Al Dmour2020

International Journal of Information Systems in the Service Sector
Volume 12 • Issue 3 • July-September 2020
The Influence of HRIS Usage on

Employee Performance and Mediating
Effects of Employee Engagement
in Five Stars Hotels in Jordan
Rand H. Al-Dmour, The Univeristy of Jordan, Jordan
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the role of employee engagement with their work as a
mediating factor in the relationship between utilisation of a human resource information system
(HRIS) and employee performance in five-star hotels in Jordan. A conceptual framework based on
social exchange theory and content analysis of similar previous studies was developed. A quantitative
approach and simple random sampling were used to obtain data via questionnaires completed by 221
human resources (HR) employees working at 21 five-star hotels in Jordan. The response rate was 71%.
Structural equation modelling (SEM) was used to analyse and verify the study variables. The findings
revealed that use of a HRIS had a significant positive influence on both employee performance and
work engagement, while the latter acted as a partial mediator between HRIS utilisation and employee
performance.
Keywords
HRIS applications, work engagement, employee performance, Jordan
INTRODUCTION
Organisations around the world are increasingly using information systems as technology improves and
globalisation increases. Human resources departments mainly use management information systems.
There are many computerised applications that are useful for the management and organisation of
staffing in all industries, including the hotel industry (Shahsavarani & Ji. 2014). Recent rapid advances
in human resource information system (HRIS) applications have highlighted their importance and their
potential effect on an organisation’s performance (Wiblen et al., 2010; Kaygusuz et al, 2016; Khashman
& Khashman, 2016). There is growing interest in understanding the impact of HRIS applications on
organisational efficiency and effectiveness (Al-Dmour et al., 2015; Kumar & Pansari, 2015).
The current literature examining HRISs shows that these applications have varying impact on
HR across organisations, but it offers little explanation about the variety. On the one hand, research
indicates that HRISs are used prevailingly to automate routine tasks and “replace filing cabinets”
(Beadles, 2005), but on the other, Khera and Gulati (2012) report that several authors have found
increasing use of the technology in strategic decision-making processes of HR departments (Khera &
Gulati, 2012). Other studies suggest that the level of strategic HRIS use varies across organisations,
and that most businesses continue to use HRISs simply to remove manually managed processes and
DOI: 10.4018/IJISSS.2020070101

Copyright © 2020, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

1
to cut down on costs (Kristine et al., 2006). However, there are few studies of the impact of HRIS
utilisation upon HR employees’ performances.
Hotels adopt these systems to improve employee training and motivation, and thereby achieve the
best overall performance of the business. This adds competitive advantage for the hotel and increases
the value of the services provided there. HR employees in hotels that use a HRIS are expected to
be more responsive, answer queries more quickly and provide more accurate information. HRISs
may enable these employees to improve their performances overall because the systems themselves
enable the employees to be more autonomous in handling HR information. The systems increase
information connectivity and, therefore, HR professionals can demonstrate greater flexibility in the
event of unanticipated change. Furthermore, more extensive use of HRISs enables HR employees
to allocate more time to broader and more transformational issues. Al-Dmour et al. (2017) and
Ammarhusein (2015) state that HRIS use in HR can reduce the automation costs of the information and
the number of employees required, but still contribute to employees checking their own information.
It can also offer HRIS managers easy access to relevant information and data, and allow them to
conduct analysis, make decisions and communicate with others without consulting HR professionals.
A growing number of companies use HRISs to support both their HR and business management
(Beulen, 2009; Obidat, 2012).
Since the tourism and hospitality industries are labour intensive with a high level of staff turnover,
information systems that support recruitment, organisation and management of human resources
in these businesses have become keys to success. The hotel industry has seen huge development,
which is increasing competition between hotels, so many seek to use computer systems to raise
the performance level and quality of services they provide. Workers in modern, high-performing
hotels are required to possess good workplace skills and competencies to contribute to the financial
success of the organisations (Ferguson, 2006). For instance, a HRIS is an effective tool that can be
used to streamline the administrative functions of the HR department. Some authors, such as Khatri,
regard information technology as necessary in HR (Khatri, 2006). HRISs offer HR departments the
opportunity to take on more efficient and strategic functions by standardising the majority of the
organisation’s HR processes, improving the quality and speed of available information and improving
services to employees.
Modern organisations focus increasingly on employee engagement and the development of
engagement strategies (Shuck & Wollard, 2010). In literature covering HR management, scholars have
adopted different theoretical perspectives related to job design to explain the influence of perceived HR
practices on employee outcomes (Guanandl, 2018). Engaged employees show emotional attachment to
their organisations and become highly involved in their job with a great enthusiasm for the success of
their employers, going the extra mile beyond their employment contractual agreements (Kompaso &
Sridevi, 2010). It is argued that an engaged employee works with a sense of passion that translates into
both high performance and the willingness to take on extra roles that are not in their job descriptions
(Al-Dmour et al, 2018). Excellent customer service requires properly engaged employees. Hotels
have recently reported problems with employee disengagement (Han, 2015; Eseynel & Harazneh,
2017). In Jordan, the topic of employee engagement has not been widely studied in the hospitality
industry and in the hotel segment in particular (Al-Dmour et al., 2018).
This study therefore aims to examine the influence of HRIS use on employee performance through
the mediating role of employee engagement in the hotels sector in Jordan. The impact of the use of
HRIS applications must be evaluated on an individual country basis, due to differences in the level
of country development. According to Spero et al (2011), the stage of economic development of a
nation has some influence on the usage or possible applications of HRISs. In developing economies,
such as Jordan’s, HRISs mainly fulfil administrative roles currently (Al-Dmour, 2012).
2
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND LITERATURE REVIEW
HRIS Applications
HRIS applications are the number of HR-related services available on an organisation’s HRIS delivery
channels (Al-Dmour et al., 2017). Researchers have made various suggestions regarding how HRIS
applications may support organisational processes (Kundu & Kadian, 2012; Udekwe, 2016). For
example, Udekwe and Harpe (2017) have reported several applications for HRISs, such as recruitment
and selection; turnover tracking /job analysis; payroll, benefits and compensation (management);
training and development; performance appraisal; internal and external communication and succession
HR planning. In addition to data storage, the HRIS also allows certain tasks to be completed more
easily than they would be by hand, while reducing the amount of paper that HR departments must store.
Previous studies have shown that HRIS applications are more commonly used in small and
medium-sized companies for administrative purposes such as employee record-keeping and payroll,
whereas in large companies, a HRIS is often used for strategic purposes (Bamel et al., 2014; Al-Dmour
et al., 2017). Sizeable research has also been published regarding work-related outcomes of HRIS
implementation. In addition, numbers of employees (size) affect HRIS usage. For instance, Wayne
(1997) observed that different groups of users employed HRISs in different ways. HR professionals
used HRISs in several roles including: regulatory reporting and compliance; compensation analysis;
payroll; pension contributions; profit-sharing administration; skill development and skill inventory; and
benefits administration. Managers in functional areas used the HRIS to meet their specific information
needs, while the final group, the employees, used a HRIS for administrative alternatives. Thus, the
functions and applications of HRISs vary with end-users and type of organisations.
Markova (2012) reports that HRISs developed in-house or in highly customised versions can
build the dynamic capabilities required by a company and ensure a firm’s competitiveness. Kumar
and Parumasur (2013) reinforce this view, stating that proper implementation of a HRIS augments
organisational effectiveness through the realisation of human resource and organisational strategy.
Maier et al. (2013) recognise the relationships between HRIS implementation, employee job
satisfaction and staff retention. In an effort to extend the scope of HRISs, Dulebohn and Johnson
(2013) report that the HRIS plays a critical role in selection, application and use of human resource
metrics and analytics, and contributes to strategic advancement of organisations. The stage of economic
development of a country also has some influence on the usage and applications of HRISs, since in
developing economies, HRISs mainly fulfil administrative roles (Spero et al., 2011).
Employee Engagement
Although there is a great deal of interest in engagement, there is no universal definition of it.
Engagement is an ambiguous term and has been conceptualised in different ways by both academic
researchers and among practitioners (Meryem & Acar, 2017; Bailey et al., 2017). Previous studies
viewed employee engagement in general as the level of commitment and involvement employees had
towards their organisation and its values (Anitha, 2014). According to Macey and Schneider (2008)
and the Society for Human Resource Management in the US (2016), employee engagement is an
organisational workplace approach that results in the correct conditions for every member of the
organisation to provide an effective performance every day, being committed to the goals and values
of the organisation, and being motivated to contribute to the organisation’s success. The employee
engagement concept revolves around ways to satisfy, the enjoyment employees experience in their
jobs and the environment in which employees work with their colleagues. Employee engagement
also relates to the way in which their work performance is associated or aligned with the outcomes of
the organisation (Amhalhal et al., 2015). Others, such as London and Mone (2014); Anitha (2014),
and Bailey et al. (2017) state that employee engagement refers to positive behaviours and attitudes
leading to enhanced organisational outcomes.
3
Many organisations are adopting new techniques to enhance their staff engagement levels. In
general, employee engagement represents an emotional connection and positive attitude felt by
employees towards their work and their employing business, and an engaged employee has passion
about the company’s goals (Anitha, 2014; Dajani, 2015). Without employee engagement in the
workplace, companies cannot survive long in the market (Zainol et al., 2016), because engagement
is a driver of organisational success. Employee or work engagement helps businesses increase their
productivity and achieve their goals, as employees give their best performances in order to enhance
organisational productivity as well as to achieve their goals (Anitha, 2014; Amhalhal et al., 2015).
Karsan and Kruse (2011) argue that employee engagement translates into employee motivation
and the extent to which a worker is ready to contribute to the organisation’s success and apply
unrestrained efforts to accomplish tasks in order to achieve organisational goals. They claim that
an engaged employee is ready to go the extra mile for the organisation, putting in overtime, giving
extra attention to the environment at the workplace, and showing recognisable effort beyond that of
his colleagues. Engaged employees have positive effects on organisations’ performances. They are
more productive, creative and loyal, and they look ahead to achieve the organisation’s goals (Jauhari
et al., 2013). The importance of employee engagement as reported by Watkin (2002) is demonstrated
in their roles and ways in which they behave that link their achievements to both the objectives of
the organisation and themselves. He found that their outstanding performances brought considerable
added-value to their places of work. Hogan and Coote (2014) suggest that employee engagement,
or the extent to which employees are engaged with their employing body, should be measurable.
To determine whether employees are considered engaged or not, three facets of their behaviour are
taken into consideration: vigour, dedication and absorption (Ferreira & de Oliveira, 2014; Schaufeli
et al., 2002; Nawaz et al., 2014).
Workers in hotels consider the key determinants of employee engagement to be: high-quality
training and development; good leadership and rewards; and strong internal communication (Al-Syaidh
et al., 2016; Darawsheh et al., 2016; Zainol et al., 2016; Alkandari et al., 2017). According to Saks
(2006) and Arunkumar and Renugadevi (2013), the main antecedents required to improve the level
of engagement are: job characteristics; perceived organisational and supervisor support; rewards and
recognition for good work; procedural justice and distributive justice. A high degree of individual
engagement in a company can create several benefits for the organisation and individual alike. The
company can attract a skilled and talented workforce, reduce staff turnover, foster customer loyalty,
enhance profitability and performance, and increase stakeholder value (Arunkumar & Renugadevi,
2013), while the employee gains job satisfaction, organisational attachment and commitment and a
sense of citizenship in the company which reduces the need to resign and seek employment elsewhere.
Engaged employees do not frequently quit their jobs (Arunkumar & Renugadevi, 2013).
Employee Performance
It is crucial for organisations to understand the impact of information systems on the performance
and productivity of users because this can improve the organisations’ and employees’ performances
(Fernandes, 2013). Employee performance is a continually examined theme in most branches of
management, including strategic management, by both academic scholars and practising managers
(Shin & Konrad, 2017). However, the importance of understanding the impact of HRISs on employee
performance has not yet received adequate attention (Kemei, 2016). Employee performance relies
simply on achieving goals set by the business (Anitha, 2014; Abualoush et al., 2018; Chuang, & Lin
2017; BaniMelhem, et al., 2018). It indicates the added-value, both financial and non-financial, of
an employee’s contribution to the attainment of goals set by the organisation (Dajani, 2015), and the
rate of realisation of purpose and activity outcomes (Tajuddin, 2013). In other words, it represents
workers achieving results or standards cited by organisations (Kok, 2011).
Employee performance is the personnel contribution to the business goals. It shows how
efficiently the staff discharge their duties and responsibilities. The people who attain high measures
4
of performance are those who have discharged their duties and responsibilities successfully, and their
behaviours therefore contribute to the goals of the organisation. The appraisal of their performances
measures the contribution made by the personnel to the fulfilment of the business’s goals (Aldemir
et al., 2004). Employee performance relates to the quantity and quality of the person’s effort and
achievement (Rizwan et al., 2014). According to Akhtar et al. (2016), employee performance also
refers to the standard of outcomes achieved by individuals compared with their colleagues, and is
the key to improving the whole organisation’s performance.
Igbaria and Tan (1997) studied the relationship between information systems and users by
investigating performance through several factors, including the use of the system, system quality,
information quality and performance of the user. Data were collected from users in large organisations.
They concluded that the above factors positively affected user performance, with user satisfaction
being an important factor that affected the use of the system. Similarly, Chan et al. (1998) examined
many factors from different perspectives to determine their contribution to the improvement of user
performance. In their model, the main factors considered were the data models, task characteristics
and user characteristics. They concluded that these factors positively affected user performance,
but other factors might have more impact. For example, the accuracy of the information used and
supplied by the system was the most effective measure of the users’ performance, as the users were
concerned about the quality of information they received from a system and this in turn affected the
quality of their performance.
The results of a study by Ali and Younis (2013) indicated that the response time, accuracy of
the information and reliability of the system was important factors that affected user performance.
Other researchers have attempted to control these factors more closely to identify their impact on user
performance more accurately. For example, Wierschem and Brodnax (2003) identified the impact
of improvements in processor speeds for personal computers on user productivity. A controlled
laboratory experiment was conducted to measure the impact of the speed of the processor on the output
of the students. It was found that the productivity of the end user, as measured by an increase in the
volume of work, improved as processor speed increased. These studies have established important
conclusions regarding certain factors and their interactions that affect the performance of the user,
such as the use of the system, system quality and reliability. In addition, they have developed more
comprehensive models and conducted new empirical investigations on the impact of information
systems on user performance.
Some previous research on the impact of information systems and performance of users
relied on dispositional factors such as attitudes and users’ intention to use systems (Jawahar, 2002;
BaniMelhem, et al., 218), which leads to more debate and ambiguity. However, Sears and Jacko
(2003) studied the effects of situational factors on the performance of the user. They established close
links between the system, the task, satisfaction and performance. In the same vein, Hossain et al.
(2012) found there was a significant impact from the psychological traits of users on the relationship
between information systems and the users’ performance. More recently, Ferguson (2006) examined
workforce performance in global companies. Survey results revealed that only 27 per cent of senior
executives regarded at least 75 per cent of their employees as having the skills necessary to execute
their jobs at an industry-leading level. Once the organisations had hired the people they regarded as
best for the jobs, they reported active engagement in employee development programmes such as
orientation, ongoing training and career development. Ferguson defined performance-based pay as
“compensating employees based on the individual, team or organisation’s performance.” This was
intended to motivate hard work by linking an employee’s effort to their salary.
Performance management has changed in many companies with the introduction of new HRIS
modules and tools in the past few years. To optimise employee performance, it is necessary to have
systems that measure each employee’s performance. HRISs can also help management produce highly
effective performance reviews to further improve performance management. So with the increasing
push for employee engagement, some companies are choosing to invest in HRIS applications to enhance
5
employee performance. Current research shows that employee engagement is ultimately related to
employee satisfaction, employee commitment and citizenship behaviour within the organisation. If
employees are satisfied, their enthusiasm for the company’s day-to-day activities and operations is
likely to be high, increasing the likelihood of good productivity and work quality, which can reflect
on the organisation’s overall performance (Kumar, 2015). The majority of studies agree that when
employees feel positive and strong relations with their work, their performance improves (Salanova et
al., 2005; Macey & Schneider, 2008; Demerouti & Cropanzano, 2010; Christian et al., 2011; Gruman
& Saks, 2011). HR practices may affect work engagement positively by enhancing the employees’
motivation, opportunity and proper working conditions while helping them to boost their skills. In
this situation, employees will be more likely to engage in work activities due to personal enjoyment
rather than because they feel coerced into them (Aybas et al., 2017). Research has demonstrated that
employees who perceive that management is effective, for example through strong organisational
and supervisory support and justice, are more likely to be engaged in their work (May et al., 2004;
Saks, 2006; Ang et al., 2013).
Recently, a heuristic framework of employee performance measurement was proposed in a
multi-disciplinary, systematic literature review (Pradhan & Jena, 2017). In this review, employee
performance consisted of two broad and generic dimensions. The first, task performance, referred to
the proficiency with which an employee performed central job tasks (Hee et al., 2014). The second
dimension, contextual performance or organisational citizenship behaviour, referred to the effort
of employees not related directly to the major task or compensation system, but still important to
increase the firm’s effectiveness, such as employee cooperation with the manager or ideas to improve
the institutional process (Akhtar et al., 2016).
Contextual performance standards can be utilised to measure employee performance (Kahya,
2007). According to Tajuddin (2013), contextual performance refers to moves by workers to avoid
a defined role attitude to add roles to their work. Task performance and contextual performance can
be easily distinguished at the conceptual level. Task performance and contextual performance both
affect turnover rate, job satisfaction and commitment to and from an organisation (Scotter, 2000).
Businesses need to ensure that effective employees are satisfied with the organisation and encouraged
to stay. However, the two performances also differ: abilities and skill tend to predict task performance;
while personality and related factors tend to predict contextual performance (Werner, 2000). The
importance of employees’ performances must be understood by the management and steps taken to
develop and motivate employees to perform well, as effective performance within an organisation
can enable it to take the lead in a market and gain extra opportunities within that market.
RESEARCH MODEL
The theoretical background and empirical studies regarding the use of HRIS applications, as well as
the relevant theoretical literature and theories (i.e., social exchange theory) on employee engagement
and performance, were reviewed and integrated to develop a conceptual framework to guide this study.
The model explained here was proposed to examine the impact of HRIS use on employee performance
through the mediating role of employee engagement. The conceptual framework consists of three major
groups of variables. These are: the independent variable (use of HRIS applications) as presented and
measured by Al-Dmour et al., (2015); the mediating variable (work engagement) as presented and
measured by Schaufeli et. al. (2002) and Lee and Ok (2015); and the dependent variable (employee
performance) as measured by several researchers: Hee et al. (2014), Kemei (2016), and Yin (2018).
Based upon this conceptual framework, the following hypotheses are proposed:
H1: There is a significant relationship between the use of HRIS applications and employee
performance.
H2: There is a significant relationship between the use of HRIS applications and work engagement.
6
H3: Work engagement significantly mediates the relationship between the use of HRIS applications
and employee performance.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This research employs a quantitative approach with an exploratory and descriptive design. To validate
the study’s conceptual model and to examine the research hypotheses, questionnaires were used to
collect the required data. The target respondents were HR employees working in hotels in Jordan. About
310 employees were working in the HR departments of four- and five-star hotels in Jordan in 2018
(JAS report, 2018). The researchers collected 221 questionnaires, which represented a response rate
of 71%. This was considered reasonable for analysis. The independent variable (HRIS applications),
mediating variable (work engagement) and the dependent variable (workforce performance) were
measured using a five–point Likert scale. The questionnaire’s content (constructs and measures)
were mainly selected and adapted from previous relevant studies and modified to take account of
the environmental practices of Jordanian hotel companies, based on the results of a pilot study and
feedback from six professional academic staff in this field.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Descriptive Statistics
The mean, standard deviation, skewed results and kurtosis were calculated for all the measurements.
The descriptive statistics presented in Table 1 indicated a positive disposition towards the items
measured. The standard deviation (SD) values ranged from 0.804 to 1.040, which indicated a narrow
spread around the mean. The mean values of all items were greater than the midpoint (3.000) and
ranged from 3.510 to 4.420. However, after careful assessment by using skewness and kurtosis, the
data were found to be normally distributed. Indeed, skewness and kurtosis were normally distributed
since most of the values were inside the adequate ranges for normality (that is, -1.000 to +1.000) for
skewness, and less than 10 for kurtosis (Byrne, 2013).
Table 2 also showed that the results of the extent of HRIS applications being used by HR
employee in hotels operating in Jordan could be considered quite high (i.e. 4.12/5), since their means
are greater than the mean of the scale*, which is 3 (i.e. mean of the scale = Σ Degrees of the scale
/ 5 = 1+2+3+4+5 / 5 = 3). These results are consistent with previous work as many surveys and
research on HRIS found that HRIS is more commonly used for administrative purposes like employee
record-keeping and payroll rather than for strategic purposes (Hussain, et al., 2007; Delorme & Arcand
2010; Bamel, et al., 2014; Al-Dmour et al., 2015; Udekwe & Harpe, 2017).
Measurement Model: Reliability and Validity

This study applies the structural equation modelling (SEM) technique to test the proposed relations
between the constructs in the model (Hooper et al., 2008). A two-stage approach of SEM (measurement
model and structural model) was employed to analyse the empirical data. The model fitness and
constructs’ reliability and validity were assessed by running AMOS21. The results of confirmatory
factor analysis (CFA) for all variables showed that the first order of factor loading for all items ranged
from 0.680 to 0.860. All the factor loading figures were higher than the cut-off of 0.600.
Therefore, all items were acceptable for the next stage of analysis as recommended by Hair and
Black (2010). CFA results for the overall model showed that all the measurements fitted except for
the goodness-of-fit index (GFI). The Chi-square fitted with a value of 678.544, degrees of freedom
(df) = 219.000, and p-value = 0.000. The baseline result showed that the GFI, comparative-fit index
(CFI), TLI, and incremental fit index (IFI) were 0.911, 0.904 and 0.923 respectively, and were higher
than the cut-off value of 0.900 (Hair et al., 2010; Hoyle, 1995). The value of the root mean square
7
Table 1. Mean, standard deviation, and normality of scale items
Construct /items Mean S.D. Skewness Kurtosis

Independent variables: HRIS applications utilizations (HS)
HS1 Employee record-keeping 4.42 0.929 -1.411- 1.881
HS2 Recruitment/selection 4.31 0.866 -1.360- 1.608
HS3 Payroll service 4.27 0.851 -1.253- 1.460
HS4 Benefits management 4.13 0.846 -1.772- 3.285
HS5 Training & development 4.35 0.855 -1.373- 1.859
HS6 Performance appraisal 4.13 0.813 0-.947- 0.789
HS7 Compensation management 4.02 0.887 -0.851- 0.428
HS8 Turnover tracking/job analysis 3.81 0.938 -0.854- 0.334
HS9 Internal and external communication 4.00 0.947 -0.820- 0.312
HS10 Succession HR planning 3.79 0.845 -0.936- 1.402
Mediating Variables: Employee engagement (EG)
1. Vigour
EG1 When I get up in the morning; I like to go to work. 3.83 0.913 -0.563- 0.307
EG2 At my work, I feel bursting with energy. 4.04 0.812 -0.565- 0.483
At my work I always persevere, even when things do not
EG3 4.17 0.811 -0.888- 1.118
go well.
EG4 I can continue working for very long periods At a time. 4.13 0.932 -0.878- 0.433
EG5 At my job, I am very persistent, mentally. 4.27 0.804 -1.106- 1.641
EG6 At my job, I feel strong and vigorous. 4.06 0.831 -0.864- 1.093
2. Absorption
EG7 When I am working, I forget everything else around me. 3.80 0.972 -0.752- 0.402
EG8 Time dies when I am working. 3.87 0.932 -0.720- 0.327
EG9 I get carried away when I am working. 3.77 0.932 -0.909- 1.380
EG10 It is difficult to detach myself from my job. 3.51 1.040 -0.530- 0.019
EG11 I am immersed in my work. 3.78 0.927 -0.759- 0.907
EG12 I feel happy when I am working intensely. 4.02 0.893 -0.834- 0.778
3. Dedication
EG13 To me, my job is challenging. 3.96 0.908 -0.811- 0.853
EG14 My job inspires me. 3.98 0.829 -0.598- 0.245
EG15 I am enthusiastic about my job. 4.06 0.894 -1.045- 1.473
EG16 I am proud on the work that I do. 4.27 0.905 -1.492- 2.497
EG17 I find the work that I do full of meaning and purpose. 4.22 0.834 -1.113- 1.538
Dependent Variable: Employee performance (EP)
EP1 I rate myself in terms of the quantity of work I achieve. 4.05 0.977 -0.739- -0.341-
EP2 I rate myself in terms of my ability to reach my goals. 4.06 0.948 -0.821- 0.309
I rate myself in terms of the potential I have for reaching
EP3 the top 10% in performance among coworkers in my 4.10 0.932 0-.862- 0.403
hotel.
I rate myself in terms of quality of my performance in
EP4 4.23 0.894 -1.115- 0.987
regard to customer relations.
EP5 4.11 0.929 -0.839- 0.412
regard to management of time
EP6 4.16 0.890 -0.937- 0.622
regard to planning ability.
EP7 3.97 0.896 -0.500- -0.345-
regard to management of expenses.
EP8 4.17 0.882 -0.879- 0.550
regard to the knowledge of my service.
EP9 3.96 0.940 -0.892- -0.505-
regard to knowledge of hotels competitors.
EP10 4.23 0.878 -1.064- 0.928
regard to knowledge of customer needs.
8
Table 2. Overall CFA Model: Convergent validity and Cronbach’s Alpha results
1st order
Constructs Variables Alpha Convergent Validity
Loading
HS1 0.71 AVE CR
HS3 0.73
HS4 0.78
HS 0.83
HS6 0.81 0.67 0.84
HS8 0.82
HS9 0.84
EG2 0.73
EG5 0.74
EG6 0.76
EG10 0.79
EG 0.92 0.69 0.86
EG9 0.82
EG13 0.83
EG15 0.85
EG8 0.86
EP5 0.68
EP8 0.73
EP EP2 0.88 0.75 0.66 0.81
EP1 0.77
EP6 0.79
error of approximation (RMSEA) was 0.068< 0.080, an acceptable value that fitted the model.
Moreover, the result of relative CMIN/df was 3.454, which also fitted as it was less than the cut-off
of 5.000 suggested by Hoyle (1995). Hence, these results showed that more than four indices fitted
the model (Chi-square, adjusted GFI (AGFI), CFA, TLI, IFI, and RMSEA). Hair et al. (2010) suggest
that a fit of three to four indices is sufficient for the model to be declared fit. Therefore, the different
results showed that the overall measurement model fitted the data sufficiently well, obviating the
requirement for further adjustments.
After checking uni-dimensionality, the reliability and validity for each construct was assessed,
Cronbach’s Alpha results for the overall measurement model and convergent validity are presented
in Table 2. As Table 2 shows, the value of AVE for the model is much higher than 0.500 for all
second order constructs, which is the cut-off AVE value recommended by (Barrett, (2007; Fornell &
Larcker, 1981). The construct values ranged from 0.660 to 0.690. Moreover, the composite reliability
values were higher than the recommended value of 0.700 for all constructs as suggested by (Hair et
al., 2010). The composite values ranged from 0.810 to 0.860. Finally, the Cronbach’s alpha values
ranged from 0.830 to 0.920, all of which were higher than the cut-off 0.700 suggested by Hair et al.,
(2010). Therefore, the Cronbach’s alpha for all constructs indicates they are sufficiently error-free.
The test of discriminant validity was then conducted for the overall model. The acceptable value
for discriminant validity is 0.850 or less, as a value higher than 0.850 can indicate multicollinearity
(Barrett, 2007; Hair et al., 2016) The result of overall model discriminant validity was less than
0.850 which is an acceptable value (Hair et al., 2016). Table 3 presents the results of the discriminant
validity test for the overall model.
9
Table 3. Discriminant validity of overall CFA model
Main Constructs HS EG EP
HRIS utilizations (HS) 0.79
Employee engagement (EG) 0.81 0.77
Employee performance (EP) 0.82 0.74 0.77
Note: Diagonals represent the square root of average variance extracted while the others represent the correlations.
Structural Model and Testing Hypotheses

Regression analysis techniques were used to examine and estimate the structural model. These
assessments performed the critical analysis of the study hypotheses. Within the structural model, the
relationship between the variables of HRIS application utilisations, (HS), employee engagement (EG)
and employee performance (EP) were therefore evaluated. The estimation of coefficient parameters
was subsequently evaluated to find the hypothesised direct effect for the study variables. Standard
regression weights along with the hypothesised direct effects are presented in Table 4.
Table 4. Direct effects of the variables
Hypotheses Path Un-standard Estimation Standard Estimation C.R. P. Value

Estimate S.E.
Ho1 HS → EP 0.19 0.079 0.18* 2.067 0.034
Ho2 Eg → EP 0.66 0.173 0.423** 4.230 0.000
Notes: *Sig. at p< 0.050; *** Sig. at p< 0.001. (Two-tailed)
The results in Table 5 indicated that all the direct paths in the structural model were significant
with different p-values. Hypotheses H1 and H2 are significant at a p-value of 0.050, and at p-value
0.000 respectively. As shown in Table 5, the CR and p-values of HRIS utilizations (HS) in predicting
employee performance (EP) were 2.067 and 0.034, respectively. This means that the likelihood of
obtaining a vital magnitude ratio as great as 2.067 in definite value was 0.034. The regression weight of
HRIS utilizations (HS) in predicting employees’ performance (EP) was therefore significantly different
from zero at the 0.050 level (two-tailed). Thus, H1 was supported. Moreover, the standardized estimate
of Beta was 0.180, indicating a positive relationship. This means that when HRIS utilizations (HS)
increases by one standard deviation, employee performance increases by 0.180 standard deviations.
Furthermore, Table 4 shows, the result of CR was 4.230 with a p. value of 0.000 for employee
engagement (EG) in predicting employee performance (OP). This means that the likelihood of
obtaining a vital magnitude ratio as large as 4.230 in definite value was 0.000. The regression weight
of employee engagement (EG) in predicting employee performance (EP) was significantly different
from zero at the 0.001 level (two-tailed). Thus, H2 was supported. Moreover, the standardized estimate
of Beta was 0.432, indicating a positive relationship. Therefore, when employee engagement increases
by one standard deviation, employee performance increases by 0.432 standard deviations. The indirect
and total effect of HRIS utilizations (HS) was calculated and the results are summarized in Table 5.
An analysis of the mediating effects of employee engagement (EG) was conducted to examine its
effect as a mediator on the relationship between the effects of HRIS (HS) on the dependent variable
employee performance (EP). A hypothesis (H3) was developed to determine the mediating effects
of EG on the relationship between the independent variable, HS, and the dependent variable EP. The
10
Table 5. Summary results of direct, indirect, and total effects of independent variables
Direct and Indirect Effect Standardized effect

Direct effect of HRIS utilizations (HS) on employee performance (EP) 0.167
Direct effect of HRIS utilizations HS on employee engagement (EG) 0.614
Indirect effect of HRIS utilizations (HS) on employee performance (EP) 0.243
Total effect of HRIS utilizations (HS) on employee performance (EP) 0.410
first step in the procedure was to ensure that the model fitted the data through goodness-of-fit indices.
The results from the structural model showed that the model fitted the data with X2 = 856.000, df =
219, p- value = 0.000, CFI = 0.921, IFI = 0.932, TLI = 0.915, RMSEA = 0.071 and X2 / df = 3.900.
Moreover, R2= 0.660 for employee engagement (EI) and 0.550 for business performance. The results
of the multiple square correlations were higher than the cut-off value of 0.300 as recommended by
Hair et al. (2016). The following sections present the results of examining the parameter estimation
to determine whether the mediation effect of employee engagement accrued, or did not, between HS
and EP. The hypothesis (H3) was therefore assessed and the output is presented in Table 6.
As shown in Table 6, there was a significant statistical relationship between HRIS utilizations
(HS) and employee performance (EP) without the mediating effect of employee engagement (EI).
The total standardized effect was 0.310 at a p-value of 0.000. Therefore, the standardized total effect
of HRIS utilizations (HS) on employee performance (EP) without the effect of employee engagement
(EG) as a mediator was statistically significant. Furthermore, the direct effect of HRIS utilizations
(HS) on employee performance (EP) with the effect of employee engagement (EG) as a mediator
was also significant at a p-value of 0.050 and with a standardized direct effect of 0.167. Thus, the
direct effect between HRIS utilizations (HS) and employee performance (EP) with exist of employee
engagement (EG) as a mediator was also significant. Additionally, the effect of HRIS utilizations
(HS) on employee engagement (EG) as a mediator was statistically significant at a p-value of 0.000
and with a standardized effect of 0.544. The effect of employee engagement (EG) as a mediator on
employees performance (EP) was also significant at a p-value of 0.000 and with a standardized effect
of 0.401. Table 6 also shows that the standardized direct effect of HRIS utilizations (HS)on employee
performance (EP) with the effect of employee engagement (EG) as a mediator decreased, and all
the paths were statistically significant. Therefore, employee engagement (EG) mediates the effect
of HRIS utilizations (HS)on employee performance (EP). Moreover, the degree of mediation effect
Table 6. Results regarding the mediating effect of employee engagement
Mediating effect Results

Total Effect of HS on EP without EG 0.310***
Direct Effect of HS on EP with EG 0.167*
Effect of HS on EG 0.544***
Effect of EG on EP 0.401***
Indirect Effect of HS on EP through EG 0.243***
Mediation Effect Yes
Degree of Mediation Partial
Hypothesis Result Significant /supported (Ho3)
Notes: * = Sig. at p < 0.05; *** = Sig. at p < 0.001, (two-tailed)
11
was partial. This result supported hypothesis Ho3. Finally, HRIS utilizations (HS) have a positive
indirect effect on employee performance (EP) through employee engagement (EG). The value of
indirect effect was 0.243, which was significant at a p-value 0.000.
CONCLUSION
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of the use of HRIS applications upon employee
performance through the mediating role of employee engagement in five-star hotels operating in Jordan.
In order to achieve the study objectives, and to conduct the research using a systematic approach, a
conceptual framework was developed. The results indicate that the extent of the HRIS applications
being used by HR employees was quite high (that is, 4.12/5; 80, 42). This result is reinforced by prior
studies such as those by Al-Dmour et al., (2015); Hussain et al.,(2007); and Delorme and Arcand,
(2010).The potential benefits of using HRIS applications are that HR employees are expected to be
more responsive, answer queries more quickly, and provide more accurate information. HRIS may
also enable these employees to be more autonomous in handling HR information.
The analysis also provides empirical evidence regarding the effect of using HRIS applications on
employee performance in hypothesis H1. The result for H1supported is significantly and positively
the linkage between HRIS utilisation and employee performance. Numerous research studies have
explored the relationship between use of HRIS applications and employee performance, such as those
by Dulebohn and Johnson (2013); Bamel et al. (2014); and Al-Dmour et al, (2017). Furthermore,
the analysis provided empirical evidence regarding the effect of work engagement on employee
performance as proposed in hypothesis H2. The results showed that the effect was positive and
significant. Therefore, the second hypothesis H2 agreed with findings from Ferguson (2006); Ali and
Younis (2013); Akhtar et al. (2016); Karatepe (2013); Albrecht (2013); Tetik (2016); and Yin (2018).
The third hypothesis (H3) was developed to determine whether there was a mediating effect of
work engagement on the relationship between HRIS utilisation and employee performance. The results
showed clearly that work engagement mediated the effect of HRIS use on employee performance, but
the mediating effect was partial. In addition, the results indicated a significant and positive indirect
effect of HRIS use on employee performance through work engagement, with a standardised indirect
effect of 0.243 at p-value of 0.000 (p<0.001). The results also showed a significant and statistical
effect of HRIS use on employee performance without the mediating effect of work engagement.
The total standardised effect was 0.310, which was significant at p-value = 0.000. Therefore, the
standardised total effect of HRIS use on employee performance, without the mediating effect of work
engagement, was statistically significant. This relation was still significant even after work engagement
was employed as a mediator between HRIS use and employee performance, as the standardised direct
effect was 0.167 at a p-value of 0.012 (p < 0.05).
This discussion shows that the standardised direct effect between HRIS use and employee
performance with work engagement as a mediator decreased to 0.167, and that the standardised
direct effect of the same relationship in the absence of the mediator was 0.310. This indicated that the
mediation was partial. Thus, this result supported hypothesis H3. Moreover, the indirect effect between
HRIS use and employee performance through work engagement as a mediator was both positive and
significant, with a standardised indirect effect of 0.243 at a p-value of 0.000 (p < 0.001).The mediating
effect of work engagement between usage of HRIS and employee performance may therefore be a
new relationship. The results indicated that HRIS use had a significant and direct positive effect on
employee performance. HRIS utilisation also had a direct effect on work engagement and this effect
was also significant, as was the effect of work engagement on employee performance. However, no
previous empirical research studies have examined the mediating effect of work engagement on the
relationship between HRIS utilisation and employee performance. The results therefore show that work
12
engagement has a vital mediation effect on the relationship between HRISs and employee performance
and the degree of mediation was partial. Therefore, hypothesis H3 was supported. Furthermore, the
main statistical results also supported the predictive validity of the study’s conceptual model. Overall,
the study validated use of HRISs to improve employee performance and work engagement.
Theoretical Contributions and Implications

This study fills the gap within the literature regarding a comprehensive understanding of the
relationships between HRIS use, employee performance and work engagement. It also significantly
contributes to supporting social exchange theory by supporting the links between HRIS utilisation,
employee performance and work engagement (Karatepe, 2013). The present study provides many
theoretical contributions to the literature on HRIS applications, one of which is to validate the research
framework applied to five-star hotels in Jordan. Moreover, this research supports the application of
HRISs in Jordan, particularly in the hotel industry. The results endorse the mediating effect of work
engagement on the relationship between the independent variable, HRIS utilisation, and the dependent
variable employee performance, which is another gap addressed by this research.
Furthermore, this study has extended the literature that considers HRIS applications by providing
the following. First, it has explained an unexplored path between the principles of the use of HRIS
applications, work engagement and employee performance. Previous research examined and linked the
effect of use of HRIS applications with employee performance (Dulebohn & Johnson, 2013; Bamel
et al., 2014) and between work engagement and employee performance (Ali & Younis, 2013; Akhtar
et al., 2016; Tetik, 2016; Yin, 2018). Second, it validates and tests the impact of the role of work
engagement as a mediating factor between the effect of the use of HRIS applications and employee
performance, which can be considered another contribution to the literature.
There are also significant implications from this study’s research findings for HR managers,
HR professionals and practitioners, and other decision-makers in hotels and similar organisations.
First, decision-makers should be fully aware of the importance of the effect of HRIS applications
on their employees’ performances, so that they can make the right decisions and choose the right
direction for any change within their organisations. Second, the role of HRIS applications to enhance
employee engagement and performance should be considered in strategic choices for the future at
every organisation.
13
REFERENCES
Abualoush, S. H., Obeidat, A. M., Tarhini, A., Masa’deh, R. E., & Al-Badi, A. (2018). The role of employees’
empowerment as an intermediary variable between knowledge management and information systems on
employees’ performance. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, 48(2), 217–237.
doi:10.1108/VJIKMS-08-2017-0050
Akhtar, A., Nawaz, M. K., Mahmood, Z., & Shahid, M. S. (2016). Impact of high-performance work practices
on employees’ performance in Pakistan: Mediating role of employee engagement Pakistan Journal of Commerce
and Social Sciences, 10(3), 708–724.
Albrecht, S. L. (2013). Work engagement and the positive power of meaningful work. In Advances in
positive organizational psychology (pp. 237–260). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. doi:10.1108/S2046-
410X(2013)0000001013
Aldemir, C., & Gülcan, Y. (2004). Student satisfaction in higher education. Higher Education Management and
Policy, 16(2), 109–122. doi:10.1787/hemp-v16-art19-en
Al-Dmour, H. H., Ali, W. K., & Al-Dmour, R. H. (2019). The Relationship Between Customer Engagement,
Satisfaction, and Loyalty. International Journal of Customer Relationship Marketing and Management, 10(2),
35–60. doi:10.4018/IJCRMM.2019040103
Al-Dmour, R. H., & Shannak, R. O. (2012). Determinants of the implementation level of electronic human
resources management (E-HRM) in Jordanian shareholding companies. European Scientific Journal, 8(17).
Al-Dmour, R., Yassine, O., & Masa’deh, R. E. (2018). A review of literature on the associations among employee
empowerment, work engagement and employee performance. Modern Applied Science, 12(11), 313. doi:10.5539/
mas.v12n11p313
Al-Dmour, R. H., & Love, S. (2015). An integrated model for identifying the determinants of the adoption of
human resources information system applications in business organisations. International Journal of Business
Innovation and Research, 9(6), 631–662. doi:10.1504/IJBIR.2015.072488
Al-Dmour, R. H., & Love, S. (2015). Determinants of the implementation of HRIS applications in business
organisations in Jordan. International Journal of Human Resources Development and Management, 15(1),
69–96. doi:10.1504/IJHRDM.2015.069974
Al-Dmour, R. H., Masa’deh, R. E., & Obeidat, B. Y. (2017). Factors influencing the adoption and implementation
of HRIS applications: Are they similar? International Journal of Business Innovation and Research, 14(2),
139–167. doi:10.1504/IJBIR.2017.086276
Ali, B. & Younes, B. (2013). The Impact of Information Systems on user Performance: An Exploratory Study.
Journal of Knowledge Management, Economics and Information Technology, 2(April), 22-33.
Alkandari, A. & Al-Lozi, M. (2017). Knowledge management and its role on organizational crisis management:
A literature review. Journal of Social Sciences, 6, 833-850.
Al-Syaidh, N. H. J., Al-Lozi, M., & Al-Harrasi, J. S. (2016). Transformational leadership and its role on the
effectiveness of employees’ behavior: A theoretical study. Journal of Business & Management, 4, 14–35.
Amhalhal, A., Anchor, J., & Dastgir, S. (2015). The Effectiveness of the Use of Multiple Performance Measures:
The Influence of Organizational Contingencies. London: Sage.
Ammarhussin. (2015). The Employee Perception of the Human Resources Information Systems Success.
International Journal Of Business and Management Invention, 4(2), 10-15. Retrieved from http://www.ijbmi.
org/papers/Vol(4)2/Version-2/B0422010015.pdf
Ang, S. H., Bartram, T., McNeil, N., Leggat, S. G., & Stanton, P. (2013). The effects of high-performance work
systems on hospital employees’ work attitudes and intention to leave: A multi-level and occupational group
analysis. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(16), 3086–3114. doi:10.1080/0958519
2.2013.775029
Anitha, J. (2014). Determinants of employee engagement and their impact on employee performance. International
Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 63(3), 308–323. doi:10.1108/IJPPM-01-2013-0008
14
Kumar, K. A., & Renugadevi, R. (2013). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement-A hypothetical
approach. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 9(3), 52–57.
Aybas, M., & Acar, A. C. (2017). The effect of human resource management practices on employees’ work
engagement and the mediating and moderating role of positive psychological capital. International Review of
Management and Marketing, 7(1), 363–372.
Bailey, C., Madden, A., Alfes, K., & Fletcher, L. (2017). The meaning, antecedents and outcomes of employee
engagement: A narrative synthesis. International Journal of Management Reviews, 19(1), 31–53. doi:10.1111/
ijmr.12077
Bamel, N., Kumar Bamel, U., Sahay, V., & Thite, M. (2014). Usage, benefits and barriers of human resource
information system in universities. VINE, 44(4), 519-536.
Banimelhem, H., Elanain, H. M. A., & Hussain, M. (2018). Impact of human resource management practices
on employees’ turnover intention in United Arab Emirates (UAE) health care services. International Journal of
Information Systems in the Service Sector, 10(4), 21-41.
Barrett, P. (2007). Structural equation modelling: Adjudging model fit. Personality and Individual Differences,
42(5), 815–824. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.018
Beadles, I. I., Aston, N., Lowery, C. M., & Johns, K. (2005). The impact of human resource information systems:
An exploratory study in the public sector. Communications of the IIMA, 5(4), 6.
Beulen, E. (2009). The contribution of a global service provider’s Human Resources Information System
(HRIS) to staff retention in emerging markets: Comparing issues and implications in six developing countries.
Information Technology & People, 22(3), 270–288. doi:10.1108/09593840910981446
Chan, H., Siau, K., & Wei, K. (1998). The Effect of Data Model, System and Task Characteristics on User
Query Performance -An Empirical! Study. The DATA BASE For Advances in Information Systems, 29(1), 31–49.
doi:10.1145/506812.506820
Chuang, S.H. & Lin, H.N. (2017). Performance implications of information-value offering in e-service systems:
Examining the resource-based perspective and innovation strategy. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems,
26(1), 22-38.
Dajani, M. A. Z. (2015). The impact of employee engagement on job performance and organisational commitment
in the Egyptian banking sector. Journal of Business and Management Sciences, 3(5), 138–147.
Darawsheh, S.R.M., ALshaar, A.S. & Al-Lozi, M., (2016). The degree of heads of departments at the University
of Dammam to practice transformational leadership style from the point of view of the faculty members. Journal
of Social Sciences, 5, 56-79.
Delorme, M., & Arcand, M. (2010). HRIS implementation and deployment: A conceptual framework of the
new roles, responsibilities and competences for HR professionals. International Journal of Business Information
Systems, 5(2), 148–161. doi:10.1504/IJBIS.2010.030626
Demerouti, E., & Cropanzano, R. (2010). From thought to action: Employee work engagement and job
performance. Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research (Vol. 65, pp. 147-163). Academic
Press.
Dulebohn, J. H., & Johnson, R. D. (2013). Human resource metrics and decision support: A classification
framework. Human Resource Management Review, 23(1), 71–83. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2012.06.005
Eseynel, I. & Harazneh, I. (2017). The Impact of using human resource system application on performance.
International Journal of Economics, commerce and Management, 1, 166-175.
Ferguson, E. D., & Page, L. J. (2006). Work Relations That Enhance the Well-Being of Organizations and
Individuals. Journal of Individual Psychology, 62(1), 80–84.
Fernandes, S. C. (2013). Main differentiating issues in aligning information systems with business performance.
International Journal of Information Systems in the Service Sector, 5(2), 17-29.
Ferreira, P., & Real de Oliveira, E. (2014). Does corporate social responsibility impact on employee engagement?
Journal of Workplace Learning, 26(3/4), 232–247. doi:10.1108/JWL-09-2013-0070
15
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error:
Algebra and statistics. JMR, Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 382–388. doi:10.1177/002224378101800313
Gruman, J. A., & Saks, A. M. (2011). Performance management and employee engagement. Human Resource
Management Review, 21(2), 123–136. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2010.09.004
Hair, J. F. Jr, Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2016). A primer on partial least squares structural
equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publications.
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., & Anderson, R.E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis.
Han, Y. (2015). A Study on Employee Engagement Program in Full Service Hotel. A Professional Paper
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for The Master of Science Hotel Administration. Las
Vegas: University of Nevada.
Hee, C. Y., Chng, H. C., Liew, P. M., & Loke, L. B. (2014). Factors affect employees’ performance in hotel
industry [Doctoral dissertation]. UTAR.
Hogan, S. J., & Coote, L. V. (2014). Organizational culture, innovation, and performance: A test of Schein’s
model. Journal of Business Research, 67(8), 1609–1621. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.09.007
Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining
model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53-60.
Hossain, M. (2012). Performance and potential of open innovation intermediaries. Procedia: Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 58, 754–764. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.1053
Hussain, Z., Wallace, J., & Cornelius, N.E. (2007). The use and impact of human resource information systems
on human resource management professionals. Information & Management, 44(1), 74-89.
Igbaria, M., & Tan, M. (1997). The consequences of information technology acceptance on subsequent individual
performance. Information & Management, 32(3), 113–121. doi:10.1016/S0378-7206(97)00006-2
Jauhari, H., & Singh, S. (2013). Perceived diversity climate and employees’ organizational loyalty. Equality,
Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 32(3), 262–276. doi:10.1108/EDI-12-2012-0119
Jawahar, I. M. (2002). A model of organizational justice and workplace aggression. Journal of Management,
28(6), 811–834. doi:10.1177/014920630202800606
Kahya, E. (2007). The effects of job characteristics and working conditions on job performance. International
Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 37(6), 515–523. doi:10.1016/j.ergon.2007.02.006
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. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.05.003
Karsan, R., & Kruse, K. (2011). We: How to increase performance and profits through full engagement. John
Wiley & Sons.
Kaygusuz, I., Akgemci, T., & Yilaz, A. (2016). The Impact of HRIS on Organizational efficiency and employee
performance: A research in industrial and banking sector in Ankara and Istanbul Cities. International Journal
of Business and Management, IV(4), 66–73. doi:10.20472/BM.2016.4.4.002
Kemei, R., & Nyerere, J. (2016). Occupational accident patterns and prevention measures in construction sites in
Nairobi county Kenya. American Journal of Civil Engineering, 4(5), 254–263. doi:10.11648/j.ajce.20160405.17
Khashman, I. M. A., & Khashman, A. M. (2016). The Impact of Human Resource Information System (HRIS)
Applications on Organizational Performance (Efficiency and Effectiveness) in Jordanian Private Hospitals.
Journal of Management Research, 8(3), 31. doi:10.5296/jmr.v8i3.9419
Khatri, N. (2006). Building HR capability in health care organizations. Health Care Management Review, 31(1),
45–54. doi:10.1097/00004010-200601000-00007 PMID:16493272
Khera, S. N., & Gulati, K. (2012). Human resource information system and its impact on human resource planning:
A perceptual analysis of information technology companies. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 3(6),
6–13. doi:10.9790/487X-0360613
16
Kok, P. C. (2011). A study of the impact of the empowerment on employee performance in the automotive industry
in Malaysia [Doctoral dissertation]. Open University Malaysia.
Kompaso, S. M., & Sridevi, M. S. (2010). Employee engagement: The key to improving performance.
International Journal of Business and Management, 5(12), 89. doi:10.5539/ijbm.v5n12p89
Kristine, D., Grant, D., & Wiblen, S. (2006). Human Resources Information (HRIS): Replacing or Enhancing
HRM. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228793352
Kumar, K., & Renugadevi, R. (2013). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement-A hypothetical
approach. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 9(3), 52–57. doi:10.9790/3021-031225258
Kumar, N. A., & Parumasur, S. B. (2013). Managerial perceptions of the impact of HRIS on organizational
efficiency. Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, 5(12), 861–875. doi:10.22610/jebs.v5i12.459
Kumar, V., & Pansari, A. (2015). Measuring the benefits of employee engagement. MIT Sloan Management
Review, 56(4), 66–73.
Kundu, S. C., & Kadian, R. (2012). Applications of HRIS in human resource management in India: A study.
European Journal of Business and Management, 4(21), 34–41.
Lee, J., & Ok, C. (2015). Drivers of work engagement: An examination of core self-evaluations and psychological
climate among hotel employees. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 44, 84–98. doi:10.1016/j.
ijhm.2014.10.008
London, M., & Mone, E. M. (2014). Designing feedback to achieve performance improvement. In The Wiley
Blackwell handbook of the psychology of training, development, and performance improvement (pp. 462-485).
Wiley. doi:10.1002/9781118736982.ch23
Macey, W. H., & Schneider, B. (2008). The meaning of employee engagement|. Industrial and Organizational
Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 1(1), 3–30. doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2007.0002.x
Maier, C., Laumer, S., Eckhardt, A., & Weitzel, T. (2013). Analyzing the impact of HRIS implementations on
HR personnel’s job satisfaction and turnover intention. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 22(3),
193–207. doi:10.1016/j.jsis.2012.09.001
Markova, G. (2012). Building dynamic capabilities: The case of HRIS. Management Research: Journal of the
Iberoamerican Academy of Management, 10(2), 81–98.
May, D. R., Gilson, R. L., & Harter, L. M. (2004). The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety
and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work. Journal of Occupational and Organizational
Psychology, 77(1), 11–37. doi:10.1348/096317904322915892
Meryem, A., & Acar, A. (2017). The Effect of Human Resource Management Practices on Employees’ Work
Engagement and the Mediating and Moderating Role of Positive Psychological Capita. International Review of
Management and Marketing, 7(1), 363–372.
Obeidat, B. Y. (2012). The relationship between human resource information system (HRIS) functions and human
resource management (HRM) functionalities. Journal of Management Research, 4(4), 192–211. doi:10.5296/
jmr.v4i4.2262
Pradhan, R. K., Jena, L. K., & Singh, S. K. (2017). Examining the role of emotional intelligence between
organizational learning and adaptive performance in Indian manufacturing industries. Journal of Workplace
Learning, 29(3), 235–247. doi:10.1108/JWL-05-2016-0046
Rizwan, M., Arshad, M. Q., Munir, H. M. A., Iqbal, F., & Hussain, A. (2014). Determinants of Employees
intention to leave: A Study from Pakistan. International Journal of Human Resource Studies, 4(3), 1. doi:10.5296/
ijhrs.v4i3.5871
Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology,
21(7), 600–619. doi:10.1108/02683940610690169
Salanova, M., Agut, S., & Peiró, J. M. (2005). Linking organizational resources and work engagement to employee
performance and customer loyalty: The mediation of service climate. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6),
1217–1227. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1217 PMID:16316275
17
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(1), 71–92.
doi:10.1023/A:1015630930326
Sears, A., Lin, M., Jacko, J., & Xiao, Y. (2003). When computers fade: Pervasive computing and situationally-
induced impairments and disabilities. HCI International, 2(3), 1298–1302.
Shahsavarani, N., & Ji, S. (2014). Research in Information Technology Service Management (ITSM)(2000–2010):
An Overview. International Journal of Information Systems in the Service Sector, 6(4), 73–91. doi:10.4018/
ijisss.2014100105
Shin, D., & Konrad, A. M. (2017). Causality between high-performance work systems and organizational
performance. Journal of Management, 43(4), 973–997. doi:10.1177/0149206314544746
Shuck, B., & Wollard, K. (2010). Employee engagement and HRD: A seminal review of the foundations. Human
Resource Development Review, 9(1), 89–110. doi:10.1177/1534484309353560
Spero, J. C., McQuide, P. A., & Matte, R. (2011). Tracking and monitoring the health workforce: A new human
resources information system (HRIS) in Uganda. Human Resources for Health, 9(1), 6. doi:10.1186/1478-4491-
9-6 PMID:21329516
Tajuddin, S. S. (2013), A Study on the Factors of Employee Empowerment on Work Performance in Manufacturing
Industry [Doctoral dissertation]. UMP.
Tetik, N. (2016). The effects of psychological empowerment on job satisfaction and job performance of tourist
guides. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 6(2), 221–239. doi:10.6007/
IJARBSS/v6-i2/2026
Udekwe, E., & Andre, C. (2017). The use of human resource information systems in two retail organisations in
the Western Cape, South Africa. SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 15, 7.
Udekwe, E. (2016), The impact of human resources information systems in selected retail outlets in Western
Cape [Doctoral dissertation]. Cape Peninsula University of Technology.
Van Scotter, J. R. (2000). Relationships of task performance and contextual performance with turnover, job
satisfaction, and affective commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 10(1), 79–95. doi:10.1016/
S1053-4822(99)00040-6
Watkin, C. (2002). Engage employees to boost performance. Selection & Development Review, 18(2), 3–6.
Wayne, S. J., Liden, R. C., Graf, I. K., & Ferris, G. R. (1997). The role of upward influence tactics in human
resource decisions. Personnel Psychology, 50(4), 979–1006. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1997.tb01491.x
Werner, J. M. (2000). Implications of OCB and contextual performance for human resource management. Human
Resource Management Review, 10(1), 3–24. doi:10.1016/S1053-4822(99)00036-4
Wiblen, S.L., Grant, D., & Dery, K. (2010). Transitioning to a new HRIS: The reshaping of human resources
and information technology talent.
Wierschem, D. C., & Brodnax, T. L. (2003). The impact of computer processor speed on end-user productivity.
Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, 15(2), 23–36. doi:10.4018/joeuc.2003040102
Yin, N. (2018). The influencing outcomes of job engagement: An interpretation from the social exchange
theory. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 67(5), 873–889. doi:10.1108/
IJPPM-03-2017-0054
Zainol, S. S., Mohd-Hussin, S., & Othman, M. S. (2016). Determinants of employee engagement in hotel
industry in Malaysia. A theoretical model. International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance
and Management Sciences, 6(3), 1–9. doi:10.6007/IJARAFMS/v6-i3/2146
18

Al Dmour2020

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

Al Dmour2020

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Information Systems in the Service Sector

Volume 12 • Issue 3 • July-September 2020

The Influence of HRIS Usage on

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND LITERATURE REVIEW

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Measurement Model: Reliability and Validity

Table 1. Mean, standard deviation, and normality of scale items

Construct /items Mean S.D. Skewness Kurtosis

Table 3. Discriminant validity of overall CFA model

Structural Model and Testing Hypotheses

Table 4. Direct effects of the variables

Hypotheses Path Un-standard Estimation Standard Estimation C.R. P. Value

Direct and Indirect Effect Standardized effect

Table 6. Results regarding the mediating effect of employee engagement

Mediating effect Results

Theoretical Contributions and Implications

You might also like