced by various individual cultural
values, such as collectivism and power distance orientation.
Second, in motivating and engaging employees in performance behaviors, high-performance HR practices do
matter. Specifically, our results suggested that high-performance HR practices have the capacity to engender a high
level of POS, which motivates employees to work with a high level of job engagement and, in turn, increases their
in-role performance and reduces their intent to quit. Thus, when implemented, high-performance HR practices
DOI: 10.1002/job
should not only function as a coherent and synergistic system (Becker & Huselid, 2006; Zacharatos et al., 2005) but
should also be portrayed by the organization as a win–win strategy benefitting both employees and the organization
(Guest, 2002; Paauwe, 2009).
Third, our results suggested that in order to improve employees’ in-role performance and reduce their intention
to quit, organizations can rely on engendering job engagement among employees. When managers try to build
employees’ job engagement, we recommend that they pay attention to both organizational- and individual-level
factors that may have an impact on employees’ job engagement, because high-performance HR practices, POS,
and employee characteristics combine to enhance employee job engagement.
Strengths, limitations, and future research
The main strengths of the current investigation are the cross-level design integrating micro and macro variables cap-
turing the antecedents and consequences of job engagement, as well as the use of three data sources, serving to
reduce the possibility of same source common-method bias explanations for the results (Siemsen, Roth, & Oliveira,
2010). Further, we used two different sources to rate high-performance HR practices and obtained good interrater
agreement, avoiding potential measurement errors (Gerhart, Wright, McMahan, & Snell, 2000) common in prior
studies that typically only had one person report on HR practices (e.g., Arthur, 1994; Delery & Doty, 1996). Also,
the large sample size provided substantial power for testing the hypotheses.
Despite these strengths, the present study has a number of limitations that should be addressed in future research.
First, the use of a cross-sectional, non-experimental design precludes the identification of cause–effect relations. For
example, opposite of our theoretical model, it is intuitively plausible that in-role performance and intent to quit affect
job engagement. In essence, performance successes may serve to enhance individual engagement to the job. Thus,
future research would benefit from testing the hypothesized model in the present study within a longitudinal design.
Especially useful would be a study in which the initial time period contained a large sample of newcomers to the
organization so that causal influences of the antecedents of engagement could be identified.
Second, although we obtained data from three separate sources to avoid common-method variance, the individual-
level mediating variables (i.e., POS and job engagement) in the research model were both based on subordinates’
self-reports. Therefore, it is unclear to what extent the results involving the mediators were attributable to same
source common-method variance. Yet results of the CFA demonstrated the distinctiveness of the focal variables,
which increased our confidence in the results.
Third, because our study investigated issues of positive work perceptions and used social exchange theory as a
theoretical basis, non-random choice (i.e., choosing a supervisor with whom the MBA student has a positive rela-
tionship) could meaningfully influence our findings. Although we asked the MBA students to randomly select both
the supervisor and his or her subordinates when we collected the data, potential non-random participation may have
inflated the relationships among the variables we studied (Huang, Liu, & Bowling, 2015).
Fourth, only one supervisor and his or her work group were represented from each of the 130 organizations
contained in the sample. Thus, what we portrayed as organization-level effects emanating from high-performance
HR practices could actually be explained as between leader differences in supervisor support. Indeed, Eisenberger,
Stinglhamber, Vandenberghe, Sucharski, and Rhoades (2002) discovered using a longitudinal design that employee
perceptions of supervisor support precede the formation of their perceptions of organizational support. Future
research needs to disentangle POS, leader support, and high-performance HR practices.
Finally, as evidenced in research by Messersmith, Patel, and Lepak (2011), Aryee, Walumbwa, Seidu, and Otaye
(2012), Christian et al. (2011), and Schaufeli (2012), other mediating variables, such as job satisfaction, empower-
ment, organizational commitment, collective or team engagement, engagement culture, and other moderating vari-
ables, such as Chinese guanxi exchange, should be explored in future research. We contend that simultaneously
testing a wider array of mediators and moderators may serve to identify the relative impact of several explanatory
mechanisms of HR practices on POS, job engagement, and work outcomes.
DOI: 10.1002/job
840 L. ZHONG ET AL.
Conclusion
The findings of the current study suggest that job engagement is not only influenced by POS directly but also im-
pacted by high-performance HR practices indirectly through POS. Job engagement is positively related to in-role
performance and negatively related to intent to quit. The influence of high-performance HR practices on POS
may be altered by employees’ cultural value orientations, such as collectivism and power distance orientation. Taken
together, these findings highlight that the effects of an organization’s high-performance HR practices on employees’
job engagement and work-related outcomes can be transmitted by POS but are at the same time contingent on the
cultural values employees hold individually.
Acknowledgement
This research is supported by a grant from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (contract/grant
number: 71172177).
Author biographies
Lifeng Zhong is an Associate Professor in the School of Business at Renmin University of China. He received his
PhD at Chinese Academy of Sciences. His research focuses on strategic human resource management, employee–
organization relationships, and leader–follower relationships.
Sandy J. Wayne is Professor of Management at the University of Illinois at Chicago. She received her PhD in
Management from Texas A&M University. Her research focuses on understanding relationships in the workplace,
including the antecedents and consequences of employee–leader and employee–organization relationships.
Robert C. Liden is Professor of Management, Coordinator of the Organizational Behavior and Human Resource
Management doctoral program, and Director of Doctoral Programs for the College of Business Administration at
the University of Illinois at Chicago. He received his PhD at the University of Cincinnati. His research focuses
on interpersonal processes within the context of such topics as leadership, groups, and career progression.
References
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Albrecht, S. L. (2010). Handbook of employee engagement: Perspectives, issues, research and practice. Cheltenham: Edward
Elgar.
Alfes, K., Shantz, A. D., Truss, C., & Soane, E. C. (2013). The link between perceived human resource management practices,
engagement and employee behaviour: A moderated mediation model. The International Journal of Human Resource Manage-
ment, 24, 330–351.
Allen, D. G., Shore, L. M., & Griffeth, R. W. (2003). The role of perceived organizational support and supportive human resource
practices in the turnover process. Journal of Management, 29, 99–118.
Arthur, J. B. (1994). Effects of human resource systems on manufacturing performance and turnover. Academy of Management
Journal, 37, 670–687.
Aryee, S., Walumbwa, F. O., Seidu, E. Y. M., & Otaye, L. E. (2012). Impact of high-performance work systems on individual-
and branch-level performance: Test of a multilevel model of intermediate linkages. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97,
287–300.
DOI: 10.1002/job
Aselage, J., & Eisenberger, R. (2003). Perceived organizational support and psychological contracts: A theoretical integration.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 491–509.
Avery, D. R., McKay, P. F., & Wilson, D. C. (2007). Engaging the aging workforce: The relationship between perceived age
similarity, satisfaction with coworkers, and employee engagement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1542–1556.
Bakker, A. B., & Xanthopoulou, D. (2009). The crossover of daily work engagement: Test of an actor–partner interdependence
model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1562–1571.
Becker, B. E., & Huselid, M. A. (1998). High performance work systems and firm performance: A synthesis of research and
managerial implications. In G. R. Ferris (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management (pp. 53–101).
Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Becker, B. E., & Huselid, M. A. (2006). Strategic human resources management: Where do we go from here? Journal of
Management, 32, 898–925.
Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.
Bliese, P. D. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis.
In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, exten-
sions, and new directions (pp. 349–381). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Brislin, R. W. (1986). Translation and content analysis of oral and written materials. In H. C. Triandis & J. W. Berry (Eds.),
Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (pp. 389–444). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Chen, C. C. (1995). New trends in rewards allocation preferences: A Sino-U.S. comparison. Academy of Management Journal,
38, 408–428.
Chen, Z. X., & Aryee, S. (2007). Delegation and employee work outcomes: An examination of the cultural context of mediating
processes in China. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 226–238.
Christian, M. S., Garza, A. S., & Slaughter, J. E. (2011). Work engagement: A quantitative review and test of its relations with
task and contextual performance. Personnel Psychology, 64, 89–136.
Clugston, M., Howell, J. P., & Dorfman, P. W. (2000). Does cultural socialization predict multiple bases and foci of commit-
ment? Journal of Management, 26, 5–30.
Crawford, E. R., LePine, J. A., & Rich, B. L. (2010). Linking job demands and resources to employee engagement and burnout:
A theoretical extension and meta-analytic test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 834–848.
Datta, D. K., Guthrie, J. P., & Wright, P. M. (2005). Human resource management and labor productivity: Does industry matter?
Academy of Management Journal, 48, 135–145.
Delery, J. E., & Doty, D. H. (1996). Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource management: Tests of universalistic,
contingency, and configurational performance predictions. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 802–835.
Dorfman, P. W., & Howell, J. P. (1988). Dimensions of national culture and effective leadership patterns: Hofstede revisited.
Advances in International Comparative Management, 3, 127–150.
Dulac, T., Coyle-Shapiro, J. A. M., Henderson, D. J., & Wayne, S. J. (2008). Not all responses to breach are the same: The
interconnection of social exchange and psychological contract processes in organizations. Academy of Management Journal,
51, 1079–1098.
Eagly, A. H., & Crowley, M. (1986). Gender and helping behavior: A meta-analytic review of the social psychological literature.
Psychological Bulletin, 100, 283–308.
Eisenberger, R., Cummings, J., Armeli, S., & Lynch, P. (1997). Perceived organizational support, discretionary treatment, and job
satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 812–820.
Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 71, 500–507.
Eisenberger, R., & Stinglhamber, F. (2011). Perceived organizational support: Fostering enthusiastic and productive employees.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Eisenberger, R., Stinglhamber, F., Vandenberghe, C., Sucharski, I. L., & Rhoades, L. (2002). Perceived supervisor support:
Contributions to perceived organizational support and employee retention. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 565–573.
Erdogan, B., & Liden, R. C. (2006). Collectivism as a moderator of responses to organizational justice: Implications for leader-
member exchange and ingratiation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 1–17.
Farh, J. L., Hackett, R. D., & Liang, J. (2007). Individual-level cultural values as moderators of perceived organizational support-
employee outcome relationships in China: Comparing the effects of power distance and traditionality. Academy of Manage-
ment Journal, 50, 715–729.
Francesco, A. M., & Chen, Z. X. (2004). Collectivism in action: Its moderating effects on the relationship between organizational
commitment and employee performance in China. Group & Organization Management, 29, 425–441.
Gavino, M. C., Wayne, S. J., & Erdogan, B. (2012). Discretionary and transactional human resource practices and employee
outcomes: The role of perceived organizational support. Human Resource Management, 51, 665–686.
George, J. M., & Bettenhausen, K. (1990). Understanding prosocial behavior, sales performance, and turnover: A group-level
analysis in a service context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 698–709.
DOI: 10.1002/job
842 L. ZHONG ET AL.
Gerhart, B., Wright, P. M., McMahan, G. C., & Snell, S. A. (2000). Measurement error in research on human resources and firm
performance: How much error is there and how does it influence effect size estimates? Personnel Psychology, 53, 803–834.
Gong, Y., Law, K. S., Chang, S., & Xin, K. R. (2009). Human resources management and firm performance: The differential role
of managerial affective and continuance commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 263–275.
Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161–178.
Gould-Williams, J. (2007). HR practices, organizational climate and employee outcomes: Evaluating social exchange relation-
ships in local government. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18, 1627–1647.
Gruman, J. A., & Saks, A. M. (2011). Performance management and employee engagement. Human Resource Management
Review, 21, 123–136.
Guest, D. (2002). Human resource management, corporate performance and employee wellbeing: Building the worker into HRM.
The Journal of Industrial Relations, 44, 335–358.
Heckman, J. J. (1979). Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica, 47, 153–161.
Hofmann, D. A. (1997). An overview of the logic and rationale of hierarchical linear models. Journal of Management, 23, 723–744.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Motivation, leadership, and organization: Do American theories apply abroad? Organizational Dynamics, 9,
42–63.
Hui, C., Wong, A., & Tjosvold, D. (2007). Turnover intention and performance in China: The role of positive affectivity, Chinese
values, perceived organizational support and constructive controversy. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychol-
ogy, 80, 735–751.
Huang, J. L., Liu, M., & Bowling, N. A. (2015). Insufficient effort responding: Examining an insidious confound in survey data.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 100, 828–845.
Huselid, M. A., & Becker, B. E. (2011). Bridging micro and macro domains: Workforce differentiation and strategic human
resource management. Journal of Management, 37, 421–428.
Hutchison, S., & Garstka, M. L. (1996). Sources of perceived organizational support: Goal setting and feedback. Journal of
Applied Social Psychology, 26, 1351–1366.
Ilies, R., Wagner, D. T., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Explaining affective linkages in teams: Individual differences in susceptibility
to contagion and individualism-collectivism. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1140–1148.
James, L. R. (1982). Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 219–229.
James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1984). Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias.
James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1993). rwg: An assessment of within-group interrater agreement. Journal of Applied
Jiang, K., Lepak, D. P., Hu, J., & Baer, J. C. (2012). How does human resource management influence organizational outcomes?
A meta-analytic investigation of mediating mechanisms. Academy of Management Journal, 55, 1264–1294.
Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management
Journal, 33, 692–724.
Kahn, W. A. (1992). To be fully there: Psychological presence at work. Human Relations, 45, 321–349.
Karatepe, O. M. (2013). High-performance work practices and hotel employee performance: The mediation of work engagement.
International Journal of Hospitality Management, 32, 132–140.
Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Bolger, N. (1998). Data analysis in social psychology. In D. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske & G. Lindzey
(Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (4th ed.) (pp. 233–265). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Kirkman, B. L., Chen, G., Farh, J. L., Chen, Z. X., & Lowe, K. B. (2009). Individual power distance orientation and follower reactions
to transformational leaders: A cross-level, cross-cultural examination. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 744–764.
Kirkman, B. L., & Shapiro, D. L. (2001). The impact of cultural values on job satisfaction and organizational commit-
ment in self-managing work teams: The mediating role of employee resistance. Academy of Management Journal, 44,
557–569.
Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Klein, K. J. (2000). A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations: Contextual, temporal,
and emergent processes. In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organiza-
tions: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (pp. 3–90). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kuvaas, B. (2008). An exploration of how the employee–organization relationship affects the linkage between perception of
developmental human resource practices and employee outcomes. Journal of Management Studies, 45, 1–25.
Lee, K., & Allen, N. J. (2002). Organizational citizenship behavior and workplace deviance: The role of affect and cognitions.
Lepak, D. P., Liao, H., Chung, Y., & Harden, E. E. (2006). A conceptual review of human resource management systems in
strategic human resource management research. In J. J. Martocchio (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources
management (pp. 217–271). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
LePine, J. A., Erez, A., & Johnson, D. E. (2002). The nature of dimensionality of organizational citizenship behavior: A critical
review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 52–65.
DOI: 10.1002/job
Liao, H., Toya, K., Lepak, D. P., & Hong, Y. (2009). Do they see eye to eye? Management and employee perspectives of
high-performance work systems and influence processes on service quality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 371–391.
Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question,
weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 151–173.
Macey, W. H., & Schneider, B. (2008). The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 3–30.
Marcus, J., & Le, H. (2013). Interactive effects of levels of individualism-collectivism on cooperation: A meta-analysis. Journal
of Organizational Behavior, 34, 813–834.
Messersmith, J. G., Patel, P. C., & Lepak, D. P. (2011). Unlocking the black box: Exploring the link between high-performance
work systems and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 1105–1118.
Mossholder, K. W., Richardson, H. A., & Settoon, R. P. (2011). Human resource systems and helping in organizations: A
relational perspective. Academy of Management Review, 36, 33–52.
Newman, K. L., & Nollen, S. D. (1996). Culture and congruence: The fit between management practices and national culture.
Journal International Business Studies, 27, 753–779.
Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Paauwe, J. (2009). HRM and performance: Achievements, methodological issues and prospects. Journal of Management Studies,
46, 129–142.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recom-
mendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 539–569.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical
review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26, 513–563.
Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychol-
ogy, 87, 698–714.
Rich, B. L., LePine, J. A., & Crawford, E. R. (2010). Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on job performance. Academy of
Management Journal, 53, 617–635.
Robert, C., Probst, T. M., Martocchio, J. J., Drasgow, F., & Lawler, J. J. (2000). Empowerment and continuous improvement in
the United States, Mexico, Poland, and India: Predicting fit on the basis of the dimensions of power distance and individualism.
Rothbard, N. P. (2001). Enriching or depleting? The dynamics of engagement in work and family roles. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 46, 655–684.
Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21, 600–619.
Schaufeli, W. B. (2012). Work engagement. What do we know and where do we go? Romanian Journal of Applied Psychology,
14, 3–10.
Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A
multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 293–315.
Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A
two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71–92.
Schneider, B., White, S. S., & Paul, M. C. (1998). Linking service climate and customer perceptions of service quality: Test of a
causal model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 150–163.
Settoon, R. P., Bennett, N., & Liden, R. C. (1996). Social exchange in organizations: Perceived organizational support, leader–
member exchange, and employee reciprocity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 219–227.
Shaw, J. D., Dineen, B. R., Fang, R., & Vellella, R. F. (2009). Employee–organization exchange relationships, HRM practices,
and quit rates of good and poor performers. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 1016–1033.
Sheridan, J. E., Slocum, J. W., Buda, R., & Thompson, R. C. (1990). Effects of corporate sponsorship and departmental power on
career tournaments. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 578–602.
Shore, L. M., Bommer, W. H., Rao, A. N., & Seo, J. (2009). Social and economic exchange in the employee–organization
relationship: The moderating role of reciprocation wariness. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 24, 701–721.
Shore, L. M., & Shore, T. H. (1995). Perceived organizational support and organizational justice. In R. S. Cropanzano & K. M.
Kacmar (Eds.), Organizational politics, justice and support: Managing the social climate in the workplace (pp. 149–164).
Westport, CT: Quorum.
Shore, L. M., & Wayne, S. J. (1993). Commitment and employee behavior: Comparison of affective commitment and continu-
ance commitment with perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 774–780.
Siemsen, E., Roth, A., & Oliveira, P. (2010). Common method bias in regression models with linear, quadratic, and interaction
effects. Organizational Research Methods, 13, 456–476.
Sonnentag, S. (2003). Recovery, work engagement, and proactive behavior: A new look at the interface between nonwork and
work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 518–528.
DOI: 10.1002/job
844 L. ZHONG ET AL.
Spence, M. (1973). Job market signaling. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87, 355–374.
Sun, L. Y., Aryee, S., & Law, K. S. (2007). High-performance human resource practices, citizenship behavior, and organizational
performance: A relational perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 558–577.
Takeuchi, R., Chen, G., & Lepak, D. P. (2009). Through the looking glass of social system: Cross-level effects of high-
performance work systems on employees’ attitudes. Personnel Psychology, 62, 1–29.
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,
1069–1083.
Tett, R. P., & Meyer, J. P. (1993). Job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover intention, and turnover: Path analyses
based on meta-analytic findings. Personnel Psychology, 46, 259–293.
Tremblay, M., Cloutier, J., Simard, G., Chênevert, D., & Vandenberghe, C. (2010). The role of HRM practices, procedural jus-
tice, organizational support and trust in organizational commitment and in-role and extra-role performance. The International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 21, 405–433.
Tsui, A. S., Pearce, J. L., Porter, L. W., & Tripoli, A. M. (1997). Alternative approaches to the employee–organization relation-
ship: Does investment in employees pay off? Academy of Management Journal, 40, 1089–1121.
Tuckey, M. R., Bakker, A. B., & Dollard, M. F. (2012). Empowering leaders optimize working conditions for engagement: A
multilevel study. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 17, 15–27.
Wagner, J. A. III (1995). Studies of individualism–collectivism: Effects on cooperation in groups. Academy of Management
Journal, 38, 152–172.
Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M., & Liden, R. C. (1997). Perceived organizational support and leader–member exchange: A social
exchange perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 82–111.
Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M., Bommer, W. H., & Tetrick, L. E. (2002). The role of fair treatment and rewards in perceptions of
organizational support and leader–member exchange. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 590–598.
Whitener, E. M. (1997). The impact of human resource activities on employee trust. Human Resource Management Review, 7,
389–404.
Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizen-
ship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management, 17, 601–617.
Wright, P. M., & Boswell, W. R. (2002). Desegregating HRM: A review and synthesis of micro and macro human resource
management research. Journal of Management, 28, 247–276.
Wu, P. C., & Chaturvedi, S. (2009). The role of procedural justice and power distance in the relationship between high perfor-
mance work systems and employee attitudes: A multilevel perspective. Journal of Management, 35, 1228–1247.
Xiao, Z., & Tsui, A. S. (2007). When brokers may not work: The cultural contingency of social capital in Chinese high-tech firms.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 52, 1–31.
Zacharatos, A., Barling, J., & Iverson, R. D. (2005). High-performance work systems and occupational safety. Journal of Applied
Zhang, Y., & Begley, T. M. (2011). Power distance and its moderating impact on empowerment and team participation. The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22, 3601–3617.
DOI: 10.1002/job

Job 2076

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Job 2076

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Organizational Behavior, J. Organiz. Behav.

37, 823–844 (2016)

Received 8 November 2014

Theoretical Development and Hypotheses

Perceived organizational support and job engagement

Hypothesis 1: Perceived organizational support is positively related to employee job engagement.

High-performance HR practices and job engagement: POS as a mediator

Hypothesis 2: High-performance HR practices are positively related to POS.

Hypothesis 3: High-performance HR practices are positively related to job engagement.

Moderating inﬂuence of collectivism

Moderating inﬂuence of power distance orientation

Job engagement and employee work-related outcomes

Sample and procedure

Perceived organizational support

Power distance orientation

Organization citizenship behavior

Conﬁrmatory factor analyses and data aggregation

Table 1. Means, standard deviations, and correlations among study variables.

1. Dumindu1 0.22 0.42

Table 2. Hierarchical linear modeling results.

Main ﬁndings and theoretical implications

Perceived Organizational Support

Strengths, limitations, and future research

You might also like