The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0143-7720.htm

The impact of
The impact of individual values values on HR
on human resource decision-making
decision-making by line managers
251
David McGuire
School of Management, Napier University Business School, Edinburgh, UK Received April 2002
Thomas N. Garavan Revised March 2005
Accepted February 2006
Department of Personnel and Employment Relations,
Kemmy Business School, University of Limerick, Limerick, UK
Sudhir K. Saha
Memorial University of Newfoundland, St John, Canada, and
David O’Donnell
Intellectual Capital Research Institute of Ireland, Ballyagran, UK

Abstract
Purpose – This paper explores this relationship between the individual values of managers and
human resource (HR) decision-making.
Design/methodology/approach – Questionnaire data were collected from a total of 340 line
managers from both Ireland and Canada. The questionnaire instrument comprises three components:
Rokeach’s instrumental and terminal values instrument; two HR related decision scenarios; and
demographic and human capital data.
Findings – The results provide modest support for the proposed model that individual values affect
HR decision-making in that capability values were shown to be a significant positive predictor of the
importance of health and safety, and peace values were a significant positive predictor of the
importance of employment equity.
Research limitations/implications – The findings emphasise the need to simultaneously examine
both individual values and organisational factors as predictors of HR decision-making. Future work
should examine the psychometric use of value instruments.
Practical implications – The study underlines the fact that managers need to be aware of the fact
that their own values influences how they make decisions. Attention to the values concept amongst
managers will improve comprehension of the decision-making process within organizations.
Originality/value – The value of the paper lies in the fact that the effect of individual values on
decision-making has been under-researched in the literature.
Keywords Human resource management, Middle managers, Decision making, Professional ethics,
Value analysis
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
Research on values has provided significant insights at individual, group, International Journal of Manpower
Vol. 27 No. 3, 2006
organizational and societal levels of analysis. Such research is primarily premised pp. 251-273
on the notion, prevalent since Aristotle, that values provide strong explanations of q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0143-7720
behaviour. A vast literature now exists, attesting to the influence of values on DOI 10.1108/01437720610672167
IJM individual behaviour in groups, organisations and society (Brief, 1998; Kleindorfer
27,3 et al., 1993; Munson and Posner, 1980). At the group level of analysis, Earley (1989,
1993) found that the degree of collectivistic values displayed by a group will affect
individual contributions to the group; at the organisational level of analysis, Finegan
(2000) found that the affective values of an organisation will significantly influence the
affective commitment of individual employees within that organisation, while at the
252 societal level, Hofstede’s (1980) seminal work notes the significance of values in
explaining the productivity of nations.
There is, however, little published research exploring the role of individual
values in explaining the decisions that managers make concerning key human
resource (HR) issues (Saha and Fisera, 1999). This paper explores this relationship
between the individual values of managers and HR decision-making by drawing
on data collected from line managers in Canada and Ireland. The structure of the
remainder of the paper is as follows; first we present a review of the relevant
literature on values; the theoretical model is then proposed; the methodology is
then outlined followed by a presentation and discussion of the main findings; the
paper concludes by arguing for further research on the individual values of
managers and identifies several potentially rewarding avenues for conducting such
research.
What are values? Values are difficult to define because they share similar
characteristics with concepts such as attitudes, preferences and viewpoints. Rokeach
(1973), for example, defined an attitude as an organization of several beliefs focused on
a specific object or situation whereas a value is an enduring belief in a specific mode of
conduct or desirable end state of existence. A number of research studies demonstrate
that attitudes and values are different constructs, not only in the minds of researchers,
but also in the minds of practitioners (Hofstede, 1998). Attitudes are most likely to vary
in terms of the level of importance attached to the object or situation. They differ from
values primarily due to their lifespan within an individual’s cognitive schemata.
Values can influence the holding of certain attitudes; however, unlike attitudes, values
are considered imperative for action (Bates et al., 2001).
This latter point leads to the distinction between values and norms. Norms have an
obligatory character; values, on the other hand, have the element of free choice towards
teleological or goal directed action (Habermas, 1996; Turner, 1991). Individual values
are addressed in decision-making and, therefore, can be expected to influence
managerial decision-making on HR issues at deeper more personal levels. The fact that
norms and values differ in this way has obvious implications for giving preference to a
study of individual values, as distinct from norms, in managerial decision-making on
HR issues.
The literature on values theories (Schwartz and Bilsky, 1990; Rokeach and
Ball-Rokeach, 1989; Sagie and Elizur, 1996; Elizur, 1996) places emphasis on the
stability of values and their structure. Values are acquired and hierarchically organized
to become somehow part of a relatively enduring system. Schwartz (1994) argues that
values are structured through a combination of social and psychological conflicts,
experienced by the individual expressing these values. Over time, these conflicts and
harmonies among value priorities result in a structure or values system – such
structures providing an individual with an ordered framework for decision-making. It
follows that values must influence decision-making. It is now generally accepted that
variations in values structures motivate individual behaviours and impact upon The impact of
actions in both managerial and non-managerial contexts. values on HR
In terms of decision-making, there is increasing consensus that a good decision
maker is not just someone who can rationally assess choices, or make the most decision-making
logical decision given for that moment, but someone who can arrive at a decision
through balancing competing values and goals (Hartmann and Patrickson, 1998;
Cohen, 1993). Traditional approaches view decision-making as rational, resulting 253
from a deliberate and intentional choice taking into account structural constraints
that restrict the set of possible action courses to a subset of feasible actions
(Zafirovski, 1999). Such approaches, however, tended to dissociate the processes of
decision making from the people that made decisions (Hambrick and Mason, 1984;
Simons and Thompson, 1998) Consequently, contemporary perspectives on
decision-making increasingly acknowledge a socially constructed reality that
emphasizes the contextualised nature of decision-making and the important role
played by values in driving decision-making processes (Tacconi, 1996).
The literature on managerial decision making tends to focus on strategic and
leadership decisions within a context of uncertainty, politics and intuition (Hartmann
and Patrickson, 1998). Increasingly, it acknowledges the often suboptional nature of
individual decision-making and that individuals are the essential source of insight
regarding the substance of decisions: the options, consequences, values and
uncertainties (Fischhoff and Johnson, 2002). In an organisational context, decision
making involves not just the management of facts but also the management of
organizational power and perception which in turn impact on decision justification
(Bacharach et al., 1995).
Acknowledging the influence of environmental variables on decision processes,
Wilcocks (1998) argues that managerial decision-making is not the result of
impersonal, deterministic and objective forces, but rather is socially constructed
and created by human agency. It recognises that decisions require anticipations
and judgements in a social context and, in most cases, a socio-psychological
dimension of power (DIO, 1983). Crucially, it emphasises the role of individual
values as playing an important role in individual and managerial decision-making
processes.
Research evidence (Kleindorfer et al., 1993; Brief, 1998) suggests that major
decisions are generally referred to an individual’s values for approval. This process of
referral leads to the selection of the most favourable decision option or the formulation
of a hypothesised solution. An individual’s internalised values function as personal
standards of conduct (Kluckhohn, 1951; Meglino and Ravlin, 1998) and the strength of
such values influences the perceived level of attractiveness or perceived legitimacy of
alternative actions.
The link between individual values and managerial decision-making is considered
to be dynamic, complex and less well understood. Gamble and Gibson (1999) argue that
values develop as individuals are exposed to layers within a social system (family,
work, employment) and a range of these external factors must also be taken into
account in examining causal relationships. Failure to study values in the context of
other variables may be one reason for this dearth of robust research findings (Shrum
and McCarthy, 1992). Some studies have highlighted antecedents such as age, gender,
education, and the moderating influence of culture and group orientation in examining
IJM the effect of values on various decision outcomes (Bigoness and Blakely, 1996; Erez and
27,3 Earley, 1987; Giacomino and Akers, 1998; Johnson and Elder, 2002; Wagner, 1995).
Becoming more specific, there is considerable justification for studying values in the
context of human resource management (HRM). The HRM field has increasingly
become values-driven with employee-centred HRM practices increasingly advocated.
This supposed shift from hierarchical and directive to more people centered and
254 participatory managerial styles suggests a change in managerial mind-sets and the
individual values of managers. The transition from rigid bureaucratic structures to
more flexible adaptive organizations has been accompanied by some shift in
management styles from hierarchic traditions to more human relations oriented
expertise (Henderson, 1996). Henderson (1996) highlights four transitions which, we
argue, must impact on the individual values of managers: first, managers are departing
from resistance and fear of cultural differences towards accepting them; second, there
is a noticeable trend away from directive supervisor-subordinate relations towards
seeking authentic peer behaviours; third, there is a greater emphasis on collaboration
over internal competition; and, finally, there has been a movement away from
avoidance or denial of the expression of employee feelings towards facilitating their
appropriate and productive expression. While this may be the case in some
organizations, it is certainly not the case in all. In an increasingly individualized and
highly competitive global business climate a massive gulf exists between the espoused
values sets of managers, not to mention HR policies and practices, of the humanistic
“mutual gains enterprise” (Kochan and Osterman, 1994) contrasted with the much
more mercenary “individualized corporation” (Ghoshal and Bartlett, 1998). The extent
to which such changes are emerging remains an open, and essentially empirical,
question.
Ranney and Carlson (1992) argue that an organisation’s HR policies, practices and
rules are good indicators of its approach to dealing with people and human behaviour.
They argue that an organisation’s managerially directed actions affect employee
perceptions leading to a strengthening or readjustment of individual values. Similarly,
Begley and Boyd (2000) suggest that individual values should be considered in the
development of HR policies and strategies leading to greater consistency in
organizational decision-making and a more harmonious working environment.
Although there is support for the link between management leadership and values
alignment at the organizational level (Bontis and Fitz-enz, 2002; Begley and Boyd,
2000), as in too much of the humanist oriented HR discourse (McGuire et al., 2005), take
too one-sided a perspective here by not adequately treating the reality of individualized
corporate life where senior managers are as likely to resort to laying off thousands of
employees as they are to inquire about their affective states or personal feelings.
Notwithstanding the heterogeneous nature of organizations, very little is really
known about how individual values of managers relate to decision making on HR
issues. We do know from extant research that managers operate from a structured set
of values that can be described and reasonably measured. We do not yet, however,
fully understand how particular individual values impact on particular HR related
decisions. This latter issue is of particular concern in the HRM field. Of its nature, HRM
is a values laden and values intensive arena of decision making, simply because it
focuses on issues that raise important questions concerning equity, equality of
treatment, due process, the promotion of individual and organizational outcomes, and
the tension between respecting the human in employees and exploiting their human The impact of
capital and productivity for the cumulative imperative of capitalist organization. values on HR
HR decisions are, moreover, increasingly devolved to line managers and are no
longer the sole preserve of the functionalist personnel or HR department (Gibb, 2002; decision-making
Bacon et al., 1998). Many commentators see the increasing responsibility of line
managers in all areas including HR as a direct consequence of organizational
delayering (White et al., 2004; Torrington et al., 2004). Line managers conduct many 255
operational dimensions of HRM, including selection, promotion, performance
management and appraisal, corrective action and discipline, access to training and
development opportunities, and compensation. In these decision situations it is likely
that the individual values of managers will influence their decision choices. As front
line representatives of the organization, line managers are tasked with the
responsibility of setting the agenda, dealing with workplace issues and providing
direction to employees. The potential for conflict exists, however, when organizational
decision-making conflicts with individual values. In such circumstances, the conflict
may end up being resolved through discussion and dialogue, it may be ignored, denied
or suppressed, or the manager may simply leave the organization. We focus in this
paper on investigating the influence of individual values on two areas of HR
decision-making, namely:
(1) employment equity; and
(2) health and safety.

However, before proceeding to the analysis, we first review the principal studies
examining the effects of individual values on various aspects of decision making.

Conceptualising the effect of the individual values of line managers on

decision-making
In research terms, values may be considered as independent, dependent or moderating
variables. In this paper we focus on values as independent predictors of HR
decision-making. There exists some empirical support for this position.
A study of individual values and decision styles of expatriates and host country
nationals based in the United Arab Emirates revealed a significant correlation between
the types of values and decision styles. Using Flowers et al. (1975) values for working
instrument, Ali et al. (1995) investigated the relationship between these values and six
types of decision styles (autocratic, pseudo-consultative, consultative, participative,
pseudo-participative and delegative styles). The study found that socio-centric value
systems correlated significantly with consultative (r ¼ 0.25) and delegative (r ¼ 0.21)
styles. Unsurprisingly perhaps, they found that egocentric values negatively correlated
with participative styles (r ¼ 2 0.17), but correlated positively with autocratic styles
(r ¼ 0.15). Both conformist and realistic values were found to be significantly
correlated with consultative, participative and pseudo-participative styles. The results
indicate a strong relationship between individual values and decision styles, but also
show that national or societal influences can affect the individual values of managers.
Argrawal and Krishnan (2000) examined the relationship between managerial
values and leadership styles. Based upon a sample of fifty manager-subordinates pairs
based in South-East India, they found that high task oriented leaders ranked
achievement values significantly higher than low-task leaders. High relations leaders
IJM gave significantly higher rankings to security and benevolence and lower rankings to
27,3 self-direction and power as compared to low relations leaders. Task oriented leadership
style was significantly related to both achievement and benevolence.
Relations-oriented leadership was significantly related to benevolence, security and
achievement.
Sharfman et al. (2000) examined the effects of managerial values on social issues
256 evaluation. A total of 129 managers from the US participated in the study. They found
a clear relationship between the issues evaluated as important and the values of the
manager conducting the evaluation. Economic values oriented managers emphasised
both community and regulatory values less than managers of other values
orientations. The contention here, also supported by Carroll (1993), is that managers
with a strong set of economic values will put economic issues ahead of social issues.
Sharfman et al. (2000) also found that managers with a strong ethical values focus
emphasised community issues, regulatory issues and political issues equally.
Similarly, legal values oriented managers emphasise regulatory and political issues
equally with community issues. A series of regression analyses were conducted which
showed that managerial values had a moderate to low effect in explaining the
evaluation of community issues (R 2 ¼ 0.21) and regulatory issues (R 2 ¼ 0.10). The
third regression model, examining the effect of managerial values on the evaluation of
political issues, was insignificant indicating that the evaluation of political issues could
not be adequately explained, in this research instance, from the managerial values
orientation proposed.
Keast (1996) examined the relationship between values and the decision making of
ten CEOs in public schools in Greenland. Using a qualitative research design, the study
showed that values played an important role in the decision-making process. It found
that a degree of similarity appears to exist in the frequency with which the same values
reoccurred in the decision making of all ten CEOs. The study also revealed that some
values that showed high occurrences in the decision cases were also found to be highly
occurring in the follow-up interviews, indicating their high level of prevalence in the
CEOs’ value make-up. Shared decision making occurred most often in organizational
redevelopment decision cases and this value, alongside trust, featured most frequently
in the follow-up organizational redevelopment interviews.
Sparrow and Wu (1998) examined the relationship between national culture and
HRM preferences of Taiwanese employees. Although the study is based upon
employees and not managers and uses cultural values rather than individual values as
its unit of measurement, the study is noteworthy for its focus on HRM
decision-making. National culture accounted for 5-10 per cent of the total individual
variance in HRM preferences. A model to predict preferences for training and
development was significantly linked to the value orientations of high “Relationship to
Nature: Harmony” and low “Relationship to Nature: Subjugation”. The model
explained 12 per cent of the variance observed. The study revealed that the
relationship between value orientations and compensation preferences was weaker
than for other HR functions. In terms of employee performance, this was linked to the
value orientation of high “Relationships: Collateral” and the resulting model explained
3.7 per cent of the variance observed.
This limited base of empirical studies indicates that there is a significant
relationship between the individual values of managers and decision-making
processes. Individual values explain, to a certain degree, a range of organisational The impact of
decisions, from leadership and decision styles (Ali et al., 1995; Argrawal and Krishnan, values on HR
2000) to decision making and social issue evaluation (Sharfman et al., 2000; Keast,
1996). Indeed, the study by Sparrow and Wu (1998), albeit based upon cultural values, decision-making
demonstrates good support for the relationship between cultural values and HRM
decision-making.
257
Methodology
Sample and response rates
A cross-national sample of Canadian and Irish managers participated in the research
study. In relation to the Canadian sample, 200 managers were contacted in a
mail-distributed survey from a cross-section of organizations. The managers were
mainly alumni of the Masters of Business Administration Programme at Memorial
University of Newfoundland or participants in a Management Development
Programme. A total of 150 responses were received, indicating a response rate of
75 per cent.
A cross-sectional design was also employed in relation to the Irish sample. A total of
250 managers were contacted. The managers were participants in management
development programmes conducted on behalf of two large multinational
organisations (one organisation operating in the technology sector and located in the
mid-west region and the other organisation operating in the financial services sector
operating in Dublin) or were alumni of the Masters of Business Studies (HRM)
programme run by the University of Limerick or the Diploma in Personnel
Management programme run by the Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology. About 180
questionnaires of a total of 250 questionnaires were administered in the presence of the
researcher, while the remaining 70 questionnaires were distributed by mail. A total of
190 responses were received indicating a response rate of 76 per cent.
The research instrument was administered to Irish and Canadian participants in the
months of January and February 2002. In both the Irish and Canadian data sets, the
research instrument was administered either directly (in the presence of the researcher)
or was sent to the manager by post. In the latter case, a stamp-addressed envelope was
enclosed with the research instrument. The overall sample can be categorised as a
convenience sample.
The overall response rate was calculated at 75.5 per cent. In a seminal study of
response rates in business research, Baruch (1999) reports an average response rate of
55.6 per cent. He examines response rates of five leading journals in the management
and behavioural sciences across three specific points in time – 1975, 1985 and 1995. He
notes that the average response rate has dropped from 64.4 per cent in 1975 to 48.4 per
cent in 1995. The high response rate in this study can be attributed to the mode of
administration of the research instrument and the personal connections between the
researchers and respondents.

The research instrument

The research instrument comprises of a ten-page questionnaire, divided into three
parts. Part 1 consists of an abridged version of Rokeach’s instrumental and terminal
value instrument designed to measure the individual values of respondents. Following
an initial pilot test, and due to considerations of reducing the length of the original
IJM instrument, six of the 36 original value items were among those excluded. The
27,3 instrument invited respondents to rate the importance of each of the value items on a
5-point likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Whilst a
rankings approach is normally adopted in relation to applications of Rokeach’s Value
Survey, a ratings approach was adopted as ranking (ordinal) measures severely restrict
the type of permissible statistical analyses. Furthermore, there is an increasing volume
258 of research indicating that ratings techniques can be applied to Rokeach’s Value
Survey without adverse consequences. Studies by Moore (1975) and Feather (1973,
1975) found that average preference orders measured by ratings and rankings are quite
similar. Rankin and Grube (1980) showed that ratings have a higher predictive validity
than rankings. Indeed, both McDonald (1993) and Finegan (2000) have stated that it is
possible to change a rank-order task to a ratings task without hurting the integrity of
the scale.
Despite the fact that Schwartz’s Value Survey is now widely acknowledged as the
seminal instrument in the field (Burroughs and Rindfleisch, 2002; Glazer et al., 2004;
Steenkamp et al., 1999), a decision was made to use the Rokeach Value Survey as this
study forms part of a larger stream of research being conducted by the third-named
author using this instrument (Saha, 1995, 1996, 1999, 2001). In addition, a number of
research studies continue to use the long established Rokeach Value Survey to
investigate the value systems of individuals and managers (Murphy and Gordon, 2004;
Connor and Becker, 2003; Lenartowicz and Johnson, 2003).
Part 2 consists of two HR decision scenarios designed to establish both the
importance that respondents attached to health and safety and employment equity and
the rationale underlying decision making for each decision scenario. The two decision
scenarios of health and safety and employment equity were used to examine the
decision making of respondents. These two decision scenarios were selected as it was
anticipated that both scenarios would be affected by similar types of values (i.e.
concern for the individual). In both instances, the employee occupies the focal point of
the decision scenario and decisions rendered signal the level of concern towards the
employee and their welfare. According to Duncan and Wack (1994) decision scenarios
present an important opportunity to examine decision making and in particular the
range of possibilities open to managers when making decisions. They argue that use of
this technique in a developmental context can help to avoid the trap of the corporate
one-track mind. The use of decision scenarios has been adopted in studies examining
choice preferences (Erb et al., 2002), public policy decision-making (Zahir, 1999),
hotelier decision-making (Sheel, 1995) and strategic decision-making (Frederickson,
1984). The facts of the decision scenario in relation to health and safety were presented
as follows:
The quarterly health and safety report of company X indicates that accidents are up 10
percent from the last quarter and 20 percent from last year. The severity of accidents is also
up. In the past, the company has tried to improve safety by using posters and talks from
supervisors. A government inspector recently visited the company for health and safety
improvement. The inspector has advised the company to improve the current safety record.

Should Company X invest money to improve safety is the decision that needs to be made now.
Your inputs to this decision will be greatly appreciated. An investment equivalent to 2% of X
company’s present total overhead needs to be made in safety training, safety contests and
 purchase of safety equipment and fixtures. According to experts, these measures would The impact of
reduce accidents and injuries.
values on HR
Respondents were asked to rate the importance of this issue on a scale ranging from 1 decision-making
(extremely important) to 7 (not at all important). The question was then posed to
respondents as to whether they would recommend no funding, partial funding or full
funding for the health and safety plan described in the decision scenario.
The decision scenario on employment equity presented respondents with the 259
following set of circumstances:
Company X hires employees based upon selection criteria that appear to be in favour of white
males. Company records show that a disproportionate number of white males have the best jobs.
Two candidates, a white male and a white female are finalists for a job in the company. The
department manager wants to hire the white male because he has better scores. The HR
department is pushing the female candidate to satisfy the requirements of employment
equity.
Again respondents were asked to rate the importance of this issue on a scale ranging
from 1 (extremely important) to 7 (not at all important). The choice was then posed as
to whether they would hire the male or female candidate.
In the third section of the research instrument, demographic and human capital
information across five dimensions was collected on respondents to the study. Personal
information was gathered from respondents regarding their gender, marital status,
educational attainment, managerial position and the type of company in which they are
employed (Figure 1). Table I shows that gender composition was very similar across

Figure 1.
The research model
IJM
Canadian sample Irish sample Total sample
27,3
Gender
Male 82 (59.0) 111 (59.2) 193 (59.2)
Female 57 (41.0) 76 (40.6) 133 (40.8)
Marital status
260 Single 12 (8.8) 64 (34.2) 76 (23.5)
Married 103 (75.2) 112 (59.9) 215 (66.4)
Separated 2 (1.5) 9 (4.8) 11 (3.4)
Divorced 10 (7.3) 1 (0.5) 11 (3.4)
Other 10 (7.3) 1 (0.5) 11 (3.4)
Education
Second level 12 (9.0) 36 (19.8) 48 (15.2)
Apprenticeship/vocational 9 (6.7) 14 (7.7) 23 (7.3)
University graduate 11 (8.2) 89 (48.9) 100 (31.6)
University postgraduate 102 (76.1) 43 (23.6) 145 (45.9)
Managerial grade
Upper management 43 (31.4) 20 (10.9) 63 (19.7)
Middle management 44 (32.1) 58 (31.7) 102 (31.9)
Lower management 23 (16.8) 74 (40.4) 97 (30.3)
Other 27 (19.7) 31 (16.9) 58 (18.1)
Employer status
Local 85 (63.4) 18 (9.8) 103 (32.4)
Table I. National 22 (16.4) 12 (6.5) 34 (10.7)
Demographic and human Multinational 27 (20.1) 154 (83.7) 181 (56.9)
capital characteristics of
the study sample Note: Figures in parentheses are percentage

the Canadian and Irish sample. The majority of respondents in both Canada and
Ireland were married, with a higher proportion of single Irish respondents. In terms of
education, most Canadian respondents were university postgraduates, whereas most
Irish respondents had completed a university undergraduate programme. An
examination of the positions held by respondents showed that in the case of Canadian
respondents, most held middle and upper managerial positions, whereas Irish
respondents held middle and lower management positions. Finally, 63.4 per cent of
Canadian respondents worked for local companies, whereas 83.7 per cent of Irish
respondents were employed by multinational companies.

Data analysis
The data set was analysed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (Version
11.0). Univariate analyses (frequency distributions), bivariate analyses
(cross-tabulations, analysis of variance (ANOVAs)) and multivariate analyses
(simple correlations, partial correlations and regression analysis) were undertaken to
examine the relationship between the independent and dependent variables.
A factor analysis was the instrument for data reduction purposes. As there were no
prior expectations relating to the factor structure, principal components factor analysis
was the type of factor analysis selected. Research suggests that components and
common factor analyses produce essentially the same results (Velicer et al., 1982;
Arrindell and Van Der Ende, 1985). Varimax rotation was the choice of rotation
selected. The results of this analysis, presented in Table II, indicate the presence of
Item Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5 Factor 6 Factor 7 Factor 8 Internal consistency

1. Dependability values 0.735

Being consistent 0.732 0.079 0.066 20.032 0.192 0.045 2 0.068 0.092
Being reliable 0.691 0.022 0.349 0.168 0.136 0.088 0.152 20.060
Being respectful to others 0.637 0.076 0.442 0.114 0.035 0.149 0.097 0.081
Having self-control 0.605 0.106 2 0.081 0.287 0.051 0.007 0.039 0.087
2. Peace values 0.637
Living in harmony with nature 0.099 0.786 0.088 0.195 0.039 2 0.063 0.024 0.135
Living in a world free of conflict 20.002 0.761 0.125 0.095 0.041 0.254 2 0.005 0.042
Having concern about an attack on your country 0.143 0.508 0.138 20.257 0.043 0.135 0.262 20.047
Having a mature approach to life 0.386 0.398 0.002 0.187 0.064 0.013 0.064 0.257
3. Tolerance values 0.655
Accepting the faults of others 0.116 0.125 0.755 0.077 0.051 0.077 2 0.116 0.086
Being open-minded about people 0.074 0.135 0.668 0.310 0.149 2 0.116 0.115 0.048
Being helpful to others 0.465 0.139 0.571 20.139 0.067 2 0.003 0.158 0.156
4. Capability values 0.643
Being at peace with oneself 0.091 0.470 0.060 0.606 20.071 0.064 0.035 0.163
Being self-reliant 0.283 0.086 0.121 0.568 0.353 0.013 2 0.073 0.025
Being competent in daily living 0.266 0.075 0.294 0.542 0.058 0.203 0.132 20.192
Having self-respect 0.075 2 0.037 0.203 0.484 0.238 0.428 0.046 0.174
5. Self-realization values 0.606
Living an exciting life 20.030 0.014 0.129 20.088 0.647 0.018 0.241 20.154
Having a personal sense of achievement 0.201 2 0.077 0.001 0.262 0.577 0.209 0.051 0.059
(continued)
decision-making

Results of factor analysis

instrument
of Rokeach’s values
261

Table II.
The impact of
values on HR
 IJM
27,3

262

Table II.
Item Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5 Factor 6 Factor 7 Factor 8 Internal consistency

Being recognised by others 0.125 0.048 20.029 20.174 0.521 0.088 20.066 0.452
Having freedom to do what you want 0.071 0.142 20.037 0.284 0.500 2 0.133 0.317 0.124
Strive to achieve your own goals 0.341 0.083 0.230 0.268 0.499 0.156 0.021 0.055
Being imaginative in your life 0.254 0.402 0.179 0.091 0.441 2 0.071 20.221 20.073
6. Relationship values 0.476
Having close companionship 0.013 0.107 0.071 0.100 0.103 0.760 20.075 0.097
Having family security 0.175 0.110 20.163 20.022 2 0.029 0.674 0.296 0.037
7. Welfare values 0.485
Living a comfortable life 0.158 2 0.042 20.034 20.081 0.082 0.149 0.775 20.008
Having equality with people 20.084 0.197 0.074 0.164 0.232 2 0.152 0.527 0.299
Living a contented life 20.003 0.111 0.187 0.232 0.080 0.409 0.488 0.102
8. Principle values 0.499
Being affectionate towards others 0.043 0.041 0.280 20.047 2 0.041 0.204 0.143 0.683
Wanting to stand up for your beliefs 0.264 0.229 20.028 0.366 0.019 0.027 0.078 0.616
Eigenvalues 6.331 1.845 1.756 1.502 1.366 1.222 1.085 1.047
Note: Extraction method: principal component analysis; rotation method: varimax with Kaiser normalisation; rotation with 23 iterations
eight distinct factors. All items exhibited a factor loading of greater than 0.30. The The impact of
eight factor solution accounted for 57.7 per cent of the variance and all eight factors values on HR
have an eigenvalue of greater than one. The eight-factor solution was examined using
the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy and the Bartlett test of decision-making
sphericity. The KMO test produced a statistic of 0.839 indicating that factor analysis
could usefully be performed on the data. The Bartlett test of sphericity resulted in a
significance level of less than 0.001, indicating the presence of strong significant 263
relationships among the scale items. The Cronbach a for the complete scale was
calculated at 0.781. The Cronbach scores for the eight factors produced range from
0.735 to 0.476.

Results
A summary of the means, standard deviations and intercorrelations is provided in
Table III. It shows that capability values and relationship values are strongly
correlated with the importance of health and safety and that peace values, tolerance
values, self-realisation values and principle values are strongly correlated with the
importance of employment equity. There is also a high degree of intercorrelation
amongst the values factors.
Table IV presents two regression models and the beta values, R 2 values and
adjusted R 2 statistics for each model. For the purposes of the regression analysis,
several dummy variables were created to permit the inclusion of demographic and
human capital variables. As there was no a priori knowledge of the expected outcomes
stepwise regression was the form of regression modelling used. In the first model
predicting the importance of health and safety, the three variables of education,
employer status and capability values accounted for 10.2 per cent of the overall
variance. Employer status was found to be the strongest predictor in the model
accounting for over half of the variance explained. Education was identified as a
significant negative predictor of the importance of health and safety, indicating that
the higher educated the person, the lower the perceived importance of health and safety
issues. The remaining variable, capability values explained 3.5 per cent of the overall
variance. The F statistic of 5.381 ( p , 0.001) confirmed the presence of significant
predictor variables within the model.
In terms of recommending funding for health and safety, 80.8 per cent (N ¼ 261) of
respondents recommend full funding for health and safety. A further 18.6 per cent
(N ¼ 60) of respondents recommend partial funding for health and safety. Only two
respondents (0.6 per cent) recommend no funding for health and safety.
In the second model, three variables were identified as predictors of the importance
of employment equity. In all, the independent variables accounted for 12.7 per cent of
the variance observed. Accounting for 5.4 per cent of the total variance, the nationality
of respondents proved to be the strongest predictor of the importance of employment
equity. This points to a significant cultural effect, or perhaps broad societal effect
(O’Donnell et al., 2001), in the perceived importance of employment equity, with Irish
respondents placing a higher importance on matters of employment equity.
Gender was identified as a significant negative predictor of employment equity,
indicating that female respondents place a higher priority on employment equity than
male respondents. Peace values accounted for the remaining 4.6 per cent of the
 IJM
27,3

264

Table III.
Pearson correlation
matrix for independent
and dependent variables
Importance
Importance of
Standard Dependability Peace Tolerance Capability Self-realisation Relationship Welfare Principle of health employment
Mean deviation values values values values values values values values and safety equity

Dependability
values 4.25 0.44 –
Peace values 3.46 0.70 0.331 * * –
Tolerance
values 4.22 0.44 0.723 * * 0.372 * * –
Capability
values 4.35 0.41 0.461 * * 0.407 * * 0.478 * * –
Self-realisation
values 3.92 0.46 0.417 * * 0.312 * * 0.397 * * 0.439 * * –
Relationship
values 4.35 0.56 0.226 * * 0.232 * * 0.148 * * 0.250 * * 0.168 * * –
Welfare values 4.10 0.50 0.215 * * 0.309 * * 0.274 * * 0.304 * * 0.337 * * 0.321 * * –
Principle
values 3.96 0.60 0.338 * * 0.358 * * 0.335 * * 0.340 * * 0.260 * * 0.238 * * 0.296 * * –
Importance of
health and
safety 6.55 0.070 0.067 0.032 0.051 0.158 * * 0.060 0.140 * 0.048 0.084 –
Importance of
employment
equity 5.42 1.46 0.010 0.148 * * 0.121 * 0.109 0.136 * 0.056 0.109 0.127 * 0.163 * * –
Notes: * *Correlation is significant at the 0.001 level (two tailed); *correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (two tailed)
 The impact of
Importance of employment
Importance of health and safety equity values on HR
Adj D Adj Adj D Adj decision-making
b R2 R2 R2 b R 2
R2 R2

Countrya 0.265 0.058 0.054 0.054

Gendera 2 0.142 0.127 0.117 0.017 265
Marital statusa
Educationa 2 0.134 0.112 0.102 0.014
Managerial gradea
Employer statusa 0.234 0.057 0.053 0.053
Dependability values
Peace values 0.223 0.107 0.100 0.046
Tolerance values
Capability values 0.194 0.094 0.088 0.035
Self-realisation values
Relationship values
Welfare values
Principle values
Importance of health and
safety
Importance of employment
equity
Overall Adj R 2: 0.102; F statistic: Overall Adj R 2: 0.127; F statistic:
Model summary 5.381 * * *; N: 279 13.075 * * *; N: 274
Notes: * * * p , 0.001; aFor the purposes of the regression analysis, the demographic and human
capital variables were converted to dummy variables: country (0 ¼ Canada, 1 ¼ Ireland), gender
(0 ¼ female, 1 ¼ male), marital status (0 ¼ married, 1 ¼ non-married), education (0 ¼ non-third level, Table IV.
1 ¼ third level), managerial grade (0 ¼ upper and middle mgt., 1 ¼ lower mgt. and other), employer Results of stepwise
status (0 ¼ local and national, 1 ¼ multinational) regression analysis

variance observed in the model. The F statistic of 13.075 ( p , 0.001) confirmed the
presence of significant predictor variables in the model.
When presented with a choice of selecting either the male or female candidate to fill
the vacant position, 74.3 per cent of respondents indicated that they would select the
male candidate for the position, while the remaining 25.7 per cent stated that the female
candidate should be selected for the position. When this decision was analysed
according to the gender of the respondent, there was no significant difference in the
selection of candidate.

Study limitations
The findings of this study should be interpreted with an acknowledgement of the
following limitations. The narrow focus of the study limits the generalizability of the
findings. The study does not include variables such as organizational structure and
culture, financial and budgetary concerns and organisational policies and procedures.
It is arguable that these factors may be more critical in HR decision-making than the
individual values of managers. At the broader societal level it is also probable that
legislative and other institutional arrangements will be expected to exert some
influence, as suggested by the findings on nationality noted above. While the inclusion
IJM of cultural, financial, political and broader societal factors might have enriched the
27,3 content of the research model and explained a greater amount of the variance present,
it might also have confounded the data analysis and interpretation of the results.
In conducting the research, the authors were mindful of the problems posed by
ecological fallacy (Freedman et al., 1998; Schwartz, 1994; Spicker, 2001). According to
Spicker (2001) an ecological fallacy may be committed when the characteristics of
266 groups are held to convey information about individuals within groups; or conversely
when the characteristics of individuals are taken as equivalent to those of groups.
Hofstede (1984, 2002) labels this latter phenomenon reverse ecological fallacy; and it
has become commonly accepted as a methodological consideration within the research
literature (Armstrong, 1997; Fu et al., 2004; Lim and Firkola, 2000; Roberts, 1997). In
relation to values, Schwartz (1994) argues that reverse ecological fallacy occurs when
researchers construct cultural indices based upon individual value measurements,
without constructing culture-level analysis. For this reason, line manager data from the
two countries (Canada and Ireland) was treated as a one large sample. Accordingly, it
was not appropriate to consider differences between Irish and Canadian line manager
values, as individual values differ by individual and extrapolating such differences to a
societal/group level in this particular instance would only confuse the levels of
analysis.
The reliance on self-report data raises issues of the consistency motif and common
method variance. Neck et al. (1999) define the consistency motif as the urge of
respondents to maintain a consistent line in a series of answers. Research has shown
that many people have lay theories on how personality, behaviour and psychological
states are interrelated and this affects responses to research studies (Phillips and Lord,
1986; Lord et al., 1978; Staw, 1975). In the case of common method variance, the reliance
on respondents to provide both the independent and dependent data introduces some
further limitations to the study. Future research could examine real-time decisions
taken by line managers and explore the value content of these decisions to obtain a
truer measure of objective decision making. Such research would undoubtedly lead to a
greater awareness of the psychological potency of individual values in HR
decision-making.
The low reliability of some of the scale items was disappointing. This low reliability
may explain the lack of significant association with the dependent variables in the
study. Future attention should be focused on improving the internal consistency of the
value items.
The precept-percept design of the study is recognised as a further limitation. As Fu
et al. (2004) argue values are likely to be expressed in the form of behavioural
intentions, which may differ from actual behaviour. They maintain that in real-life,
situational forces will exert greater pressure in forcing individuals to act in an
automatic or spontaneous mode. A more objective measure of the dependent variable,
through observational studies or critical incident techniques would produce a more
reliable measure of decision making as opposed to espoused decisions. Moreover,
further research should consider examining the decisions of managers over time to
obtain a more consistent measure of decision making.
The social desirability of some responses is identified as a final limitation to the
study. There are mixed views in the literature regarding the challenges posed by social
desirability bias. While both Saunders et al. (2002) and Dillman (1978) argue that
respondents to self-administered questionnaires are relatively unlikely to provide more The impact of
socially desirable responses, Konrad and Linnehan (1995) disagree, stating that there is values on HR
often pressure on respondents to present a socially desirable image of their
organisations. For their part, Podsakoff and Organ (1986) maintain that to the extent to decision-making
which social desirability bias causes only an upward shift in the distribution of
responses, it is not a serious concern, at least in the interpretation of correlation
involving the scale. They go further and state that even if the effect of social 267
desirability responses were to compress the range of responses around the end of the
scale the damage would occur mainly in the attenuation of correlations (because of
restricted variance in scale scores).

Discussion and conclusion

An examination of the literature on values reveals significant gaps in our
understanding of the instrumentality of individual values in HR decision-making
processes. While decision making is central to an organization’s existence and survival,
limited research has been conducted examining the effect of espoused values on HR
decision-making. To address this imbalance, the current study examined the effect of
the espoused individual values of managers on HR decision-making in the areas of
health and safety and employment equity.
In relation to the decision scenario of health and safety, capability values were
identified as a significant predictor variable. This suggests that respondents
associated the importance of health and safety with the capability and capacity of
respondents to participate meaningfully in work activities. This finding is underlined
by the fact that 80.8 per cent of respondents advocated full funding for health and
safety activities in response to the facts outlined in the decision scenario.
The identification of peace values as a significant predictor of the importance of
employment equity is also a significant finding. It suggests that respondents associate
equity and fairness in the workplace with notions of peace and harmony. In relation to
the choice of candidate, the fact that there was consistency in the selection of candidate
across male and female respondents suggests the application of criteria other than
gender-based criteria in the decision taken.
In both decision scenarios, the regression models generated accounted for 10.2-12.7
per cent of the variance observed, indicating the effect of factors other than individual
values and demographic/human capital factors impacting on the respondent’s
decisions. These factors are most likely to be organisational factors and further
research should examine the effect of factors such as organisational culture and
politics, budgetary concerns and performance orientation in an effort to improve the
predictive explanatory power of regression models. Consideration should also be given
to examining possible mediation and moderation effects between individual values and
other factors in predicting HR decision-making.
The study highlights a number of important implications for HRM practice. It is
clear that the need for a greater understanding of decision-making processes has never
been greater. Both the quantitative and qualitative data analysed identify the
importance of values as underlying factors influencing the decision processes of
managers. Further work in this area could result in the psychometric use of value
instruments alongside traditional personality and ability measurement instruments in
recruitment and selection and management development processes. It is arguable that
IJM values will serve as better guides to organisational decision making than generic
27,3 personality characteristics.
Finally, the study draws attention to the need for greater awareness of the effects of
individual values. It identifies an important role for academics in studying the effects
of individual values and underlines the fact that managers need to be aware of the fact
that their own values influence how they make decisions. Attention to the values
268 concept amongst managers will improve comprehension of the decision-making
process within organizations.

References
Ali, A.J., Ahmed, A.A. and Krishnan, K.S. (1995), “Expatriates and host country nationals:
managerial values and decision styles”, Leadership and Organisation Development
Journal, Vol. 16 No. 6, pp. 27-34.
Argrawal, T. and Krishnan, V.R. (2000), “Relationship between leadership styles and value
systems”, Management & Labour Studies, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 136-43.
Armstrong, R.W. (1997), “The relationship between culture and perception of ethical problems in
international marketing”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 15 No. 11, pp. 1199-209.
Arrindell, W.A. and Van Der Ende, J. (1985), “An empirical test of the utility of the
observations-to-variables ratio in factor and components analysis”, Applied Psychological
Measurement, Vol. 9, pp. 165-78.
Bacharach, S.B., Bamberger, P. and Mundell, B. (1995), “Strategic and tactical logics of decision
justification: power and decision criteria in organizations”, Human Relations, Vol. 48 No. 5,
pp. 467-88.
Bacon, N., Ackers, P., Storey, J. and Coates, D. (1998), “It’s a small world: managing human
resources in small businesses”, in Mabey, C., Salaman, G. and Storey, J. (Eds), Strategic
Human Resource Management: A Reader, Sage, London.
Baruch, Y. (1999), “Response rate in academic studies – a comparative analysis”, Human
Relations, Vol. 52 No. 4, pp. 421-38.
Bates, R.A., Hatcher, T., Holton, E.F. III and Chalofsky, N. (2001), “Redefining human resource
development: an integration of the learning, performance and spirituality of work
perspectives”, in Aliaga, O. (Ed.), Academy of Human Resource Development 2001
Proceedings, Academy of Human Resource Development, Baton Rouge, LA.
Begley, T.M. and Boyd, D.P. (2000), “Articulating corporate values through human resource
policies”, Business Horizons, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 8-15.
Bigoness, W.J. and Blakely, G.L. (1996), “A cross-national study of managerial values”, Journal of
International Business Studies, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 739-52.
Bontis, N. and Fitz-enz, J. (2002), “Intellectual capital ROI: a causal map of human capital
antecedents and consequents”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 223-47.
Brief, A.P. (1998), Attitudes in and around Organisations, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Burroughs, J.E. and Rindfleisch, A. (2002), “Materialism and wellbeing: a conflicting values”,
Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 348-71.
Carroll, A.B. (1993), Business & Society, Southwestern Publishing, Cincinnati, OH.
Cohen, M.S. (1993), “The naturalistic basis of decision biases”, in Klein, G.A., Orasanu, J.,
Calderwood, R. and Zsambok, C.E. (Eds), Decision Making in Action: Models and Methods,
Ablex Publishing Corporation, Norwood, NJ, pp. 51-102.
Connor, P.E. and Becker, B.W. (2003), “Personal value systems and decision-making styles of The impact of
public managers”, Public Personnel Management, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 155-80.
values on HR
Dillman, D.A. (1978), Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method, Wiley, New York,
NY. decision-making
DIO International Research Team (1983), “A contingency model of participative decision making:
an analysis of 56 decisions in three Dutch organizations”, Journal of Occupational
Psychology, Vol. 56, pp. 1-18. 269
Duncan, N.E. and Wack, P. (1994), “Scenarios designed to improve decision-making”, Strategy &
Leadership, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 18-27.
Earley, P.C. (1989), “Social loafing and collectivism: a comparison of the United States and the
People’s Republic of China”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 34, pp. 565-81.
Earley, P.C. (1993), “East meets west meets mid east: further explorations of collectivistic and
individualistic work groups”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 36, pp. 319-48.
Elizur, D. (1996), “Work values and commitment”, International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 17
No. 3, pp. 25-30.
Erb, H.P., Bioy, A. and Hilton, D.J. (2002), “Choice preferences without inferences: subconscious
priming of risk attitudes”, Journal of Behavioural Decision-Making, Vol. 15 No. 3,
pp. 251-62.
Erez, M. and Earley, P.C. (1987), “Comparative analysis of goal setting strategies across
cultures”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 72 No. 4, pp. 658-65.
Feather, N.T. (1973), “The measurement of values: effects of different assessment procedures”,
Australian Journal of Psychology, Vol. 25, pp. 221-31.
Feather, N.T. (1975), Values in Education and Society, The Free Press, New York, NY.
Finegan, J.E. (2000), “The impact of person and organisation values on organisational
commitment”, Journal of Occupational & Organisational Psychology, Vol. 73 No. 2,
pp. 149-69.
Fischhoff, B. and Johnson, S. (2002), “The possibility of distributed decision making”, in Shapira,
Z. (Ed.), Organizational Decision-Making, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.
Flowers, V.S., Hughes, C.L., Myers, M. and Myers, S. (1975), Managerial Values for Working, A
Nationwide A.M.A. Survey Report.
Frederickson, J.W. (1984), “The comprehensiveness of strategic decision processes: extension,
observation, future directions”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 445-67.
Freedman, D.A., Klein, S.P., Ostland, M. and Roberts, M.R. (1998), “Review of a solution to the
ecological inference problem”, Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 93,
pp. 1518-22, with discussion, Vol. 94 (1999), pp. 352-57.
Fu, P.P., Kennedy, J., Tata, J., Yukl, G., Bond, M.H., Peng, T.K., Srinivas, E.S., Howell, J.P.,
Prieto, L., Koopman, P., Boonstra, J.J., Para, S., Lacassagne, M.F., Higashide, H. and
Cheosakul, A. (2004), “The impact of societal cultural values and individual social beliefs
on the perceived effectiveness of managerial influence strategies: a meso approach”,
Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 35, pp. 284-305.
Gamble, P.R. and Gibson, D.A. (1999), “Executive values and decision-making: the relationship of
culture and information flows”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 217-40.
Ghoshal, S. and Bartlett, C.A. (1998), The Individualized Corporation, Heinemann, London.
Giacomino, D.E. and Akers, M.D. (1998), “An examination of differences between personal values
and value types of female and male accounting and non-accounting majors”, Issues in
Accounting Education, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 565-85.
IJM Gibb, S. (2002), “Line manager involvement in learning and development: small beer or big
deal?”, Employee Relations, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 281-94.
27,3
Glazer, S., Daniel, S.C. and Short, K.M. (2004), “A study of the relationship between
organizational commitment and human values in four countries”, Human Relations, Vol. 57
No. 3, pp. 323-45.
Habermas, J. (1996), Between Facts and Norms, W. Rehg translation, Polity, Cambridge.
270 Hambrick, D.C. and Mason, P.A. (1984), “Upper echelons: the organisation as a reflection of its
top manager”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 27, pp. 271-91.
Hartmann, L.C. and Patrickson, M. (1998), “Individual decision-making: implications for decision
training in TQM”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 15 No. 6,
pp. 619-33.
Henderson, G. (1996), Human Relations Issues in Management, Quorum Books, Westport, CT.
Hofstede, G. (1980), Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work Related Values,
Sage, Beverley Hills, CA.
Hofstede, G. (1984), Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work Related Values,
Sage, Beverley Hills, CA.
Hofstede, G. (1998), “Attitudes values and organizational culture: disentangling the concepts”,
Organization Studies, Vol. 19, pp. 477-92.
Hofstede, G. (2002), “The pitfalls of cross-national survey research: a reply to the article by
Spector et al. on the psychometric properties of the Hofstede values survey module 1984”,
Applied Psychology, Vol. 51 No. 1, pp. 170-8.
Johnson, M.K. and Elder, G.H. (2002), “Educational pathways and work value trajectories”,
Sociological Perspectives, Vol. 45 No. 2, pp. 113-39.
Keast, D.A. (1996), “Values in the decision-making of CEOs in public colleges”, Canadian Journal
of Higher Education, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 1-34.
Kleindorfer, P.R., Junreuther, H.C. and Schoemaker, P.J.H. (1993), Decision Sciences: An
Integrated Perspective, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Kluckhohn, C. (1951), “Values and value-orientations in the theory of action”, in Parsons, T. and
Shils, E. (Eds), Towards a General Theory of Action, Harvard University Press,
Cambridge.
Kochan, T.A. and Osterman, P. (1994), The Mutual Gains Enterprise, Harvard Business School
Press, Boston, MA.
Konrad, A.M. and Linnehan, F. (1995), “Formalised HRM structures: coordinating equal
employment opportunity or concealing organisational practices?”, Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 787-811.
Lenartowicz, T. and Johnson, J.P. (2003), “A cross-national assessment of the values of Latin
America managers: contrasting hues or shades of gray”, Journal of International Business
Studies, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 266-84.
Lim, L. and Firkola, P. (2000), “Methodological issues in cross-cultural management research:
problems solutions and proposals”, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Vol. 17 No. 1,
pp. 133-50.
Lord, R.G., Binning, J.F., Rush, M.C. and Thomas, J.C. (1978), “The effect of performance cues and
leader behaviour on questionnaire ratings of leadership behaviour”, Organizational
Behaviour and Human Performance, Vol. 21, pp. 27-39.
McDonald, P. (1993), “Individual-organisational value congruence: operationalisation and
consequents”, unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Western Ontario, Canada.
McGuire, D., Cross, C. and O’Donnell, D. (2005), “Why humanistic approaches in HRD won’t The impact of
work”, Human Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 131-7.
Meglino, B.M. and Ravlin, E.C. (1998), “Individual values in organisations: concepts,
values on HR
controversies and research”, Journal of Management, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 351-90. decision-making
Moore, M. (1975), “Rating versus ranking in the rokeach value survey: an Israeli comparison”,
European Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 5, pp. 405-8.
Munson, J.M. and Posner, B.Z. (1980), “Concurrent validation of two value inventories in 271
predicting job classification and success for organisational personnel”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 65, pp. 536-42.
Murphy, E.F. and Gordon, J.D. (2004), “A preliminary study exploring the value changes taking
place in the United States since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack on the world trade
center in New York”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 81-97.
Neck, C.P., Neck, H.M., Manz, C.C. and Godwin, J. (1999), “I think I can I think I can: a
self-leadership perspective towards enhancing entrepreneur thought patterns, self-efficacy
and performance”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 14 No. 6, pp. 477-501.
O’Donnell, D., Garavan, T.N. and McCarthy, A. (2001), “Understanding the Irish VET system:
beyond neoclassicism”, International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 425-44.
Phillips, J.S. and Lord, R.G. (1986), “Notes on the practical and theoretical consequences of
implicit leadership theories for the future of leadership measurement”, Journal of
Management, Vol. 12, pp. 31-41.
Podsakoff, P.M. and Organ, D.W. (1986), “Self-reports in organisational research: problems and
prospects”, Journal of Management, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 531-44.
Rankin, W.L. and Grube, J.W. (1980), “A comparison of ranking and rating procedures for value
system measurement”, European Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 10, pp. 233-46.
Ranney, G.B. and Carlson, B. (1992), “Reviewing organisational policies and rules”, Quality
Progress, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 50-6.
Roberts, K.H. (1997), “On looking at an elephant: an evaluation of cross-cultural research related
to organisations”, in Warner, M. (Ed.), Comparative Management: Critical Perspectives on
Business and Management, Routledge, London, pp. 327-50.
Rokeach, M. (1973), Nature of Human Values, Free Press, New York, NY.
Rokeach, M. and Ball-Rokeach, S.J. (1989), “Stability and change in American value priorities,
1968-1981”, American Psychologist, Vol. 44, pp. 775-84.
Sagie, A. and Elizur, D. (1996), “The structure of personal values: a conical representation of
multiple life areas”, Journal of Organizational Behaviour, Vol. 17, pp. 573-86.
Saha, S.K. (1995), “Differences in managerial beliefs and values: do they influence HRM in
different countries?”, in Mangaliso, M. and Palmer, D. (Eds), Managing in a Global
Economy VI, Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference, Eastern Academy of
Management, Singapore, pp. 66-70.
Saha, S.K. (1996), “Human resource decision-making and managerial values: a study of Pakistani
managers and MBAs”, Administrative Sciences Association of Canada, Annual Meeting,
Montreal.
Saha, S.K. and Chaudhury, S. (2001), “Issues in human resource management: a comparative
study between India and Canada”, paper presented at the Academy of Management
Conference, Washington, September2001.
Saha, S.K. and Fisera, I. (1999), “Managerial beliefs and values as antecedents to human resource
decisions: an international comparison”, Proceedings of the Eastern Academy of
Management International Conference, Prague, Czech Republic, June 20-24 1999.
IJM Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2002), Research Methods for Business Students,
Financial Times Prentice Hall, London.
27,3
Schwartz, S.H. (1994), “Beyond individualism/collectivism: new cultural dimensions of values”,
in Kim, U., Triandis, H.C., Kagitcibasi, C., Choi, S.C. and Yoon, C. (Eds), Individualism and
Collectivism: Theory, Method and Applications, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Schwartz, S.H. and Bilsky, W. (1990), “Toward a psychological structure of human values”,
272 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 58, pp. 878-91.
Sharfman, M.P., Pinkston, T.S. and Sigerstad, T.D. (2000), “The effects of managerial values on
social issues evaluation: an empirical investigation”, Business and Society, Vol. 39 No. 2,
pp. 144-82.
Sheel, A. (1995), “Monte Carlo simulations and scenario analysis – decision-making tools for
hoteliers”, Cornell Hotel & Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Vol. 36 No. 5, pp. 18-27.
Shrum, L.H. and McCarthy, J.A. (1992), “Individual differences in differentiation in the rating of
personal values: the role of private self-consciousness”, Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, Vol. 18, pp. 223-30.
Simons, R.H. and Thompson, B.M. (1998), “Strategic determinants: the context of managerial
decision-making”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 7-21.
Sparrow, P. and Wu, P. (1998), “Does national culture really matter? Predicting HRM preferences
of Taiwanese employees”, Employee Relations, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 25-56.
Spicker, P. (2001), “Poor areas and the ‘ecological fallacy’”, Vol. 76, available at: www.radstats.
org.uk/no076/spicker.htm, pp. 38-49.
Staw, B.J. (1975), “Attribution of the ‘Causes’ of performance: a new alternative interpretation of
cross-sectional research in organizations”, Organizational Behaviour and Human
Performance, Vol. 13, pp. 414-32.
Steenkamp, J.B.E.M., TerHofstede, F. and Wedel, M. (1999), “A cross-national investigation into
the individual and national cultural antecedents of consumer innovativeness”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 63 No. 2, pp. 55-69.
Tacconi, L. (1996), “Dissent from choice theory: implications for environmental decision making”,
International Journal of Social Economics, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 331-45.
Torrington, D., Hall, L. and Taylor, S.W. (2004), Human Resource Management, Financial Times
Prentice Hall, London.
Turner, J.H. (1991), The Structure of Sociological Theory, 5th ed., Wadsworth, Belmont, CA.
Velicer, W.F., Peacock, A.C. and Jackson, D.N. (1982), “A comparison of component and factor
patterns: a Monte Carlo approach”, Multivariate Behavioural Research, Vol. 17, pp. 370-88.
Wagner, J.A. (1995), “Studies of individualism-collectivism: effects of cooperation in groups”,
Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 152-72.
White, M., Hill, S., Mills, C. and Smeaton, D. (2004), Moving to Change? British Workplaces and
the Future of Work, Palgrave Macmillan, New York, NY.
Wilcocks, S.G. (1998), “Managerial effectiveness in an NHS trust: some observations based on
contrasting organisational perspectives”, International Journal of Public Sector
Management, Vol. 11 Nos 2/3, pp. 130-8.
Zafirovski, M. (1999), “What is really rational choice? Beyond the utilitarian concept of
rationality”, Current Sociology, Vol. 47 No. 1, pp. 47-113.
Zahir, S. (1999), “Synthesising intensities of group preferences in public policy decision using the
AHP: is it time for the new democracy?”, Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences,
Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 353-67.
Further reading The impact of
Patrickson, L.C. and Patrickson, M. (1998), “Individual decision making: implications for decision values on HR
training in TQM”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 15 No. 6,
pp. 619-33. decision-making
Saha, S.K., Ali, M.O. and Hossain, A. (1999), “Managerial beliefs and values as antecedents to
human resource decisions”, Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Association for
Global Business, Las Vegas, 18-21 November. 273
About the authors
David McGuire is Lecturer in HRD at School of Management, Napier University, Edinburgh,
Scotland. His PhD dissertation on the relationship between individual and managerial values
and human resource decision-making was completed at the University of Limerick (2004). He has
just returned from the USA where he was a Fulbright Scholar in HRD at Oakland University,
Michigan. His main research interests are in values-based decision-making, boundary-setting
in HRD and critical theory. David McGuire is the corresponding author and can be contacted at:
d.mcguire@napier.ac.uk
Thomas N. Garavan is Senior Lecturer in HRD at the Department of Personnel and
Employment Relations at the University of Limerick, Ireland. He is author of six leading
textbooks, over 60 academic articles, Editor of the Journal of European Industrial Training for
the past seven years and Associate Editor of Human Resource Development International for the
past three years. His main research interests are in workplace learning, management
development and cross-cultural HRD.
Sudhir K. Saha is Professor of Human Resource Management and Organisational Behaviour
at Memorial University of Newfoundland, Canada. He has conducted extensive trans-national
research on managerial values and employment equity issues and is a regular contributor on
international teaching assignments.
David O’Donnell, Intellectual Capital Research Institute of Ireland, is an interdisciplinary
researcher in the fields of intellectual capital, organization theory, HR, and critical management
studies. He has a particular interest in bringing insights from the Frankfurt School of Critical
Theory, particularly the work of Jürgen Habermas, into discourse on the knowledge economy
and society.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints