The effects of human resource management systems on economic performance: An international comparison of US and Japanese plants

被引:203
作者
Ichniowski, C
Shaw, K
机构
[1] Columbia Univ, Sch Business, New York, NY 10027 USA
[2] Carnegie Mellon Univ, Grad Sch Ind Adm, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA
关键词
human resource management; productivity; Japan;
D O I
10.1287/mnsc.45.5.704
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
This study uses personally collected data from 41 steel production lines to assess the effects of Japanese and U.S. human resource management (HRM)) practices on worker productivity. The Japanese production Lines employ a common system of HRM practices including: problem-solving teams, extensive orientation, training throughout employees' careers,extensive information sharing, rotation across jobs, employment security, and profit sharing. A majority of U.S. plants now have one or two features of this system of HRM practices, but only a minority have a comprehensive system of innovative work practices that parallels the full system of practices found among the Japanese manufacturers. We find that the Japanese lines are significantly more productive than the U.S. lines. However, U.S. manufacturers that have adopted a full system of innovative HRM practices patterned after the Japanese system achieve levels of productivity and quality equal to the performance of the Japanese manufacturers. This study's evidence helps reconcile conflicting views about the effectiveness of adopting Japanese-style worker involvement schemes in the United States. United States manufacturers that have adopted a definition of employee participation that extends only to problem-solving teams or information sharing do not see large improvements in productivity. However, U.S. manufacturers that adopt a broader definition of participation that mimics the full Japanese HRM system see substantial performance gains.
引用
收藏
页码:704 / 721
页数:18
相关论文
共 18 条
[11]  
Ichniowski C, 1997, AM ECON REV, V87, P291
[12]   What works at work: Overview and assessment [J].
Ichniowski, C ;
Kochan, TA ;
Levine, D ;
Olson, C ;
Strauss, G .
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, 1996, 35 (03) :299-333
[13]   PEER PRESSURE AND PARTNERSHIPS [J].
KANDEL, E ;
LAZEAR, EP .
JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY, 1992, 100 (04) :801-817
[14]  
Lawler E.E., 1992, EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT
[15]   WORK ORGANIZATION AND WORKFORCE COMMITMENT - A STUDY OF PLANTS AND EMPLOYEES IN THE UNITED-STATES AND JAPAN [J].
LINCOLN, JR ;
KALLEBERG, AL .
AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, 1985, 50 (06) :738-760
[16]   HUMAN-RESOURCE BUNDLES AND MANUFACTURING PERFORMANCE - ORGANIZATIONAL LOGIC AND FLEXIBLE PRODUCTION SYSTEMS IN THE WORLD AUTO INDUSTRY [J].
MACDUFFIE, JP .
INDUSTRIAL & LABOR RELATIONS REVIEW, 1995, 48 (02) :197-221
[17]  
MILGROM P, 1990, AM ECON REV, V80, P511
[18]   HOW COMMON IS WORKPLACE TRANSFORMATION AND WHO ADOPTS IT [J].
OSTERMAN, P .
INDUSTRIAL & LABOR RELATIONS REVIEW, 1994, 47 (02) :173-188