Do HR Practices Influence Job Satisfaction? Examining the Mediating Role of Employee Engagement in Indian Public Sector Undertakings

Abstract

There is a dearth of research examining relationship among HR practices, employee engagement and job satisfaction in public sector undertakings in India. The present study makes an attempt to shed light on this largely neglected area of research by examining the mediating function of employee engagement between HR practices and job satisfaction. Data were collected from 393 executives through a questionnaire survey. Structural equation modelling was used to examine the relationship between HR practices, employee engagement and job satisfaction. HR practices were found to be positively linked with job satisfaction. Further, employee engagement significantly mediated the relationship between HR practices and job satisfaction. The practical implications of the study are discussed in the light of the existing literature.

Keywords

HR practices employee engagement mediator job satisfaction public sector undertakings India

Introduction

Since a long time, people management has been regarded as one of the critical aspects of an organization. This is because the growth and development of an organization relies on the efficiency and productivity of its people. In order to achieve competitive advantage, an organization should make effective and efficient utilization of its human capital (Price, 2004). Human resource (HR) practices of any organization play a major role in creating competitive advantage through its human capital that is unique and difficult to imitate by its competitors (Balgovind, 2007; Jena & Pradhan, 2014). Sound HR policies and practices are some of the important determinants of an organization’s growth (Hallberg & Schaufeli, 2006; Paul & Anantharaman, 2003). Earlier researchers have stated that human resource management (HRM) plays a crucial role in making an organization successful (Condrey, 1995; Huselid, 1995; Koys, 2001). The impact of HR practices on organizational performance and employee’s attitude has been a popular matter of study in Western countries (Delaney & Huselid, 1996; Huselid, 1995; Katou & Budwar, 2007; Petrescu & Simmons, 2008); however, much attention has not been given to this area of research in developing countries like India. There is also a dearth of research for exploring the path through which HR practices influence various organizational outcomes.

The significance of managing human capital is a vital agenda at national level as the growth of a country mainly relies upon the capability, motivation and deployment of its employees (Akinbode, 2011; Ayanda & Sani, 2011). In India, public sector enterprises (PSEs) are playing a dynamic role in the growth and development of the nation. In contemporary period, there is increased pressure from public on government organizations to increase their performance. Gone are the days when public sector employees were perceived as ‘lazy and good for nothing types’. With increased pressure from the public, government expects its employees to fulfil various social responsibilities expected by its citizens (Linna, Pekkola, Ukko, & Melkas, 2010). In order to face the challenging situations, organizations are formulating policies and practices to increase productivity of its employees (Akinbode, 2011; Ayanda & Sani, 2011; Becker & Huselid, 1998; Kim, 2010). Previous researchers have viewed that ‘happy employees are productive employees’. Thus, happy and satisfied employees of an organization play a major role in achieving organizational objective. Hence, in this volatile, ever-changing business climate, public sector undertakings (PSUs) should emphasize on keeping satisfied those who are instrumental in achieving organization’s objective. Therefore, more attention should be paid in order to find out the determinants that make employees satisfied at their jobs and make them more productive. There is a dearth of research in the area of employee attitudes and job satisfaction, even at a time when human capital plays an important role in making an organization successful.

The article proceeds with the intention to study three variables—HR practices, employee engagement and job satisfaction—and their underlying association. The objective of the study is to understand how HR practices influence job satisfaction in PSUs among Indian executives and the role of employee engagement between these two variables. The first part of the article explores the previous literature and backdrop of the variables under study and intermittently forms hypothesis of the study. The second section raises the methods including sample, participants and procedure followed for conducting the research. Further ahead, the next section discusses the analysis, result findings and discussions in light of the findings. Finally, the article concludes with the implications, limitation and future directions.

Review of Literature

HR Practices and Job Satisfaction

HR practices of the organizations play a decisive role in maximizing the efficiency of human capital to accomplish organization’s goal (Huselid, 1995). According to Bogdanova, Enfors and Naumovska (2008), ‘HR practices make optimum utilization of human resources which facilitate to attain organizational goal in long run.’ Previous discussions regarding HR outcomes indicate that HR practices of the organization help to enhance the confidence, flexibility and motivation of human capital which in turn make them more energetic, dedicated and engrossed in their jobs and ultimately creating the feeling of satisfaction. Khan (2010) suggested that there needs to be some defined approach to develop and implement HRM practices for attaining the ultimate objective in competitive work climate. For deriving competitive advantage, organizations are expected to invest in HR practices considerably (Becker & Huselid, 1998). HR practices refer to the activities of an organization aimed at management of its pool of employees and assuring that these resources are properly engaged for accomplishment of the organization’s objective (Schular & Jackson, 1987).

Job satisfaction is defined as a favourable emotional feeling resulting out of the assessment of an individual’s work. Satisfaction is basically employees’ perception of their own jobs (Locke, 1976). It is an important factor determining the employees’ feelings towards their jobs and indicates how satisfied the employees are with their jobs. The satisfaction level of employees is a crucial factor for determining the productivity of the organization. It is one of the essential factors in making an organization successful. Therefore, organizations have started giving more emphasis on making employees satisfied with regard to their jobs. Gurbuz (2009) suggested that for sustaining in this highly competitive business environment, organizations should adopt suitable HR practices which will promote job satisfaction of individuals and it has several important benefits for the organization.

Earlier researchers have discussed about the positive association between HR practices and organizational performance (Arthur, 1994; Combs, Liu, Hall, & Ketchen, 2006; Huselid, 1995; Macduffie, 1995; Pradhan & Jena, 2017). However, one of the major drawbacks is that they have given more attention to the link between HR practices and organizational performance, overlooking the procedures or systems that enhance organizational performance (often indicated as ‘black box problem’—Wright, Gardner & Moynihan, 2003). While establishing the HRM–performance relationship, many researchers (Delaney & Huselid, 1996; Guest, 1997; Huselid, 1995; Macduffie, 1995; Paauwe & Ricardson, 1997) advocated about the influence of HR practices on organizations’ performance through the employees’ work-related behaviours and attitudes such as turnover, job satisfaction, commitment and motivation. Thus, in the same line of thought, the present article has focused on establishing a link between HR processes and job satisfaction. Earlier researchers have also viewed that HR processes influence attitudes of the employees at work through employees’ experiences and behaviours based on social exchange theory (Blau, 1964; Eisenberger, Hungtinngton, Hutchison, & Sowa, 1986) and signalling theory (Casper & Harris, 2008; Ostroff & Bowen, 2000).

The aforementioned theories advocated regarding the influence of HR systems on the attitudes and behaviour of employees by facilitating them or acting as ‘signals’, conveying the organizational motive for the employees. These theories have also suggested that greater organizational support through HR practices will make the employees obliged towards the employer (Shore & Wayne, 1993). The employees will try to reciprocate it through their positive attitudes and behaviours. Employees perceive organizations’ good HR practices as the organization’s investment on them for which they feel obliged and try to reciprocate by their positive attitudes for the organization.

HR Practices and Employee Engagement

When organizations pay special emphasis on providing employees with internal career opportunities, proper training programmes, security for employment and clear job descriptions, and promoting participative decision-making, employees engage themselves more at the workplace (Gebauer, Lowman, & Gordon, 2008; Jena, Pradhan, & Basu, 2016; Saks, 2006). The manifestation of engaged employees arising out of HR practices can be theoretically explained through the theory of social exchange of Blau (1964). He suggested that employees generally try to reciprocate to those who supported them. Social exchange generally takes place between associations when each party expects for a continuing relationship. Social exchange creates a mutual belief between the parties (Burns, 1973; Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005). This theory states that individuals create, continue and end relationships with each other ‘on the basis of the perceived ratio of benefits to costs in the relationship’ (Ensher, Thomas, & Murphy, 2001). Thus, it would seem that individuals will be more engaged in their jobs in the organizations that have good HR practices. This is because when employees feel that they are being taken care of by the organizations and being treated courteously, then their association will be beyond economic exchange. It will comprise real support from the organizations and they tend to continue their association and prefer to remain highly engaged in the organization.

When an employee gets proper opportunity to take part in the decision-making activity in the organization and gets a fair chance to be heard from the superiors, then the degree of employee engagement is expected to be on the higher side (Jose & Mampilly, 2014). Employees’ desire to be involved in the decision-making of the organizations also used to affect them (Tusi, Pearce, Porter, & Tripoli, 1997). Organization’s trustful environment, where workers are inspired to give their inputs for taking their organization forward, will create more engaged employees at the workplace. Organizations invest on their employees by imparting various training programmes to develop their abilities, expertise and wisdom. Employees respond to this by becoming more energetic, dedicated and engrossed towards their jobs. Organizations which follow fair and unbiased procedures will lead to high level of employee engagement. Thus, by applying social exchange philosophy, we can assume that the engagement level of the employees will be higher when it is being perceived that they are being taken care of and loved (Cardona, Lawrence, & Benter, 2004; Gebauer et al., 2008; Saks, 2006; Turnley, Bolino, Lester, & Bloodgood, 2003; Tusi et al., 1997).

HR Practices, Employee Engagement and Job Satisfaction

The important cause behind the popularity of the concept of employee engagement is because of its favourable outcome for organizations (Jena et al., 2016; Ram & Prabhakar, 2011). Job satisfaction can be defined as a pleasant and favourable condition of mind that emerges as employees assess their jobs (Locke, 1976). Nowadays organizations want engaged and satisfied employees more than ever before (Pradhan & Jena, 2016; Orgambídez-Ramos et al., 2014). There are many reasons to expect the relationship of employee engagement with job satisfaction (Saks, 2006). Highly engaged employees tend to be more involved in the organization and develop a more trustworthy relationship. Hence, they are expected to show favourable attitudes like job satisfaction (Ram Prabhakar, 2011). Kahn (1992) advocated that employee engagement has personal-level consequences (i.e., quality of employees’ job and their proficiencies related to ways of work) and organizational-level outcomes (i.e., productivity and development of organizations). The employee engagement was defined as a fulfilling, positive work-associated feeling and a pleasurable state of mind (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004; Sonnentag, Mojza, Demerouti, & Bakker, 2012) and has been proved to be associated with good health and favourable work effect (Sonnentag, 2003) like job satisfaction.

Employee engagement is an emerging issue inviting the attention of researchers, HR consultants and practitioners nowadays. With the evidence of collective support regarding the relationship of HR practices and job satisfaction, this still remains a complex area of research and yet to be fully understood (Sonnentag et al., 2012). The past research recommends the existence of mediating variables that could be taken as a mediator between these two variables and the researchers were unaware about any study investigating employee engagement as a mediator between HR practices and job satisfaction in PSUs in India till date. We propose that when the organizations have good HR practices, the employees get engrossed in their jobs as a norm of reciprocity, realizing a sense of personal gratification in performing their roles, which makes them feel good about their jobs. Therefore, on this basis, we can anticipate that organization’s HR practices will influence employee engagement, and engaged individuals stay happy in the job. Thus, engagement is one of the mechanisms which describe the association of HR practices with job satisfaction. The previous literature establishes that HR practices of the organization help in making employees more energetic, enthusiastic and happily engrossed in the jobs which ultimately make the individuals feel satisfied with their jobs. HR practices through employee engagement practices are expected to raise energy level of employees which correspondingly raises morale, motives and generates a feeling of satisfaction.

Objective of the Study

Facilitation of better HR practices gives employees necessary avenues for creating a conducive environment that enhances motivation, morale and job satisfaction of employees (Mallick, Pradhan, Tewari, & Jena, 2015). Nowadays organizations are trying to implement the up-to-date HR practices for getting the best out of their human capital and because of globalization organizations choose the best HR practices. Up-to-date and best HR systems are beneficial for employers and employees as they play a major role in the constructive, sustained growth of an organization. However, there are no defined set of practices called as good HR practices that can be applied across organizations (Becker & Huselid, 1998; Boxall & Macky, 2007; Delery, 1998; Macduffie, 1995; Thompson, 2000). Therefore, in this piece of research, we have tried to assimilate five best HR practices that are primarily used by successful MNCs. These practices are internal career opportunities (Delery & Doty, 1996), employment security (Demerouti & Bakker, 2011), training (Seigts & Crim, 2006), participation (Pradhan & Jena, 2015) and job descriptions (Rich, LePine, & Crawford, 2010) and they were found to have an impact on HR outcomes in the past. Thus, on the basis of the above discussion, we can presume that good HR practices may increase the satisfaction level of employees at workplace. Hence, we propose that the mediating role of employee engagement between HR practices and job satisfaction should be empirically investigated.

Methodology

Sample Frame

The data were collected from 393 employees drawn from manufacturing and service sectors in Indian PSUs. Participants of this study comprised of employees working in PSUs located in northern and eastern parts of India. Data were gathered by using a questionnaire survey from their respective work sites. Respondents were assured regarding the confidentiality of their responses. Out of 393 subjects, 332 subjects (84 per cent) were males and 61 subjects (16 per cent) were females. The average age of respondents was 32.7 years. Descriptive statistics comprising of mean, standard deviations and correlations between variables and reliability indices are shown in Table 1.

Measures

For measuring different variables of the study uniformly, data were collected from the respondents through structured a questionnaire using Likert’s five-point scale, which varies from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree. Previously developed scales were used for measuring different items of the study. The survey questionnaire administered consisted of 37 items grouped under various scales for measuring the variables of this study. A brief explanation of all the measures of this study is mentioned in the following.

Table 1.

Mean, SD and Correlations among the Variables

	Variable	Mean	SD	1	2	3
1	HR Practices	3.94	0.42	1
2	Employee Engagement	3.83	0.77	0.38**	1
3	Job Satisfaction	4.41	0.80	0.42*	0.46**	1

Source: Authors’ own findings.

Notes: ** p < 0.01; *p < 0.05.

HR Practices: The scale to measure HR practices was adopted from Delery and Doty (1996). It consisted of 20 items which correspond to different HR practices, that is, internal career opportunities (e.g., ‘Individuals in this job have clear career paths within the organization’), employment security (e.g., ‘Job security is almost guaranteed to employees in this job’), training (e.g., ‘Employees in this job will normally go through training programmes every few years’), participation (e.g., ‘Employees in this job are allowed to take decisions’) and job descriptions (e.g., ‘The duties of this job are clearly defined’). Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was found to be 0.82.

Employee Engagement: This was assessed using Schaufeli and Bakker’s (2006) shortened version of Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (e.g., ‘I feel happy when I am working intensely’). The scale consisted of nine items. Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was found to be 0.90.

Job Satisfaction: For measuring job satisfaction, the scale developed by Tusi, Egan and O’Reilly III (1992) was used. This scale comprised of six items (e.g., ‘Considering everything I am satisfied with my current job situation’). Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was found to be 0.81.

Data Analysis

Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20.0 and the Analysis of Moments Structure (AMOS) version 18.0 were used in order to analyze the data. Structural equation modelling (SEM) was utilized in order to examine the model. It is a statistical technique which allows us to model relationships among multiple criteria and predictor variables. SEM allows us to assess the extent up to which employee engagement acts as a mediator between HR practices and job satisfaction. In addition to this, it gives various values that assist in determining the compatibility of the hypothesized model fit to the dataset. It considers two important things: validation of measurement model and testing, fitting and modification of the structural model (Byrne, 2001; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001b). Validation of measurement model is done by confirmatory factor analysis, whereas the other concept is attained through path analysis with latent variables (Schumacker & Lomax, 2004; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001a). The main objective of using SEM is to find a statistically relevant theoretical model which has both practical and substantive meaning (Schumacker & Lomax, 2004). The goodness-of-fit indices were examined through absolute fit indices and relative fit indices. We have followed the five-steps approach suggested by Schumacker and Lomax (2004) in order to fulfil the two concepts. Those steps are model specification, model identification, model estimation, model testing, model fit and possible model modification.

Measurement Model

Initial measurement model CFA1 (χ² = 731.67, χ²/df = 1.67, P = 0.01, GFI 0.89, CFI = 0.93, TLI = 0.92, RMSEA = 0.04) did not produce satisfactory model fit for the empirical data. After making necessary modifications, the final CFA2 yielded adequate improved fit indices (χ² = 635.25, χ²/df = 1.60, P = 0.01, GFI = 0.90, CFI = 0.94, TLI = 0.93, RMSEA = 0.03). Results of the first CFA model incorporated eight items pertaining to different scales such as HR practices, employee engagement and job satisfaction. The fit indices of the initial and final model are shown in Table 2. In Table 3, Cronbach’s alpha values are mentioned which indicate scale reliability. The values of Cronbach’s alpha of all instruments are beyond the established threshold value of 0.70, meeting the reliability criteria.

Structural Model

The hypothesized model is evaluated following three important steps. First, the proposed model should fulfil the goodness-of-fit criteria and match to the corresponding empirical data. Second, the model is revised in order to get a better model fit. Finally, in the third step, the direction and significance of relationship of all hypotheses are evaluated and a superior model is assessed and reported.

Table 2.

Goodness-of-fit Indices for the Two Models

Model	χ²	χ^2/df	P	GFI	TLI	CFI	RMSEA	Item deleted	Reason for deletion
CFA1 (Initial)	731.67	1.67	0.01	0.89	0.92	0.93	0.04	–	–
CFA2 (Final)	635.25	1.60	0.01	0.90	0.93	0.94	0.03	HRP18	LMI

Source: Authors’ own findings.

Note: Large Modification Indices, P < 0.001 in all the cases.

Table 3.

Reliability Value of the Instruments

Constructs	No. of Items	Cronbach’s Alpha (α)
HR Practices	20	0.821
Job Satisfaction	6	0.813
Employee Engagement	9	0.905

Source: Authors’ own findings.

This study examined the proposed hypothesis by using SEM method. As per the recommendation of Hair et al. (2006), the theoretical model of the present study was developed in a recursive manner in order to overcome the problem of statistical identification. The hypothesized association by using SEM is shown in Figure 1. It has been noticed that HR practices significantly predicted job satisfaction and employee engagement and employee engagement significantly predicted job satisfaction (χ² = 86.45, χ²/df = 2.01, GFI = 0.96, TLI = 0.92, CFI = 0.94, RMSEA = 0.05). This is shown in Table 4.

A different structural model was prepared in order to examine the role of employee engagement as a mediator between HR practices and job satisfaction (Figure 2). When employee engagement was taken as mediating between HR practices and job satisfaction, the assessment of the initial hypothesized model indicated (χ² = 215.14, χ²/df = 1.85, GFI = 0.93, TLI = 0.93, CFI = 0.94, RMSEA = 0.04). It has been observed that after employee engagement was entered as a mediator, the direct effect of HR practices on job satisfaction was reduced from 0.27 to 0.17, indicating a partial mediation effect (Table 5).

Table 4.

Goodness-of-fit Outcomes of the Structural Model without Mediator

Model	χ²	χ^2/df	P	GFI	TLI	CFI	RMSEA
Initial and final structural model	86.45	2.01	0.01	0.96	0.92	0.94	0.05

Source: Authors’ own findings.

Table 5.

Goodness-of-fit Results for the Structural Model after Mediation

Model	χ²	χ²/df	P	GFI	TLI	CFI	RMSEA
Initial and final structural model	215.14	1.85	0.01	0.93	0.93	0.94	0.04

Source: Authors’ own findings.

In order to test our model and hypothesized relationship between variables, the SEM technique recommended by Byrne (2001), Tabachnick and Fidell (2001b) and Kline (2004) were adopted. Using AMOS version 18.0, the initial step is to examine the model without a mediator, that is, the direct effect between HR practices and job satisfaction was considered alone. Initially, we have examined the effect of HR practices on job satisfaction. The findings are summarized in Table 6.

The result of the present piece of research is in line with past studies. In a study on Dutch public sector employees, Stejin (2004) found positive effect of HR practices on job satisfaction. Similar results came from a study on local government organizations in the United Kingdom. Gould-Williams (2003) revealed positive association of HR practices of the local government organizations with higher level job satisfaction, workplace trust and organizational performance.

We have also tested the influence of HR practices on employee engagement. The impact of employee engagement on job satisfaction is summarized in Table 7.

Resembling the results of past research findings, the role of HR practices on employee engagement, this study also found considerable effect of HR practices on employee engagement. The outcomes of the present study converge with the findings of Owner (2015) that HR practices of soft drinks firms of Uganda have significant positive effect on engagement level of employees.

Employee Engagement as a Mediator

The first objective of the present research work is to find out the role of employee engagement as a mediator, among HR practices and job satisfaction. In this study, HR practices are revealed to be significantly linked to job satisfaction. For the direct effect of HR practices on job satisfaction, beta estimate was found to be 0.27 (Table 5) and remained significant (p < 0.05). When employee engagement was entered as a mediator, the beta value declined from 0.27 (Figure 1) to 0.17 (Figure 2) and became insignificant (P > 0.05) indicating full mediation (Table 8) of employee engagement between HR practices and job satisfaction.

Table 6.

Impact of HR Practices on Job Satisfaction

Hypothesized paths	Direction	Beta estimate	CR/ t-value	Decision
JS HRP	+	0.17	2.181	Supported

Source: Authors’ own findings.

Table 7.

Effect of HR Practices on Employee Engagement

Hypothesized paths	Direction	Beta estimate	CR/ t-value	Decision
EE HRP	+	0.49	2.702	Supported

Source: Authors’ own findings.

Table 8.

Employee Engagement as a Mediator between HR Practices and Job Satisfaction

Hypothesis	Paths	Beta estimate	P value Results
Employee engagement mediates between HR practices and job satisfaction	HRP→EE→JS	0.17	0.011 Supported

Source: Authors’ own findings.

Discussion

This present research intended to empirically assess the association among HR practices, employee engagement and job satisfaction. Based on the previous literature, measurement scales for all the three constructs were examined. Detailed inspection regarding reliability and validity of the measurement scale has been established as acceptable. This research was carried out among PSU employees of northern and eastern parts of India in the year 2015–2016. Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) was carried out using SPSS version 20.0 package. In order to analyze the theoretical model fit and hypothesis testing, AMOS version 18.0 was used.

After confirming the anticipated relationship among different variables, the anticipated model was examined through SEM to examine fitness of the model on the basis of collected data. The anticipated hypotheses which were intended to find out the structural relationship among the variables were examined. The anticipated model was modified in order to attain a requisite goodness-of-fit to the data. All the three assumed hypotheses were supported and have been found to be significant. Precise discussion based on the objectives and findings of this study is elaborated in upcoming sections.

First, the purpose of this piece of research is to explore the relationship between HR practices and employee engagement. Results revealed a positive relationship of HR practices with employee engagement as hypothesized. The result of this study match with the previous research studies (Jose & Mampilly, 2012), wherein HR practices revealed to have a significant impact on employee engagement. Positive association of these two is due to the reason that HR practices of organizations make the individuals obliged through economic and socio-emotional resources by investing in them through HR practices. In return, employees try to reciprocate by being energetic, dedicated and giving more attention to achieving organizational goals (Macey & Schneider, 2008). When organizations adopt employee-friendly HR practices, employees consider it as the organization’s commitment towards them which they try to reciprocate through their supportive actions (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004; Kinnie, Hutchinson, Purcell, Rayton, & Swart, 2005), that is, employee engagement. Previous researchers justified the association of HR practices and employee engagement by using social exchange theory. Thus, when employees feel valued and important from their organization, they become more energetic, engrossed and dedicated towards their jobs. This makes them enjoy their jobs and they ultimately become satisfied with their jobs.

Our study is consistent with the earlier studies having employee engagement as one of the important factors in predicting job satisfaction. Some previous research works (Alarcon & Lyons, 2011; Demerouti & Bakker, 2011; Ram & Prabhakar, 2011; Saks, 2006; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004; Simpson, 2009) also reported similar findings about employee engagement and its positive influence on job satisfaction. Employee engagement is explained as a favourable, satisfied job-related feeling (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). Hence, these positive feelings and experiences like employee engagement are expected to result in positive job outcome like job satisfaction. Thus, employees who are more engaged are expected to be more satisfied with their jobs. The third objective of this study is to study the role of employee engagement between HR practices and job satisfaction. The study’s result indicated full mediation of employee engagement between HR practices and job satisfaction.

Conclusion and Limitations of the Study

The present study has few limitations which urge immediate attention from research community for future research. First, the data was collected through self-report questionnaires. Thus, biasness of subjectivity and social desirability might influence the generalization of the results of this study. Possible extension of this study can be designed to determine the role of other variables, like commitment, as mediators between HR practices and job satisfaction. The study was conducted on employees of Indian PSUs. Hence, findings of the study cannot be generalised across sectors and organisations. It is suggested that researchers should conduct study on employees from private and public sector organisations in future to examine and understand how employees conceive the role of HR practices and employee engagement in promoting job satisfaction at work.

In spite of the aforementioned limitations, the study reports that employees of the organizations which have good HR practices are expected to be more engaged in workplace and are likely to stay satisfied with their jobs. We can conclude that the present study substantially contributes to the existing knowledge of HRM and organizational behaviour in many ways, such as methodology, quantitative analysis and new findings. However, the findings of the mediating role of employee engagement between HR practices and job satisfaction on a sample of Indian PSU employees are quite unique. This study confirmed as per the previous research that HR practices in PSUs play significant role in determining the satisfaction of employees towards their jobs. When organizations have good HR practices at workplace, it makes employees stay happy with their jobs. Good HR practices of the organizations promote engagement level of employees towards their jobs which ultimately results in increased level of job satisfaction of employees. From this we can conclude that HR practices enhance the degree of job satisfaction of PSU employees through employee engagement. The present article is expected to guide managers in enhancing job satisfaction of individuals through adoption of best employee-friendly HR practices which will engage employees in their jobs.

Implications of the Study

The study offers a number of implications for academicians, researchers and practitioners. It provides deeper insights to HR managers of PSUs to understand the underlying mechanism between HR practices, employee engagement and job satisfaction. They will try to promote good HR practices and employee engagement in organizations for increasing the level of job satisfaction among employees. A greater understanding regarding HR practices, employee engagement and job satisfaction relationship of PSUs will fill a research gap and this understanding will support HR managers in developing programmes that emphasizes on good HR practices in order to fully engage their employees and more importantly keep the employees satisfied in their job.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the anonymous referees of the journal for their extremely useful suggestions to improve the quality of the article. The usual disclaimers apply.

References

Akinbode

G.A.

(2011). Demographic and dispositional characteristics as predictors of organisational citizenship behaviour: An appraisal of OCB in a non-English culture workgroups. Ife Psychologia, 19(1), 375–403.

Alarcon

G.M.

& Lyon

J.B.

(2011). The relationship of engagement and job satisfaction in working samples. Journal of Psychology, 145(5), 463–480.

Arthur

J.B.

(1994). Effects of human resource systems on manufacturing performance and turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 670–687.

Ayanda

O.J.

& Sani

A.D.

(2011). Strategic human resource management and organizational performance in the Nigerian manufacturing sector: An empirical investigation. International Journal of Business and Management, 6(9), 46–56.

Balgovind

(2007). The relationship between human resource management practices and organisational performance in the manufacturing sector of the beer industry in South Africa (Master thesis). South Africa: University of Pretoria.

Becker

B.E.

& Huselid

M.A.

(1998). High performance work systems and firm performance: A synthesis of research and managerial implications. Human Resource Journal of Management, 37(2), 421–428.

Blau

P.M.

(1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York, NY: Wiley.

Bogdanova

Enfors

& Naumovska

(2008). Work environment stressors: The link between employees well-being and job performance (Bachelor Thesis). Sweden: Jon Koping International Business School, Jonkoping University. Retrieved 22 Nov. 2015, from https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:3761/FULLTEXT01.pdf

Boxall

& Macky

(2007). High-performance work systems and organizational performance: Bridging theory and practice. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 45(3), 261–270.

10.

Bowen

D.E.

& Ostroff

(2004). Understanding HRM-firm performance linkages: The role of the strength of the HRM system. Academy of Management Review, 29(2), 203–221.

11.

Burns

(1973). A structural theory of social exchange. Acta Sociologica, 16(3), 188–208.

12.

Byrne

(2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

13.

Cardona

Lawrence

B.S.

& Benter

P.M.

(2004). The influence of social and work exchange relationships on organizational citizenship behavior. Group and Organization Management, 29(2), 219–247.

14.

Casper

W.J.

& Harris

C.M.

(2008). Work-life benefits and organizational attachment: Self-interest utility and signaling theory models. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 72(1), 95–109.

15.

Combs

Liu

Hall

& Ketchen

(2006). How much do high-performance work practices matter? A meta-analysis of their effects on organizational performance. Personnel Psychology, 59(3), 501–528.

16.

Condrey

S.E.

(1995). Reforming human resource management systems: Exploring the importance of organizational trust. American Review of Public Administration, 25(4), 341.

17.

Cropanzano

& Mitchell

M.S.

(2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874–900.

18.

Delaney

J.T.

& Huselid

M.A.

(1996). The impact of human resource management practices on perceptions of organizational performance. The Academy of Management Journal, 39(4), 949–969.

19.

Delery

J.E.

(1998). Issues of fit in strategic human resource management: Implications for research. Human Resource Management Review, 8(3), 112–119.

20.

Delery

J.E.

& Doty

H.D.

(1996). Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource management: Tests of universalistic, contingency, and configurational performance predictions. Academy of Management Journal, 39(4), 802–835.

21.

Demerouti

& Bakker

A.B.

(2011). The job demands-resources model: Challenges for future research. SAGE Journal of Industrial Psychology, 37(2), 1–9.

22.

Eisenberger

Hungtinngton

Hutchison

& Sowa

(1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 500–507.

23.

Ensher

E.A.

Thomas

& Murphy

S.E.

(2001). Comparison of traditional, step-ahead, and peer mentoring on protégés’ support, satisfaction, and perceptions of career success: A social exchange perspective. Journal of Business and Psychology, 15(3), 419–438.

24.

Gebauer

Lowman

& Gordon

(2008). Closing the engagement gap: How great companies unlock employee potential for superior results. New York, NY: Penguin.

25.

Gould-Williams

(2003). The importance of HR practices and work place trust in achieving superior performance: A study of public-sector organizations. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14(1), 28–54.

26.

Guest

D.E.

(1997). Human resource management and performance: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 8(3), 263–276.

27.

Gurbuz

(2009). The effect of high performance HR practices on employees’ job satisfaction. Istanbul University Journal of the School of Business Administration Cilt, 38(2), 110–123.

28.

Hair

Black

Babin

Anderson

& Tatham

(2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

29.

Hallberg

U.E.

& Schaufeli

W.B.

(2006). Same same: but different? Can work engagement be discriminated from job involvement and organizational commitment? European Psychologist, 11(2), 119–127.

30.

Huselid

M.A.

(1995). The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity, and corporate financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 38(3), 635–672.

31.

Jeet

& Sayeeduzzafar. (2014). A study of HRM practices and its impact on employee job satisfaction in private sector banks: A case study of HDFC bank. International Journal of Advance Research in Computer Science and Management Studies, 2(1), 62–68.

32.

Jena

K & Pradhan

R.K.

(2014). Deliverables towards HR sustainability: A conceptual review. European Journal of Business Management, 6(23), 95–102.

33.

Jena

L.K.

Pradhan

R.K.

& Basu

(2016). Employee engagement and citizenship behavior: The mediating role of organisational commitment in Indian manufacturing industries. In Bamel

U.K.

Sengupta

& Singh

(Eds), Emerging challenges in HR: VUCA perspectives (pp. 53–68). New Delhi: Emerald Group Publishing.

34.

Jose

& Mampilly

S.R.

(2012). Satisfaction with HR practices and employee engagement: A social exchange perspective. Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, 4(7), 423–430.

35.

Jose

& Mampilly

S.R.

(2014). Psychological empowerment as a predictor of employee engagement: An empirical attestation. Global Business Review, 15(1), 93–104.

36.

Kahn

W.A.

(1992). To be fully there: Psychological presence at work. Human Relations, 45(4), 321–349.

37.

Katou

A.A.

& Budwar

P.S.

(2007). The effects of human resource management policies on organizational performance in Greek manufacturing firms. Thunderbird International Business Review, 49(1), 1–35.

38.

Khan

M.A.

(2010). Effects of human resource management practices on organizational performance—An empirical study of oil and gas industry in Pakistan. European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Sciences, 24, 157–175.

39.

Kim

(2010). Strategic human resource practices: Introducing alternatives for organization performance improvement in the public sector. Personnel Administrative Review, 70(1), 38–49.

40.

Kinnie

Hutchinson

Purcell

Rayton

& Swart

(2005). Satisfaction with HR practices and commitment to the organization: Why one size does not fit all. Human Resource Management Journal, 15(4), 9–29.

41.

Kline

R.B.

(2004). Beyond significance testing: Reforming data analysis methods in behavioral research. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

42.

Koys

D.J.

(2001). The effects of employee satisfaction, organizational citizenship behavior, and turnover on organizational effectiveness: A unit-level longitudinal study. Personnel Psychology, 54(1), 101–114.

43.

Linna

Pekkola

Ukko

& Melkas

(2010). Defining and measuring productivity in the public sector: Managerial perceptions. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 23(3), 300–320.

44.

Locke

E.A.

(1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In Dunnette

M.D.

(Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organisational psychology. Chicago, IL: Rand-McNally.

45.

Macduffie

J.P.

(1995). Human resource bundles and manufacturing performance: Organisational logic and flexible production systems in the world auto industry. Industrial and Labour Relations Review, 48(2), 197–221.

46.

Macey

W.H.

& Schneider

(2008). The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 1(1), 3–30.

47.

Mallick

Pradhan

R.K.

Tewari

H.R.

& Jena

L.K.

(2015). Organisational citizenship behavior, job performance and HR practices: A relational perspective. Management and Labor Studies, 39(4), 1–12.

48.

Orgambídez-Ramos

Borrego-Alés

& Mendoza-Sierra

(2014). Role stress and work engagement as antecedents of job satisfaction in Spanish workers. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 10(1), 360–372.

49.

Ostroff

& Bowen

D.E.

(2000). Moving HR to a higher level: HR practices and organizational effectiveness. In Klein

K.L.

& Kozlowski

S.W.J.

(Eds), Multilevel theory, research and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions and new directions (pp. 211–266). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

50.

Paauwe

& Richardson

(1997). Introduction to special edition on HRM and performance. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 8(3), 257–262.

51.

Paul

A.K.

& Anantharaman

R.N.

(2003). Impact of people management practices on organisational performance: Analysis of a casual model. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14(7), 1246–1266.

52.

Peterescu

A.I.

& Simmons

(2000). Human resource management practices and worker’s job satisfaction. International Journal of Manpower, 29(7), 651–667.

53.

Pradhan

R.K.

& Jena

L.K.

(2015). Spirituality at workplace: Role of engaging leadership. Business Manager, 17(11), 12–15.

54.

Pradhan

R.K.

& Jena

L.K.

(2016). Workplace spirituality and employee engagement: A study in Indian service industry. In Birdie

A.K.

(Ed.), Employees and employers in service organizations: Emerging challenges and opportunities (pp. 223–246). US: Apple Academic Publishers, Taylor and Francis Group.

55.

Pradhan

R.K.

& Jena

L.K.

(2017). Employee performance at work: Theory and measurement. Business Perspectives and Research, 5(1), 69–85.

56.

Price

(2004). Human resource management in a business context. London: Thomson Learning.

57.

Ram

& Prabhakar

G.V.

(2011). The role of employee engagement in work-related outcomes. Interdisciplinary Journal of Research in Business, 1(3), 47–61.

58.

Rich

B.L.

LePine

J.A.

& Crawford

E.R.

(2010). Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 53(3), 617–635.

59.

Saks

A.M.

(2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(7), 600–619.

60.

Schaufeli

W.B.

& Bakker

A.B.

(2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organisational Behaviour, 25(3), 293–315.

61.

Schular

& Jackson

(1987). Linking competitive strategies with human resource management practices. Academy of Management Executive, 2(3), 207–219.

62.

Schumacker

& Lomax

(2004). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

63.

Seigts

G.H.

& Crim

(2006). What engages employees the most or, the ten C’s of employee engagement. Ivey Business Journal, 1–5.

64.

Shore

L.M.

& Wayne

S.J.

(1993). Commitment and employee behavior: Comparison of affective commitment and continuance commitment with perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(5), 774–780.

65.

Simon

L.A.

Bakker

A.B.

Gruman

J.A.

Macey

W.H.

& Saks

A.M.

(2015). Employee engagement, human resource management practices and competitive advantage. Journal of Organisational Effectiveness: People and Performance, 2(1), 7–35.

66.

Simpson

M.R.

(2009). Engagement at work: A review of the literature. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 46(7), 1012–1024.

67.

Sonnentag

(2003). Recovery, work engagement, and proactive behavior: A new look at the interface between non-work and work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(3), 518–528.

68.

Sonnentag

Mojza

E.J.

Demerouti

& Bakker

(2012). Reciprocal relations between recovery and work engagement: The moderating role of job stressors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(4), 842–853.

69.

Stejin

(2004). Human resource management and job satisfaction in the Dutch public sector. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 24(4), 291–303.

70.

Tabachnick

& Fidell

(2001a). Data samples. Using multivariate statistics (pp. 57–85). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

71.

Tabachnick

& Fidell

(2001b). Structural equation modeling. Using multivariate statistics (pp. 653–771). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

72.

Thompson

(2000). The competitiveness challenge: The bottom line benefits of strategic human resources. London: DTI.

73.

Tsui

A.S.

Egan

T.D.

& O’Reilly III

C.A.

(1992). Being different: Relational demography and organizational attachment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(4), 549–579.

74.

Turnley

W.H.

Bolino

M.C.

Lester

S.W.

& Bloodgood

J.M.

(2003). The impact of psychological contract fulfillment on the performance of in-role and organizational citizenship behaviour. Journal of Management, 29(2), 187–206.

75.

Tusi

A.S.

Pearce

J.L.

Porter

I.W.

& Tripoli

A.M.

(1997). Alternative approaches to the employee–organisation relationship: Does investment in employees pay off? Academy of Management Journal, 40(5), 1089–1121.

76.

Wright

P.M.

Gardner

T.M.

& Moynihan

L.M.

(2003). The impact of HR practices on the performance of business. Human Resource Management Journal, 13(3), 21–36.