مدل سازی عوامل موثر بر بهره وری منابع انسانی (مطالعه ای کیفی با استفاده از روش فراترکیب)
علی اصغر مباشری
1
(
دانشجوی دکتری گروه مدیریت منابع انسانی، دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران
)
محدثه نادرشاهی
2
(
استادیار گروه مهندسی صنایع، دانشگاه پیام نور تهران، تهران، ایران.
)
سید رسول عنبرزاده
3
(
دانشجوی دکتری گروه مهندسی صنایع، دانشگاه جامع امام حسین (ع)، تهران، ایران.
)
کلید واژه: بهره وری, بهره وری منابع انسانی, فراترکیب,
چکیده مقاله :
با توجه ضرورت شناسایی عوامل موثر بر بهره‌وری منابع انسانی در قالب چارچوبی منسجم و یکپارچه، پژوهش حاضر با هدف شناسایی و مدل‌سازی عوامل موثر بر بهره‌وری منابع انسانی طراحی و اجرا گردید. پژوهش از نظر هدف کاربردی و به لحاظ روش در دسته پژوهش‌های کیفی قرار می‌گیرد که با روش فراترکیب انجام شد. با توجه به ماهیت روش فراترکیب، جامعه آماری پژوهش را مطالعات پیشین تشکیل می‌دهند که در این میان پس از جستجو و یافتن منابع موجود، از طریق بررسی و ارزیابی عنوان، چکیده و محتوای منابع یافت شده نسبت به انتخاب منابع مناسب جهت انجام پژوهش به عنوان نمونه، اقدام شد. داده‌های لازم نیز از طریق بررسی یافته‌های منابع منتخب گردآوری گردید. پس از تحلیل داده‌های گردآوری شده، عوامل موثر بر بهره‌وری منابع انسانی در قالب 4 مضمون اصلی عوامل فردی (متشکل از مضامین فرعی عوامل دانشی، عوامل نگرشی و عوامل مربوط به مهارت و توانایی)، عوامل گروهی (در بر دارنده مضامین فرعی عوامل دورن‌گروهی و عوامل برون‌گروهی)، عوامل شغلی (با دو مضمون فرعی عوامل مربوط به محیط شغل و عوامل مربوط به شغل) و عوامل سازمانی (متشکل از سه مضون فرعی عوامل فرهنگی، عوامل مربوط به ساختار سازمانی و عوامل مربو ط به فرایندهای سازمانی) مدل‌سازی شدند. نتایج، حاکی از این واقعیت است که رفع مشکلات بهره‌وری منابع انسانی و یا بهبود و ارتقای بهره‌وری کارکنان نمی‌تواند موضوعی تک‌بعدی نگریسته شود و مدل‌های تک‌متغیره و خطی ساده از کفایت لازم جهت پاسخگویی به مشکلات و چالش‌های مربوط به بهره‌وری منابع انسانی در سازمان‌ها برخوردار نیستند.
چکیده انگلیسی :
Considering the determining role of the performance and productivity of human resources in organizations, as well as the need to identify the factors affecting this issue in a coherent and integrated framework, the present research was designed and implemented to modeling the factors affecting the productivity of human resources. The research is applied in terms of purpose and qualitative in terms of method, which was carried out with meta- synthesis method. Due to the nature of the meta-synthesis method, the statistical population of the research is made up of previous studies. After searching and finding the available sources, through the review and evaluation of the title, abstract and content of the found sources, the selection of suitable sources to conduct the research was done as a sample. After analyzing the collected data, the factors affecting the productivity of human resources were modeled in 4 main themes of individual factors (consisting of sub-themes of knowledge factors, attitudinal factors and factors related to skill and ability), group factors (including the sub- themes of in-group and out-group factors), job factors (with two sub-themes of job environment and job-related factors) and organizational factors (consisting of 3 sub-themes of cultural factors, factors related to organizational structure and factors related to organizational processes). The results indicate that solving the problems of human resource productivity or improving it, can not be viewed as a one-dimensional issue, and simple linear and single-variable models are not sufficient to answer the problems of the productivity of human resources in organizations.
Key words: Productivity, human resources Productivity, Meta-Synthesis.
- Introduction
Although productivity has always been one of the topics of interest to managers and researchers in the field of organization and management; Nevertheless, the paradigm shift in valuing the assets of organizations as a result of entering the information age and the emergence of the knowledge-based economy has made the productivity of human resources and the factors affecting it a very important issue. Therefore, the productivity of human resources and the factors affecting it have become one of the main research trends in the literature of human resources management in the past years, and many studies related to the identification of the factors affecting the productivity of human resources in organizations have been designed and implemented all over the world. On the other hand, the review of the studies conducted in connection with the factors affecting the productivity of human resources shows that different researchers have identified different factors in this field. These various factors have been identified as the antecedents of human resource productivity, which is the result of different views of researchers on this issue; It can increase the complexity of this issue for managers. Because managers and policy makers need coherent and integrated frameworks to enable them to understand the phenomenon under investigation during decision-making and planning. Therefore, it is necessary to present the factors affecting the productivity of human resources in a way that, while reducing the complexity of the problem, can increase the insight of managers in this connection. . Therefore, the present study is designed with the aim of identifying and modeling the factors affecting the productivity of human resources and providing a coherent and comprehensive framework in this connection and covering a corner of the existing scientific gap.
- Literature Review
Productivity, which literally means the power of production (Asar, 2016), being fertile and productive, is one of the concepts that have been examined and conceptualized from various perspectives. Some describe productivity as a culture and a rational attitude to work, the purpose of which is to make activities more intelligent in order to achieve a better and superior life (Lewis et al., 2013). while others consider productivity as a criterion by which the success or failure of an organization in achieving its goals is evaluated (Ahmadi, 2016). From an economic point of view, productivity is described in relation to the reduction of production costs, and it is achieved when the consumption of resources is reduced without harming the product (from quantitative and qualitative aspects). While productivity from a managerial point of view means the sum of effectiveness (fulfillment of goals) and efficiency (reduction of costs) (Anjanarko & Jahroni, 2022). The literature review also shows that different factors have been identified as antecedents of human resources productivity in different studies. Factors such as creativity and innovation of employees (Ahmadi, 2016), Intellectual Capital (Safari Ojgaz & Rangriz, 2020), Effective and efficient planning, financial and technological factors, motivation, commitment and teamwork spirit, knowledge, skills and systemic thinking (Ghrachorloo & ghahremani nahr, 2022), wage and salary (Solminihac, 2017), Equipment and technical facilities, salaries and wages, methods of motivating employees (Salimova et al., 2022), work environment, leadership (Djazilan & Arifin, 2022), Management style, access to necessary facilities and equipment, working environment conditions (hik & Kameswara Rao, 2022).
- Methodology
This study is a qualitative research that was conducted using the meta- synthesis method. Meta-composite, which is one of the types of meta-study method (Bench & Day, 2010) and is used when various findings related to a specific topic have been obtained in previous studies. Meta-synthesis requires that the researcher conduct a thorough and deep review and combine the findings of related researches (Zimmer, 2006). In this research, the seven-step meta- synthesis method presented by Sandelowski & Barroso (2006) was used in order to model the factors affecting the productivity of human resources. And thematic analysis method has been used in order to analyze and combine the data and report the final results of meta- synthesis (data categorization and thematization process). Thematic analysis is a systematic method for recognizing, organizing and reporting the semantic patterns (themes) of ideas and guidelines in the investigated data; And because of its practicality and flexibility, it has become one of the most common methods of qualitative data analysis (Braun, & Clarke, 2012).
- Result
Considering the purpose of the research and also keeping in mind the principles of conducting a meta- synthesis study, the research questions were formulated first. What are the effective factors on the productivity of human resources? How can the effective factors on the productivity of human resources be identified? What is the desired time frame of the research? What is the method of modeling factors affecting the productivity of human resources? In this connection, the previous experimental studies (published between 2000 and 2023 in English and Persian languages) as sources for identifying the factors and components affecting the productivity of human resources and meta- synthesis as a modeling method, were chosen. In the next step, the literature was examined and, while searching for keywords appropriate to the topic and purpose of the research in databases and search engines, the necessary resources were identified, evaluated and selected. At this stage, 151 sources were selected for use in the research. Then, the text of the selected articles was reviewed and a total of 307 factors affecting the productivity of human resources were identified as primary. After extracting the primary codes, all the codes were carefully examined and while removing duplicate codes and merging similar codes, the final categories affecting the productivity of human resources were identified. After that, the identified categories were categorized according to the semantic and conceptual similarity in the form of specific and distinct themes (sub-themes). Then, by categorizing the identified sub-themes related to each other in the form of the main themes, modeling the factors affecting the productivity of human resources in 4 themes was done that includes: individual factors (consisting of 3 sub-themes of knowledge factors, attitude factors and factors related to skill and ability), Group factors (It has 2 sub-themes of intra-group factors and inter-group factors), Job factors (with 2 sub-themes of factors related to job environment and factors related to job) and Organizational factors (It consists of 3 sub-themes of cultural factors, factors related to organizational structure and factors related to organizational processes).
- Discussion
Although the findings have been emphasized in other studies, however, no study has considered these factors in an integrated way. For example, Zare et al. (2022), have paid attention to some organizational processes affecting the productivity of human resources, such as the processes of attraction, development, maintenance and exploitation of human resources, but other processes as well as individual and group factors And they do not discuss an effective job in this connection. Ghrachorloo & ghahremani nahr (2022), have also examined some influential individual factors in this relationship such as motivation, commitment and spirit of team work, knowledge, skill and system thinking; Other levels of analysis have been ignored. This research gap is also evident in studies conducted abroad. Some researchers have studied factors related to the work environment, such as management style, access to necessary facilities and equipment, and the conditions of the work environment in relation to the productivity of human resources. While they have not paid attention to other factors (Karthik & Kameswara Rao, 2022). Other researchers have had a one-dimensional approach to these factors or have considered the factors affecting the productivity of human resources only from limited dimensions and aspects (Solminihac, 2017; Karthik & Kameswara Rao, 2022; Salimova et al. al., 2022). According to these explanations, the most important difference between the present research and the previous studies is the modeling of factors affecting the productivity of human resources in the form of a comprehensive framework with a holistic approach.
Abtahi, H., & Kazemi, B. (2000). Productivity. Tehran: Institute for Traide Studies and Research. [In Persian]
Afrahi, B., Blenkinsopp, J., de Arroyabe, J. C. F., & Karim, M. S. (2022). Work disengagement: A review of the literature. Human Resource Management Review, 32(2), 100822. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2021.100822
Ahmadi, E. (2016). The Relationship between Creativity and Productivity of Human Resources. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Administration, 7(27), 209-222. [In Persian] DOI: 20.1001.1.20086369.1395.7.27.12.5
Alnıaçık, E,. & Alnıaçık, U. (2012). Identifying Dimensions of Attractiveness in Employer Branding: Effects of Age, Gender, and Current Employment Status”, 8th International Strategic Management Conference, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 58, 1336 – 1343. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.1117
Anjanarko, T. S., & Jahroni, J. (2022). The Effect of Workload and Compensation on Employee Productivity. International Journal of Service Science, Management, Engineering, and Technology, 1(2), 17-21. doi:10.55299/ijec.v2i2.527
Ansari, G. H., & Sabzi Aliabadi, S. (2010). Pritorize of effective organizational factors on improvement of productivity of human resources of small industries. J Business Survey, 39, 14-22.
Armstrong, m., & Taylor, S. (2023). Armstrong’s handbook of human resource management practice. London; New York, NY: Kogan Page.
Asar, M. T. (2016). Investigating the relationship between management skills and increasing the productivity of human resources. Journal of Research Police Science, 18 (3), 125-141. [In Persian]
Ataro, G. (2020). Methods, methodological challenges and lesson learned from phenomenological study about OSCE experience: Overview of paradigm-driven qualitative approach in medical education. Annals of Medicine and Surgery, 49, 19-23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2019.11.013
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2012). Thematic analysis, in Cooper. H, Camic. P. M, Long. D. L, Panter. A. T, Rindskopf. D and Sher. K. J (Eds), (2012) APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol. 2: Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological, Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 57-71.
Diawati, P., Gadzali, S. S., Abd Aziz, M. K. N., Ausat, A. M. A., & Suherlan, S. (2023). The Role of Information Technology in Improving the Efficiency and Productivity of Human Resources in the Workplace. Jurnal Teknologi Dan Sistem Informasi Bisnis, 5(3), 296-302. DOI: 10.47233/jteksis.v5i3.872
Djazilan, M. S., & Arifin, S. (2022). Analysis of Factors Affecting Employee Work Productivity. International Journal of Service Science, Management, Engineering, and Technology, 2(1), 26-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.53695/injects.v3i2.774
Gallardo-Gallardo, E., Thunnissen, M., & Scullion, H. (2020). Talent management: Context matters. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 31(4), 457–473. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2019.1642645
Gehrels S (2019) Employer Branding for the Hospitality and Tourism Industry: Finding and Keeping Talent. United Kingdom: Emerald Publishing Limited.
Ghrachorloo, N., & ghahremani nahr, J. (2022). Resource Productivity Indicators in Scientific and Technological Organizations Human. The Journal of Productivity Management, 16(2(61) summer), 217-241. [In Persian] DOI: 20.1001.1.27169979.1401.16.2.8.2
Karthik, D., & Kameswara Rao, C. B. (2022). Identifying the significant factors affecting the masonry labour productivity in building construction projects in India. International Journal of Construction Management, 22(3), 464-472. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2019.1631978
Khalilian, S., & Rahmani, F. (2008). Survey on affecting factor on agronomy human resource of Iran. Journal of Sciences & Industries of Agronomy, 22(1), 79-89.
Lewis, D., Brazil, K., Krueger, P., Lohfeld, L., & Tjam, E.(2013). Factors affecting productivity. International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, 14(3), 31-37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JEDT-05-2021-0277
Mehregan, M. R., Hosseinzadeh, M., & Rabie Servandi, N. (2019). Modeling the Disturbance-Dynamics Model of Human Resources Development in Iran's Oil Industry. Journal of Public Administration, 11(2), 309-338. [In Persian] DOI: 10.22059/jipa.2019.277895.2514
Mobasheri, A. A., & Teimouri, H. (2023). Designing a Pattern of the Causes and Consequences of Mobbing in Organizations. Strategic Research on Social Problems in Iran, 12(1), 123-145. [In Persian] DOI: 10.22108/srspi.2023.135792.1862
Nurmeksela, A., Mikkonen, S., Kinnunen, J., & Kvist, T. (2021). Relationships between nurse managers’ work activities, nurses’ job satisfaction, patient satisfaction, and medication errors at the unit level: a correlational study. BMC health services research, 21, 1-13. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-021-06288-5
O’Connor, C., & Joffe, H. (2020). Intercoder reliability in qualitative research: debates and practical guidelines. International journal of qualitative methods, 19, 1-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919899220
Ram, M., McCarthy, I., Green, A., & Scully, J. (2022). Towards a more inclusive human resource community: Engaging ethnic minority microbusinesses in human resource development programmes targeted at more productive methods of operating. Human Resource Management Journal, 32(3), 540-554. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12416
Ranaei Kordshouli, H., Ebrahimi, A., & Mobasheri, A. A. (2019). Measuring Employer Brand. Management Studies in Development and Evolution, 28(91), 139-161. [In Persian] DOI: https://doi.org/10.22054/jmsd.2019.9664
Safari Ojgaz, F., & Rangriz, H. (2020). The Relationship between Intellectual Capital and Human Resource Productivity: A Meta-Analysis Study. The Journal of Productivity Management, 14(4(55) winter), 50-71. [In Persian] DOI: 20.1001.1.27169979.1399.14.4.2.6
Salimova, G., Ableeva, A., Galimova, A., Bakirova, R., Lubova, T., Sharafutdinov, A., & Araslanbaev, I. (2022). Recent trends in labor productivity. Employee Relations, 44 (4), 785-802. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-03-2021-0111
Sandelowski, M., & Barroso, J. (2007). Handbook for synthesizing qualitative research. New York: Springer.
Solminihac, H. D. (2017). Copper Mining Productivity: Lessons from Chile. Journal of Policy Modeling, 40(1), 182-193. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2017.09.001
Soomro, M. M., Wang, Y., Tunio, R. A., Aripkhanova, K., & Ansari, M. I. (2021). Management of human resources in the green economy: Does green labour productivity matter in low-carbon development in China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(42), 59805-59812. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-021-14872-9
Vakili, Y., & Khamehchi, H. (2022). A Meta-Analysis of Human Resource Productivity Antecedents. The Journal of Productivity Management, 16(1(60)spring), 167-189. [In Persian] DOI: 10.30495/qjopm.2021.1898224.2829
Zare R, Teimoornejad K, Rajabbaigy M. (2022). Knowledge Worker Productivity Evaluation Model in Industry. Strategic studies in the oil and energy industry, 14 (53), 127-146. [In Persian] DOI: http://iieshrm.ir/article-1-1396-fa.html
Zimmer, L. (2006). Qualitative meta‐synthesis: a question of dialoguing with texts. Journal of advanced nursing, 53(3), 311-318. DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006.03721.x.
