临时知识型员工自主性动机激发：关系导向人力资源管理建构及其作用机理

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1042.2021.01534

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

快速变化的技术需求使得人才外部化, 人才共享成为组织获取技能型、知识型人才的重要方式。共享经济背景下的人力资源管理属于新兴研究领域, 企业在管理临时知识型员工面临很大挑战。由于身份的外部性、临时性, 员工关系基础薄弱, 临时知识型员工专业能力发挥受限, 工作场所关系需求受阻, 导致自主性动机不足, 影响绩效产出, 而传统对外部员工的契约型管理难以解决以上问题。针对嵌入团队工作的临时知识型员工, 研究基于关系型协调理论探索关系导向人力资源管理实践构成。在此基础上, 结合自我决定理论探讨关系导向人力资源管理实践提升临时知识型员工绩效的作用机理, 验证从自主性动机来源、自主性动机激发到自主性动机结果的路径机制。对关系导向人力资源管理实践内容和效用探讨有助于深入理解临时知识型员工的管理, 为共享经济背景下新型用工管理实践提供启示。

关键词: 关系导向人力资源管理实践, 高质量关系, 关系型合作, 自主性动机, 合作绩效

Abstract:

The rapidly changing technology environment makes “talent sharing” as a key way to acquire the required skilled and knowledge workers for organizations. Research on human resources management in sharing economy is an emerging field. Enterprises are facing great challenges for management on temporary knowledge workers. Due to the externality of identity and the weak relationship base with co-workers, the basic needs of competence and relatedness of temporary knowledge worker' are hindered, resulting in insufficient autonomous motivation, which in turn affect performance. Specifically, the challenges faced by temporary knowledge workers management are: First, temporary knowledge workers lack relationships basis with other team members due to the externality of identities, which in turn limits their professional influence, then their autonomous motivation are insufficient and in the results of low quality cooperation; Second, the relatedness needs of employees are difficult to satisfy due to the periphery identity (compared to the core employees of the organization), which hinders the formation of autonomous motivation, and then affects the workplace experience and cooperation performance. These two major challenges focus on how to deal with the insufficient autonomous motivation of temporary knowledge workers.

In the literatures, professional influence of contract experts (DiBenigno, 2020) and the establishment of workplace identity of non-core employees (Bolinger et al., 2018) both depend on the workplace relationship building. Therefore, this paper from the perspective of motivation management, explores human resource management practices and its role in the mechanisms for temporary knowledge workers combined with relational coordination theory and self-determination theory. For temporary knowledge workers who are embedded in team work, the research explores the relationship-oriented human resource management constructs based on the relational coordination theory. The self-determination theory is used to explore how the relationship-oriented HRP improve performance of temporary knowledge employees. We verify the path from the source (relation-oriented HRP; high quality relationship), the formulation (satisfaction of competence need and relatedness need), and results autonomous motivation (knowledge sharing intention, knowledge sharing behaviors and job satisfaction). This research will: (1) exploring the composition of practices of relationship-oriented human resource management for temporary knowledge workers, by identifying the relationship-oriented human resource management practices and develop corresponding measurement tool; and (2) verifying the impact of relationship-oriented human resource management practices on performance. We will verify that the relationship-oriented human resource management practice influences the employees' autonomous motivation (satisfaction of competence needs and relatedness needs) by establishing high-quality role relationship, and then improve the cooperation attitude (willingness to share knowledge) and behaviors (knowledge sharing behavior).

Research on the content and utility of relationship-oriented HRP is helpful for a deeper understanding on the management of temporary knowledge worker and give implication for management practice in sharing economy. First of all, this research will promote the understanding of relationship-oriented human resource management under the background of “talent sharing” time. Secondly, we explored the effect of the relationship-oriented human resource management from the autonomous motivation perspective, which beyond the "resource path" and "exchange relationship" of relationship human resource management research in previous studies. Finally, the research brings the high-performance human resource management in a new context and give enlightenment for workplace diversity management.

Key words: the relationship-oriented HRP, high quality relationship, relational coordination, autonomous motivation, cooperation performance

中图分类号:

B849: C93

刘小浪, 刘善仕, 赵瑜, 秦传燕, 陆文珠. (2021). 临时知识型员工自主性动机激发：关系导向人力资源管理建构及其作用机理. 心理科学进展 , 29(9), 1534-1550.

LIU Xiaolang, LIU Shanshi, ZHAO Yu, QIN Chuanyan, LU Wenzhu. (2021). The temporary knowledge workers’ autonomous motivation: Relationship-oriented human resource management construction and its mechanism. Advances in Psychological Science, 29(9), 1534-1550.

图/表 6

参考文献 59

[1]	陈晨, 刘玉新, 赵晨. (2020). 独立、协同和平衡视角下的单维式基本心理需要满足. 心理科学进展, 28(12), 2076-2090.
[2]	程德俊. (2007). 知识视角下的人力资源内部化和外部化战略. 科研管理, 28(3), 70-77.
[3]	林润辉, 范建红, 黄传锋. (2009). 临时型知识团队合作治理中社会约束影响的实验研究. 南开管理评论, 12(5), 144-150.
[4]	刘善仕, 冯镜铭, 王红椿, 吴坤津. (2016). 基于合作型人力资源实践的员工网络嵌入与角色外行为的关系研究. 管理学报, 13(11), 1641-1649.
[5]	潘安成, 姜葵助, 肖宇佳. (2016). 战略实践观与关系化组织——以中国文化背景为基础的质性研究. 南开管理评论, 19(3), 110-122.
[6]	潘李鹏, 池仁勇. (2018). 基于内部网络视角的企业知识结构与创新研究——“发散为王, 还是收敛制胜?”. 科学学研究, 36(2), 288-295.
[7]	许科, 韩雨卿, 于晓宇, 王炜. (2016). 快速信任与临时团队绩效: 共享心智模型与团队互依性的角色. 管理评论, 28(9), 238-249.
[8]	张春虎. (2019). 基于自我决定理论的工作动机研究脉络及未来走向. 心理科学进展, 27(8), 1489-1506.
[9]	赵曙明, 张敏, 赵宜萱. (2019). 人力资源管理百年: 演变与发展. 外国经济与管理, 41(12), 50-73.
[10]	Andersen S. M., & Chen S. (2002). The relational self: An interpersonal social-cognitive theory. Psychological Review, 109(4), 619-645. pmid: 12374322
[11]	Bergman M. E., & Jean V. A. (2016). Where have all the “workers” gone? A critical analysis of the unrepresentativeness of our samples relative to the labor market in the industrial- organizational psychology literature. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 9(1), 84-113. doi: 10.1017/iop.2015.70 URL
[12]	Blatt R. (2008). Organizational citizenship behavior of temporary knowledge employees. Organization Studies, 29(6), 849-866. doi: 10.1177/0170840608088704 URL
[13]	Bolinger A. R., Klotz A. C., & Leavitt K. (2018). Contributing from inside the outer circle: The identity- based effects of noncore role incumbents on relational coordination and organizational climate. Academy of Management Review, 43(4), 680-703. doi: 10.5465/amr.2016.0333 URL
[14]	Brickson S. (2000). The impact of identity orientation on individual and organizational outcomes in demographically diverse settings. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 82-101. doi: 10.5465/amr.2000.2791604 URL
[15]	Caldwell N. D., Roehrich J. K., & George G. (2017). Social value creation and relational coordination in public-private collaborations. Journal of Management Studies, 54(6), 906-928. doi: 10.1111/joms.2017.54.issue-6 URL
[16]	Carmeli A., Atwater L., & Levi A. (2011). How leadership enhances employees’ knowledge sharing: The intervening roles of relational and organizational identification. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(3), 257-274. doi: 10.1007/s10961-010-9154-y URL
[17]	Claggett J. L., & Karahanna E. (2018). Unpacking the structure of coordination mechanisms and the role of relational coordination in an era of digitally mediated work processes. Academy of Management Review, 43(4), 704-722. doi: 10.5465/amr.2016.0325 URL
[18]	Collins C. J., & Clark K. D. (2003). Strategic human resource practices, top management team social networks, and firm performance: The role of human resource practices in creating organizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Journal, 46(6), 740-751.
[19]	Cross S. E., Bacon P. L., & Morris M. L. (2000). The relational-interdependent self-construal and relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(4), 791-808. pmid: 10794381
[20]	de Stefano, F., Bonet, R., & Camuffo, A. (2019). Does losing temporary workers matter? The effects of planned turnover on replacements and unit performance. Academy of Management Journal, 62(4), 979-1002. doi: 10.5465/amj.2017.0291 URL
[21]	Deci E. L., Olafsen A. H., & Ryan R. M. (2017). Self-determination theory in work organizations: The state of a science. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4, 19-43. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113108 URL
[22]	Deci E. L., & Ryan R. M. (1987). The support of autonomy and the control of behavior. Journal of personality and Social Psychology, 53(6), 1024-1037. pmid: 3320334
[23]	DiBenigno J. (2020). Rapid relationality: How peripheral experts build a foundation for influence with line managers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 65(1), 20-60. doi: 10.1177/0001839219827006 URL
[24]	Dutton J. E. & Ragins B. R. (Eds.). (2007). Exploring positive relationships at work: Building a theoretical and research foundation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[25]	Evans W. R., & Davis W. D. (2005). High-performance work systems and organizational performance: The mediating role of internal social structure. Journal of Management, 31(5), 758-775. doi: 10.1177/0149206305279370 URL
[26]	Fu N. (2015). The role of relational resources in the knowledge management capability and innovation of professional service firms. Human Relations, 68(5), 731-764. doi: 10.1177/0018726714543479 URL
[27]	Gittell J. H. (2001). Supervisory span, relational coordination and flight departure performance: A reassessment of post- bureaucracy theory. Organization Science, 12(4), 468-483. doi: 10.1287/orsc.12.4.468.10636 URL
[28]	Gittell J. H. (2002). Relationships between service providers and their impact on customers. Journal of Service Research, 4(4), 299-311. doi: 10.1177/1094670502004004007 URL
[29]	Gittell J. H. (2016). Transforming relationships for high performance: The power of relational coordination. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
[30]	Gittell J. H., & Douglass A. (2012). Relational bureaucracy: Structuring reciprocal relationships into roles. Academy of Management Review, 37(4), 709-733. doi: 10.5465/amr.2010.0438 URL
[31]	Gittell J. H., Seidner R., & Wimbush J. (2010). A relational model of how high-performance work systems work. Organization Science, 21(2), 490-506. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1090.0446 URL
[32]	Gittell J. H., Weinberg D., Pfefferle S., & Bishop C. (2008). Impact of relational coordination on job satisfaction and quality outcomes: A study of nursing homes. Human Resource Management Journal, 18(2), 154-170. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-8583.2007.00063.x URL
[33]	Grant A. M. (2007). Relational job design and the motivation to make a prosocial difference. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 393-417. doi: 10.5465/amr.2007.24351328 URL
[34]	Hartgerink J. M., Cramm J. M., Bakker T. J. E. M., van Eijsden A. M., Mackenbach J. P., & Nieboer A. P. (2014). The importance of multidisciplinary teamwork and team climate for relational coordination among teams delivering care to older patients. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 70(4), 791-799. doi: 10.1111/jan.12233 pmid: 23980594
[35]	Jia L., Shaw J. D., Tsui A. S., & Park T. Y. (2014). A social-structural perspective on employee-organization relationships and team creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 57(3), 869-891. doi: 10.5465/amj.2011.0147 URL
[36]	Jiang J. Y., & Liu C. W. (2015). High performance work systems and organizational effectiveness: The mediating role of social capital. Human Resource Management Review, 25(1), 126-137. doi: 10.1016/j.hrmr.2014.09.001 URL
[37]	Kehoe R. R., & Collins C. J. (2017). Human resource management and unit performance in knowledge-intensive work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(8), 1222-1236. doi: 10.1037/apl0000216 URL
[38]	Lavelle J. J., Rupp D. E., & Brockner J. (2007). Taking a multi-foci approach to the study of justice, social exchange, and citizenship behavior: The target similarity model. Journal of Management, 33(6), 841-866. doi: 10.1177/0149206307307635 URL
[39]	Leana III, C.R., & van Buren, H.J. (1999). Organizational social capital and employment practices. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 538-555. doi: 10.5465/amr.1999.2202136 URL
[40]	Lee H. W., & Kim E. (2020). Workforce diversity and firm performance: Relational coordination as a mediator and structural empowerment and multisource feedback as moderators. Human Resource Management, 59(1), 5-23. doi: 10.1002/hrm.v59.1 URL
[41]	Lepak D. P., & Snell S. A. (1999). The human resource architecture: Toward a theory of human capital allocation and development. Academy of Management Review, 24(1), 31-48. doi: 10.5465/amr.1999.1580439 URL
[42]	Liden R. C., Wayne S. J., Zhao H., & Henderson D. (2008). Servant leadership: Development of a multidimensional measure and multi-level assessment. Leadership Quarterly, 19(2), 161-177. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.01.006 URL
[43]	McDermott A. M., Conway E., Cafferkey K., Bosak J., & Flood P. C. (2019). Performance management in context: Formative cross-functional performance monitoring for improvement and the mediating role of relational coordination in hospitals. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 30(3), 436-456. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2017.1278714 URL
[44]	Methot J. R., Rosado-Solomon E. H., & Allen D. G. (2018). The network architecture of human captial: A relational identity perspective. Academy of Management Review, 43(4), 723-748. doi: 10.5465/amr.2016.0338 URL
[45]	Mossholder K. W., Settoon R. P., & Henagan S. C. (2005). A relational perspective on turnover: Examining structural, attitudinal, and behavioral predictors. Academy of Management Journal, 48(4), 607-618. doi: 10.5465/amj.2005.17843941 URL
[46]	Okhuysen G. A., & Bechky B. A. (2009). 10 coordination in organizations: An integrative perspective. Academy of Management annals, 3(1), 463-502. doi: 10.5465/19416520903047533 URL
[47]	Parker S. K. (1998). Enhancing role breadth self-efficacy: The roles of job enrichment and other organizational interventions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(6), 835-852. pmid: 9885197
[48]	Parker S. K., Axtell C. M., & Turner N. (2001). Designing a safer workplace: Importance of job autonomy, communication quality, and supportive supervisors. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6(3), 211-228. pmid: 11482633
[49]	Poppo L., Zhou K. Z., & Ryu S. (2008). Alternative origins to interorganizational trust: An interdependence perspective on the shadow of the past and the shadow of the future. Organization Science, 19(1), 39-55. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1070.0281 URL
[50]	Rockmann K. W., & Ballinger G. A. (2017). Intrinsic motivation and organizational identification among on-demand workers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(9), 1305-1316. doi: 10.1037/apl0000224 pmid: 28394148
[51]	Ryan R. M., & Deci E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. New York: Guilford Publications.
[52]	Settoon R. P., & Mossholder K. W. (2002). Relationship quality and relationship context as antecedents of person-and task-focused interpersonal citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 255-267. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.87.2.255 URL
[53]	Sluss D. M., & Ashforth B. E. (2007). Relational identity and identification: Defining ourselves through work relationships. Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 9-32. doi: 10.5465/amr.2007.23463672 URL
[54]	Soltis S. M., Brass D. J., & Lepak D. P. (2018). Social resource management: Integrating social network theory and human resource management. Academy of Management Annals, 12(2), 537-573. doi: 10.5465/annals.2016.0094 URL
[55]	Stamper C. L., Masterson S. S., & Knapp J. (2009). A typology of organizational membership: Understanding different membership relationships through the lens of social exchange. Management and Organization Review, 5(3), 303-328. doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8784.2009.00147.x URL
[56]	Sun L. Y., Aryee S., & Law K. S. (2007). High-performance human resource practices, citizenship behavior, and organizational performance: A relational perspective. Academy of management Journal, 50(3), 558-577. doi: 10.5465/amj.2007.25525821 URL
[57]	Vogus T. J. (2006). What is it about relationships? A behavioral theory of social capital and performance. Labor and Employment Relations Proceedings, 58, 164-173.
[58]	Walumbwa F. O., & Hartnell C. A. (2011). Understanding transformational leadership-employee performance links: The role of relational identification and self-efficacy. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 84(1), 153-172. doi: 10.1348/096317910X485818 URL
[59]	Zhang S., Liu W., & Liu X. (2012). Investigating the relationship between Protestant work ethic and Confucian dynamism: An empirical test in mainland China. Journal of Business Ethics, 106(2), 243-252. doi: 10.1007/s10551-011-0993-8 URL

名称	理论基础	内涵	具体实践	作用机理/效果	学者
关系导向工作设计	关系理论	指用于塑造员工与其他人员之间联系和互动的工作结构特征	提供员工之间相互联系和交流的机会以及工作结构设计, 包括频率、持久性、物理临近性、深度以及广度。	亲社会动机; 帮助行为; 社会价值; 服务动机; 同理心; 客户情感承诺	Grant, 2007
关系化工作情境设计	关系理论	旨在引导和促进组织成员建立双向的联系的管理实践设计	基于双向关系的组织结构设计基于双向关系的任务结构设计基于双向关系的奖酬结构设计	关系认同等	Brickson, 2000
合作型人力资源管理	社会资本理论	致力于员工合作关系建立和维持的人力资源管理系统	提高合作能力实践激发合作动机实践提供合作机会实践	通过提升合作能力、合作动机和合作参与机会提高合作绩效	刘善仕等, 2016
高管的社会关系网络人力资源管理	社会资本理论	帮助高管人员拓展外部社会关系网络的人力资源管理实践	提供与关键客户建立个人联系的资金培训和发展个人关系技能评估与关键利益相关者建立联系的能力与关键利益相关者建立联系提供激励	建立外部社会网络关系	Collins & Clark, 2003
关系型高绩效工作系统	关系型协调理论	组织正式的人力资源管理制度用于建立和促进工作角色之间的互惠关系	基于关系能力的雇佣和培训跨角色的绩效评价和奖励跨角色的冲突解决方法关系型工作设计	关系型生产; 关系型领导; 关系型协作沟通质量; 关系质量; 任务绩效; 护理质量	Gittell & Douglass, 2012
基于网络调整的人力资源管理实践	社会网络理论身份认同理论	用于调整人力资本社会网络构成(人员主体); 内容(关系性质)及结构的人力资源管理实践	促进网络同质性或异质性的招聘和选拔实践与网络密度正相关的开放的工作场所设计; 基于团队的薪酬; 团队培训实践; 与关系强度相关的工作关系设计, 如督导关系、领导力发展项目	员工关系认同, 身份认定	Methot et al., 2018

名称	理论基础	内涵	具体实践	作用机理/效果	学者
关系导向工作设计	关系理论	指用于塑造员工与其他人员之间联系和互动的工作结构特征	提供员工之间相互联系和交流的机会以及工作结构设计, 包括频率、持久性、物理临近性、深度以及广度。	亲社会动机; 帮助行为; 社会价值; 服务动机; 同理心; 客户情感承诺	Grant, 2007
关系化工作情境设计	关系理论	旨在引导和促进组织成员建立双向的联系的管理实践设计	基于双向关系的组织结构设计基于双向关系的任务结构设计基于双向关系的奖酬结构设计	关系认同等	Brickson, 2000
合作型人力资源管理	社会资本理论	致力于员工合作关系建立和维持的人力资源管理系统	提高合作能力实践激发合作动机实践提供合作机会实践	通过提升合作能力、合作动机和合作参与机会提高合作绩效	刘善仕等, 2016
高管的社会关系网络人力资源管理	社会资本理论	帮助高管人员拓展外部社会关系网络的人力资源管理实践	提供与关键客户建立个人联系的资金培训和发展个人关系技能评估与关键利益相关者建立联系的能力与关键利益相关者建立联系提供激励	建立外部社会网络关系	Collins & Clark, 2003
关系型高绩效工作系统	关系型协调理论	组织正式的人力资源管理制度用于建立和促进工作角色之间的互惠关系	基于关系能力的雇佣和培训跨角色的绩效评价和奖励跨角色的冲突解决方法关系型工作设计	关系型生产; 关系型领导; 关系型协作沟通质量; 关系质量; 任务绩效; 护理质量	Gittell & Douglass, 2012
基于网络调整的人力资源管理实践	社会网络理论身份认同理论	用于调整人力资本社会网络构成(人员主体); 内容(关系性质)及结构的人力资源管理实践	促进网络同质性或异质性的招聘和选拔实践与网络密度正相关的开放的工作场所设计; 基于团队的薪酬; 团队培训实践; 与关系强度相关的工作关系设计, 如督导关系、领导力发展项目	员工关系认同, 身份认定	Methot et al., 2018

比较内容	人力资本视角下的HRM	关系视角下的HRM
管理对象	人力资本	关系(结构; 内容; 关系主体)
管理基础	工作任务/岗位	角色关系
管理逻辑	理性计算	理性逻辑/情感逻辑
管理目标	交易成本降低人力资本积累	有效地协作社会资本的组织化
组织类型	科层组织	关系型组织关系型科层组织
管理策略	制度权威层级控制	关系制度化/文化/价值观等 (如关系型工作设计)
典型实践	严格的招聘基于绩效的奖酬基于岗位需求的培训	基于关系能力的招聘跨角色绩效评估和奖励关系导向工作设计
典型研究	Lepak & Snell, 1999	Gittell & Douglass, 2012; Grant, 2007

比较内容	人力资本视角下的HRM	关系视角下的HRM
管理对象	人力资本	关系(结构; 内容; 关系主体)
管理基础	工作任务/岗位	角色关系
管理逻辑	理性计算	理性逻辑/情感逻辑
管理目标	交易成本降低人力资本积累	有效地协作社会资本的组织化
组织类型	科层组织	关系型组织关系型科层组织
管理策略	制度权威层级控制	关系制度化/文化/价值观等 (如关系型工作设计)
典型实践	严格的招聘基于绩效的奖酬基于岗位需求的培训	基于关系能力的招聘跨角色绩效评估和奖励关系导向工作设计
典型研究	Lepak & Snell, 1999	Gittell & Douglass, 2012; Grant, 2007

实践类型		具体实践	来源
结构化实践	传统人力资源管理实践	跨功能工作团队选拔跨功能冲突解决机制跨功能的绩效评价跨功能的奖酬系统跨功能会议跨功能角色岗位设置支持专业语言的发展降低人员流动提高各主体目标一致性	Gittell, 2010 Caldwell et al., 2017
非结构化实践	关系型实践	非正式聚会, 公司庆祝活动, 以及鼓励非正式社会交往的文化规范心理安全空间成员间反馈教练及角色模拟	Gittell, 2001 Gittell, 2016 Fu, 2015
	组织流程	区分目标和角色流程地图结构化问题解决机制等	Gittell, 2016
	其他	工作惯例、团队会议、边界跨越者	Gittell, 2002