Measurement error in research on human resources and firm performance: Additional data and suggestions for future research

Personnel Psychology

Volumn 54, Issue 4, 2001, Pages 875-901

  Wright, Patrick M ^a   Gardner, Timothy M ^a   Moynihan, Lisa M ^a   Park, Hyeon Jeong ^a   Gerhart, Barry ^b   Delery, John E ^c  

^a Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0035729321     PISSN: 00315826     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2001.tb00235.x     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Becker BE, Gerhart B. (1996). The impact of human resource management on organizational performance: Progress and prospects. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 779-801.
2. Becker BE, Huselid MA. (1998). High performance work systems and firm performance: A synthesis of research and managerial implications. In Ferris GR (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resource management, (Vol. 16, pp. 53-101). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
3. Burke M, Dunlap W. (2001). Estimating interrater agreement with the average deviation (AD) Index: A user's guide. Manuscript in preparation, Tulane University.
4. Delery JE, Doty DH. (1996). Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource management: Tests of universalistic, contingency, and configurational performance predictions. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 802-835.
5. Gardner TM, Moynihan LM, Park HJ, Wright PM. (2000, August). Unlocking the black box: Examining the processes through which human resource practices impact business performance. Paper presented at the 2000 Academy of Management Meetings, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
6. Gardner TM, Wright PM, Gerhart B. (1999, August). The HR-firm performance relationship: Can it be in the eye of the beholder? Paper presented at the 1999 Academy of Management Meetings, Chicago, IL.
7. Gerhart B. (1999). Human resource management and firm performance: Measurement issues and their effect on causal and policy inferences. In Wright PM, Dyer LD, Boudreau JW, Milkovich GT (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management, Supplement 4 (pp. 31-51). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
8. Gerhart B, Wright PM, McMahan GC. (2000). Measurement error and estimates of the HR-firm performance relationship: Further evidence and analysis. PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY, 53, 855-872.
9. Gerhart B, Wright PM, McMahan GC, Snell SA. (2000). Measurement error in research on human resources and firm performance: How much error is there and how does it influence effect size estimates? PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY, 53, 803-834.
10. Huselid MA. (1995). The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity, and corporate financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 635-672.
11. Huselid MA, Becker BE. (1996). Methodological issues in cross-sectional and panel estimates of the human resource-firm performance link. Industrial Relations, 35, 400-422.
12. Huselid MA, Becker BE. (2000). Comment on measurement error in research on human resources and firm performance: How much error is there and how does it influence effect size estimates? PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY, 53, 835-854.
13. Huselid MA, Jackson SE, Schuler RS. (1997). Technical and strategic human resource management effectiveness as determinants of firm performance. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 171-188.
14. James LR, Demaree RG, Wolf G. (1984). Estimating within group interrater reliability with and without response bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 85-98.
15. wg: An assessment of within-group interrater agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 306-309.
16. Kozlowski SWJ, Hattrup K. (1992). A disagreement about within-group agreement: Disentangling issues of consistency versus consensus. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 161-167.
17. MacDuffie JP. (1995). Human resource bundles and manufacturing performance: Organizational logic and flexible production systems in the world auto industry. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 48, 197-221.
18. Murphy K, DeShon R. (2000). Interrater correlations do not estimate the reliability of job performance ratings. PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY, 66, 873-900.
19. Nunnally JC. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
20. Nunnally JC, Bernstein I. (1994). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
21. Rogers EW, Wright PM. (1998). Measuring organizational performance in strategic human resource management: Problems, prospects, and performance information markets. Human Resource Management Review, 8, 311-331.
22. Rothstein H. (1990). Interrater reliability of job performance ratings: Growth to asymptote level with increasing opportunity to observe. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 322-327.
23. Schmidt FL, Hunter JE. (1989). Interrater reliability coefficients cannot be computed when only one stimulus is rated. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 368-370.
24. Schwab DP. (1980). Construct validity in organizational behavior. In Staw BM, Cummings LL (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (pp. 3-43). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
25. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420-428.
26. Viswesvaran C, Ones D, Schmidt F. (1996). Comparative analysis of the reliability of job performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 557-574.
27. Welbourne TM, Andrews AO. (1996). Predicting the performance of initial public offerings: Should human resource management be in the equation? Academy of Management Journal, 39, 891-919.
28. Wright PM, McCormick B, Sherman WS, McMahan G. (1999). The role of human resource practices in petro-chemical refinery performance. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 10, 551-571.