Are high‐performance work practices (HPWPs) enabling or disabling? Exploring the relationship between selected HPWPs and work‐related disability disadvantage. Issue 2 (15th November 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Hoque, Kim; Wass, Victoria; Bacon, Nicolas; Jones, Melanie
• Is Part Of: Human resource management. Volume 57:Issue 2(2018)
• Page Start: 499
• Page End: 513
• Publication Date: 2017-11-15
• Subjects: Ability–Motivation–Opportunity -- disability -- high‐performance work practices -- strategic human resource management -- well‐being at work; 658.3005
• DOI: 10.1002/hrm.21881
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0090-4848

Abstract

Abstract : We develop the organizational characteristics element of Stone and Colella's (1996) framework by drawing on the Ability–Motivation–Opportunity (AMO) model to assess the relationship between high‐performance work practices (HPWPs) and work‐related disability disadvantage. We develop competing "enabling" and "disabling" hypotheses concerning the influence of selected HPWPs (competency testing, performance appraisal, individual performance‐related pay, teamworking, and functional flexibility) on disabled relative to nondisabled employees. An empirical assessment of these competing hypotheses using matched employer–employee data from the nationally representative British Workplace Employment Relations Study 2011 reveals a negative relationship between these HPWPs when used in combination and the proportion of disabled employees at the workplace, although this relationship disappears in workplaces with a wide range of disability equality practices. While disabled employees report lower work‐related well‐being than their nondisabled counterparts, we find limited evidence that this is associated with the presence of HPWPs.