Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
THE DEVELOPMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCE PRACTITIONER COMPETENCY MODEL PERCEIVED BY MALAYSIAN HUMAN
RESOURCE PRACTITIONERS AND CONSULTANTS
ABDUL HAMID BIN ABDULLAH
A Thesis Submitted to the School of Management, Asia e University in Fulfilment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Business Administration
November 2010
Abstract
The development of HR competency models/frameworks is an area that has gained a
great deal of interest over the years. Most of the notable HR competency models are
developed in the US and Europe. HR competency models can assist HR Practitioners
to observe their tasks and work dimensions, the competencies they are expected to
acquire, and hence profess them. The aim of the study was to develop an empirically
substantiated HR Practitioner Competency Model. The HR Practitioner Competency
Model with significant competencies was developed through the administration of a
self developed survey questionnaire and the target respondents were the HR
practitioners and HR consultants in Malaysia. The study undertaken is an
extrapolation of the notable studies carried out primarily by Brewster et al. (2000),
Brockbank and Ulrich (2003), and Ulrich et al. (2008). The competency domains in
the generic/behavioural competency category, business competency category, and
the technical HR competency category were analysed using Exploratory factor
analysis (EFA), Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and Structural equation
modeling (SEM). Altogether 12 competency domains and 103 items were analysed.
The competency categories significant in the study were the generic/behavioural
competency category and the technical HR competency category. The business
competency category was not significant in the study. The competency domains
significant in the HR Practitioner Competency Model were: relationship building and
process drivers; personal credibility and attributes; resourcing and talent
management; and employee relations and compliance. Altogether 14 competency
factors were significant in the study and these include process management,
flexibility, information seeking, strong initiative, pride at work, pro-activeness,
ii
iii
ability to change, leadership, organisation development, career planning, succession
planning, human performance improvement, discipline, and occupational safety and
health. The empirically tested HR Practitioner Competency Model was derived in a
local Malaysian cultural setting and it will benefit the HR practitioners, HR
consultants, HR communities of practice, the academia, organisations, and other
related individuals.
Declaration
I hereby declare that the thesis is submitted in fulfilment of the PhD degree is my own work and that all contributions from any other persons or sources are properly and duly cited. I further declare that the material has not been submitted either in whole or in part, for a degree at this or any other university. In making this declaration, I understand and acknowledge any breaches in this declaration constitute academic misconduct, which may result in my expulsion from the programme and/or exclusion from the award of the degree.
Name: Abdul Hamid bin Abdullah
Signature of Candidate: Date: 8 November 2010
v�
Copyright by Abdul Hamid bin Abdullah and Asia e University
vi�
Acknowledgements
The journey undertaken by the researcher has been an arduous and a challenging
one. The researcher would like to thank his Supervisor, Associate Prof. Dr. Raja
Mohamed Fauzi bin Raja Musa for his guidance, facilitation, and continuous
intellectual stimulation that enabled the completion of this thesis.
The encouragement given by his spouse, Ms. Rauna Khunisa Abdul Jabbar is
appreciated. This thesis, too, is dedicated to his late parents and in particular to his
late father who is his role model. The author would like to thank Prof. Dr. Juhary Hj.
Ali, the former Dean of the School of Management and the Senior Officials of the
Asia e University for rendering all the support.
This thesis would not have been completed without the support given his team in
EMC Management Centre. For this, he would like to thank Mr. Ramu Thangaraju
and Mr. Ravindran Thangaraju who stood with him at all times. The researcher, too,
would like to thank Ms. Nurlizawati, Mr. Mohd. Indera, and others who have
provided the needful support.
To his children, Muhamad Faris and Noor Farizah, the researcher hopes this thesis
serves as an inspiration to strive hard to excel in life.
vii�
viii�
To all the respondents who participated in the survey, the researcher would like to
express a big “thank you.” This thesis, which the researcher opines has always been
somewhat missing in HRM in Malaysia is truly a gift to the Malaysian HR
Community of Practice.
ix
�
Table of Contents
AbstractSignature Approval Page Declaration PageCopyright Page Acknowledgements Table of ContentsList of TablesList of FiguresList of Abbreviations
Page
iiivvviviiix
xiiixivxvi
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.11.21.31.41.51.61.71.8
BackgroundStatement of Research Problem Aim of the Research Research Objectives Research Questions Research Hypotheses Significance of Research Scope / Limitations of Research
114161617181923
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.12.22.32.42.52.62.72.82.9
BackgroundHuman Resource Models Competencies and its Evolution Competency Models and Work Place Competencies Human Resource and Human Capital Management Competency Based Human Resource Models Global HR Practitioner Models General ObservationConclusion
27304248566178
101108
CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.13.23.3
3.43.5
3.63.73.8
BackgroundConceptual/ Theoretical Framework Research Framework 3.3.1 HypothesesResearch Procedures Research Tools 3.5.1 Research Instrument and Questionnaire Design 3.5.2 Scaling Techniques Sampling Procedures and Population Data Collection ProceduresProfile of Respondents
111112119122125128128131131138140
x
�
3.9 Statistical Testing and Data Analysis Procedures3.9.1 Data screening3.9.2 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Latent Variables 3.9.3 Second (2nd) Order Analysis of the Latent Constructs 3.9.4 Structural Examination of Hypothesised, Generated, First (1st) Re-specified, and Final Re-specified Model 3.9.5 The Advantage of Using Structural Equation Modeling 3.9.6 Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) of Generated (Specified) Model 3.9.7 First (1st) and Final Re-specified Models 3.9.8 Direct and Indirect Effects of Hypothesis Testing 3.9.9 Goodness to the Model Fit 3.9.10 Composite Reliability 3.9.11 Discriminant Validity Using Average Variance Extracted (AVE)3.9.12 Multicollinearity
141145
148151
152
153
157163164166172
173173
CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
4.14.24.3
4.4
IntroductionProfiles of RespondentsResults of Preliminary Testing 4.3.1 Multivariate Outliers4.3.2 Normality Test 4.3.3 Reliability of Measurements Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Latent Variables 4.4.1 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of HR Competency Model Development 4.4.2 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Generic/ Behavioural Competency Category 4.4.2.1 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Leadership Domain 4.4.2.2 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Building Work Relationship Domain 4.4.2.3 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Personal Credibility and Attributes Domain 4.4.2.4 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Self - Development Domain 4.4.3 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Business Competency Category 4.4.3.1 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Entrepreneurial and Business Acumen Domain 4.4.3.2 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Strategic Orientation Domain 4.4.3.3 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Customer Orientation Domain
175176186186187192196
197
199
199
200
201
202
203
203
204
205
xi
�
4.5
4.64.74.8
4.94.10
4.11
4.4.3.4 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Essential Performance Enablers Domain 4.4.4 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Technical HR Competency Category 4.4.4.1 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Resourcing and Talent Management Domain 4.4.4.2 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Learning and Development Domain 4.4.4.3 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Rewards and Performance Management Domain 4.4.4.4 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Employee Relations and Compliance Domain Second (2nd ) Order Analysis of Latent Constructs4.5.1 Generic/Behavioural Competency Category 4.5.2 Business Competency Category 4.5.3 Technical HR Competency CategoryMeasurement Model of Exogenous Variables The Generated Model The First (1st) Re-specified Model 4.8.1 General Discussion on First (1st) Re-specified Model 4.8.1.1 Latent Construct of Generic /Behavioural Competency Category 4.8.1.2 Latent Construct of Business Competency Category 4.8.1.3 Latent Construct of the Technical HR Competency Category 4.8.1.4 Renaming of the Competency Domain “Building Work Relationship” to
“Relationship Building and Process Drivers” Goodness-of-Fit Indices of the ModelStandardised Regression Weights of the First (1st)Re-specified Model4.10.1 Factor Loadings 4.10.1.1 General Discussion on Standardised Regression Weights 4.10.2 Correlation Among Variables 4.10.3 Squared Multiple Correlation (SMC) of Endogenous Variables 4.10.3.1 General Discussion on Squared Multiple Correlation (SMC)Summary of Hypotheses Testing and Research Objectives 4.11.1 General Discussion on Research Objectives and Hypothesis Testing Results 4.11.2 Direct Effect of Hypothesis Testing4.11.3 Indirect Effect of Hypothesis Testing 4.11.3.1 Research Findings of Indirect Effect on the Structural Model 4.11.3.2 General Discussion on the Exogenous and Endogenous Variables
206
207
207
208
209
210212212213215216218222224
224
228
233
239241
243243
244259
260
262264
267271275
275
277
xii
�
4.12
4.13
4.11.4 Structural Model of Hypothesis TestingInterpretation of the First (1st) Re-specified Model 4.12.1 Research Objectives4.12.2 Research Questions 4.12.2.1 Research Question 1 4.12.2.2 Research Question 2 4.12.2.3 Research Question 3 Conclusion
281283283290290292294295
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.15.2
5.3
5.45.5
5.65.7
5.85.95.10
IntroductionGeneral Observations of the Study5.2.1 Generic/ Behavioural Competency Category 5.2.2 Business Competency Category 5.2.3 Technical HR Competency CategoryResearch Findings on HR Practitioner Competency Model Development Non Significance of the Business Competency CategorySignificance of the Competency Factors in the Study and their Relationship Status of HRM in MalaysiaContributions of the Study5.7.1 Contributions to the Knowledge of HRM5.7.2 Contributions to the Improvement of Practical Perspectives of HRMLimitations of the Study Suggestions for Further ResearchConcluding Remarks
297297298303306
312315
316317318318
320321322324
REFERENCES 326
APPENDIXES Appendix 1 Results of Pilot Test 355Appendix 2 Survey: A Study of Human Resource Practitioner
Competencies in Malaysia 363Appendix 3 Survey: A Study of Human Resource Practitioner
Competencies in Malaysia 370Appendix 4 Online Survey for HR Consultant 378Appendix 5 Online Survey for HR Practitioner 381Appendix 6 Profile of Respondents 384Appendix 7 Structural Equation Modeling Using AMOS Package 400
xiii
�
List of Tables
Table Page
1 HRM seen from the Perspective of Different Models 31 2 Conceptual / Theoretical Framework of Study 113 3 Alignment of the Relationship of Various Research Parameters
of the Study
123 4 Response Rate of Questionnaires of HR Practitioners and HR
Consultants
139 5 Goodness-of-Fit (GOF) Criteria and Acceptable Fit
Interpretation
171 6 Summary of Profile of Respondents (N=380) 178 7 Profile of HR Practitioners and HR Consultants 182 8 Profile of Respondents Based on Age Categories 184 9 Profile of Respondents Based on Education Level 186 10 Identification of Non Normal Items 189 11 Final Transformation of Non Normal Items 191 12 Reliability of Generic/ Behavioural Competency Measurement
( � = 0.930 )
192 13 Reliability of Technical HR Competency Measurement ( � =
0.888 )
193 14 Reliability of Business Competency Measurement ( � = 0.933 ) 194 15 Reliability of HR Practitioner Competency Model Development
Measurement (� = 0.778)
195 16 Model Fit Statistics of Exogenous Constructs 218 17 Summary of the Goodness-of-Fit to the Structural Model 242 18 Results of Standardised Regression Weights of the 1st Re-
specified Model
243 19 Correlation Among Exogenous Variables 260 20 Squared Multiple Correlation (SMC) Among Endogenous
Variables
261 21 Summary of Research Objectives and Hypotheses Testing 266
xiv
�
List of Figures
Figure Page
1 A Contingency Model for HRM Strategies 342 The Harvard Framework for Human Resource Management 363 Model of Strategic Change and Human Resource Management 374 The Michigan Model of HRM 385 The Human Resource Cycle of the Michigan Model 406 American Society for Training and Development /Department
of Labour Model of “generic” Competencies 52
7 Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills Model of “generic” Competencies
53
8 United Nations Competency Model 549 The United States Model of Competencies 5410 Integration of Competencies into Human Resource
Management 7111 Competency Model of HR Account Manager 7312 Major Categories of HR Competencies 7413 Evolution of HR Competency Models from 1987 to 2002 7614 Human Resource Competency Model 7915 Workplace Learning Performance Competencies that are
Important for Taiwan HR Practitioners 8516 Competency Model for HR Professional 8617 Human Resource Wheel 8718 Functions of HR Management 8819 2004 ASTD Competency ModelTM 9020 Driving Business Performance 9121a Competency Framework for Level 1 9821b Competency Framework for Level 2 9921c Competency Framework for Level 3 9922 Conceptual/Theoretical Framework of Study 11423 Research Framework of the Study 12124 Research Procedures of Study 12625 Structural Equation Modeling Procedures 16026 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of HR Practitioner Competency
Model Development 198
27 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Leadership Domain 20028 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Building Work Relationship
Domain 201
29 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Personal Credibility and Attributes Domain
202
30 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Self - Development Domain 20331 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Entrepreneurial and Business
Acumen Domain 204
32 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Strategic Orientation Domain 20533 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Customer Orientation Domain 20634 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Essential Performance
Enablers Domain 207
xv
�
35 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Resourcing and Talent Management Domain
208
36 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Learning and Development Domain
209
37 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Rewards and Performance Management Domain
210
38 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Employee Relations and Compliance Domain
211
39 Second (2nd) Order Analysis of the Generic/Behavioural Competency Category 213
40 Second (2nd) Order Analysis of the Business Competency Category
214
41 Second (2nd) Order Analysis of the Technical HR Competency Category
216
42 Measurement Model of Exogenous Variables 21743 Hypothesised Model of HR Practitioner Competency Model 22044 Generated Model of HR Practitioner Competency Model 22145 First (1st) Re-specified Model of HR Practitioner Competency
Model223
46 Final Re-specified Model of HR Practitioner Competency Model
298
47 HR Practitioner Competency Model with the Significant Competencies 319
xvi
�
List of Abbreviations
AFTA Asian Free Trade Agreement AGFI Adjusted Goodness-Fit-Index AHRI Australian Human Resources Institute AIC Akaike’s Information Criterion AMOS Analysis of Moment Structures AOEs Areas of expertiseASTD American Society for Training and Development AVE Average Variance Extracted CAIC Consistent Akaike’s Information Criterion CEOCFA
Chief Executive OfficerConfirmatory Factor Analysis
CFI Comparative Fit Index CIPDCMINCMIN/dfdf
Chartered Institute of Personnel Development Chi SquareNormed Chi Square Degree of Freedom
DOLDV
Department of Labour Dependent variable
ECVI Expected Cross – Validation Index EFA Exploratory Factor AnalysisEOSC Employment Occupational Standards Council EPC Expected Parameter Change EQS Equivalent Structural Modeling FMM Federation of Malaysian Manufacturers GDP Gross Domestic Product GFI Goodness-of-fit indexGLM General Linear ModelGOF Goodness-of-FitHCM Human Capital Management HR Human Resource HRBOK Human Resource Body of Knowledge HRCI Human Resource Certification Institute HRCS Human Resource Competence Study HRD Human Resource Development HRDCHRM
Human Resources Development Council Human Resource Management
IFI Incremental Index of Fit IPMA International Public Management Association IV Independent variableKSAKPIMI
Knowledge, Skills, and Attitudes Key Performance Index Modification Index
MLI Maximum Likelihood Indicator MNCs Multinational Corporations NAPA National Academy of Public Administration NCS National Competency StandardNCVER National Centre for Vocational Education Research
xvii
�
NCVQ National Council for Vocational Qualification NFI Normed Fit Index NNFI Non- Normed Fit Index NOSS National Occupational Skills Standard NCSU North Carolina State UniversityNSTF National Skills Task Force OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development PHR Professional in Human Resource PNFI Parsimonius Normed Fit Index PwCRCMP
PricewaterHouseCoopers Royal Canadian Mounted Police
RMSEA Root Mean Square Error of Approximation RMSR Root Mean Square Residual SCANS Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills of United
StatesSEM Structural Equation Modeling SHRM Society for Human Resource Management SMC Squared Multiple Correlation SME Small and Medium Enterprise SMIs Small and Medium Scale Industries SPHR Senior Professional in Human Resource SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences SRMR Standardised Root Mean Residual TLI Tucker-Lewis Index VE Variance Extracted WFPMA World Federation of Personnel Management Associations WLP Workplace Learning and Performance
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
The world of “work and organisation” is becoming even more demanding and
turbulent today (Burke and Cooper, 2004). The accelerating rate of change in world
economic conditions is exerting enormous pressure on businesses and industries to
become more competitive (Dubois, 1998). Day by day, new strategic planning tools,
concepts and approaches are being developed to make organisations more efficient
and effective.
World wide socio-economic developments such as globalisation, increasing speed
towards a service economy, shorter product life cycles, changes in workforce
demographics, focus on customer loyalty, the increasing war on talent, and
emphasis on financial performance challenges the human resource (HR) function
in its role for creating added value to the organisation (Brockbank et al., 2002;
and Bucknall and Ohtaki, 2005).
Rapid economic globalisation insists on capability to operate in different
cultural settings. Countries such as India and the Republic of China where the
foreign direct investment was low in the past are steadily growing recipients of
this investment. It is necessary to acknowledge the growing complexity of
inter- and intra-organisations and multiple cultures in a globalising business
context (Ker�ien� and Savaneviciene, 2005).
1
The importance of the role of human resource management (HRM) in
organisations today is far greater compared to that in the past. Traditionally, the
function of HRM in the past was operational and mainly focused on
administrative tasks, developing and managing recruitment, carrying out
performance appraisal, paying compensation and benefits to the employees, and
handling staff welfare. Generally these activities are operational and they are not
related to the organisational strategy (Noe et al., 2000).
Today, the function of HRM is more strategic as the human resource (HR) plans and
strategies are developed on a long term basis, considering likely changes in the
society, industrial relations systems, economic conditions, legislation, global, and
technological issues as well as new directions in business operations (Compton, 2009).
Ulrich (1997) lists eight major challenges currently facing organisations and these
include globalisation, responsiveness to customers; increasing revenue and
decreasing cost; building organisational capability; change and transformation;
implementing technology; attracting and developing human capital; and ensuring
fundamental; and long lasting change. As a result of these, competition among
organisations has significantly increased. Most organisations can copy technology,
manufacturing processes, products, and strategy. However, the HRM practices and its
organisation are difficult to copy, thereby representing a unique competitive
advantage (Pfeffer, 1994, 1998). To be successful in the future, organisations will
have to build organisational capability. Human resource professionals and HRM
practices will be required to create value by increasing organisational competitiveness
(Ferris et al., 1999).
2
How do we create organisations that add value to the investors, customers, and
employees? Human resource management is increasingly becoming an important
consideration in organisations. This is especially true in a competitive
environment where the management realises that there are certain limitations to
the inputs of technology, however advanced it may be. Although sophisticated
technology is available to organisations that can afford it, possessing this
technology does not guarantee success. Ultimately it is the human capital in the
organisation and their collective efforts that are going to make the difference
between success or failure of the business.
The organisations today cannot ignore the fact that their employees come from
a very diverse background. Today, besides ethnicity, culture, gender, religion,
customs and education, there are some other very important considerations such as
individual needs, motivation and work preferences that workers have and bring with
them into an organisation. Managing the modern workforce requires an approach in
which the manager would need to formulate new suitable and compatible solutions
that may be complex, but are however competitive and sustainable and could
adequately meet the needs of employees in the organisation.
Performance management practices such as selective hiring, extensive training,
sharing of information, etc. lead to performance results. Human resource
management practices influence employee skills through the acquisition and
development of human capital (Wright et al., 1994). Effective recruitment and
selection practices can provide the organisation with highly qualified individuals.
Training and development opportunities contribute to human capital development.
3
Human resource management practices can also influence levels of motivation through
the use of performance appraisals, pay-for-performance incentives, etc. (Brown et al.,
2003). Human resource management practices, too, can also influence the design
of work so that highly motivated and skilled employees can use what they
know in performing their jobs (Wright and Boswell, 2002).
The concept of HRM continues to be debated in the academic literature. The
concept was initially coined in the United States of America (USA) in 1960s
and 1970s and since then, it has been adapted increasingly around the world
(Brewster, 1995). In the struggle to think of new approaches to HRM, many
private businesses and government entities are moving towards competencies
and competency-based systems as the answer to meeting organisational needs.
Competencies can be used to facilitate change in human resource. There is
recognition that the role of HRM is moving from an emphasis on rules to
focus on results and deliverables. To help facilitate the paradigm shift, both
public and private organisations recognise the importance of identifying new
competencies (NAPA, 1996).
A great deal has been written on the evolving role of human resource and the
shift from a more transactional to strategic, or transformational role by authors
including Boudreau and Ramstead (2007), Compton (2009), Flamholtz (2005),
Phillips (2005), Nankervis et al.(1999), and Ulrich and Brockbank (2005). The
authors, too, compared the traditional role of human resource with an emerging
need for a more strategic function. Traditionally, the role of human resource has
included a fair percentage of administration work, which in many organisations
4
has now been outsourced, substituted for advanced information technology
programmes, or in some way reorganised within the overall structure of human
resource.
According to Ulrich and Brockbank (2005), it was rather rare and unusual for HR to
get involve with external customers twenty years ago. HR professionals concentrated
on staffing, compensation, training, policies, and other programmes that primarily
focus on employees and kept companies legally compliant. In the last decade, the
concentration was on becoming business partner and aligning the work with business
strategies. HR professionals have been coached to spend time with general managers
and their counterparts in sales, marketing, and manufacturing to ensure that HR work
helps to deliver business results. Human resource must value the finance and sales
perspective and without this HR is redundant (Ulrich and Brockbank, 2005).
The strategic role of HR leaders in their organisations has changed considerably,
especially during the past five years. Senior managers continue to struggle with how to
redesign and expand the role of HR function and the system of workforce management
practices to enhance the value (Becker and Huselid, 2006). Ulrich et al. (2009) asserts
that as business challenges become more complex, HRM must transform to contribute
to the changing demands. This include the organisation of HR departments, and the
design of the HR practices in relation to business requirements.
Boselie and Paauwe (2005) asserts that in the future, human resource manager is
expected to be an entrepreneur who is willing to take risks, is customer oriented, has
business knowledge and specific HR knowledge, is responsible and accountable for
5
human resource results, is open minded, and knows how to motivate and persuade
people, and implement and facilitate change.
Globalisation of individual companies and capital markets over the past two decades
has changed the business landscape. Many US organisations have expanded operations
overseas. To respond to global competition, organisations are adopting new
technologies to provide better, lower-cost solutions for their customers and
competitors. At the same time, global capital markets are putting pressure on firms to
innovate and reduce costs (SHRM, 2008).
With global economic uncertainty, technological change, customer demands,
demographic transitions, and industry convergences, HR issues are more
important to leaders now than ever before (Brockbank and Ulrich, 2003). Global
competition has become so intense that HRM professionals are tasked by their
organisations to optimise the skills, talents, and creativity of every employee.
Failure to do so will probably mean that the organisation will be unable to
compete in the globally interconnected world (Junaidah, 2007).
In Asia and as in most parts of the world, HR management in the 1970s was known as
personnel management. The themes then were employee welfare and participation. In
1980s, the emphasis was on training, development and empowerment; in 1990s, the
emphasis was on talent management and engagement. But in the new millennium, the
emphasis is on talent war and how to win it (Chua, 2009).
6
Malaysia is no exception to these challenges. HRM is presently a rapidly growing
discipline in Malaysia. Also aided by researchers and practitioners, the area of
training and development itself has grown significantly in recent years in Malaysia.
The term “human resource development” or even “human capital development” is
increasingly being used to replace training and development. The amount of
development in this area will benefit the development of people at work which
will sharpen the competitive edge of participating organisations (Yong, 2003).
This could be so because of the importance given to talent management and
retention in organisations today.
Ulrich (1997) in his book, Human Resource Champions challenged HR to shed
its old myths, adapt new competencies, redefine its roles to focus on results, and
evolve into a true profession that makes a difference for the organisations. The
complex challenges faced by organisations and the strategic thinking on
professionalism of human resource over the past decade has somewhat led to
the growing momentum on the development of HR competency models. HR
competency models can assist in refocusing and revitalising the HR profession
and the workforce.
To be effective in organisations, HR practitioners have to change and transform
themselves as business partners (Ulrich, 1997). As business partners, the HR
practitioners must practice four roles as a strategic partner, as a change agent, as
an administrative expert, and as an employee champion. Each role furthers the
goals of both the business and its employees.
7
Over the past thirty years, the conceptualisation of global strategies by
multinational corporations have developed dramatically and the implication of
these global strategic models for international human resource processes and
practices has been no less dramatic (Engle et al., 2001).
Alike any other discipline, to ensure value adding occurs, it is important to have the
right person for the right job. Among some of the questions that are often asked are the
HR’s contribution to business performance; roles of HR in the future; and the
knowledge, skills, and competencies that should be acquired by the HR practitioners?
Unlike in the past, Malaysian organisations today are beginning to place greater
emphasis on strategy than on operations in HRM. The main task of HR
practitioners is no longer to deal with routine tasks but to ensure they provide
robust systems, processes, and services to the employees. Although, there is an
increasing shift towards globalisation, and hence arguably towards convergence,
in a global project as this is, it is still essential to consider Malaysian variation
in the definition of HR competencies and professional standards (Yong, 2003).
Malaysian HR practices, systems, and employment laws and regulations are largely
influenced by the British colonisation experience of the nineteenth century. It is
commonly viewed that HR practices of Malaysia are the artifacts derived from an
integration of western and indigenous HR practices. Hirano (1991) categorises
Malaysian HR practices into two mainstreams, namely British oriented values
and ethnic oriented values (e.g., Malay, Chinese, and Indian values). It is found
8
that companies are managed either in more of the British or the indigenous
way (Hirano, 1991).
The Former Prime Minister of Malaysia, Rt. Hon. Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamed,
unveiled Vision 2020, a vision that will see Malaysia becoming a fully
developed country by the year 2020 (Ahmad, 1993). Since Vision 2020 was
introduced, the concern in particular for human resource development has been
expressed in enlarging the contribution of both public and private sector
involvement in education and training, relaxing the inflow of foreign labour and
encouraging Malaysians to pursue continuing education to meet the challenges
of modernisation (Yong, 2003).
At the corporate level, it is observed that a subtle paradigm shift is underway
(Yong, 2003). Organisations are upgrading their employees with technological
support principally in information technology to enhance productivity, and giving
much more emphasis to the human side of the enterprises. A manifestation of
this is the upgrading of the personnel function to the status of a full-fledged
human resource department looking after not just maintenance issues of
recruitment, wages and salary administration, and disciplinary issues, but
increasingly on development issues and challenges of enhancing human capital
development. Also, activities that contribute a lesser value are being outsourced
(Yong, 2003).
The role of human resource has changed with the globalisation of business.
Malaysian organisations are no exception, as the Government has encouraged
9
Malaysian organisations to compete globally with the introduction of the Asian
Free Trade Agreement (AFTA). In such a competitive environment, the human
resource function can no longer afford to be like the old personnel department
whose function was always associated with “hiring and firing” people. Rather, it
must fulfill a broader and more strategic role in driving towards the business
direction (Junaidah, 2007).
Since the late 1980s, Malaysian managers have increasingly used the term HRM
in place of the older genus, personnel management. It was also in 1990 that the
Labour Ministry of Malaysia then discarded the old name in favour of Human
Resources Ministry (Maimunah, 1997). Going a step further, today, a number of
organisations, too, have even renamed their human resource departments as
human capital departments and examples of those organisations include: F&N Coca-
Cola (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd., Great Eastern Life Assurance (Malaysia) Berhad, KPJ
Healthcare Berhad, Kulim (Malaysia) Berhad, Malayan Banking Berhad, Sapura
Holdings Sdn. Bhd., and Telekom Malaysia Berhad.
To ensure that the human resource profession remains relevant and adaptable to
changing times and needs, it must reorient and reinvent itself. This is important
as the importance of HR in supporting the business enterprise is becoming
increasingly recognised by successful organisations such as ExxonMobil, General
Electric, Intel Corporation, Petroliam Nasional Berhad (PETRONAS), Procter &
Gamble, Seagate Technology, Royal Dutch Shell plc, and Western Digital. The
“human element” is often viewed as the most important source of sustaining
the future and propelling organisations forward. For HR practitioners, it is no
10
longer sufficient to be technically competent. There must be value-added
contributions to the strategic objectives and goals of the organisation-mission driven,
market driven, flexible, customer focused, and strategic (Mondy, 2008).
According to Bernthall et al. (2004), competencies are the clusters of skills,
knowledge, abilities, and behaviours required for job success. Palan (2003) asserts that
the study of competencies is important for the organisations, employers, and
performance. Organisations need competent people to achieve results efficiently and
effectively. Organisations depend upon competent people to generate returns on
investment on the use of physical and technological resources.
According to Palan (2003), competencies are enablers. A competent person is able to
deliver desired results that meet organisational standards on quality, quantity, and
costs. Boyatzis (1982) defines effective performance of a job as “the attainment of
specific results (outcomes) required by the job through specific actions while being
consistent with policies, procedures, and conditions of the organisational
environment.” Boyatzis’s model for effective performance includes three elements:
individual’s competencies; functions and demands of the job; and organisational
environment.
Spencer and Spencer (1993) categorises competencies into two main categories:
threshold and differentiating competencies. Threshold competencies are “those
essential characteristics that everyone must acquire to be minimally effective, but that
do not distinguish superior from average performers.” Differentiating competencies
are “those factors that distinguish from average performers.”
11
According to Spencer and Spencer (1993), HRM adds value when it assists individuals
and organisations to perform better than their present level of performance. Ulrich et
al. (2008) asserts that HR professionals who possess the right HR competencies will
be able to support their organisations to achieve the desired organisational goals and
objectives.
Mc Daniel et al. (1998) suggests that competency models /frameworks can be used for
the following reasons: developing individual development plans; developing training
curriculum; supporting in staffing decisions such as hiring, transfers, and promotions;
carrying out succession planning; conducting performance appraisals; and developing
job descriptions.
Competency frameworks basically comprise several competencies that are deemed
important for a particular job/occupation, or a task. Each competency is mapped with
its corresponding capability (mastery) levels of behavioural indicators. Individuals can
be profiled against the capability (mastery) levels and the acquisition level of the
particular competency can be established. Both positive and/or negative gaps of the
individuals can be ascertained. According to Palan (2003), competency levels (i.e.
capability levels) in a competency framework can be described using several formats,
and one of the commonly used formats describe the levels as: novice, learner,
proficient, professional, and an expert. A competency framework is extremely useful
in gauging the acquisition of the competency of an individual.
A competency framework can be developed for the HR practitioners using the HR
competencies that are significant in the HR Practitioner Competency Model. The
12
established HR Practitioner Competency Model sets out the competency categories
with their corresponding competency domains and competency factors.
The development of an Human Resource (HR) Practitioner Competency Model
can to an extent assist the HR practitioners to observe their new tasks and
work dimensions and the competencies they are expected to acquire, and hence
profess them. This, too, will support in the redefinition of the function of
human resource and the expectations of it. The model, too, will support in
helping individuals and organisations to improve their performance and deliver
business results.
The competency framework developed from the HR Practitioner Competency Model
established in the study will be useful for the HR practitioners in profiling the
acquisition of the actual competencies, desired capability levels, and the positive and
negative gaps of the HR practitioners. The competency framework will be useful for
developing individual development plans; in hiring and selection of people;
developing training programmes; developing career and succession plans; conducting
performance appraisals; and designing the appropriate compensation plans.
New models are necessary because the business world is changing at an
unprecedented rate. Since HR activities directly impact on an organisation’s
ability to compete, competency models need to be continually researched and
updated.
13
1.2 Statement of Research Problem
The development of an HR Practitioner Competency Model is an area of interest
to practitioners, researchers, academicians, employers, and consultants in HRM
today. Studies carried out by Brewster et al. (2000), Budhwar and Debrah (2001),
Hsu and Seat (2000), Brockbank and Ulrich (2003), Junaidah (2007), Choi and Wan
Khairuzzaman (2008), Ulrich et al. (2008), show the importance of carrying out
studies on HR competencies. Boxall and Dowling (1990), Khatri (1999), Nankervis et
al. (1999), and Budhwar and Debrah (2001) assert that HR competency
models/frameworks developed in the west may not be suitable in the east due to the
different culture and diversity.
In Malaysia, some of the larger organisations in particular the multinational
corporations (MNCs) including ExxonMobil Malaysia Sdn. Bhd., Intel Electronics
(Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd., Shell Malaysia Ltd., and Unilever (Malaysia) Holdings Sdn.
Bhd. have developed their own human resource practitioner models/frameworks.
In the United Kingdom, the Employment Occupational Standards Organisation
(EOSC) has developed a human resource practitioner competency model for the
industry (EOSC, 1994). Those models/frameworks are useful in hiring staff,
developing the talent, conducting performance appraisal, career planning, succession
planning, etc..
A number of organisations in Malaysia have primarily developed HR competency
frameworks for their own organisations. However, most of those are carried out
through qualitative studies. There appears to be a scarcity of empirical studies carried
in developing competency models/frameworks for the HR practitioners. Consultants
14
including Palan (2003) have developed in particular the competency frameworks
through consultation work specifically for organisations. Others, too, have developed
such frameworks, but most of the documents are not accessible for public use.
Organisations generally use the competency frameworks for their own people and
those are generally not shared with other organisations possibly for confidential
reasons. With the fast pace of change and the changing global and
organisational strategy, such models, too, may need to be reviewed to suit to the
changing dimensions, cultural sensitivity, and changing business priorities.
Most of the HR models that are currently used by HR practitioners in
Malaysia have been adopted from the academic models and these include the
descriptive, analytical, and normative/prescriptive models. These models were
established either in the United States of America or in the United Kingdom.
One competency-based model that is widely accepted globally is that developed
by the University of Michigan (Brockbank and Ulrich, 2003).
What has prompted this research is that currently there is a scarcity of complete
empirically tested HR Practitioner Competency Models available in Malaysia.
Although some attempts have been made by a few of the researchers in this
area, the research carried out does not establish a complete model that HR
practitioners can use in further professionalising the HR profession.
Although some organisations have developed their own HR Practitioner
Competency Models, these may not have been empirically tested in the
Malaysian organisational context and climate. Due to the local diversity and
15
culture, some of the western models may need to be adapted to suit to the
local organisational climate and needs.
Given the above scenario, it is important to study, research, and hence develop
an HR Practitioner Competency Model for the HR and other communities of
practice in Malaysia. This model, too, can be adapted for use globally.
1.3 Aim of the Research
The aim of the research is to develop an empirically substantiated HR
Practitioner Competency Model. The model will be useful for the human
resource community of practice and will significantly contribute to the Human
Resource Body of Knowledge (HRBOK).
1.4 Research Objectives
The main objectives of the research are as follows:
1. To determine the latent variables in the construct of the generic/behavioural
competency category.
2. To determine the latent variables in the construct of the business competency
category.
3. To determine the latent variables in the construct of the technical HR
competency category.
4. To examine the influence of the generic/behavioural competency category on
the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
5. To examine the influence of the business competency category on the HR
Practitioner Competency Model.
16
6. To examine the influence of the technical HR competency category on the HR
Practitioner Competency Model.
7. To determine the interactional effect between the construct of the
generic/behavioural competency category and the HR Practitioner Competency
Model.
8. To determine the interactional effect between the construct of the business
competency category and the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
9. To determine the interactional effect between the construct of the technical
HR competency category and the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
10. To determine the interactional effect between the construct of the generic/
behavioural competency category, the business competency category, and the
technical HR competency category on the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
1.5 Research Questions
The study attempts to answer the following research questions:
� To what extent all the latent variables (competency domains) befit into the
corresponding constructs of the generic/behavioural competency category, the
business competency category, and the technical HR competency category?
� Is the HR Practitioner Competency Model influenced by the constructs of the
generic/behavioural competency category, the business competency category,
and the technical HR functional competency category?
� To what extent the interactional effect of the HR practitioners and the HR
consultants on the constructs of the generic/behavioural competency category,
the business competency category, and the technical HR competency category
influence the HR Practitioner Competency Model?
17
1.6 Research Hypotheses
The research hypotheses of the study are given below:
Hypothesis 1 (H1). The generic/behavioural competency category has a direct and
positive relationship with the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
Hypothesis 2 (H2). The business competency category has a direct and positive
relationship with the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
Hypothesis 3 (H3). The technical HR competency category has a direct and
positive relationship with the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
Hypothesis 4 (H4). HR practitioners and HR consultants have interactional effect
with regards to the constructs of the generic/behavioural competency category and
the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
Hypothesis 5 (H5). HR practitioners and HR consultants have interactional effect
with regards to the constructs of the business competency category and the HR
Practitioner Competency Model.
Hypothesis 6 (H6). HR practitioners and HR consultants have interactional effect
with regards to the constructs of the technical HR competency category and the
HR Practitioner Competency Model.
18
Hypothesis 7 (H7). HR practitioners and HR consultants have interactional effect
with regards to the constructs of the generic/behavioural competency category, the
business competency category, the technical HR competency category, and the HR
Practitioner Competency Model.
1.7 Significance of Research
Human resource management is an important discipline because it supports
organisations to compete through their capabilities and help the individuals to
perform through their abilities. HR professionals can contribute to the success
and failure of organisations. The profession globally today is in transition, with
changing dimensions, challenges, demands, increased opportunities, and
requirements. In the face of the change that is happening, the HR professionals,
too, should view HR professionalism more seriously, seek new systems of
practice, be knowledge savvy, be productivity conscious, and function as
business partners.
One competency-based HR model that is widely accepted by the HR community
of practice is that developed by the Business School of the University of
Michigan (Brockbank and Ulrich, 2003). The Human Resource Competence Study
(HRCS) has been an ongoing research project since the late 1980s. Major
blocks of data were gathered and analysed in 1987, 1992, 1997, and 2002 in the
USA. In 2002, the HRCS – University of Michigan research team and its
associated partners around the globe carried out a major research in four
continents: North America, Latin America, Asia, and Europe. Over 25, 000
respondents contributed to the four rounds of the study. The five competency
19
domains used in the study were: strategic contribution, personal credibility,
human resource delivery, business knowledge, and human resource technology
(Brockbank and Ulrich, 2003).
HRCS released its latest findings of the HR Competency Model in 2007
(Ulrich et al., 2008). Over 10,000 individuals participated in the survey, making
this the largest global study on HR competencies. The study identifies six core
competencies that high performing HR professionals embody. These supersede
the previous five competencies outlined in the 2002 HRCS study – reflecting the
continuing evolution of the HR profession. The six core competency domains of
the 2007 HR Competency Model are: credible activist; culture and change steward;
talent manager/organisation designer; strategy architect; operational executor; and
business ally (Ulrich et al., 2008).
The World Federation of Personnel Management Associations (WFPMA), too,
carried out an important project on human resource competencies and
professional standards globally. The aim of the project was to develop a
worldwide definition of who an “HR practitioner” is and does in terms of a
“global set of core competencies” (Brewster et al., 2000).
Unfortunately in Malaysia, there is no HR Practitioner Competency Model
available as a reference for the HR community of practice. Unlike other
professions which have either the National Occupational Skills Standards
(NOSS) or National Competency Standards (NCS), such documents, too, have not
been developed for HRM in Malaysia.
20
In Malaysia, a number of Consultants have developed HR Practitioner
Competency Frameworks for organisations. However, the frameworks may vary
from one consulting body to another. The approach used to develop the HR
Practitioner Competency Frameworks may not have been empirically tested and
may not be statistically valid.
Although the intended HR Practitioner Competency Model is for use by the
industry (i.e., private sector), it, too, can be used by the HR practitioners from the
public sector. This is because the concepts and principles of HR are the same
except for the policies, set practices, and guidelines.
The HR Practitioner Competency Model can be used by the HR practitioners
to understand the important competencies that are essential to ensure
effectiveness at work. This, too, can possibly support in the development of HR
practitioners and talent management of the organisations. The establishment of
the competency model for the HR practitioners will enable the HR practitioners
to serve in new roles as strategic/business partners, advisors, consultants, and
change agents as well as professional experts in all areas of HRM. The findings
of the research can possibly contribute to the human resource body of
knowledge and the human resource profession, and support in the following:
� Redefine the roles of the human resource in organisations. The research may
possibly highlight the importance of some of the competency categories,
competency domains, and competency factors that were not given emphasis
21
in the past. This may possibly give new dimensions to the changing
roles of the human resource profession.
� Set out the competencies that are needed by the HR practitioners. The
research may possibly set the competency domains and the competency
factors that are important to the HR practitioners in the Malaysian
context.
� Establish the framework for possibly building a performance-oriented
and mission driven HR organisation. The HR Practitioner Competency
Model may possibly assist the HR practitioners to understand the
competency domains and competency factors in the business competency
category that are somewhat important in transforming organisations to a
performance-oriented culture.
� Provide a tool for hiring, developing, maintaining, retaining, and assessing
the performance of the HR practitioners. Competency domains and the
competency factors that are significant and important found in the study
can be used to assist the organisations to possibly manage better talent
management practices including hiring better people, developing, and
retaining them.
� Establish a framework for internal strategic and workforce planning for human
resource. Competency domains and competency factors that are significant
and important in the study can possibly be used to set up better strategic
succession, and career development plans specifically for the human resource
practitioners.
22
� Possibly use in the development of the National Occupational Skills
Standards (NOSS) or National Competency Standards (NCS) for the HR
practitioners. Presently there is no NOSS or NCS framework for the
HR practitioners. The development of the HR Practitioner Competency
Model can possibly be used as a reference.
� Possibly use the HR Practitioner Competency Model in developing
curriculum for human resource academic programmes. This is important
as the references presently used are mainly the traditional academic
models including the descriptive, analytical, and normative/prescriptive
models. These models do not provide specific competency domains or
competency factors as desired of the HR practitioners.
� Possibly use the HR Practitioner Competency Model in developing
training materials for the human resource training. Traditionally, the HR
practitioners were mainly trained specifically in the competency domains
and competency factors that comprise the technical HR competency
category. Studies carried out in particular by ASTD/DOL (1988), Kearns
(2001), NSTF (2000), and SCANS (1991) to some extent illustrate on the
importance of the generic/behavioural competencies at work place. The
intended research will however show if the traditional thinking still
applies or there are other competencies that must now be considered in
training the HR practitioners.
1.8 Scope/ Limitations of Research
The focus of the research was on the development of an HR Practitioner
Competency Model and it will be specifically limited to the establishment of the
23
generic/behavioural competencies, the technical HR competencies, and the business
competencies, which are important for HR practitioners to acquire in the
industry.
Global models that are available are used as references to construct the
research framework and research model. The research was limited to only
constructing the basic model and comprises of three competency categories
namely:
� Generic/behavioural competency category,
� Technical HR competency category, and
� Business competency category.
All the three competency categories comprise of a number of relevant competency
domains and competency factors. The clustering of the competency factors into
appropriate competency domains was done to understand the significance,
importance, and the patterns of the competencies that are important for the HR
practitioners.
The research covers only the competencies that are perceived to be important and
significant for the HR practitioners. The data was gathered using survey
questionnaires. The construct of the survey questionnaires was based on the similar
research carried out globally.
24
The HR Practitioner Competency Model developed in this study was specifically
for the management level of HR practitioners who are working in the private sector,
and it is for this reason, the data was collected from the HR practitioners at the
management level only. Data was gathered from those HR practitioners from the
medium and large scale organisations in Malaysia. This was necessary as those
HR practitioners are generally involved with a broad spectrum of functions
unlike those from the small scale industries who are highly operational in
function. The survey broadly covered both the operational and strategic
perspectives of HRM.
In line with the triangulation concept (Neuman, 2006), the data, too, was collected
from the HR consultants. However, the same survey questionnaire with some
changes to the background information of the respondents was used. This is
necessary to ensure the validity of the researched model. The input given by
both the HR practitioners and the HR consultants was used to develop the HR
Practitioner Competency Model.
The research covered only the following:
� The development of the HR Practitioner Competency Model was based
on only three competency categories: generic/behavioural competencies,
technical HR competencies, and business competencies.
� The model shows the relationship between three different competency
categories and its corresponding competency domains and competency
factors. The competency factors were clustered into appropriate
25
competency domains and the relative importance, and the significance of
these were studied.
� The researched model was developed from the feedback given by the
HR practitioners and the HR consultants using the survey questionnaires
in the form of both “hard” and “soft” copies. The HR practitioners
represented both the manufacturing and services economic sectors in
Malaysia. For convenience, the HR consultants were those chosen from
Kuala Lumpur and the Klang Valley.
� Views of the HR practitioners and the HR consultants were used to
balance the importance of both the operational and strategic
perspectives.
The research did not however cover the following:
� Link the importance of the competencies to the human resource
performance in the organisations. Performance can be due to many factors,
and is not the main concern of this research.
� No interviewing was carried out. The feedback was obtained strictly using
the survey questionnaires in the form of both “hard” and “soft” copies.
The responses of HR practitioners and HR consultants were captured and used
in the process of validating the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
26
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Background
Global competition has become so intense that the human resource management
(HRM) professionals are now being challenged by their organisations to
optimise the skills, talents, and creativity of every employee. Failure to respond
to this will probably mean that the organisation will be unable to compete in
the globally interconnected world (Junaidah, 2007).
According to Boudreau and Ramstead (2007), the resource that lies within
employees and how it is organised irrespective of whether it is called as
“people,” “labour,” “intellectual capital,” “human capital,” “human resources,” or
“talent” is increasingly recognised as critical to strategic success and competitive
advantage.
As more organisations are recognising the importance of human resource and
knowledge management with respect to competitive success, it is reasonable to
expect that HR professionals would be at the forefront of organisational
leadership. Yet, to the contrary, the importance of activities performed by HRM
seems to be losing ground in a majority of organisations, while other functional
areas (for example, information technology, operations, finance, and marketing) gain
greater and greater influence. In most cases, HRM appears to be playing a
secondary role at a time when the ability to harness a firm’s human resource
27
should be more in demand and more valued than ever before (Lengnick-Hall
and Lengnick-Hall, 2003).
Human resource management continues to be criticised for its operational and
bureaucratic focus and its ability to keep up with changes in the environment.
While the market forces have radically altered the workplace, HR policies,
programmes, and practices have been slow to adapt and have even more rarely
taken the lead in helping firms capitalise on unprecendented opportunities.
HRM has typically focused its attention on honing its ability to do the same
kind of things better and better rather than to consider an entirely different
kind of contribution (Lengnick-Hall and Lengnick-Hall, 2003).
Robinson and Robinson (2004) asserts that times have changed and organisations are
now operating in a much more complex, competitive, and challenging environment.
Many of the challenges directly target the human side of business, with
resulting implications for the HR function. The requirements placed upon HR
functions, and for those who work within them, have changed significantly. In
addition to the more traditional requirements, which include recruitment,
compensation, and training, HR departments are expected to operate more
strategically and proactively. By strategic, it means HR has to focus most of its time
and resources to optimise workplace performance in order to maximise the results of
the organisation.
Smilansky (1997) notes that in the United Kingdom, it is evident that
organisations are experiencing large scale changes. The HR management, too, has
28
not escaped these changes. There is a change of focus from a more administrative,
service delivery approach provided by a large number of relatively junior
practitioners to more strategic consultancy service, in which the HR function
provides guidance, and advise to line management.
Graddick-Weir (2005) believes that HR professionals must be competent not only
in their field but also as business professionals. HR professionals are not
entitled to a seat at the strategic table just because everyone should understand
the value contributed by HRM . Human resource instead has to earn the seat by
demonstrating individual competency in delivering the right value. There is a
lot of pressure upon HR professionals today in becoming a “business partner.”
A business partner is “someone who works alongside senior managers, providing
the link between business and organisational strategies, providing support and
challenge to the senior team, and developing credible initiatives in a setting of
ongoing cost reduction” (Kenton and Yarnell, 2005).
Business leaders recognise that managing people is vital to organisational
success, and it is among their top concerns. Top HR officers are respected
these days and successful chief executive officers (CEOs) agree that there is
connection between their success and their talent management processes.
Financial research shows that increasing amounts of market value is driven by
intangibles, including human capital. Researchers from disciplines as diverse as
accounting, consumer research, finance, political science, and operations
management compete to define the latest metrics for human capital within
organisations. Academics and consulting firms provide a barrage of evidence
29
that HR practices correlate with financial performance (Boudreau and Ramstead,
2007).
2.2 Human Resource Models
One way to advance knowledge of what happens in organisations is to create
models of varieties of personnel functions that are based on behaviours, actions,
roles, and relationships (Tyson, 1995). Winter (1966) argues that models typically
follow three design principles. The principle of unification requires that they
describe a distinct phenomenon, or address a particular question. They, too, require
a dynamic structure, so that a model can be articulated, to show how it would
change under different circumstances, or with a changing variable. Models, too,
require some ordering principle, so that the information they contain is internally
related in a consistent way, allowing comparisons with different realities.
Tyson (1995) sets out three models of HRM namely the descriptive, analytical, and
normative models. Each type of model examines human resource at a different
level of analysis. These are given in Table 1 below.
30
Table 1. HRM seen from the Perspective of Different Models (Tyson, 1995)
Principle of unification
Description of HR
work
Analytical of HR
causes
Normative content/
purpose
Dynamic
Structure
How work changes
with different
settings and
contexts
How HR people
are able to perform
a role and why
What HR people
should do
Ordering
principle
1. Level of analysis
Organisation Organisation and
society
Company
management
2 .Activities
described
Work of HR people Reasons for the
work
Contribution of HR
to organisations
3 .Purpose To elucidate what
happens
To discover why
HR work occurs
and how it
interacts
To improve
organisational
performance and
to help
management
Examples Tyson and Fell
(1986)
Ackermann (1986) Armstrong (1992)
The descriptive model is all about how work changes with different settings and
contexts. Studies show that three distinct models have emerged as a result of
clustering of activities based on the three different dimensions in personnel
management that include the levels of analysis, activities, and purpose. These
range from a basic administrative model (termed as “clerk of works”), to a
sophisticated, industrial-relations oriented, systems model (often called “contracts
manager”) and a business oriented, strategically aware function, which designs
the employment relationship (often called the “architect”).
31
Human resource management roles have evolved from the “clerk of works” to change
agent and business partner. Tyson’s (1987) typology provides a good starting point.
Due to the increased fragmentation of the personnel function, he distinguishes three
“weberian” ideal types or models as follows:
� The “clerk of works” model.
This model views personnel management as an administrative support activity
with no involvement in business planning. The authority is vested in line
managers.
� The “contract manager” model.
This is concerned with confronting unions with a system, as part of a
comprehensive policy network. The personnel staff engage in trade union
agreements, in fixing day-to-day issues with the unions, and in responding in a
reactive way to problems.
� The “architect” model.
Personnel staff seek to create and build organisation to a whole. Personnel
contributes to success of business and influences corporate plans with an
integrated system of controls between personnel and line managers.
Although these findings were reported in the 1980s, there is evidence that the
models still accurately reflect present personnel practices (Monks, 1993).
The analytical models are all about the “how” and “why” of the roles of
human resource people (Tyson, 1995). The contingency approach to
understanding personnel management, since the work of Legge (1978) has seemed
to offer the most fruitful line of enquiry. From the bewildering array of
32
theories which could be chosen, it presents the possibility that one may attach
contingency research into HRM to other research, in such fields as business
strategy, organisational design, and structure (Tyson, 1995). Tyson (1979), and
Tyson and Fell (1986) assert that there are significant differences in the way
HRM is carried out from the organisational perspectives.
Ackermann (1986) provides a more detailed contingency model considering five
influencing determinants on human resource strategies. These five determinants are:
business strategies, environment, organisational structure, company size, and the
availability of resources. Ackermann’s “model” or framework of human resource
strategies is given in Figure 1.
33
Environment Business Strategies Structure
� Dynamism � Heterogeneity � Challenge
� Defender � Prospector � Analyser � Reactor � Hybrid
� Centralisation � Specialisation � Differentiation � Integration � Participation � Control � Analysis
Resources Company size
HRM strategies
� Turnover � Absenteeism � Personnel expenses/ number of employees � Sales/ number of employees � Sales / amount of personnel expenses � Extent of capacity utilisation � Extent of financial goals’ achievement
Organisational effectiveness and efficiency
Figure 1. A Contingency Model for HRM Strategies (Ackermann, 1986)
Ackermann defines human resource strategy as being “a pattern in constant
stream of HRM decisions” (Ackermann, 1986). His research shows a
characteristic pattern of individual decision variables, which are interpreted as
four factor-analytical types of human resource strategies that include:
development strategy-emphasising training, long term planning and internal
hiring; control strategy-emphasising performance appraisal, performance rewards,
job evaluation; administrative strategy-short term manpower planning, external
hiring, low level human resource; and scanning strategy-emphasising labour
market scanning, attitude surveys, money incentives.
34
Similar observations were made by Schuler and Jackson (1987) in researching HRM
practices in 304 business units to determine whether organisations adopted HR
practices to support their business strategies. These were categorised under the
categories: dynamic growth strategies, extract profit strategies or turnaround
strategies.
Normative versions of HRM are commonly outlined in textbooks and
practitioners’ articles (Tyson, 1995). Those aim at providing ideas on the
relationship between management, people, values and corporate performance, or
the distinct values of a particular corporation. One of the characteristics of the
normative models of HRM is the tendency to slip into prescription. Normative
ideologies help to sustain the managerial prescriptions for success and fortune,
and to legitimise managerial work. Normative models of HRM become
prescriptions for “why” as well as how to perform the HRM roles. Unlike the
other two models, normative models have an experiential reality because of the
influence on the minds of the managers.
The Harvard Business School developed an influential model of HRM. This is
given in Figure 2. The Harvard Framework or commonly referred to as
“Harvard map” is based on an analytical approach and provides a broad causal
depiction of the “determinants and the consequences of policies.” It shows
human resource policies are influenced by significant considerations - situational
factors in the outside business environment or within the firm and stakeholder
interests including those of shareholders, management, employees, unions,
community, and government (Beer et al., 1984).
35
HRM policy choices: Employee influenceHuman resource flowReward systems Work systems
Stakeholder interests:
Shareholders Management Employeegroups Government Community Unions
HR outcomes:
CommitmentCompetence Congruence Cost effectiveness
Long-termconsequences:
Individual well being Organisational effectiveness Societal well- being
Situationalfactors:
Workforce characteristics Business strategy and conditions Management philosophy Labour market Unions Task technology Laws and Societal values
Figure 2. The Harvard Framework for Human Resource Management (Beer et al.,
1984)
Hendry and Pettigrew (1990) in the model given in Figure 3 plays down the
prescriptive element of the Harvard Framework and extend the analytical
elements.
According to Hendry and Pettigrew (1990), the prescriptive elements of the
Harvard Framework are absent and there is a greater emphasis on the analytical
approach to human resource strategy. The Harvard Framework gives full
recognition to the external context of human resource strategy and also
36
identifies a two-way rather than a one-way relationship with organisational
strategy. There is also an important recognition of the impact of the role of the
personal function on the human resource strategy content. Hendry and Pettigrew
(1990) argues that better descriptions of structures and strategy of complex
organisations, and frameworks of understanding them, are necessary in
understanding HRM.
HRM context
Socioeconomic Technological Political-legal Competitive
Culture Structure Politics/ leadership Task-technology Business outputs
Business strategy context
Inner context
Objectives Product-market Strategy & tactics
Role Definition Organisation HR outputs
HR flows Work systems Reward systems Employee relations
HRM context
Figure 3. Model of Strategic Change and Human Resource Management
(Hendry and Pettigrew, 1990)
37
A different view of HRM is given by the Michigan Business School (Tichy,
Fombrun, and Devanna, 1982). The Michigan Model (which at times is referred
to the “matching model”) holds that HR systems and the organisation structure
should be managed in a way that is congruent with organisational strategy
(Armstrong, 1988). The Michigan Model which is given in Figure 4 has a
harder, less humanistic edge, holding that employees are a resource in the same
way as any other business resource. HRM is seen as strategic process making
the most effective use of an organisation’s human resource.
HumanResource
Management
Organisation Structure
FIRM
Mission and
Strategy
Culturalforces Economic
forces
Politicalforces
Figure 4. The Michigan Model of HRM (Armstrong, 1988)
Guest (1987) expresses a preference for HRM to be regarded as something
special, in particular as an attempt to set up policies, systems, and approaches
that produce employee commitment. The Harvard Framework is expanded by
defining four policy goals that can be used as testable propositions and these are:
38
strategic integration; high commitment; high quality; and flexibility (Armstrong,
1988).
Summarising the above, the normative models of personnel management are
mainly concerned with matching the needs of individuals with those of society,
“integrating” the interests of employers, and organisations.
Tyson (1995) further concludes that in order to create a general theory of
HRM, models of activities are required which reveal the symbolic order within
organisations, showing how this order is sustained and changed. The descriptive
models have alluded to the way how HRM is conducted. Analytical models
reveal the causes as well as the consequences of the actions performed by
those who seek to influence the employment relationship. The normative models
on the other hand which have a prescriptive element can be experienced by
managers, and represent one area for strategic choice for organisations. The
challenges come from a rapidly changing business, political, and social
environment where institutional changes are the norm.
Many of the recent writings on HRM in the USA share concerns about the
core notions of the earlier models of HRM, even if they have had less
generally available data to draw upon (Brewster, 1995).
Fombrun et al. (1984) identifies a five part Human Resource Cycle as given in
Figure 5. This is an integral of the Michigan Model as given in Figure 4. The
Human Resource Cycle identifies key areas for development of appropriate HR
39
policies and systems. These include selection of the most suitable people to
meet business needs; performance in pursuit of business objectives i.e., appraisal,
monitoring performance, and providing feedback to organisation; employees
rewards for appropriate performance; and development of the skills and
knowledge required to meet business objectives.
Selection PerformanceManagement
Development
Performance
Rewards
Figure 5. The Human Resource Cycle of the Michigan Model (Fombrun et al.,
1984)
Different analyses of the concept have tended to emphasise different elements,
giving extra weighting to “hard” approaches that emphasise the need to consider
employees as a resource (Fombrun et al., 1984), or to “soft” approaches as that
stipulated by Beer et al. (1985).
Storey (1989) distinguishes between the “hard” and “soft” forms of HRM,
typified by the Michigan Model and Harvard Framework respectively. The “hard”
HRM focuses on the resource side of the human resource and it emphasises on
costs in the form of “headcounts” and places control firmly in the hands of
40
management. The “soft” HRM on the other hand stresses the “human” aspects of
HRM. Its concerns are with communication, motivation, etc..
Carrol (1991) envisages a shift in HRM roles, as a result of its important links with
business needs and contribution to organisational effectiveness. These roles include:
� Delegator – Role enables line managers to serve as primary implementation of
HRM systems.
� Technical expert – This function encompasses a number of highly specific
HRM related skills in areas such as remuneration and management
development.
� Innovator – As innovators, HR managers recommend new approaches to
solving HRM – related problems such as productivity or a sudden increase in
absenteeism.
It appears that whichever school of thought is examined in either the academic
texts or the more popular prescriptive texts, there are some common key
elements. Nankervis et al. (1999) argues that all HRM models are based upon
assumptions; values and beliefs about the nature of relationships between the
employers; their employees and unions; and all HR functions take place within
the national, industry,and industrial contexts which shape them. Accordingly, a
single model of HRM will not be appropriate for all environments. The type of
models, too, will be influenced by either the “unitarist” or “pluralist” perception
of the employment relationship. A “unitarist” approach assumes common
interests between employers and employees, and attempts to encourage
41
commitment by both inclusive (e.g., communication, consultation, rewards systems),
and exclusive (e.g., discouragement of union membership) means.
“Pluralism,” on the other hand, recognises that employers and their employees
will inevitably experience conflicts of interest, which HRM will need to
negotiate and resolve in order to meet organisational goals.
2.3 Competencies and its Evolution
As the interest in measuring and predicting performance in the workplace has
grown over the past decade, the term “competency” appears to have become a
staple part of an HR practitioner’s vocabulary. While it is among the most
frequently used terms among the HR practitioners, it is also one of the least
understood.
The concept of “competency” was first brought about by Selznick (1957), and
McClelland (1973) thereafter used the term to illustrate the major key factor to
affect individual learning.
The term “competency” has been defined in the academic literature from several
different points of view (Bowden and Masters, 1993). It was popularised in the
management field through the work of Boyatzis (1982). Human resource
managers view the concept as a technical tool to implement strategic direction
through the tactics of recruitment, placement, training, assessment, promotion,
rewards, and personnel planning (Hoffman, 1999). Strebler et al. (1997) asserts that
the term has no widely accepted single definition. Competencies may be
42
“expressed as behaviours that an individual needs to demonstrate,” or they may
be “expressed as minimum standards of performance” (Strebler et al., 1997). The
term “competency” has been used to refer to the meaning expressed as behaviours,
while the term “competences” has been used to refer to the meaning expressed as
“standards.” Organisations in the private sector tend to use the term “competency
model,” while those in the public sector use “competence model” (Strebler et al.,
1997). A review of the literature shows three main positions are taken towards the
definition of the term.
Competencies were defined as either:
� Observable performance (Boam and Sparrow, 1992; and Bowden and Masters,
1993),
� The standard or quality of the outcome of the person’s performance
(Rutherford, 1995; and Hager et al., 1994), or
� The underlying attributes of a person (Boyatzis, 1982; and Sternberg and
Kolligion, 1990).
Some authors used more than one of these positions to define the concept (Boyatzis,
1982; Rutherford, 1995; Rumsey, 1994; and Ulrich et al., 1995).
Boyatzis (1982) defines competency as an “underlying characteristic of a person
which results in effective and/or superior performance in a job.” Boyatzis expands the
definition to include “a motive, trait, skill, aspect of one’s self image or social role, or
a body of knowledge which he/she uses.” The term “competencies” in this case
appears to refer to the underlying attributes of an individual.
43
Hager et al. (1994) defines competency as “the specification of knowledge and skills
and the application of that knowledge and skills to the standard of performance
required.”
A well accepted definition of competency refers to the underlying attributes of a
person such as their knowledge, skills, or abilities. The use of this definition creates a
focus on the required inputs of individuals in order for them to produce competent
performances (Hoffman, 1999). This means that the individuals must have prerequisite
knowledge in order to perform competently.
Kanungo and Misra (1992) and Parry (1998) assert the term “skills” as task centred
and it is best suited for routine or programmed tasks. Grzeda (2004) states that there is
some evidence to indicate that knowledge and competency are highly synonymous
terms. In the managerial competence literature, “knowledge” is often considered in
relation to business school curriculum content (Albanese, 1989) and knowledge -
based competencies are understood as knowledge of subject matter (McLagan, 1997),
ranging from the more specific and concrete, to the broader, more general or more
abstract.
Spector (1997) further defines knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics
(KSAOs). “Knowledge” is what a person knows that is relevant to the job. “Skill” is
what a person is able to do on the job. “Ability” (mental, physical, and psychomotor)
is the capacity to learn a skill, and “other characteristics” include attitudes, beliefs,
personality characteristics, temperaments, and values.
44
Woodruffe (1993) asserts that there is a basic distinction between “aspects of the job at
which a person is competent and aspects of the person which enable them to be
competent.” Competencies are the job behaviours people need to display in order to do
a job effectively. To Woodruffe (1993), competency refers to the “behaviour or the
performance of an individual.” Yet, reference is still made to the underlying “aspects
of a person, such as their knowledge or skills, that enable them to be competent.”
Hoffmann (1999), and Heffernan and Flood (2000) assert that there appears to be two
clearly different models applied to the concept of competency:
� One is predominantly an American approach such as that portrayed by
Boyatzis, Ulrich, and others who define competency “as the underlying
attributes of a person.” This is basically a descriptive model.
� The other approach is to observe it as a “set of performances and standards.”
The predominant U.S. approach portrayed by Boyatzis, Ulrich, and others define
competency as “the underlying attributes of a person.” It is largely an input-based
approach, defining the inputs needed to demonstrate competent performance. In
contrast, the UK approach observes competency as a set of performances and
standards.
Boam and Sparrow (1992) among others are part of a group of mostly English authors
propose that competency is best used as a measure of output learning. The training and
assessment of performance was the thrust of the approach.
45
Brewster et al. (2000) defines competency as “one of the key enabling factors for an
organisation to create its own sustainable and competitive advantage in the market
place.” Very closely associated with competence and competency is the term
“standard.” At the work place, there can be several applications of the use of the term
“standards” (Hoffmann, 1999):
� A standard could refer to a minimum acceptable level of performance.
� A standard could refer to higher levels of acceptable performance than had
previously existed.
� A standard could be used to manage change. By setting new competency
standards, new work relationships may be introduced, and the process of
change managed through the assessment process.
� Competency standards may be written governing both the multiple tasks of
the individuals and the means for the operation of teams. Competency
standards could be used to provide feedback on the progress of individuals
and teams through the assessment process.
� A standard could refer to the need to standardise performances across parts
of a company.
A well known definition of competence is “the demonstration of the knowledge, skills,
and attitudes required to perform a given task” whereas a standard may be defined as
“a specification by which the qualities required of something may be tested or
compared.” Standards specify distinct performance goals. When assessing
competence, standards are written into any specification of behaviour that will test a
person’s ability to demonstrate appropriate skills (Walkin, 1991).
46
Dubois (1998) defines competencies as “those characteristics, knowledge, skills,
mindsets, thought patterns, and the like - that, when used either singularly or in
various combination, resulting in successful performance.” Jackson and Schuler
(2003) defines competencies as “the skills, knowledge, abilities, and other
characteristics that someone needs to perform a job effectively.” However, recently
some authors suggest precise definitions that describe competencies as work-related
personal attributes, knowledge, skills, and values that individuals draw upon to do
their work well (Roberts, 1997). Nowadays, the terms competency and competence
appears almost to connote identical meaning with a trivial difference, competence
being mostly used in organisational level and competency being used in individual
level. In this study, both the terms: “competence” and “competency” are used
interchangeably. The definition as given by Brewster et al. (2000), too, is relevant here
as the study is pertaining to organisations.
In this study, the definition of competency as given by Lucia and Lepsinger (1999)
which is “a cluster of related knowledge, skills, and attitudes that affect a major part of
one’s job (a role or responsibility), that correlates with performance on the job, that
can be measured against well-accepted standards, and that can be improved via
training and development” will be used. This definition is more practical as it
recognises a competency being bigger than a skill, includes knowledge, connects to
performance, and can be improved.
Järvalt et al. (2002) recognises the importance of the competency approach as it
supports the strategic and integrated approach to developing strategic leadership.
Although there are many ways of defining competencies, the approach of defining it
47
as “an underlying characteristic of an employee which results in effective and /or
superior performance in a job” is broadly accepted (Boyatzis, 1982). Järvalt et al.
(2002) stresses the importance of a competency framework or a model that provides
measurement instrument by which competencies can be expressed and assessed.
2.4 Competency Models and Work Place Competencies
Competency models are created to illustrate how competencies lead to performance.
The models illustrate personal and job related characteristics, the organisational
context, and the interrelationship of those elements that result in performance in
relation to the predetermined standards. Organisations generally use competency
models for various purposes and the general reasons that remain valid across all users
as given by Palan (2003) are to:
� Provide a way in which the concept of competency can be applied to
organisational needs.
� Understand the variables determining performance and their correlation to it.
� Enable the rapid deployment of competencies for use in an organisation.
The construct of the model in terms of components as well as data collection and
analysis techniques will depend on the planned use. However according to Palan
(2003), the model may:
� Define core requirements for all employees regardless of function or level.
� Define requirements only for specific levels/functions.
� Define requirements for each distinct role or job in an organisation.
48
Cooper (2000) defines a competency model as “collection of competencies and
standards of performance establishing qualifications for a specific job position.”
According to Lucia and Lepsinger (1999), a competency model is “a descriptive tool
that identifies the skills, knowledge, and personal characteristics as well as behaviours
needed to perform a role effectively in an organisation, and to help the business meet
its strategic objectives.” A competency model can be used to clarify jobs and work
expectations, hire the best available people, maximise productivity, enhance the 360
degree feedback process, adapt to change, and align behaviours with organisational
strategies and values. Cooper (2000) provides a definition for 360 degree as “a
measurement or feedback approach where a worker’s managers, subordinates, and
coworkers provide a performance evaluation. The participants may also include non
employees such as suppliers or customers.”
Competency models identify the competencies that truly have an impact on results or
deliverables. Draganidis and Mentzas (2006) refers to a competency model as “a list of
competencies which are derived from observing satisfactory or exceptional employee
performance for a specific occupation.” The model can provide identification of the
competencies that employees need to develop in order to improve performance in their
current job or to prepare for other jobs. Competency standard identifies the essential
skills and knowledge the workers must have and defines the performance levels they
must achieve to demonstrate competency in a specific work segment of function
(Draganidis and Mentzas, 2006). Competencies are the building blocks of competency
models.
49
Not only are there many definitions of “competency” found in literature, there are also
various approaches used in framing and understanding competencies (Berge et al.,
2002). McLagan (1996) identifies six approaches that can be used to defining and
developing models of competency and these are given as follows:
� Job tasks,
� Results of work effort,
� Outputs,
� Knowledge, skills, and attitude (KSA),
� Qualities of superior performances, and
� Bundles of attributes.
A competency model is a descriptive tool that identifies the skills, knowledge,
personal characteristics, and behaviours needed to perform a role effectively in an
organisation. A competency model can help businesses in clarifying jobs and work
expectations, hiring, maximising productivity, adapting to change and aligning with
organisational strategies, and values (Wall, 2000).
At times, the term competency framework, too, is commonly used in place of a
competency model. According to Shippmann et al. (2000), a competency model is
also known as a competency framework.
Competency models ensure a clear understanding between performance expectations
and measures because they define the skills and knowledge to do a job. They, too,
address behaviours that will have the most direct impact on job performance.
Competency models provide the “glue” necessary among the elements of HRM
50
systems in order to take a unified and coordinated approach. Once a competency
framework has been researched and designed, it can be used in recruitment, selection,
training and development, performance management, and rewards systems
(Hondeghem, 2002; and Horton, 2000).
In this research, the operational definition of a competency model is that it refers to “a
list of competencies which are derived from observing satisfactory or exceptional
employee performance for a specific occupation. It provides identification of the
competencies employees need to develop in order to improve performance in current
job or to prepare for other jobs.” This definition is given by Draganidis and Mentzas
(2006).
The late 1980s and early 1990s witnessed attempts to identify, define and draw up
frameworks of key workplace competencies in Britain, Australia, and the United
States of America. Development efforts in these countries were driven by similar
concerns with the implications of workplace change and the consequent need to ensure
the supply of essential generic skills that employers required (Kearns, 2001). The
interest on generic skills needed at the workplace is possibly due to the emergence of
an information society and knowledge- based new economy. Generic skills is defined
as “those transferable skills, essential for employability which are relevant at different
levels for most” (NSTF, 2000).
The American Society for Training and Development/Department of Labour (United
States) (ASTD/DOL) study of workplace basics is a major empirical study undertaken
in 1988 and the 16 skills emerging from the ASTD/DOL studies are given in Figure 6.
51
Some of the important elements of the study include: the introduction of the
foundation concepts focused on learning; creativity skills that are linked to the concept
of adaptability; concept of personal development which include a range of personal
attributes (self-esteem skills, motivation, and goal setting skills); and the inclusion of
leadership skills (ASTD/DOL, 1988).
GROUP EFFECTIVENESS � Interpersonal skills � Negotiation skills � Teamwork skills
ASTD/ DOL Study
ACADEMIC BASICS � Reading skills � Writing skills � Computational skills
COMMUNICATION � Speaking skills � Listening skills
PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT � Self-esteem skills � Motivation and goal-setting
skills � Personal and career
development skills
INFLUENCING SKILLS � Organisational
effectiveness skills � Leadership skills
LEARNING TO LEARN � Foundation skills and
learning how to learn
ADAPTABILITY � Problem solving
skills � Creativity skills
Figure 6. American Society for Training and Development /Department of Labour
Model of “generic” Competencies (ASTD/DOL, 1988)
The Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills of United States
(SCANS) adopted the foundation concepts embedded in the ASTD/DOL’s report, and
similarly adopted a broad approach that include personal attributes as well as
“workplace competencies.” This approach is reflected in the two part structure adopted
by SCANS and categorised into workplace competencies and foundation skills. This is
given in Figure 7 (SCANS, 1991).
52
The know-how identified by SCANS is made up of five competencies and a three-part foundation of skills and personal qualities that are needed for job performance
Workplace competencies Effective workers can productively use: � Resources�they know how to allocate time, money, materials, space and staff � Interpersonal skills�they can work in teams, teach and others, serve customers,
lead, negotiate, and work well with people from culturally diverse backgrounds � Information�they can acquire and evaluate data, organise and maintain files,
interpret and communicate, and use computers to process information � Systems�they understand social, organisational, and technological systems; they
can monitor and correct performance; and they can design or improve systems � Technology�they can select equipment and tools, apply technology to specific
tasks, and maintain and troubleshoot equipment
Foundation skills Competence workers in the high-performance workplace need: � Basic skills�reading, writing, arithmetic and mathematics, speaking and listening � Thinking skills�the ability to learn, to reason, to think creatively, to make
decisions and to solve problems � Personal qualities�individual responsibility, self-esteem and self-management,
sociability, and integrity
Figure 7. Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills Model of “generic”
Competencies (SCANS, 1991)
The United Nation’s Secretariat has developed a competency model for the United
Nations that adopts a broad approach which includes core competencies, core values,
and managerial competencies. This is given in Figure 8. The United Nations
Competency Model illustrates how progressive organisations are adopting a broad
approach to generic skills which links core competencies and values with management
competencies, and attributes which are required to give effect to the generic skills, and
values in a high performance workplace (Kearns, 2001).
53
Core Competencies
Communication
Teamwork
Planning & organisation
Accountability
Creativity
Client orientation
Commitment to continuous learning
Technological awareness
Managerial CompetenciesLeadership
Vision
Empowering others
Building trust
Managing performance
Judgement/decision making
Core Values
Integrity
Professionalism
Respect for diversity
Figure 8. United Nations Competency Model (Kearns, 2001) Figure 8. United Nations Competency Model (Kearns, 2001)
Another important model, The United States Model involves a broader, more flexible,
and more holistic set of generic skills which include basic skills, personal attributes,
values and ethics, learning to learn as well as work place competencies. This is
reflected in the flexible approach to voluntary national skills standards adopted by the
United States National Skills Standard Board (NSSB) (Kearns, 2001). The model is
given in Figure 9.
Another important model, The United States Model involves a broader, more flexible,
and more holistic set of generic skills which include basic skills, personal attributes,
values and ethics, learning to learn as well as work place competencies. This is
reflected in the flexible approach to voluntary national skills standards adopted by the
United States National Skills Standard Board (NSSB) (Kearns, 2001). The model is
given in Figure 9.
Broader
More flexible
United StatesModel
More holistic set generic skills
Basic Skills
Personnel Attributes
Ethics
Values
Figure 9. The United States Model of Competencies (Kearns, 2001) Figure 9. The United States Model of Competencies (Kearns, 2001)
54
The Australian Mayer Key Competencies Model for effective participation in the
emerging patterns of work and work organisation include: collecting, analysing, and
organising information; communicating ideas and information; planning and
organising activities; working with others and in teams; using mathematical ideas and
techniques; solving problems and using technology. The United Kingdom National
Council for Vocational Qualification (NCVQ) core skills include communication,
personal skills (improving own learning and performance), working with others,
numeracy (application of numbers), problem solving, information technology, and
modern foreign language (NCVER, 2000).
The models of generic and workplace competencies given above illustrate the
importance of the generic competencies at workplace. According to Agut et al. (2003),
“generic” competencies covers individual characteristics that involve coping with less
programmed and technical tasks and more generic job situations. This is true as the
“workplace” competencies are non-technical in nature.
However, some of the models used the term “generic” as synonymous to “workplace”
competencies. The generic competencies as given in the models are important as
they, too, are applicable to the HR practitioners. Using the proper taxonomy of
competencies, most of the competencies given in the models are either “competency
domains,” or “competency indicators.” The operational definitions of these are further
given in the literature review. Some of these have been adopted into the survey
questionnaire for the research.
55
2.5 Human Resource and Human Capital Management
Personnel management transformed to human resource management way back in the
1980s and now it is on its way into transforming into human capital management. The
field of HR management is in transition and is evolving from an administrative
function to a strategic partner whose value proposition is the contribution to an
organisation’s financial performance or bottom line (Albers-Mohrman et al., 1997;
and Becker et al., 1997). What is less recognised is that a critical dimension of the
transition is the need to change the perspective of HRM from a behavioural field
anchored in social and organisational psychology to a field rooted in measurement and
analytical tools. This paradigm shift from the traditional perspective transforms HR to
human capital management (HCM) (Flamholtz, 2005).
The discipline of “people management” in organisations is going through active
debate on the rightful usage of the terminology- human resource management or
human capital management. Globally and even in Malaysia, a number of
organisations have renamed their human resource management departments as human
capital management departments. It appears that there has been an increasing focus on
“human capital” recently and the number of books and articles published on this
phenomenon, too, have reciprocated.
The Dictionary of Human Resources and Personnel Management (2006), defines
human capital as “employees of an organisation, and their skills, knowledge, and
experience, considered as one of the organisation’s assets.” The Dictionary, too,
defines human resources as “the employees that an organisation has available”
56
whereas human resource management is defined as “responsibility for an
organisation’s productive use of and constructive dealings with its employees.”
Bennet (1992) defines human resource management as “those aspects of management
which deal with the human side of enterprise and with employees relations with firms
and it covers, inter alia, elements of industrial psychology, personnel management,
training, and industrial relations.”
According to Flamholtz (2005), although HCM is related to the notion of HRM, there
is a subtle significant difference in the perspectives. Human capital emphasises the
essential idea that people are an asset of an organisation rather than an expense. It, too,
implies that people are assets to be employed or used an optimum manner instead of
expenses to be minimised. The concept however requires measurement and the key to
making this concept operational and practical is the measurement of costs,
replacement cost, and economic value of human resource, or human capital.
Experts give various definitions of HCM. Whilst some are of the opinion that HRM
and HCM are synonymous, others say they are not. From the above definitions, it can
be seen that HCM goes beyond HRM as it factors the skills and tacit experiences of
the employees and truly recognises employees as assets.
Phillips (2005) in his book, Investing in Your Company’s Human Capital, writes that
human capital concept is not new. It has been used by economists as far back as Adam
Smith in the eighteenth century. Human capital theory explores the ways individuals
and society derive economic benefits from investment in people. From an economist’s
57
point of view, human capital designates investments in improving competencies and
skills.
According to Davenport (1999), the term “human capital” first appeared in a 1961
American Economic Review article, “Investment in Human Capital”, by Nobel Prize-
winning economist, Theodore W. Schultz.
Schultz (1981) further elaborates the concept of human capital as “Consider all human
abilities to be either innate or acquired. Every person is born with a particular set of
genes, which determines his innate ability. Attributes of acquired population quality,
which are valuable and can be augmented by appropriate investment will be treated
as human capital. By investing in themselves, people can enlarge the choices available
to them.”
Economists have since added on many terms into the dimension of human capital.
However most agree that human capital comprises of skills, experience, and
knowledge. Becker (1993) further added personality, appearance, reputation, and
credentials to the definition. In simple words, Davenport (1999) defines human capital
as “the intangible resources of abilities, effort, and time that workers bring to invest in
their work.”
Davenport (1999) further refines the definition of human capital by breaking it into
elements: ability, behaviour, effort, and time. Ability means “proficiency in a set of
activities or forms of works and it comprises of three subcomponents - knowledge,
skills, and talent.” “Knowledge” refers to the command of a body of facts required to
58
do a job. “Skill” refers to the facility with the means and methods of accomplishing a
particular task. “Talent,” according to Davenport is the inborn faculty for performing a
special task. “Behaviour” means “observable ways of acting that contribute to the
accomplishment of a task and behaviours combine inherent and acquired responses to
situations and situational stimuli.” And, “effort” is the conscious application of mental
and physical resources toward a particular end. “Time” refers to the chronological
element of human capital investment: hours per day, years in a career, or any unit in
between.
Divanna and Rogers (2005) defines human capital as “the current skills, knowledge,
and techniques of the people employed and the potential of those employed to
innovate, adapt, and transform the business activities to a future operating state.” The
first part of the definition addresses the aspect of human capital, which can generally
yield the greatest short term value and is easiest to measure. The future value of
human capital in the latter part of the definition is the harder challenge. According to a
study (The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD],
2001), human capital is defined as the “knowledge, skills, competencies, and attributes
embodied in individuals that facilitate the creation of personal, social, and economic
well-being.” This definition of human capital extends beyond those capital assets
contained within any given organisation and human capital is linked directly to
productivity, encompassing factors that reflect the broader values associated with
healthy, well educated population (OECD, 2001).
The Accounting for People Task Force (2003) describes human capital management as
a “strategic approach to people management that focuses on the issues that are critical
59
to the organisation’s success.” It treats people management as high level strategic
issue and seeks systematically to analyse, measure, and evaluate how people policies
and practices create value. Scarborough and Elias (2002) notes that the biggest
contribution of human capital to date is in defining the “link between HR and business
strategy.” The concept of human capital is most usefully viewed as a bridging concept
- that is, it defines the link between HR practices and business performance in terms of
assets rather than business processes. According to Edvinsson and Malone (1997),
human capital is one of the three elements of intellectual capital and human capital
refers to the knowledge, skills, abilities, and capacity to develop and innovate
possessed by people in an organisation.
Fitz-enz (2000) elaborates that in business terms, human capital can best be described
as a combination of the following factors:
� The traits one brings to the job: intelligence, energy, positive attitude,
reliability, and commitment.
� One’s ability to learn: aptitude, imagination, creativity, and what is often called
“street smarts,” savvy (or how to get things done).
� One’s motivation to share information and knowledge: team spirit and goal
orientation.
Bontis et al. (1999) asserts that human capital consists of the intangible resources that
workers provide for their employers. It represents the human factor in the
organisation; the combined intelligence, skills, and expertise that gives the
organisation its distinctive character. The human elements of the organisation are
those that are capable of learning, changing, innovating, and providing the creative
60
thrust which if properly motivated can ensure the long term survival of the
organisation.
While there is no consistent definition among human resource professionals and
executives on human capital, a consistent theme is that human capital represents the
relationship between what organisations invest in employees and the emerging success
(Phillips, 2005).
In this study, the terms human resource management and human capital management
will be regarded as synonymous and the term human resource management will be
used throughout the study. This is because human resource management has been
widely accepted over the years whereas human capital management is still in its quest
for common definition and scope.
2.6 Competency Based Human Resource Models
The research on managerial competencies gained momentum since Boyatzis (1982)
identified the competencies specific to managerial effectiveness. Schoonover (2003)
argues that environmental changes transform the way organisations create value and
conduct businesses. Besides new capabilities, specific functional direction and
particular set of roles, HR practitioners must also master competencies to meet the
challenges. Although the three basic roles of HR specialist, HR generalist, and HR
strategist still predominate, the responsibilities of each have expanded significantly.
Going forward, Schoonover suggests that a competency framework structured into
four building blocks is vital. These include personal attributes, leadership and
61
management competencies, HR core competencies, and HR role-specific
competencies (Schoonover, 2003).
Personal attributes category encompasses four competency areas: result orientation,
commitment, continuous learning, honesty, and integrity. Leadership and management
category encompasses eight competencies namely visioning and alignment, strategic
thinking, networking, resource management, team work, process excellence,
performance development, and goal setting. HR core competencies include eleven
competencies that are stewardship, compliance, customer focus, coaching and
consulting, talent management, technology expertise, vendor management, knowledge
management, virtual teamwork, assessment and measurement of skills, and employee
advocacy.
The HR role specific competencies include the perspective of behavioural demands
such as HR generalist and HR specialist roles, and another category, the HR strategic
role. The competencies that are relevant for the HR generalist are organisation design,
development and effectiveness, relationship management, project and product
management. For the HR strategic role, the competencies that are important are
business acumen, strategic influence, and change management. And for the HR
specialist role, the functions that are important are learning and development,
compensation, benefits, recruitment and staffing, human resource information system
(Schoonover, 2003).
62
Schoonover’s study is elaborate and it covers a wide gamut of roles and
responsibilities of an HR practitioner. This is important as some of the competencies
are included in this study in developing the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
Boam and Sparrow (1992) outlines a number of business pressures creating the need
for new competencies in organisations and these include: new technology, drive for
quality, flexibility and responsive organisation, supply of resources, new competitive
arrangements, internationalisation of business, and the power of information.
According to the US government agency (National Academy of Public Administration
[NAPA], 1996), the importance of HR in supporting the business enterprise is
becoming increasingly recognised by successful companies and academicians. The
human factor is viewed as the most important source of sustaining the future and
propelling organisations forward. For HR professionals, it is no longer sufficient to be
technically competent. The HR professionals must be value-added contributors to the
objectives of the organisation: mission driven, flexible, and customer-focused (NAPA,
1996).
Garret-Owens et al. (2003) reports a survey carried out pertaining to Human Resource
Competency Model for HR professionals by the University of Michigan, USA. The
purpose of the study is to identify competencies that HR professionals need to perform
their jobs successfully and to create a model that the Human Resource Academy could
use for curriculum development. The study researched models from around USA -
from the corporate, government, and public institutions. The study focuses on four
63
categories of HR competencies: strategic contribution and business mastery; personal
credibility; expert HR delivery; and culture change and mastery.
For strategic contribution and business mastery, the list of competencies include
strategic thinking and planning, customer orientation, leadership and strategic
analyses/metrics. For personal credibility, the list selected include ethics and integrity,
collaboration and partnership, achievement orientation, communication, coaching and
mentoring and self awareness, and professional development.
The category of competencies of expert HR delivery comprises of the
functional/technical competencies. It includes human resource planning, recruitment,
staffing, training and development, performance management, compensation and
benefits, labour relations, and conflict management. Culture change and process
mastery include: culture and change management, organisational design, consulting,
facilitation, and project management.
The Personnel Standards Lead Body in the United Kingdom in association with the
HR Directors of leading organisations together with experienced senior practitioners in
HRM developed a map of the personnel standards. As reported in a study
(Employment Occupational Standards Council [EOSC], 1994), there are five areas of
personnel work and two areas of general work covered by the standards. The areas
grouped under personnel work are: strategy and organisation; resourcing;
development; reward, relations with employees. The areas grouped under general
work areas are: professionalism and management (Smilansky, 1997; and EOSC,
1994).
64
For each of the areas of personnel, the separate activities are given as follows (EOSC,
1994):
� Strategy and organisation (organisation’s strategy and plans, organisation’s
structures and work processes, organisation’s culture and values, and
information technology).
� Resourcing (resourcing strategy and plans, recruitment, internal resourcing,
and release).
� Development (development strategies and plans, performance management,
long term individual development, team development, and equal
opportunities).
� Reward (reward strategies and plans, levels of reward, benefits and expenses
and payment).
� Relations with employees (strategies and plans for employee relations,
employee commitment, communication, employee support and welfare, health
and safety, compliance, negotiation and consultation, and grievance and
discipline).
� Professionalism (helping non-personnel practitioners provide personnel
services, and professionalism and ethics).
� Management (personnel strategy, finance, planning and evaluating work, and
working with others).
According to Butteriss (1998), Professor Ulrich in his 1994 talk to the Canadian
Human resource planners, highlighted several key HR competencies that are important
for the HR practitioners and these are as follows:
� Knowledge of business.
65
� Business and strategic thinking.
� Business and customer focus.
� Individual leadership.
� Knowledge and implementation skills.
� Change management skills set.
� Work in partnership with other functions, and
� Ability to benchmark HR practices within organisation and with external
organisations.
Lawson and Limbrick (1996) identifies a list of required skills and personal attributes
of human resource managers most frequently identified by CEOs. These skills among
others are interpersonal skills, proactive decision making skills, human resource
technical skills, business knowledge, and strategic focus skills.
Pfeffer (1998) categorises the human resource practices into seven broad areas that
deal with implementation and these include employment security, selective hiring,
self-managed teams and decentralisation, high compensation contingent on
performance, training, reduction of status differences and sharing of information.
Shandler (2000) outlines the importance of core competencies and those that are
relevant to the performance of both individuals and organistions. A core competency
for the individual is one that is essential for the successful performance for a given job
at a specific level within the organistional structure. Core competencies change and
evolve to meet the needs of the organisations. Cooper (2000) provides a simple
definition of core competency. According to him, “ a core competency applies to the
entire organisation and it is typically seen as a strategic factor in the overall success of
66
the organisation.” According to Cooper (2000), core competencies can also be more
generic, with leadership working to make employees more creative, more quality
oriented or financial savvy.
Ulrich and Eichinger (1998) claims that “HR must become more professional and HR
must be recognised as a profession and HR has not reached that status yet. There is a
need for an accepted and commonly known body of knowledge, common standards
for entry and performance, standards of conduct, sets of best practices and
communities with strong identities and distinctiveness.” In addition Ulrich and
Eichinger (1998), also, argues that the route to professionalism is through the
definition and gaining of competencies. They believe this has already been achieved to
a large extent throughout the 1990s in the USA, but this work should now be taken
forward to create a common professional knowledge.
There is a large body of HR literature that postulates the need to develop an HR
Practitioner Competency Model. The reasons for this are in order to audit the current
skills gap and to provide appropriate development to ensure that the HR function is
able to add value (Brewster et al., 2000). The competency model can be developed
using the senior management input (subjective approach) or through a conceptual
framework such as functional analysis (objective approach). A number of surveys
have already been carried out around the world to attempt to build both the subjective
and objective approaches (Schoonover, 1998; Csoka and Hackett, 1998; Heneman et
al., 1998; Laabs, 1996; Lawson and Limbrick, 1996; and Walker, 1998).
67
A study project was carried out by the World Federation of Personnel Management
Associations (WFPMA) in 2000. The aim of the project was to develop a worldwide
definition of who an “HR professional” is and does in terms of a global set of core
competencies; how do different countries define the use of standards for what
constitutes an HR professional; and what are the competencies they will need to be
able to apply at the various levels of their professional activities from the operational
to the most strategic levels. In the study, six terms: competences, capabilities, skills,
knowledge, attributes, and characteristics are used interchangeably to represent
competencies (Brewster et al., 2000).
The study project carried out by WFPMA (Brewster et al., 2000) categorises the
competencies into four broad categories of skills and knowledge. These include
personal, organisational, managerial, and functional. The competencies that were
studied in the broad categories include:
� Personal – communication, decision making and problem solving, business
acumen, credibility and professionalism, leadership, relationship management,
and adaptability.
� Organisational – knowledge of the external environment, knowledge of the
industry/sector, knowledge of the organisation, and the importance of the HR
department.
� Managerial – management of self, management of people, management of
resources/assets, management of operations, including outsourcing,
management of information, and change management.
� Functional – HR planning and staffing, performance management and
development, employee and labour relations, compensation and benefits,
68
health, safety, welfare and security, systems and information management, and
organisational design and development.
The WFPMA study project (Brewster et al., 2000) observes that the technical or the
functional HR competencies are relatively easy to acquire, although this was not
necessarily the case a number of decades ago. In most countries unlike the USA,
strategic HR competencies are still scarce. In the USA, empirical studies show that
organisations emphasise the importance of strategic HR competencies and not
technical or functional competencies. An interesting observation was that the core
competencies do not necessarily vary in nature but rather in the weighting. Potential
conflicts that may arise when developing a competency model were stated, however
the overwhelming position of the HR literature is that there is a need for a competency
model in order to make progress in developing HR function further.
According to Becker and Huselid (1998), business related competencies refer to the
business skills and experiences that employees possess outside their functional
specialism. Business competencies also have strong influence on corporate financial
performance. Unfortunately, common problems nowadays is that HR practitioners do
not possess an adequate working knowledge of what business is all about, or of the
strategic goals of the organisations.
Mc Daniel (1998) defines business competency as “a competency that applies to many
different positions in a company.” Rothwell et al. (1999) defines business
competencies as “those that are associated with the understanding of organisations as
systems and of the process, decision making criteria, and issues that businesses face.”
69
But in this study, business competency refers to a competency that applies to many
different positions in an organisation and somewhat it has links to the business
strategy of the organisation. Its acquisition will improve the business performance of
the organisation.
Mc Daniel (1998) defines technical competency as “a competency that is unique or
specific to a role or function.” Palan (2003) defines functional competencies as “the
work tasks and outputs, i.e., knowledge and skills that are needed to perform a job at a
specific job level.” In this study, technical HR competency refers to that competency
which is unique or specific to HR roles or functions.
Rothwell et al. (1999) defines role competencies as “a grouping of competencies
targeted to meet specific expectations of a job of function.” In this study, the definition
as given by Rothwell et al. (1999) was used.
Every management model is driven by certain principles, whether previously
established or not and whether formalised or inferred from the policies, concepts,
practices adopted by the organisation. Fischer and Albuquerque (2005) observes that
in a study done using nine management principles that were researched through the
trends in the academic literature still relevant by the current Brazilian organisations.
The management principles as set out in the study include: knowledge management,
competence management, empowerment, different labour contracts, employability,
corporate education, self–development, commitment of people to organisational
objectives, and HR management in line with the business. The research respondents
consider these principles as relevant when it comes to setting up an HRM model.
70
The scope of using competency-based systems is enormous (Boam and Sparrow,
1992). Figure 10 outlines applications of the competency framework and their
integration into HRM. The proper introduction of competency frameworks can
provide an organisation with a system for hiring, measuring performance and
providing feedback for developing competencies and rewarding superior performance
for top talent (Santo, 1998).
COMPETENCIES
360 degree Feedback
Recruitment and Selection
Performance Appraisal
Assessment
Rewards
Succession Planning
Training & Development
Learning & Development Programmes
Figure 10. Integration of Competencies into Human Resource Management (Santo,
1998).
One of the leading thinkers about HRM is Professor Dr. Dave Ulrich. At a Conference
in May 1999, he revealed some of research findings into competencies required if the
modern HR practitioner is to be successful (Ulrich, 1999). Five main competency
groups were established, and the research enabled a success weighting to be placed on
each one of them. The human resource practices (contributed 16% to overall success),
understanding the business (12% to overall success), ability to manage culture (19% to
overall success), ability to manage change (24% to overall success), and personal
credibility (being 29% to overall success).
71
Fitz-enz and Phillips (1998) in their book, A New Vision for Human Resources
emphasises that “human resource should be, can be, and in many cases is, a valuable
part of a business organisation.” Playing a new role requires developing new skills. A
fully functioning HR professional needs three types of skills today: human resource
management, business management, and change management. Ulrich and Beatty
(2001) further stresses the importance of the concept of HR partner. This concept
which has been popular since the 1990s recognises that for the HR field to move
beyond its “polite” (people focused) and “police” (regulation focused) roles and add
value to executing a firm’s strategy, it needs to:
� Know the business,
� Become an expert in HR basics (the functions “tool kit” ), and
� Learn how to use those tools to change the organisation’s culture and strategy
capabilities through effective and efficient development of its workforce.
Eli Lilly and Company employs more than 20, 000 people in over 100 countries and it
specialises in ethical drugs. In 1994, in line with the change in its global strategy, it
transformed its global HR organisation into a strategic business partner within the
organisation. To ensure its success, it developed a competency model for its HR
managers. This is given in Figure 11 below. The HR competency model contains six
different competencies that relate to superior performance, and five of which are
business competencies that can apply to many different positions in the company. The
sixth competency is a technical competency that is unique to the HR Account Manager
position. The six competencies include 23 skills; 12 knowledge areas, and 13 beliefs,
motives, traits, and values (Mc Daniel, 1998). From the competency model, it can be
observed that the model comprises of three main types of competencies: skills;
72
knowledge and beliefs; motives, traits, and values. Competencies such as beliefs,
motives, traits, and values which are complex are embedded deeper into the
competency model whereas knowledge and skills are at the outer end of the
competency model.
Conviction
Openness
Motivated by Results
Confidence
Balance
Beliefs, Motivates,
Traits, Values Judgment
Realistic
Energy
Integrity
Learning Trust & Credibility
Relationships & Sensitivity
Behavioral Science
Knowledge
Organisational Theory
Quality High
Persuasion
Information Sharing
Skills
Competencies (I demonstrate…
Consulting/ Counseling
Negotiating
Figure 11. Competency Model of HR Account Manager (Mc Daniel, 1998)
The University of Michigan’s Business School (Brockbank and Ulrich, 2003) carried
out the longest and the largest study of competencies of the HR professionals in 2002.
The project was conducted in four major waves over sixteen years: 1987, 1992, 1997,
and 2002. This was done via 360 – degree surveys with managers and peers, plus
extensive reviews of academic work across Europe, Asia, Latin America, and USA.
The categories of competencies studied were the business knowledge, strategic
contribution, HR technology, personal credibility, and HR delivery. This is given in
Figure 12 (Brockbank and Ulrich, 2003).
73
Strategic Contribution•Culture Management • Fast Change • Strategic Decision-Making • Market-Driven Connectivity
HR Delivery • Staffing •Development • Organisational Structure • Performance Management
Personal Credibility• Achieving Results• Effective Relationships • Personal Communication
HR Technology
Business Knowledge
Figure 12. Major Categories of HR Competencies (Brockbank and Ulrich, 2003)
The study shows that strategic contribution had 43% impact on business performance;
personal credibility had 23% impact; HR delivery had 18% impact; business
knowledge had 11% impact; and HR technology had only 5% impact on the business
performance. The survey also reveals that HR does best at personal credibility but this
only had moderate influence on business performance. Meanwhile what HR
professionals do only moderately well (making strategic contribution) had almost
twice the influence on the businesses where it occurs. For the category of strategic
contribution, the competencies include: culture management, fast change, strategic
decision making, and market driven community. Personal credibility comprises of:
achieving results, effective relationships, and communication skills. For the category
of HR delivery, it include: staffing, training and development, organisational design,
HR measurement, legal compliance, and performance management. Business
knowledge includes: knowledge of value chain, knowledge of organisation’s value
proposition, and labour knowledge. In the study by the University of Michigan’s
Business School, the five competency categories are also referred to as competency
74
domains and all the competencies in each of the domains are called “competency
factors” (Brockbank and Ulrich, 2003).
Figure 13 outlines the evolution of the Human Resource Competency Studies carried
out by University of Michigan’s Business School from 1987 to 2002. The four
grounded HR Competency Models have been further studied by other researchers
globally. Among the four HR Competency Models, the HR Competency Model
established in 2002 as given in Figure 12 is a significant seminal study because it
emphasises the importance of the competency domain “strategic contribution.” The
competencies given in all the HR Competency Models are actually competency
domains (Ulrich et al., 2008).
75
Business Knowledge
HR Delivery
Change
1987
1992
1997
2002
Strategic
Contribution
HR
Technology
Personal
Credibility
HR
Delivery
Business
Knowledge
Personal
Credibility
Change
Culture
HR
Delivery
Business
Knowledge
Personal Credibility
Change HR Delivery
Business knowledge
Figure 13. Evolution of HR Competency Models from 1987 to 2002 (Ulrich et al.,
2008)
In this research, the operational definition for competency category is that it refers to a
broad group to which homogenous and/or similar competencies belong (Draganidis
and Mentzas, 2006).
76
Within the categories of competencies are competency domains. Competency domains
in this research refers to an area comprising of clusters of competencies that have
some primary relationship with one another. Spencer and Spencer (1993) refers to a
competency cluster as “a group of distinguishing competencies” and this definition is
used in this research. Each competency domain comprises of competency factors.
According to Brockbank and Ulrich (2003), a competency factor is a variable that
makes up the competency domain. In this research, a competency factor is a variable
that makes up the competency domain and this is the smallest unit of competencies.
Armstrong (2001), and Lengnick-Hall and Lengnick-Hall (2003) emphasise that
effective HR practitioners of tomorrow need to be experts on organisation analysis,
design, and development. This is because HR managers can then enhance their roles
as advocates of “soft” issues such as developing strategy-oriented leaders, establishing
flexible organisation structure, measuring value creation, and applying state-of-the-art
change management solutions.
General Electric (GE) of US established its own HR Competency Model. Its model
comprises of four components namely the: business mastery, HR mastery, change and
process mastery, and personal attributes. From the model, it is evident that GE places
great importance on HRM. Besides focusing just on HR mastery which is actually the
technical or functional competency, the HR Competency model, too, gives
importance to generic, core, and business related competencies (Laming, 1995).
77
2.7 Global HR Practitioner Models
In 2007, the HR Competency study was further continued with its Round Five by the
RBL Group and the University of Michigan’s Business School and it involved more
than 10,000 HR professionals and line management employees in the United States,
Canada, Latin America, Europe, China, Australia/Asia Pacific, and India. The
respondents of the survey include the HR practitioners, peers of the HR practitioners
themselves, and non-HR associates who are line executives and internal customers.
The earlier rounds of the study were conducted by the University of Michigan in 1987,
1992, 1997, and 2002. This survey grouped the questions by likeness to yield six
distinct competency domains. The domains were defined with the idea in mind that
HR competencies include not just knowledge, ability, and values, but also the ability
to use the knowledge (Ulrich et al., 2008).
The primary purpose of the research is to provide empirical evidence on a global scale
that assists both the HR Departments and HR professionals to increasingly add greater
value as defined by the customer and capital markets. The findings show that the HR
professionals must be adept in six major competency areas that include credible
activist; culture and change; talent manager/organisation designer; strategy architect;
operational executor; and business ally (Ulrich et al., 2008). The competency model is
given in Figure 14 as below:
78
Figure 14. Human Resource Competency Model (Ulrich et al., 2008)
The findings show that the skills of HR professionals of organizations are more critical
now than ever, accounting for 20% of its business results, and are increasingly
becoming part of an organisation’s competitive advantage. It, too, indicates that in
order to be prepared for greater demand, the HR professionals must define, assess, and
improve their performance against a set of specific competencies as given in the HR
Competency Model. The definitions of the six major competency areas as given in the
study are:
� Credible activist � “part of which is performing `human resource’ with an
attitude. HR professionals must be trusted, respected, admired, listened to but
above all, have a point of view and take a position.”
� Culture and change – “HR professionals recognise, articulate, and help shape a
company’s culture. It means being clear about the expectations of external
customers, and then translate the expectations into employee and
organisational behaviours.”
79
� Talent manager/organisation designer – “talent management focuses on how
individuals enter, move up, across, or out of the organisation. Organisation
design focuses on the capabilities an organisation has that are embedded in the
structure, processes, and policies that shape how the organisation works.”
� Strategy architect – “vision for how the organisation can win in the future, and
play an active part in the establishment of the overall strategy to deliver the
vision. It includes recognising business trends and their impact on business,
being able to forecast potential obstacles to success, and facilitating the process
of gaining strategic clarity.”
� Operational executor “execution of operational aspects of managing people
and organisations, such as drafting, adapting, and implementing policies. It
also ensures that the employees basic needs including being paid, relocation,
hiring and training are efficiently delivered through technology, shared
services, and/or outsourcing.”
� Business ally – “contribute to the success of the business knowing the social
context or setting in which their companies operate. They, too, should know
about the business, customers, products or services and functions of the various
corporate departments” (Ulrich et al., 2008).
Butteriss (1998) in her book, Re-Inventing HR: Changing Roles to Create the High
Performance Organisation, classifies the HR competencies by the types. Two broad
categories are set out and those are “general” competencies and “HR technical”
competencies. The “general” competencies include: business knowledge, customer
service, innovation, change, risk taking; supporting organisational change; teamwork;
leadership, interpersonal skills, and personal effectiveness. The HR technical
80
competencies include: developing and delivering training; compensation management
and benefits administration; health and safety; labour and employee relations;
recruitment and staffing; and HR Information Systems/Payroll.
Schweyer (2004) in his book, Talent Management Systems: Best practices in
technology solutions for recruitment, retention, and workforce planning outlines
several skills and competencies that are required by HR practitioners. The general
competencies required include: career planning, business acumen, decision making,
managing change, performance management, delegation, team leadership, problem
solving, facilitating meetings, consultation, presentations, and organisational
awareness. The occupational competencies include: microsoft excel, needs analysis,
benefits research, recruitment and selection, labour relations, microsoft word, training
effectiveness, collective agreements, HR laws and policies, and pension
administration. The relational competencies include: self confidence, results driven,
strategic thinking, intuition, persuading and influencing, and coaching.
Although not explicitly labelled as a Human Resource Competency Model, the
Human Resource Certification Institute (HRCI, 2003) which is affiliated to the
Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) of USA has established an
important body of knowledge of the HR field which outlines the breadth and
depth of the knowledge necessary for the HR professionals. HRCI certifies the
knowledge and competence of members of the profession (Mathis and Jackson,
2002).
81
The functional areas include:
� Management practices (sub-areas: role of HR in organisations; human
resource planning; organisational design and development; budgeting,
controlling and measurement; motivation; leadership; quality and
performance management; employee involvement strategies; HR research;
International HR Management; and ethics).
� General employment practices (sub-areas: legal and regulatory factors; job
analysis; individual employment rights; performance appraisals; workplace
behaviour problems; employee attitudes, opinions and satisfaction).
� Staffing (sub-areas: equal employment opportunity/affirmative action;
recruitment; selection; career planning and development; and organisational
exit).
� Human resource development (sub-areas: HR training and the organisation;
training needs analysis; training and development programmes).
� Compensation and benefits (sub-areas: tax and accounting treatment of
compensation and benefits programmes; economic factors affecting
compensation; compensation philosophy, strategy and policy; compensation
programmes; job evaluation methods; job pricing, pay structure and pay
rate administration; employee benefits programmes; managing employee
benefit programmes; evaluating total compensation strategy, and
programme effectiveness).
� Employee and labour (sub-areas: union representation of employees;
employer unfair labour practices; union unfair labour practices; collective
bargaining; managing organisation-union relations; maintaining nonunion
82
status; public sector labour relations/; health, safety, and security (HRCI,
2003).
Through a series of consultations and surveys across Australia, and in collaboration
with authorities on HR in US such as Dave Ulrich and Wayne Brockbank, the
Australian Human Resources Institute (AHRI) developed a “Model of Excellence” for
the HR roles. This model recognises that HR management consists of a number of
inter-related activities, all of which need to be business driven. The six areas of HR
capability identified in the model are:
� Business outcome focus - possessing a broad knowledge and understanding of
organisation’s whole business.
� Strategic thinking - understand core business objectives and people
management for strategic decision making.
� Communicating and influencing – having ability to influence and communicate
change effectively, negotiate outcomes and drive corporate culture, and
motivate employees.
� Customer and stakeholder focus – supporting the senior executives and line
managers and provide solutions for the business.
� Application of professional HR knowledge – having the ability to apply
knowledge of HR functions.
� Ethical behaviour – demonstrating leadership in policy development on
organisational values and ethics in business (Stafford, 2008).
83
The “Model of Excellence” of the Australian Human Resources Institute, too,
identifies the responsibilities of HR managers in the following areas:
� HR measurement reporting,
� HR compliance requirements,
� Occupational health and safety standards, and policies,
� Human capability profiling,
� Training and development programmes,
� Strategic HR planning processes,
� Induction,
� Negotiating awards/agreements,
� Risk management,
� Training needs analysis, and
� Recruitment and selection (Stafford, 2008).
Chen et al. (2005), using the competency groups of the American Society for
Training and Development (ASTD) models for work place learning and
performance, researched the importance of the work place competencies for the
HR practitioners in Taiwan. The competency factors that were studied in the six
competency groups are given in Figure 15. The work place learning and
performance competency groups that are important for the HR practitioners in
Taiwan are: business competency, interpersonal competency, analytical
competency, leadership competency, technological competency, and technical
competency groups.
84
1.Knowledge Management
2.Systems Thinking
3.Analytic al Thinking
Analytical Competency Group
Leadership Competency Group
1. Visioning
2. Goal Implementation
3. Leadership
1.Feedback
2.Fac ilitations
3.Questioning
Technical Competency Group
Interpersonal Competency
1. Communication
2. Interpersona l Relationship Building
3. Communication Networks
1. Computer Mediated Communication
2. Technolog ic al Literacy
3. Electronic Performance Support Sy stems
Business Competency Group
1. Ability to See the “Big Picture”
2. Knowledge Capital
3. Projec t Management
Technolog ical Competency Group
Figure 15. Workplace Learning Performance Competencies that are Important for
Taiwan HR Practitioners (Chen et al., 2005)
Boselie and Paauwe (2005) asserts that for the new future, HRM manager is expected
to be an entrepreneur who is willing to take risks, is customer oriented, has business
knowledge, and specific human resource knowledge.
The International Public Management Association for Human Resource of the US
(IPMA, 2005) developed an IPMA-HR Competency Model. This is given in Figure
16. This model adapted the business partner model as proposed by Dave Ulrich
(Ulrich, 1997). The competency domains included in the model are: Business, Leader,
HR Expert, Advocate, and Change Agent. The model comprises of 23 competency
factors that can possibly be grouped in both the generic/behavioural, and business
competency categories. No emphasis appears to be given to the technical HR
competencies.
85
Figure 16. Competency Model for HR Professional (IPMA, 2005)
McLagan (1989) carried out a study for the American Society for Training and
Development (ASTD) to identify the Human Resource Development (HRD) roles
and competencies needed for human resource departments to function effectively.
The study reveals that the focus of the human resource had expanded from
traditional training and development activities to include career development and
organisational development issues (DeSimone et al., 2002; and McLagan, 1989).
The study carried out by McLagan is believed to be a primary effort to research broad-
based HR competencies. Her work initially examined competencies of HR
development professionals and it was then generalised to all HR professionals
(McLagan and Suhadolnik, 1989).
McLagan (1989) developed a model of HRD practices that was referred to as
the “Human Resource Wheel.” The wheel, as given in Figure 17, shows the various
HRD and HRM functions.
86
HUMAN RESOURCE RESULTS� Productivity�Quality� Innovation�HR Fulfillment�Readiness for Change
TRAINING & DEVELOPMENT
FOCUSAssuring the
development of key competencies that enable individuals to perform current
and future jobs
RESEARCH & INFORMATION
SYSTEMS FOCUS
Assuring a human resource
information base
CAREER DEVELOPMENT FOCUS
Assuring the alignment of individual career planning and organisationcareer management to achieve an
optimal match of needs
ORGANISATION DEVELOPMENT
FOCUSAssuring healthy inter
and intra unit relationships and
helping groups initiate and manage change
LABOUR RELATIONS
FOCUSAssuring healthy
union-organisationrelationships
EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE FOCUS
Providing personal problem-solving and counseling to
individual employees
COMPENSATION & BENEFITS
FOCUSAssuring compensation and
benefits fairness and consistency
SELECTION & STAFFING
FOCUSMatching people and their
career needs and capabilities with jobs and career paths
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
SYSTEMS FOCUS
Assuring that individual and organisation goals
are linked and what individuals do everyday
supports the organisational goals
HUMAN RESOURCE PLANNING
FOCUSDetermining the key
human resource needs, strategies and
philosophies of the organisation
COMPENSATION & JOB DESIGN FOCUS
Defining how tasks, authority and systems will be organised
and integrated across organisational units and in
individual jobs
Figure 17. Human Resource Wheel (McLagan, 1989)
In McLagan’s model, the primary HRM functions include HR research and
information systems, union/labour relations, employee assistance, and
compensation/benefits. HRD functions focus on improving and developing
individual employees and the organisation through training and development, and
career development. Functions that support both HRM and HRD are selection
and staffing, performance management systems, and human resource planning
(DeSimone et al., 2002). The “Human Resource Wheel” elaborates mainly the
functional or technical competencies as required by the HR practitioners. This
is important as the HR functions will support in developing the HR Practitioner
Competency Model.
87
The central focus for HR management is to contribute to organisational success.
Mathis and Jackson (2002) illustrates the typical HR management activities in
an organisation. This is given in Figure 18. HR management usually comprises of
several groups of interlinked activities and typical HR activities include HR
planning and analysis; equal employment opportunity; staffing; HR development;
compensation and benefits; health, safety and security; and employee and labour
management relations. However, HR professionals, too, must consider external
environmental forces including the legal, political, economic, social, cultural, and
technological aspects when addressing HR activities.
HR Planning and Analysis
• HR Planning
• HR Information and Assessment Systems
Equal Employment Opportunity
• Compliance
• Diversity
• Affirmative Action
Staffing
• Job Analysis
• Recruiting
• Selection
HR Development
• Orientation
• Training
• Employment Development
• Career Planning
• Performance Management
Compensation and Benefits
• Wage/Salary Administration
• Incentives
• Benefits
Health, Safety and Security
• Health and Wellness
• Safety
• Security
Employee and Labour/ Management Relation
• HR Policies
• Employee Rights and Privacy
• Union/Management Relations
Figure 18. Functions of HR Management (Mathis and Jackson, 2002)
The “Human Resource Wheel” set out by McLagan (1989) and the exemplary
functions of HR as given by Mathis and Jackson (2002) are basically the
technical or functional competencies that are required of the HR professionals.
88
The American Society for Training and Development further developed a Competency
Model in 2004. This is given in Figure 19. This model is broad to cover all workplace
learning and performance (WLP) professionals that include even the HR practitioners
(Bernthal et al., 2004).
This ASTD Competency Model includes three layers of knowledge and skill areas:
competencies, specific areas of professional expertise, and roles as given below:
� Competencies - The model divides the foundational competencies into three
clusters of competencies: interpersonal, business/management, and personal.
Altogether 12 competencies are identified in the three clusters.
� Areas of Expertise (AOEs) – These are specific technical and professional skills,
and knowledge required for success in WLP speciality areas. The AOEs are
positioned above the competencies because they direct and supplement the
competencies through specialised skills and knowledge. All the AOEs rely on the
specialised technologies, coaching, etc. to leverage and support their skills or
knowledge.
� Roles – These are broad areas of responsibility within the WLP profession that
require a certain combination of competencies and AOEs to perform effectively.
An individual can play more than one role. Roles occupy the peak of the model
because a vast body of underlying skills and knowledge supports their execution
(Bernthal et al., 2004).
89
Figure 19. 2004 ASTD Competency ModelTM (Bernthal et al., 2004)
Bernthal et al. (2004) in a further study on ASTD Competency Model, too, developed
an improved version of the “Human Resource Wheel.” This is given in Figure 20
below.
The improved “Human Resource Wheel” places more emphasis on business strategy.
At the centre of the wheel is the business strategy. As all the traditional HR and
organisational disciplines and AOEs, making up the “spokes” contribute to an
organisation’s success, they are aligned with the business strategy. This alignment
drives and contributes to business performance.
The left hand side of the wheel shows the AOEs, which represent the WLP
professional disciplines. The bottom left section highlights AOEs that focus primarily
on learning and development solutions as the means to improving performance. The
90
upper left section represents AOEs that are broader in focus. Traditional HR
disciplines only appear in the upper right section of the wheel unlike in the model
proposed by McLagan (1989) which places total emphasis on human resource
development and human resource management. The bottom right section includes
examples of other non-WLP or HR related organisational functions (Bernthal et al.,
2004; and McLagan, 1989).
Figure 20. Driving Business Performance (Bernthal et al., 2004)
It has been observed that over the last decade, there has been a tremendous
shift in the emphasis on the recognition of HR as a strategic business
contributor. Ulrich (1997) in his book, Human Resource Champions, stresses on
the importance of HR as a strategic partner and the emphasis involves HR in
several areas:
91
� Involvement in strategic planning,
� Decision making on mergers, acquisitions, and downsizing,
� Redesigning organisations and work processes,
� Ensuring financial accountability for HR results,
� Attracting and retaining human resources,
� Developing human resource capabilities, and
� Identifying and rewarding performance.
The research and writings of Ulrich has over the years given new breadth and
dimension on the recognition of HR and the role the HR Practitioners need to
play in the mainstream of organisational activities.
Categorising the competencies in HR can be a challenging task as it would
depend upon the different authorities and circumstances. Spencer and Spencer
(1993) used the term “core” competencies in place of “generic” competencies.
Among some of the core competencies that have been outlined by Spencer and
Spencer (1993) in their book, Competence at Work: Models for Superior
Performance include: self control, self confidence, organisational commitment,
flexibility, expertise, information seeking, analytical thinking, conceptual thinking,
achievement orientation, concern for order/accuracy/quality, initiative, interpersonal
understanding, customer service orientation, impact and influence, organisational
awareness, relationship building, directiveness, developing others, teamwork and
cooperation, team leadership, strategic thinking, change leadership, change
implementation, entrepreneurial innovation, empowering, team facilitation,
portability, achievement motivation, work motivation, and collaborativeness,
92
problem solving, decision making, influencing, directing and controlling,
opportunities seeking, persistence, efficiency orientation, persuasion, assertiveness,
and professional expertise.
Mansfield (1996) suggests that all individuals are expected to possess “core”
competencies regardless of their position in organisations. These can also be
termed as organisational competencies. Prahalad and Hamel (1990) uses the term
“core competency” to refer to the complex bundles of skills, technologies,
resources, capabilities, and processes that make a disproportionate contribution to
customer value. These give an organisation a competitive and distinct advantage.
As reported in a study (The Royal Canadian Mounted Police [RCMP], 1997), a set
of eight core competencies namely leadership, planning and organising, personal
effectiveness, flexibility, continuous learning, communication, interpersonal skills,
thinking skills, and client-centred service were established. A “core” competency
for RCMP refers to an individual’s demonstrated knowledge, skills, or abilities
in areas that are central to successful performance in the RCMP, regardless of
rank, responsibility, position, or function.
Dare and Leach (1999) reports that the competencies identified in Models for HRD
Practice by McLagan (1989) and later adapted as a definitive model of competencies
by the American Society for Training and Development (ASTD) appears to continue
to provide the basis for preparation of HRD professionals. These include:
� Technical competencies (adult-learning understanding, career development
theories and techniques understanding, competency identification skills,
93
computer competence, electronic-systems skills, evaluation skills, media
selection skills, training and development theories and techniques
understanding, and research skills).
� Business competencies (budget and resource management skills, business
understanding, organisation behaviour understanding, organisation
development and organisation – development theories, and techniques).
� Interpersonal competencies (coaching skills, feedback skills, group-process
skills, negotiation skills, presentation skills, questioning skills, relationship-
building skills, and writing skills).
� Intellectual competencies (data-reduction skills, information-search skills, and
visioning skills).
Schoonover (1997) examined 300 hundred HR professionals from various sectors and
observed several important HR competencies as follows:
� leadership style,
� management intuition,
� functional abilities, and
� personal attributes.
In an empirical study carried out by Wharton and Browne (2006) in an Australian
Company with regards to the competencies that are required for HR professionals, it
was observed that the most important competency is people skills. Besides this, other
important competencies are business acumen, HR delivery, influencing, and
leadership.
94
Chiu (1999) stresses that HR leaders need to be flexible and capable to alter existing
plans to accommodate sudden and long term changes by introducing creative
alternative to problem solving.
Mustafa (1999) asserts that competencies can be divided into two main types,
namely the core competencies, and functional, or technical competencies. Core
competencies focus on generic skills and knowledge, and are those that are
fundamental for development of the whole range of job specific abilities. The
functional, or technical competencies are specific vocational competencies that
focus on job specific knowledge and skills, generally related to a narrow range
of functions. Core, generic, and behavioural competencies are those competencies
that must be shared by all the employees and they reflect the organisational
vision, values, mission, and strategy.
According to Chua (2009), some of the generic competencies that are important for the
HR professionals in North Asia are: inspiring trust loyalty, respect for each other,
using team work and collaboration, continuous improvement, developing self and
others, entrepreneurship, commitment and accountability, and social responsibility.
But for South Asia, the generic leadership competencies that are important for the HR
professionals are: inspiring trust and loyalty, respect for each other, using teamwork
and collaboration, relationship building, impact and influence, developing self and
others, entrepreneurship, customer service orientation, and social responsibility (Chua,
2009).
95
In Malaysia, very little work appears to have been done with regards to the
competency development for the HR practitioners. An HR Practitioner
Competency Model has yet to be established and the National Vocational
Training Council which is a government agency has yet to develop even the
National Competency Standards for HR practitioners. Organisations in isolation
appoint consultants to undertake assignments in the development of competency
frameworks for the various positions in the organisations. The assignments are
generally conducted for the “core” (generic) competencies, although some in
isolation may establish the role specific and functional competencies (Palan,
2003; and Abdul Hamid, 2004).
Palan (2003) has developed competency models for organisations using
categories such as core competencies, role competencies, behavioural
competencies, and functional competencies. In his development of the models,
“core” competencies, he argues are unique to the organisation and the
appropriate definition used is as given by Prahalad and Hamel (1990) which is
the “bundle of skills and technologies that enable a company to provide a
disproportionately high value to customers.”
Palan (2003) asserts that the behavioural competencies are the underlying
characteristics having a causal relationship with effective or superior
performance and these are classified into tasks, personal attributes, relationships,
and service. Cooper (2000) defines behaviour in the competency context as “the
observable set of actions that demonstrate a competency.” As given in the
literature review earlier, the term “generic skills refer to those transferable skills
96
essential for employability which are relevant at different levels for most”
(NSTF, 2000).
In this research, one of the category of competencies is “generic/behavioural
competency category” and the definition offered by Kearns (2001) is used. It
refers to “all those competencies which can be used across a large number of
different occupations and they include key competencies but extend beyond
those to include a range of other cognitive, personal, and interpersonal skills
which are relevant to employability.”
Abdul Hamid (2004) outlines the work carried out on the development of
programmes for the Certification of HR practitioners in Malaysia. The
programmes for three different levels were developed for the HR practitioners
for the corporations in Malaysia. The programmes initially undertake the
facilitation of the modules relevant to the levels, and only thereafter an
assessment is carried out. Level 1 is for the Clerks, HR Assistants, and the
Junior Executives. Level 2 is for Executives and up to Managers (Junior
standing). Level 3 is for Managers and higher positions. For Level 1, only the
functional competencies are covered in the certification process and it includes
the areas: human resource planning and acquisition, compensation and benefits,
learning and human capital development, employment laws and legislation, and
occupational safety, health and security. Level 2 includes both the functional and
core/generic competencies. The functional competencies cover the human
resource planning and acquisition, employee relations and organisational
development, compensation and benefits, employment laws and regulations,
97
occupational safety, health, and environment. The core/generic competencies
include: project management, financial management, and professionalism, and
management.
Occupational Safety Health and Security
Human Resource Planning and Acquisition
Employment Laws and Legislation
(Basic)
Compensation and Benefits
Learning & Human Capital
Development
LEVEL I
Functional Competencies
Figure 21a. Competency Framework for Level 1 (Abdul Hamid, 2004)
98
Figure 21b. Competency Framework for Level 2 (Abdul Hamid, 2004)
Figure 21c. Competency Framework for Level 3 (Abdul Hamid, 2004)
99
In Level 3, the functional competencies include human resource planning and
acquisition, organisational and management development, compensation and
benefits, performance management and human performance improvement, and
employee relations legislation. In Level 3, the core/generic competencies include:
project management, financial management, strategic profile and business strategy,
and professionalism and management. The programmes are developed and
structured to match the capability/mastery levels as expected of the different
levels of HR practitioners. These are given in Figures 21a, 21b, and 21c as
above.
The Human Resource Certification Institute (HRCI) is the certifying body for
the human resource profession in the USA. There are two levels of assessments
carried out by HRCI. The Professional in Human Resource (PHR) certification
measures the individual’s ability to apply HR knowledge at an operational level
or technical level. The Senior Professional in Human Resources (SPHR)
certification measures the individual’s strategic perspective and ability to address
issues with organisation wide impact. For both of the assessments, the HR
practitioners are assessed in six functional areas of the Human Resource Body of
Knowledge (HRBOK) that include: strategic management; workforce planning and
employment; human resource development; compensation and benefits; employee
and labour relations; and occupational health, safety and security (Bogardus,
2004).
The Body of Knowledge assessed by the HR Certification programmes as
outlined by Abdul Hamid (2004) and the HRCI (Bogardus, 2004) mainly covers
100
competency domains from the generic/behavioural, and technical HR competency
categories.
It is observed that other institutions that deal with education and training of human
resource management in Malaysia have strong technical/functional competency
elements in the programmes. Most of them however adopt the traditional academic
analytical and descriptive models.
2.8 General Observation
There is very limited academic literature available on the development of
Human Resource Practitioner Competency Models. Most of the academic
literature available is mainly on the study of competencies, generic skills, and
workplace competencies, or on functional/technical competencies of HR
practitioners. This is possibly due to the limited work that has been carried out
in this area globally, and even in Malaysia.
Selmer and Randy (2004) surveyed 3000 HR professionals, consultants, line
executives, and academicians. The empirical study carried out in Hong Kong outlines
that HR professionals should master both traditional and new skill areas including:
HRM concepts and functional knowledge, communication, project management,
international management, diversity management, market knowledge, international
leadership, continuous change and innovation, strategic problem solving, community
relations, business partnerships, employee involvement, employee champion, team
development, empowerment, organisation development, and global business
knowledge.
101
An empirical study was carried out by the Hong Kong Institute of Human Resource
Management and the University of Michigan’s Business School in 1998 involving HR
practitioners and associates (Selmer and Randy, 2004). The list of significant and
important competencies for HR practitioners established in the study is given as
follows:
� Human resource knowledge,
� Professional personal skills,
� Labour relations,
� Change agent,
� Innovation and crisis management,
� Financial/business knowledge,
� Organisational knowledge, and
� Corporate relations (Selmer and Randy, 2004).
Ramlall (2006) carried out a study on HR competencies and it was found that the most
important competencies for the HR professionals were knowledge of business, HR
delivery, and strategic contribution. However, in the study, the HR professionals, too,
ranked their own competency levels and the highest ranked competencies were: the
ability to deliver HR services, technical competencies in HR, ability to manage
change, self-assessment of knowledge of the business, and the ability to manage an
organisation’s culture.
Selmer and Randy (2004) asserts that in the study conducted by Hong Kong Institute
of Human Resource Management and the University of Michigan’s Business School
in 1998, the competency “change agent” was the biggest challenge faced by the HR
102
professionals. Business firms must be flexible to change forms and structures to suit to
the ever changing market environment. The study, too, observes that, as HRM
responsibilities change from a function oriented to a process – oriented culture; HR
managers need to initiate and coordinate business process or subsystems in order to
offer services that contribute to organisational and business successes.
Selmer and Randy (2004) observes that technical competencies which include
knowledge and delivery of traditional HRM are still very important and relevant
competencies in organisations.
In Malaysia, Junaidah (2007) carried out an empirical study on the type and level of
competencies possessed by the human resource managers from the top management
perspective. This study was based on the Human Resource Competency Model
developed by Ulrich, Brockbank, Yeung, and Lake (1995). The competency domains
studied include: business mastery, human resource mastery, change mastery,
organisational culture mastery, and personal credibility. The sample of study consists
of medium-sized Malaysian manufacturing companies with not more than 1000
employees. The sample size of the study was 360 and the total responses received
were 55. Based on the study, the human resource managers are satisfactorily
competent in business mastery, they are competent in human resource management
mastery, unsatisfactorily competent in managing change mastery, fairy competent in
managing culture mastery, and satisfactorily competent in personal credibility. The
study, too, reveals that the most important competency human resource managers
should acquire is “business mastery” and they should be aware of the organisation’s
business, and understand its economic and financial strength.
103
Choi and Wan Khairuzzaman (2008) examined competencies and roles of HR
professionals in the manufacturing companies in Malaysia. Based on the study, the top
ranking competency factors are: personal communication, legal compliance, effective
relationship, and performance management.
The most notable studies are those that are carried out in particular by the
Business School of the University of Michigan, USA and WFPMA. The
empirical study carried out by the Business School of the University of
Michigan, USA in collaboration with the RBL Group has been carried out
consistently and the latest being that model established in 2007 (Brewster et al.,
2000; and Ulrich et al., 2008). Most of the studies in USA and the UK were
initiated sometime in mid 1980s, and it appears that interest has grown even
more in the twenty first century.
Most of the work carried out by other researchers is mainly extrapolated from
the progressive studies carried out by the University of Michigan, USA in
collaboration with the RBL Group, or others like the American Society for
Training and Development. The work carried out by Chen et al. (2005), too, is
somewhat related to the work carried out the University of Michigan. The
study however used the competency groups developed by the American Society
for Training and Development (ASTD) models for work place learning and
performance to research the importance of the work place competencies for the
HR practitioners in Taiwan.
104
Khatri (1999) notes that in Singapore, “the state of HR function and
competencies of HR managers is not satisfactory.” Despite many theoretical and
empirical studies in strategic HRM, no coherent theoretical framework has
emerged in the discipline. An understanding of those issues would go a long way in
developing a coherent body of knowledge in the field. A major limitation of prior
work in the strategic HRM area according to Khatri is the lack of in-depth
qualitative studies and this form of research is very much needed in strategic
HRM in developing comprehensive and more valued models and framework.
Most of the studies in strategic HRM field are based on the western context
and there is relatively little research in the eastern context (Khatri, 1999).
Boxall and Dowling (1990) notes that seminal HRM texts are all American and
the most significant critical responses to date have been British. Conducting
strategic HRM studies in other parts of the world especially in Asia, would
help to meet the shortage of empirical work in the field in those parts of the
world and also serve as a vehicle for comparative studies.
Hsu and Seat (2000) observes that in the academic literature, many of the
prominent theoretical or analytical models of HRM and strategic HRM have
been developed by American, or European researchers. Most of these models
reflect the particular cultural characteristics of their country of origin and this
sometimes raises questions about the applicability of those western-oriented
models in a different cultural and contextual environment (Hsu and Seat, 2000).
105
According to Hofstede (2001), there are five dimensions of country cultures that he
observes in his study on national work related values. Those include: power distance;
individualism; uncertainty avoidance; masculinity; and short and long term
orientation. Those dimensions of culture affect the behaviour of organisations and
possibly because of this, the HR competency-based models/frameworks developed in
the U.S. and Europe may not be suitable for application in Malaysia. Hofstede and
Hofstede (2005) asserts that although foreign subsidiaries formally adopt home
culture, ideas, and policies, they will internally function according to the value
systems and beliefs of the host culture. This is important as there are several
Multinational corporations operating in Malaysia.
Galang (2008) posits that in HRM, the question of convergence or divergence
continues to be debated or researched. Convergence theorists argue that market,
economic, and technological forces will lead to organisations in different countries
becoming similar; while divergence theorists point to institutional or socio political
factors that will maintain or increase the differences across countries.
Sparrow et al. (1994) used survey data gathered by IBM and Towers Perrin to study
the convergence and divergence of HR practices and policies in several countries in
different regions including North America, Europe, Asia, and Latin America. The
objective of the study was to find out on the importance given to various HRM
policies and practices in gaining competitive advantage in the year 1991 and for the
future (year 2001). It was observed that countries clustered in five groups in
accordance to the culture: the Anglo-Saxon cluster (Australia, Canada, U.S., U.K.,
Germany, and Italy); the Latin American cluster (Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico); and
106
the cultural islands of France, Korea, and Japan. It, too, was observed that for all the
clusters, there was a greater emphasis on empowerment; equality; diversity
management; flexibility in job design; flatter organisational structures; customer focus
in performance and compensation; flexibility in staffing, training, and exit decisions;
and greater communication with employees. Sparrow et al. (1994) asserts that HRM
systems are moving in the direction towards convergence.
According to Rowley and Benson (2004), convergence of some HRM practices
towards a more “western” model in eight different Asian countries (China, Hong
Kong, Japan, South Korea, Phillipines, Singapore, Taiwan, and Thailand) is taking
place, specifically with respect to merit-based selection, performance-based pay,
employment contracts, harmonised work conditions, and continuous in-house training.
However at the policy level, strategic role of personnel managers, and line managers
taking a more active interest in HR issues; less change was happening with respect to
beliefs and assumptions.
Zhu et al. (2007) in examining various studies carried out in China, Japan, Malaysia,
South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam posits that people-management system
in those countries is of a “hybrid” model, combining aspects from the U.S. and
European models with the prevailing practices. They, too, argue that the western
models are likewise influenced by Asian ways of managing people.
The studies carried out by Sparrow et al. (1994), Rowley and Benson (2004), Hostede
and Hofstede (2005), Zhu et al. (2007), and Galang (2008) show that the HRM
practices in the Asian countries are to some extent influenced by the local culture and
107
diversity. Human resource management practices, too, are to some extent converging
and the HR models/frameworks developed in the east are influenced by the
models/frameworks developed in the west.
As given above, very few empirically tested models have been developed in
Asia, and particularly in Malaysia. There is a great need to develop an HR
Practitioner Competency Model for a developing country like Malaysia.
2.9 Conclusion
The intensity of globalisation has somewhat forced the HR professionals to re-
examine their practices and change accordingly to suit to the changing needs and
challenges. Organisations today are operating in a much more complex, competitive,
and challenging environment. HR departments today are expected to operate more
strategically and proactively. Ulrich et al. (2009) asserts that the competencies that all
the HR practitioners once needed are no longer sufficient in the new world of HR
challenges.
The descriptive, analytical, and normative HR models provide the basic framework of
HRM. During the initial years of its inception in the late 1970s and 1980s, HRM was
still in its quest for its form, and it was during this period, the HR models established
were somewhat academic in nature. However, over time, especially in the late 1980s,
1990s, and the twenty first century, the direction was towards the establishment of
competency-based HR models. The HR competency-based models/frameworks
developed by Ulrich et al. (2008), Brockbank and Ulrich (2003), McLagan (1989),
Brewster et al. (2000), Bernthal et al. (2004), and others are somewhat practical and
108
useful models. These models basically set out the activities that the HR practitioners
must engage in to be successful in the HR profession. These models, too, are used by
organisations to further map out their own HR models/frameworks.
However most of the models were developed and tested in the west and may not be
suitable for application in the east including Malaysia. There appears to be a scarcity
of research in the establishment and development of empirically tested local
indigenous HR models/frameworks in the east. As outlined in the literature review, the
researchers (Boxall & Dowling, 1990; Khatri, 1999; and Hsu & Seat, 2000) assert that
more work needs to be carried out in the east including that in Malaysia.
This research, The Development of Human Resource Practitioner Competency Model
Perceived by Malaysian Human Resource Practitioners and Consultants is somewhat
filling up the apparent gap in the area. This research is based on in depth analysis of
previous notable studies carried out by Brewster et al. (2000); Brockbank and Ulrich
(2003); Spencer and Spencer (1993); Mc Daniel (1998); Butteriss (1998); Schoonover
(2003); Schweyer (2004); Chen et al. (2005); IPMA (2005); and Ulrich et al. (2008)
as given in the literature review. The study undertaken in this research is narrowly
focused and aims at developing an HR Practitioner Competency Model. The approach
undertaken is however slightly different as compared to the above given studies. The
competency factors and the competency domains in this study were systematically
clustered under the “generic/behavioural competency category,” the “technical HR
competency category,” and the “business competency category.”
109
As outlined in the literature review, there is a great need to develop an HR Practitioner
Competency Model for a developing country like Malaysia. This is because the HR
models/frameworks used as reference are those developed in the west. This research
will compliment the studies carried out by other researchers globally. HRM is an
organic field with great challenges and such studies must be carried out continuously
to bring about a value in HRM.
110
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Background
The literature review in the previous section illustrates the need to carry out
empirical studies on establishing an HR Practitioner Competency Model. The
studies carried out in particular by the World Federation of Personnel Management
Associations (WFPMA) (Brewster et al., 2000), the University of Michigan
(Brockbank and Ulrich, 2003), and Ulrich et al. (2008) strongly inspired the keen
interest in carrying out the study.
This chapter presents a detailed review of the research methods that were used
in developing the HR Practitioner Competency Model. This research is aimed at
producing an HR Practitioner Competency Model that is empirically established. This
chapter describes the methodology from which the model was derived. Research
methodology is included to instill confidence in the model and the research
methods from which the model was derived. This study employs both the
quantitative and qualitative approaches as an in depth understanding is necessary
in the establishment of the HR Practitioner Competency Model. The quantitative
approach basically employs a survey design using multi-item scales with five -
point Likert response formats for all measures (Likert,1932; and Sekaran, 2003) and
those procedures as prescribed by Fowler (2002). Qualitative exploratory research
was utilised to design the survey questionnaire.
111
This chapter includes sections on conceptual/theoretical framework, research
framework, research procedures, research tools, sampling procedures and population,
data collection procedures, and statistical testing and data analysis procedures.
3.2 Conceptual / Theoretical Framework
The aim of the research was to develop an empirically substantiated HR
Resource Practitioner Competency Model. The model was developed through
the administration of a survey instrument i.e., a survey questionnaire and the
target respondents were the HR practitioners and HR consultants in Malaysia.
The conceptual/theoretical framework of the study is given in Table 2 and Figure 22.
112
Table 2. Conceptual / Theoretical Framework of Study
Competency Category
Competency Domain
Competency Factor
Leadership � Process management � Leadership � Team leadership
� Directiveness � Motivation and drive
Building work relationship
� Flexibility � Communication skills � Tolerance � Adaptability � Interpersonal skills � Cross-cultural sensitivity
� Results orientation � Team work � Resilience � Commitment � Relationship building � Changing composition of
workforce Personal credibility and attributes
� Personal effectiveness � Loyalty � Strong initiative � Pro-activeness
� Persistency � Professional image � Pride at work � High integrity
Generic/ Behavioural Competency Category
Self-development
� Ability to change � Analytical thinking � Information seeking
� Conceptual thinking � Continuous learning
Entrepreneuri-al and business acumen
� Financial knowledge � Consulting skills � Accountability � Sales and marketing � Accounting knowledge � Information & communication
technology � Business process design
� Entrepreneurial skills � Responsibility � Project management � Knowledge management � Globalisation awareness � Technology awareness
Strategic orientation
� Strategic alignment � Strategic thinking
� Strategic planning
Customer orientation
� Customer satisfaction � Consciousness toward quality
� Knowledge of products/services � Responsiveness
Business Competency Category
Essential performance enablers
� Decision making � Problem solving skills � Professionalism and ethics � Facilitation skills � Presentation skills � Negotiation skills � Persuasion skills � Creativity
� Management skills � Handling conflict � Managing resources � Command of English language � Writing skills � Influencing skills � Innovation
Resourcing and talent management
� Recruitment and selection � HR planning & acquisition � Policy formulation � Organisational development
� Talent management system � Talent retention � HR strategy � Human resource information
system Learning and development
� Human resource development � Career planning
� Succession planning
Rewards and performance management
� Salary and payroll administration
� Rewards management � HR performance measurement � Human performance technology
� Compensation and benefits � Performance management and
development � Human performance improvement
Technical HR Competency Category
Employee relations and compliance
� Employee relations � Staff welfare � Termination and separation � Security management
� Discipline � Employment laws and legislation � Occupational safety and health
113
Figu
re 2
2. C
once
ptua
l/The
oret
ical
Fra
mew
ork
of S
tudy
114
The approach to the study is based on the competencies that are desired of the
HR practitioners in the private sector. Previous studies carried out in similar
vein by the WFPMA (Brewster et al., 2000), the University of Michigan
(Brockbank and Ulrich, 2003), and Ulrich et al. (2008) provided the framework for
this thesis’s basic enquiry. The empirical studies carried out by University of
Michigan (Brockbank and Ulrich, 2003) over several years established a model
depicting five competency domains. The competency domains established are:
strategic contribution, personal credibility, business knowledge, HR delivery, and HR
technology. The competency domains constitute various competency factors. The
survey was extensively done in Europe, Asia, Latin America, and the USA.
In the study carried out by Brockbank and Ulrich (2003), the impact of the five
competency domains on business performance was studied. It, too, identified the
specific areas in which the HR practitioners excelled. The study carried out by
Ulrich et al. (2008) was a continuation of that carried out by Brockbank and
Ulrich (2003). The HR Competency Model established was, however, different
as it was observed that competency domains that impact business performance
have changed. The competency domains established in the study carried out by Ulrich
et al., (2008) are: credible activist, business ally, operational executor, talent
manager/organisation designer, culture and change steward, and strategy architect.
This research was primarily based on the grounded competency models established by
Brockbank and Ulrich (2003) and Ulrich et al. (2008).
The aim of the study carried out by WFMPA (Brewster et al., 2000) was to
develop a worldwide definition of who an “HR professional” is and does in
115
terms of a global set of core competencies; how do different countries define the
use of standards for what constitutes an HR professional; and what are the
competencies they will need to be able to apply at various levels of their
professional activities from the operational to the most strategic levels. A list of
different competency factors and competency domains were outlined in the
survey and the respondents were requested to provide feedback on their
involvement in the given areas.
Other studies that were carried out in the past prior to those carried out by Brewster et
al. (2000), Brockbank and Ulrich (2003), and Ulrich et al. (2008) on the HR
competency models were mainly pertaining to the conceptual constructs of
descriptive, analytical, and normative models.
The research undertaken is an extrapolation of the studies carried out primarily by
Brockbank and Ulrich (2003) and Ulrich et al. (2008). However the approach
undertaken is slightly different as compared to the above given studies. The study
undertaken in this research is narrowly focused and aims at only developing an HR
Practitioner Competency Model. As given in the conceptual/theoretical framework of
the study in Table 2 and Figure 22, the three competency categories, competency
domains, and the competency factors were derived from an in depth analysis of
previous notable studies carried out by Brewster et al. (2000); Brockbank and Ulrich
(2003); Spencer and Spencer (1993); McDaniel (1998); Butteriss (1998); Schoonover
(2003); Schweyer (2004); Chen et al. (2005); IPMA (2005); and Ulrich et al. (2008).
116
The study intends to identify and analyse the competency factors which are the
measured variables that are important to the HR practitioners in the industry.
The list of competency factors set out in each of the competency categories are
broad and covers a wide spectrum of knowledge, skills, and attributes.
Competency factors were primarily selected from the studies carried out by
Brewster et al. (2000); and Brockbank and Ulrich (2003), Ulrich et al. (2008), and
those offered by Spencer and Spencer (1993).
Unlike that carried out by Brockbank and Ulrich (2003) and Ulrich et al. (2008),
the competency domains in this study were not made known upfront to the
respondents in the survey questionnaires. All the given competency factors set out
in the survey questionnaires were clustered into the established competency
domains upon the collection of the data. For the generic/ behavioural competency
category, the four competency domains established were “leadership,” “building work
relationship,” “personal credibility and attributes,” and “self-development.” For the
business competency category, the four competency domains established were
“entrepreneurial and business acumen,” “strategic orientation,” “customer
orientation,” and “essential performance enablers.” And for the technical HR
competency category, the four competency domains established were “resourcing and
talent management,” “learning and development,” “rewards and performance
management,” and “employee relations and compliance.” Competency domains that
were important and significant, together formed the HR Practitioner Competency
Model. This approach was used in the current study as the competency domains had
been explained by previous studies. The current study therefore sought to confirm
what has already been established in some of the earlier studies.
117
The study carried out is an empirical study and it was limited to the
development of the HR Practitioner Competency Model for the management
level of employees in the private sector. Management level employees refer to
those who are Supervisors, Administrative Officers, Executives, Managers, Senior
Managers, General Managers, Directors, etc. and those above in standing. Because
of this, the respondents for the survey questionnaire were targeted at this level,
too. The survey was restricted only to HR practitioners who were working in the
private sector.
Since the HR Practitioner Competency Model is a pragmatic model, the
approach undertaken by the study must reflect upon a model that is viable,
practical, and easily immediately applicable by the HR practitioners. Should there
be gaps in the acquisition of knowledge and the practices of HR skills, these
can be easily recognised, and development programmes can then be carried out
by the organisations.
Besides the HR practitioners, the survey, too, included HR consultants.
118
3.3 Research Framework
In the industry, it is observed that both HR practitioners and HR consultants to
an extent have some influence on the competencies that are deemed necessary
in the human resource management profession. It is because of that the
respondents for this study and the units of analysis were the HR practitioners
and HR consultants.
Figure 22 above sets out the conceptual/theoretical framework of the study. In the
study, the proposed HR Practitioner Competency Model comprised of the three
competency categories: generic/behavioural competency category, business
competency category, and technical HR competency category.
In the category of generic/behavioural competency, 30 competency factors were
included in the survey. For the technical HR category of competencies, 25
competency factors were included in the survey. Due to the importance of HR
playing an active role in the mainstream operations and business strategy of
organisations as given in the academic literature survey, the category of business
competencies, too, was included in the study. Altogether, 35 competency factors
representing the business competencies category were included in the survey
questionnaire. Table 2 above (conceptual/theoretical framework of study) sets out the
three competency categories with their respective competency domains, and
competency factors.
119
Besides the above, the survey, too, gauged the need for the development of the
HR Practitioner Competency Model. For this section, altogether 13 questions in
the form of brief statements were included in the survey questionnaire.
One set of survey questionnaires for both the HR practitioners and HR consultants was
used. However only the section on background information and respondent’s profile
was different. The units of analysis were both the HR practitioners and HR
consultants. This was necessary to get balanced and non biased responses in the
development of the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
In this study, the HR practitioner is synonymous with HR professional. The Webster’s
New World Dictionary and Thesaurus defines a professional as “those engaged
in some sport or in a specified occupation for pay” (Agnes, 1996). A
professional is “a person who is qualified to practice in addition to having a
specific body of knowledge and ethical code of conduct” (Brewster et al., 2000).
In this study, the definition offered by Brewster et al. 2000) is used for the HR
practitioner.
The Webster’s New World Dictionary and Thesaurus defines a consultant as
“an expert who gives professional or technical advice” (Agnes, 1996). In this
study, the definition offered by Agnes (1996) is used for the HR consultant.
Upon obtaining the response from the respondents i.e., both the HR
practitioners and HR consultants, the competency factors were analysed using
inferential statistical techniques including factor analysis and Structural equation
120
modeling (SEM). Both exploratory and confirmatory factor analytical techniques were
used in the study. As given in Figure 22 above, the HR Practitioner Competency
Model was established utilising both HR practitioners and HR consultants as the
respondents.
Generic/BehaviouralCompetency
Category
BusinessCompetency
Category
Technical/ HR
CompetencyCategory
HR PractitionerCompetency Model
Self-developmentPersonal credibility &attributes
Building workrelationship
StrategicOrientation
CustomerOrientation
Essential Performance
Enablers
Resourcing andTalent Management
Learning andDevelopment
Rewards andPerformanceManagement
Leadership
Entrepreneurial &Business Acumen
Employee Relations& Compliance
Figure 23. Research Framework of the Study
121
3.3.1 Hypotheses
The research framework of the study (i.e., the hypothesised model of the research) is
given in Figure 23 above. Table 3 below sets out the alignment of the relationship of
various parameters undertaken in the study. The research questions, research
objectives, hypotheses, and the statistical analysis techniques used in the study are
further given in Table 3.
122
Table 3. Alignment of the Relationship of Various Research Parameters of the Study
NO. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES HYPOTHESES
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
TECHNIQUES 1 To determine the latent
variables in the construct of the generic/ behavioural competency category
None
2nd Order Analysis of Latent Construct Variables
2 To determine the latent variables in the construct of the business competency category
None 2nd Order Analysis of Latent Construct Variables
1. To what extent all the latent variables (competency domains) befit into the corresponding constructs of the generic/behavioural competency category, the business competency category, and the technical HR competency category?
3 To determine the latent variables in the construct of the technical HR competency category
None 2nd Order Analysis of Latent Construct Variables
4 To examine the influence of the generic/behavioural competency category on the HR Practitioner Competency Model
The generic/ behavioural competency category has a direct and positive relationship with the HR Practitioner Competency Model (H1)
Direct Effect of Re-Specified Model
5 To examine the influence of the business competency category on the HR Practitioner Competency Model
The business competency category has a direct and positive relationship with the HR Practitioner Competency Model (H2)
Direct Effect of Re-Specified Model
2. Is the HR Practitioner Competency Model influenced by the constructs of the generic/behavioural competency category, the business competency category, and the technical HR competency category?
6 To examine the influence of the technical HR competency category on the HR Practitioner Competency Model
The technical HR competency category has a direct and positive relationship with the HR Practitioner Competency Model (H3)
Direct Effect of Re-Specified Model
7 To determine the interactional effect between the construct of the generic/behavioural competency category and the HR Practitioner Competency Model
HR practitioners and HR consultants have interactional effect with regards to the constructs of the generic/ behavioural competency category and the HR Practitioner Competency Model (H4)
Structural Analysis of Re-Specified Model
3. To what extent the interactional effect of the HR practitioners and the HR consultants on the constructs of the generic/behavioural competency category, the business competency category, and the technical HR competency category influence the HR Practitioner Competency Model? 8 To determine the
interactional effect between the construct of
HR practitioners and HR consultants have
Structural Analysis of Re-Specified Model
123
the business competency category and the HR Practitioner Competency Model
interactional effect with regards to the constructs of the business competency category and the HR Practitioner Competency Model (H5)
9 To determine the interactional effect between the construct of the technical HR competency category and the HR Practitioner Competency Model
HR practitioners and HR consultants have interactional effect with regards to the constructs of the technical HR competency category and the HR Practitioner Competency Model (H6)
Structural Analysis of Re-Specified Model
10 To determine the interactional effect between the construct of the generic/behavioural competency category, the business competency category, and technical HR competency category on the HR Practitioner Competency Model
HR practitioners and HR consultants have interactional effect with regards to the constructs of the generic/ behavioural competency category, the business competency category, the technical HR competency category, and the HR Practitioner Competency Model (H7)
Structural Analysis of Re-Specified Model
124
3.4 Research Procedures
Figure 24 sets out the research procedures of the study. From the academic
literature review, the intended area of research was established based on the
focal and background theories. The measurement/observed variables in this study
were the competency factors in three broad categories of competencies namely
the generic/behavioural competencies, the technical HR competencies, and the
business competencies. All the three competency categories or constructs are the latent
variables. The appropriate and relevant survey questionnaires were developed to
seek responses from both the HR practitioners and HR consultants.
125
Figu
re 2
4: R
esea
rch
Proc
edur
es o
f Stu
dy
126
A pilot test was carried out. The survey questionnaire was tested using a selected
group of 50 HR practitioners. A pilot test was necessary to measure the reliability
and validity of the competency factors that are tested. Cooper and Schindler (2003)
asserts that a pilot test is conducted to detect weaknesses in design and
instrumentation. The size of a pilot group may range from 25 to 100 subjects. The
results of the pilot test are given in the Appendix 1.
The Cronbach’s alpha levels for generic/behavioural competency category, business
competency category, and technical HR competency category were 0.922, 0.932, and
0.886 respectively. All the Cronbach’s alpha levels were acceptable as the values were
more than 0.7 (Nunnally, 1978). Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient measures how
well a set of items measure a single unidimensional construct. It, too, explains the
internal consistency of the items in the scales. Therefore, the scales of the instrument
were reliable and the instrument was fit. Due to the acceptable levels of Cronbach’s
alpha, no items were dropped from the survey questionnaires.
The questionnaires were mailed to all the HR practitioners. But for the HR
consultants, the questionnaires were either mailed or personally handed to them. For
further analysis, the competency factors of each of the competency categories were
clustered into competency domains. These are set out in Table 2
(Conceptual/theoretical framework of study). This was done qualitatively and was
based upon previous studies carried out by Spencer and Spencer (1993); Mc Daniel
(1998); Butteriss (1998); Brewster et al. (2000); Brockbank and Ulrich (2003);
Schoonover (2003); Schweyer (2004); Chen et al. (2005); IPMA (2005); and Ulrich et
al. (2008). Data was collected and thereafter analysed.
127
To ensure the credibility and validity of the HR Practitioner Competency Model, the
concept of triangulation was used in the study. The study was triangulated based upon
the data involving two different units of analysis: HR consultants and HR
practitioners; and method employing two sets of survey questionnaires (i.e., one set for
the HR practitioners and the other for the HR consultants). Overall, the research
methodology was based on the concept of triangulation, combining qualitative and
quantitative analysis (Denzin, 1978; Meetoo and Temple, 2003; and Neuman, 2006).
Dentzin (1970), too, extends the idea of triangulation beyond its conventional
association with research methods and designs. Data triangulation, too, refers to
gathering data through several sampling strategies, at different times and social
situations, as well as on a variety of people.
3.5 Research Tools
3.5.1 Research Instrument and Questionnaire Design
A self-developed questionnaire was formulated mostly based on the studies carried out
by Brewster et al. (2000); Brockbank and Ulrich (2003), and Ulrich et al. (2008). Then
the survey questionnaire was designed using the following primary steps:
� The researcher examined the available academic literature on HR and
related management models on knowledge, skills, and abilities to identify
the competency factors that were included in the three competency
categories: generic/behavioural competencies, technical HR competencies, and
business competencies. The views of selected HR practitioners and HR
consultants, too, were sought in identifying the suitable competency factors.
128
� The researcher then developed questions pertaining to the need for the
development of HR Practitioner Competency Model.
� A survey questionnaire was generated and pilot-tested with 50 selected
HR practitioners. A cross section of the HR practitioners with ranging
years of experience were chosen to provide valuable feedback.
� The survey questionnaire, too, included a section on the background
information and respondent’s profile for both the HR practitioners and
the HR consultants.
� The survey questionnaire included five sections: background information
and respondent’s profile separately for the HR practitioners and the HR
consultants; generic/behavioural competency category; technical HR
competency category; business competency category, and HR Practitioner
Competency Model Development.
Structured questionnaires for both the HR practitioners and HR consultants were
used to acquire the necessary data for the research. The questionnaires were
prepared in English Language to avoid misleading and controversial
interpretations. As English is the second language in Malaysia, and the language
for business transactions, the researcher is confident that the respondents were
familiar with the language.
The questionnaires comprised of several sections. These are given in Appendixes 2
and 3. For the HR practitioner, the first section is on the respondent’s profile,
which requires the respondent to provide information about his/her background,
personal profile, and the organisation he/she is working for. An important sub
129
section is on the category of economic sector (i.e., either manufacturing or services)
the HR practitioner is engaged in, too, was included. But for the HR consultant, the
information required was about his/her personal profile, organisations he/she has
worked for in the past, and the nature of organisations he/she is providing
consultancy service to. For both the HR practitioners and the HR consultants,
the names of the individuals were kept anonymous.
The second section of the questionnaires consisted of measurement of competency
factors in the generic/behavioural competency category. Respondents were required
to respond to 30 given competency factors.
The third section of the questionnaires consisted of measurement of competency
factors in the technical HR competency category. Respondents were required to
respond to 25 given competency factors.
The fourth section of the questionnaires consisted of measurement of competency
factors in the business competency category. Respondents were required to respond
to 35 given competency factors.
The fifth section of the questionnaires was on the importance and relevance on
development of the HR Practitioner Competency Model. Responses from both HR
practitioners and HR consultants were sought for this section. Altogether 13
questions were included in this section.
130
3.5.2 Scaling Techniques
For the three competency categories, the respondents’ perceptions were measured
by way of a five - point likert interval scale based on the importance of the
particular competency factor (i.e., measurement variable) in establishing the HR
Practitioner Competency Model. It ranged from “not important” to “very
important.” Since the research is an empirical study, nominal scales were used to
examine the profile of the respondents. Although the nominal scale is regarded
as the least powerful measurement scale, nevertheless it provides some basic,
categorical, and gross information (Sekaran, 2003).
Except for section one (i.e., the respondent’s profile), all the remaining sections of the
survey questionnaire used the interval scales of measuring the variables where
respondents were asked to respond to items that measured a variable through
the five- point scale.
In understanding the importance on the development of the HR Practitioner
Competency Model, structured questions, too, were developed. It ranged from
“strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.”
3.6 Sampling Procedures and Population
The list of organisations in Malaysia were obtained from a number of primary
sources - directories of information including the Federation of Malaysian
Manufacturers (FMM, 2007), Human Resource Development Council (HRDC,
2006) database of employers, SMI Malaysia – Web Guide (SMI, 2006), and Safety,
Health, and Environmental Directory (2003). Information, too, was obtained from
131
secondary sources including the local newspapers including the STAR and New
Straits Times edition published on Saturdays, yellow pages, and the internet. The
local newspapers, too, are important as they generally include addresses of new
organisations, or those that are not registered in the given directories.
The population for this study was limited only to the HR practitioners who
were working in the manufacturing and services-based organisations in Malaysia.
It, too, included the HR consultants who are providing service to the Malaysian
or MNCs in Malaysia.
The database of all the HR practitioners were compiled from the sources as mentioned
above. After deleting duplicates and individuals with job roles and responsibilities that
were not related to HR, a list of 3500 HR practitioners was compiled. Out of this
population, a sample size of 1100 HR practitioners were selected through
disproportionate stratified random sampling frame.
Disproportionate stratified random sampling procedures as prescribed by Sekaran
(2003) were used. The disproportionate stratified random sampling was used because
for the sample size, each important segment of the population is better represented and
more valuable, and differentiated information can be obtained with respect to each
group (Sekaran, 2003). In particular for the services category of economic sector as set
out in questionnaire for the HR practitioners, it included several sub-sectors that are
too small or too large. For this, the most appropriate sampling design is
disproportionate stratified random sampling frame.
132
Altogether 660 survey questionnaires which is equivalent to 60% of the total survey
questionnaires were sent to the manufacturing sector, and the balance of 440 (i.e.,
40%) were sent to the services sector. The reason for sending more survey
questionnaires to the manufacturing sector is because of the availability of reliable
database unlike the services economic sector. All the survey questionnaires were
mailed directly to the HR practitioners or the organisations. For organisations
with available electronic mail addresses, web page based surveys, too, were sent
to ensure higher rate of response.
The survey questionnaire was accompanied by a cover letter introducing the
study together with a postage paid self addressed envelope. The unit of analysis
was the individual himself/herself.
For the HR practitioners, they were chosen from medium scale and large
organisations. The National SME Development Council of Malaysia offers the
definitions for the medium scale industries. In the manufacturing, manufacturing
related services, and agro-based industries, it refers to those enterprises with
sales turnover of between RM10 million to RM25 million or with 51 to 150 full
time employees. But for the service, primary agriculture, and information and
communication technology industries, it refers to those enterprises with sales
turnover of between RM1 million to RM5 million or with 20 to 50 full-time
employees (Mohd. Khairuddin, 2007). The organisations chosen for the study were
based on the minimum criteria as given by the definition of medium scale
industries. Using the definitions given above, on the medium scale industries,
70% of the organisations chosen were large organisations.
133
The reason for choosing such samples was because in the opinion of the
researcher, the HR practitioners in the medium or large scale industries are
exposed to different and challenging human resource practices and operations.
Such organisations generally have structured human resource departments and
well established organisation structure. It is important for the HR practitioners to
be well exposed to the different human resource operations to provide a good
response, and an accurate view of the human resource competencies.
To obtain well balanced and well distributed responses from the industries, the
organisations chosen were from two broad categories of economic sectors:
manufacturing and services. In Malaysia, some of the HR practices with regards to
competencies have been fairly studied in the manufacturing economic sector. These
include the studies carried out by Junaidah (2007), and Choi and Wan Khairuzzaman
(2008). The Bank Negara Malaysia Annual Report of 2007 reports that the services
economic sector contributed to 53.4% of share of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
in 2007. And the manufacturing economic sector contributed to 30.2% of the share of
the GDP. Services and manufacturing economic sectors were the two largest
contributors to the GDP in 2007 (Bank Negara Malaysia, 2007). It was for this reason
that both of the economic sectors were chosen in this study. Human resource practices
in both of the economic sectors would fairly represent the HR practices in the private
sector. The sub sectors as outlined in the Malaysian Economic Report 2008/2009 for
the services’ economic sector were included in the study. This include industries such
as: finance and insurance, real estate and business services, transport and storage, and
communications (Economic Report, 2008/2009).
134
In designing the questionnaires, the researcher took into consideration the structure of
the questionnaires as it is crucial to the success of the overall research design
(Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007). The questionnaire needs to be easy to administer and
should be able to generate useful information to the study (Sekaran, 2008). The items
included in the questionnaires should require respondents to evaluate their experience.
The appearance of the questionnaire should be attractive, the questions should be easy
to understand, the layout should be in sequence; and the rating scales and the length of
the questions asked should be appropriate. The respondents’ understanding of the
questions, the type of the questions, and the wordings of the questionnaires, too, must
be relevant (Sekaran, 2008). The researcher also took into consideration that the
surveyed HR practitioners and HR consultants spent not more than 30 minutes of their
valuable time in completing the questionnaire.
Pilot tested survey questionnaires were sent to organisations all over Malaysia
including the States of Sabah and Sarawak. However, a larger proportion of the
questionnaires were sent to organisations in the Klang Valley (i.e., mainly Kuala
Lumpur and the State of Selangor Darul Ehsan), Penang, and the State of Johore.
This is because most of the medium scale and larger industries are located in
these States. Due to the vast geographical location of the respondents’ place of
work, the approach of mail survey was adopted. Respondents were given
written instructions to return the completed questionnaires by mail. Postage paid
self addressed envelopes was also provided to every respondent.
But for the HR consultants, purposive sampling frame was used and the guidelines as
prescribed by Sekaran (2003) and Cooper and Schindler (2003) were followed. This is
135
because HR consultants are “specific target groups” and in the opinion of the
researcher, these professionals are most advantageously placed to provide the desired
information. The HR consultants, too, could reasonably be expected to have expert
knowledge by virtue of having gone through the experiences and processes themselves
and might perhaps be able to provide relevant data or information (Sekaran, 2003).
Data base was obtained mainly through the internet, local newspapers, database of
speakers in seminars, workshops, conferences, and those who the researcher has
personally known or was referred to by his colleagues. Unlike the HR
practitioners, the data base for the HR consultants was limited and the information had
to be scouted from various available sources. The sample size chosen for HR
consultants was 100 individuals. One hundred survey questionnaires were mailed
and/or personally handed to the HR consultants. Most of the HR consultants
selected were mainly from Kuala Lumpur and the State of Selangor Darul Ehsan.
This is because most of the established HR consultants are based in this location. Web
page based survey questionnaires, too, were sent to the HR consultants who had
electronic mail addresses. This was done to ensure higher rate of response.
For the HR practitioners, 30 survey questionnaires were returned due to the change
of address or the organisation has shifted elsewhere. For this, an equal number
of survey questionnaires were sent to other organisations in the same locality and
with the same or similar business concern, and of almost the same magnitude in
terms of revenue and size of the workforce. For the HR consultants, too, nine
survey questionnaires were returned due to the change of address. For this, too, an
equal number of survey questionnaires were sent to other HR consultants.
136
For the HR practitioners, follow up was carried primarily through electronic mail. This
was done approximately one month after the date of mailing the questionnaires. For
the HR consultants, follow up, too, was made by the researcher himself through
telephone calls, electronic mails, or short messaging service. This, too, was done
approximately one month after the date of mailing or handing of the survey
questionnaires. According to Yu and Cooper (1983), follow up letters and telephone
calls have been shown to be effective in encouraging increased responses rates.
At times, it is also necessary to resend the survey questionnaire(s) due to
missing questionnaires. Samples of the survey questionnaires together with the
cover letter and the web page version of the survey questionnaires are given in
Appendixes 4 and 5.
The HR practitioners and the HR consultants are the contact persons (or
participant raters) in this study. The application of multiple respondents in this
approach enables unique research control on the (inter) reliability of the
respondents’ answers (Gerhart et al., 2000).
Although Guest (1999) argues that the employees’ perception of human resource
practices is crucial for the impact of human resource on performance, this
empirical study relies heavily on objective data from HR practitioners and HR
consultants. It is possible that systematic errors may occur in the data, for
example, caused by a social desirability bias. The issue reflects the respondent’s
tendency to be too positive about the results because of his/ her own interests
within the organisation. The researcher assumes that this type of error in this
137
study is systematic in a way that all respondents have a tendency to present
“excellent” results that are slightly overestimated.
Several issues or problems that could possibly have affected the results in this
study include the following:
� Respondents refuse to fill up the survey questionnaire,
� Respondents’ unknown fear of the response given falling into wrong
hands and may jeopardise the position of individuals in the
organisations,
� Busy schedule,
� Lack of understanding of the aim and objectives of the research,
� Confusion on the semantics of the competency factors in the
questionnaire,
� Insufficient working experience of the respondents, and
� Lack of awareness of the importance of the survey.
The susceptibility to non-response bias is a common criticism of any survey.
Researchers are encouraged to take measures to reduce non-response bias and
to estimate the effects of non-response bias as a means of reducing its impact
(Armstrong and Overton, 1977).
3.7 Data Collection Procedures
All the information and data were primarily collected through survey questionnaires.
Admittedly, the method is time consuming and costly. However, it can secure the
validity and reliability of the data.
138
Out of the 1100 survey questionnaires distributed to the HR practitioners in
Malaysian organisations, a total of 369 responses were received within a period
of five months. A total of 41 questionnaires had to be discarded due to gross
incompletion and inconsistencies. The mail surveys for the HR practitioners had
managed to achieve approximately 34% rate of return which is the acceptable
response rate as suggested by Sekaran (2003). The relatively good response rate
could be attributed to the high anonymity; selection of the right target sample;
possibly the interest to respond; and the opportunity to express their views. A
few individuals, too, at their own effort wrote notes on the survey questionnaires to
express their views that it is an important study and they would appreciate if the
established HR Practitioner Competency Model can be shared with the HR community
of practice. The topic of the research which is applied, interesting, and
meaningful to the respondents, too, may have contributed to this.
But for the HR consultants, out of 100 survey questionnaires, a total of 52 responses
were received. The rate of return was 52%. Comrey and Lee (1992) provides a general
rule of thumb that it is comfortable to have at least 300 respondents or cases for factor
analysis. The response rates of questionnaires of the HR practitioners and HR
consultants are given in Table 4 below.
Table 4. Response Rate of Questionnaires of HR Practitioners and HR Consultants
N (HR practitioners) (%)
N (HR consultants)(%)
Distributed 1100 100
Returned 369 (34%) 52 (52%)
Usable 328 (30%) 52 (52%)
139
Not all the respondents answered all the items in the survey questionnaires. In the case
of the HR practitioners, 41 questionnaires had left out more than 25% of the total
items in the questionnaires and these were treated as unused survey questionnaires
(Sekaran, 2003). But for the HR consultants, all the 52 survey questionnaires were
useable.
Altogether a total of 380 survey questionnaires were useable. This include both the HR
practitioners and HR consultants.
Data were collected by means of a questionnaire containing altogether 103 items.
All of the items were likert measurement items, and based on a scale from
“not important” to “very important.”
3.8 Profile of Respondents
For the HR practitioners, the profile variables included the age of respondents, highest
qualification achieved, number of years of organisations in operation, total number of
years of working experience, number of years of working experience, number of
years of working experience in human resource management, number of employees in
the organisation, economic business category of the organisation, the category of
position in the organisation, the current job title, and the number of employees
reporting to the respondents. These were captured by direct single item using
nominal scales.
For the HR consultants, the profile variables included the age of respondents, highest
qualification achieved, total number of years of working experience, number of years
140
of working experience in human resource management, highest level of job title/
designation whilst in gainful employment, number of organisations that utilise the
services of the respondents, and the average size of organisations of the clients. These,
too, were captured by direct single item using nominal scales.
3.9 Statistical Testing and Data Analysis Procedures
The instruments for measuring and establishing the dependent variable i.e., the HR
Practitioner Competency Model and the independent variables i.e., the three
competency categories and the corresponding competency domains in the study were
based on the techniques and instruments that have been used in past research and have
proven to have high reliability and consistency.
Upon collection of the data, each individual item in the questionnaire was labelled
using codes. Then the data was entered with the codes. The data set was saved into
Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) Windows version 17.00. The data
collected was screened for errors in terms of completeness and consistency. Reverse
coding of some of the items was used to ensure consistency. Inconsistency was
detected in some of the questionnaires in which respondents provided similar scores
for both the positive and negative coded items. All of the reverse coded items were
reversed prior to summation of the multi-item measures. The data set were analysed
using both the descriptive and inferential statistical techniques. After determining the
reliability coefficients (Cronbach’s alpha) for the measures, frequency distributions for
the profiles of respondents were obtained.
141
Both Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were
used in the study. The research results were processed based on the values of
Cronbach’s alpha and Eigen values by using inferential statistical analysis such as
EFA and CFA to map out the HR Practitioner Competency Model. As a factorial
design experiment, a variation in the design of the in between groups involves using
two or more treatment variables to examine the independent and simultaneous effects
of those treatment variables on an outcome (Vogt, 1999). This widely used
behavioural research design explores not only the effects of each treatment separately,
but also the effects of variables used in combination thereby providing a rich and
revealing multi-dimensional view (Keppel, 1991).
Fabringer et al. (1999) argues that although EFA is one of the widely used statistical
procedures, it has limited utility for aiding in the development of theory as it cannot be
relied on to provide meaningful insights into data.
Structural equation modeling (SEM) was carried out by using software analysis of
moment structures (AMOS) package version 17.0 (Arbuckle, 2008). SEM was used in
the research process to test or confirm specific theories concerning the constructs
underlying a set of variables, identification of the latent variables in the HR
Practitioner Competency Model, and how it affects the research variables. SEM
encourages confirmatory rather than exploratory modeling. Thus it is suited to theory
testing rather than theory development. Its strengths are in its ability to model
constructs as latent variables (i.e., variables which are not measured directly but are
estimated in the model from observed/measured variables). This allows the capturing
of unreliability of measurement in the model which in theory allows the structural
142
relations between the latent variables to be accurately estimated. Factor analysis, path
analysis, and regression analysis all represent special cases of SEM (Arbuckle and
Wothke, 1999; Kline, 1993; Kline, 2005; Mc Dermeit et al., 2000; and NCSU, 1996).
Nelson et al. (2007) states that SEM refers to a class of analytical approaches that
simultaneously estimate model parameters by analysing a sample covariance matrix.
SEM, too, provides the appropriate and most efficient estimation technique for a series
of separate multiple regression equations estimated simultaneously (Hair et al., 2009).
SEM does not designate a single statistical technique but instead refers to a family of
related procedures. The explicit representation of the distinction between the observed
variables, latent variables, and the latent constructs is a characteristic of SEM. This
distinction makes it possible to test a wide variety of hypotheses (Kline, 2005). In the
study, SEM was employed as the principal research tool. This is because SEM has the
ability to incorporate latent variables into the analysis and SEM models can be tested
in different ways. SEM, too, has the ability to represent unobserved concepts in
relationships and account for measurement error in the estimation process (Hair et al.,
2009). Like factor analysis, some of the variables are latent whereas others are directly
observed. And like multiple regression, the goal may be to study the relationships
among many variables (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007). Besides these, SEM, too, has
the ability to work on nominal, ordinal, interval and ratio scales of measurement,
which is not what some statistical tools can do.
SEM takes into account the modeling of interactions, nonlinearities, correlated
independents, measurement error, correlated error terms; multiple latent independents
each measured by multiple indicators, and one or more latent dependents also each
143
with multiple indicators. SEM can be used as a powerful alternative to multiple
regression, path analysis, and analysis of covariance (NCSU, 1996).
SEM modeling process centres around two main steps: validating the measurement
model and fitting the structural model. Measurement model is accomplished primarily
through CFA. Structural model is accomplished primarily through path analysis with
latent variables. Besides using SEM packages to implement models with latent
variables, it, too, can be used to run regression models or path models (NCSU, 1996).
The structural model includes hypothesised directional relationships to be tested.
Structural models utilise multiple regression paths among latent variables to test
specific relationships between constructs (Nelson et al., 2007). It is for this reason why
SEM was employed in the study.
The combined analysis of the measurement and structural models enable:
� Measurement errors of the observed variables to be analysed as an integral path
of the model.
� Factor analysis to be combined in one operation with the hypothesis testing
(Gefen et al., 2000).
Thus in the study, by using SEM, factor analysis and hypotheses are tested in the same
analysis. SEM techniques also provide complete information about the extent to which
the research model is supported by the data than in regression techniques. The holistic
analysis that SEM is capable of performing is carried out through the statistical
technique – covariance analysis which is employed in AMOS package version 17.0
(Gefen et al., 2000).
144
Six steps that often characterise most SEM applications and those that were used in
this study are: confirmatory factor analysis for every latent variable and latent
construct in the structural model; 2nd order analysis of latent constructs; measurement
model of exogenous and endogenous variables; generated model; 1st Re-specified
structural model; and Final Re-specified structural model (Schumacker and
Lomax,1996). Statistical testing and data analysis procedures involved several
concepts, procedures, testing, and measurements. These are given as follows:
3.9.1 Data Screening
Before the raw data file or matrix summary of the data was created for SEM, the
original data was carefully screened. Collected data was screened for errors in terms of
completeness and consistency. The various tests and analytical procedures as given
below were used.
A. Multivariate outliers using Mahalanobis distance
Multivariate outliers are those that have extreme scores on two or more variables or its
pattern of scores is atypical (Kline, 2005). According to Schumacker and Lomax
(1996), outliers often alter the covariance matrix and can seriously impact the results
in SEM. The presence of outliers can effect the models significantly and the AMOS
package version 17.0 supports in identifying outliers (Arbuckle, 2008).
In this study, the raw data file was analysed for multivariate outliers. Mahalanobis
distance statistic was employed in the data analysis as prescribed by Kline (2005).
Mahalanobis distance is a generalised distance measure that accounts for the
correlations among variables in a way that weighs each variable equally (Hair et al.,
145
2009). Mahalanobis distance is one measure of that multivariate distance and it is
evaluated for each case using �2 (chi-square) distribution (Tabachnick and Fidell,
2007). Detection of outliers can contribute to multivariate normality (Kline, 2005).
Presence of outliers can be due to incorrect data entry, failure to specify missing value
codes, outliers not being a member of the population from which the sample was
taken, and the distribution for the variable in the population has more extreme values
than a normal distribution (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007).
In the study, outliers were cases with out-of-range values due to incorrect data entry or
failure to specify missing value codes in the statistical software. (Tabachnick et al.,
1996). Altogether 37 outliers were discarded in the study. These were detected by the
gravest univariate outliers by observing minimum/maximum values of summary
statistics. From a total of 380 responses including for both the HR practitioners and
HR consultants, only 343 responses were usable in the final analysis.
B. Normality Tests Using Skewness and Kurtosis
Screening continuous variables for normality is an important step in almost every
multivariate analysis. Although normality of the variables is not always required for
analysis, the solution is usually better if the variables are all normally distributed
(Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007).
The most basic assumption in multivariate analysis is normality (Hair et al., 2006).
Normality refers to the shape of the data distribution for an individual metric variable
and its correspondence to the normal distribution. The shape of the distribution can be
146
explained by two measures: (a) kurtosis and (b) skewness. Kurtosis refers to the
“peakedness” or “flatness” or the height of the distribution compared to the normal
distribution while skewness is used to describe the balance of the distribution, that is
whether it is unbalanced and shifted either to the left or right (Tabachnick and Fidell,
2007). If a distribution is unbalanced, it is skewed. A positive skewness denotes a
distribution to the right while a negative skewness shifts to the left (Hair et al., 2006).
A more reliable approach to test for normality is the normal probability plot (Hair et
al., 2006). Besides using the normal probability plot, statistical tests can also be used
to assess normality. In a normal distribution the values of skewness and kurtosis are
zero (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007). Each dependent latent variable in the model
should be normally distributed for each value of each other latent variable (NCSU,
1996). A rule of thumb to assess normality is based on the skewness and kurtosis
values. Skewness values should be below 2.0 whereas kurtosis values should be below
7.0 (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007). In this study, statistical test based on the skewness
and kurtosis values was used to assess normality.
C. Data Transformation
If a variable has an undesirable characteristic such as non normality that detracts from
its use in a multivariate technique, Hair et al. (2009), and Tabachnick and Fidell
(2007) suggest the application of transformation. A transformed variable is more
suited to portraying a relationship. Generally, it is recommended that transformation of
variables is necessary in most situations. However, it is important to ascertain that the
variables are normally distributed after transformation. In transformation, there is
often the need to try first one transformation, and then another until the researcher
147
finds the transformation that produces the skewness and kurtosis values nearest zero
and/or with fewest outliers (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007).
3.9.2 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Latent Variables
Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) has limitations in its utility (Nokelainen, 1999). In
CFA, the correlations between the factors are an explicit part of the analysis because
they are collected in a matrix of factor correlations. According to Tacq (1997), with
CFA, researchers are able to decide whether the factors would correlate or not.
With CFA, the analysis can possibly determine:
� Pairs that common factors are correlated,
� Common factors that affect a particular variable,
� Observed variables that are affected by a unique factor, and
� Pairs of unique factors that are correlated (Long, 1983).
Tabachnick and Fidell (2007) asserts that CFA is a much more sophisticated technique
used in the advanced stages of the research process to test a theory about latent
process. Variables are carefully and specifically chosen to reveal underlying processes.
CFA is often performed through SEM.
In this study, EFA was performed in the initial phase of the research as it provides a
tool for consolidating variables. Measurement model technique of exogenous and
endogenous variables was employed to explore the competency factors and
competency domains of every competency category. Measurement model technique
was used to determine the covariances of exogenous variables to confirm the
competency domains for all the three competency categories. The levels of
148
multicollinearity among the variables and the competency domains, too, was studied
(Tabachnick and Fidell 2007). CFA which is a much most sophisticated technique was
used in the second phase of the research through SEM (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007).
In a similar Human Resource Competency Study in establishing the HR Competency
Model, the researchers only performed EFA (Ulrich et al., 2008). The researchers
admitted that more rigorous SEM and CFA should have been carried out. It is for this
reason that SEM was employed in this study. In this study, the relationship between
the different competency categories, competency domains, and competency factors
were studied using CFA and SEM. Attention was paid to those that are significant.
Relative importance and the weightage factors of the competencies, too, were studied.
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) seeks to determine if the number of factors and
the loadings of measured (indicator) variables on them conform to what is expected on
the basis of pre-established theory (Byrne, 2001). Indicator variables are selected on
the basis of prior theory and factor analysis is used to see if they load as predicted on
the expected number of factors (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007).
The researcher's à priori assumption is that each factor (the number and labels of
which may be specified à priori) is associated with a specified subset of indicator
variables. A minimum requirement of confirmatory factor analysis is that one
hypothesises beforehand the number of factors in the model, but usually also the
researcher will posit expectations about which variables will load on which factors
(Byrne, 2001).
149
According to Bryne (2001), although SEM is typically used to model causal
relationships among latent variables (factors), it is equally possible to use SEM to
explore CFA measurement models. This is done by AMOS procedure through
removing from the model all straight arrows connecting latent variables, adding
curved arrows representing covariance between every pair of latent variables, and
leaving in the straight arrows from each latent variable to its indicator variables as well
as leaving in the straight arrows from error and disturbance terms to their respective
variables. Such a measurement model is run like any other model and is evaluated like
other models, using goodness-of-fit measures generated by the SEM package
(Ferdinand, 2002).
Using CFA in SEM having several or even a score of indicator variables for each
factor, tends to yield a model with more reliability, greater validity, higher
generalisability, and stronger tests of competing models, than will CFA with two or
three indicators per factor, all other things being equal. However, the researcher takes
account of the statistical artifact that models with fewer variables will yield apparently
better fit as measured by SEM goodness-of-fit coefficients, all other things being
equal. The CFA confirms each construct in the model (Byrne, 2001). Furthermore, the
significant level of the measurement with the low level of error is the results of CFA
which is very important to further structural analysis.
Testing structural equation models is viewed as a way of testing a specific theory
about the relationships between theoretical constructs which constitute the structural
equation part of the model (Hair et al., 2006). In addition, it is also viewed as a way of
testing the theoretical relationships between the observable indicators and the
150
theoretical constructs which constitute the measurement part of the model (Ferdinand,
2000). Therefore, the measurement model is highly recommended to be estimated
prior to the testing of a structural model. The accuracy of the analysis has an important
view related to the elimination of the error in the item level (Byrne, 2001).
Accordingly, a two step covariance structure analysis approach described by Gerbing
and Jöreskog (1996) was used to analyse the data. A two step modeling approach is
used in testing the measurement of models and structure. It is widely accepted that
both of these assessments of fit should be conducted. The first step entails developing
a confirmatory measurement model for scale purification and assessing the properties
of the measures (Byrne, 2001). This first assessment aims to identify the fit of the
observed variables to the latent variables (i.e., also referred to as the measurement
model). The second step entails developing a structural equation model that specifies
the hypothesised causal relationship among the latent variables. With convergent and
discriminate validity established in the confirmatory measurement model, the test of
the structural model then constitutes a confirmatory assessment of nomological
validity (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007).
3.9.3 Second (2nd) Order Analysis of the Latent Constructs
A first order concept or construct is a latent variable that has observed variables (i.e.,
the items in its measure) as indicators of the latent construct. The second order
construct is an unobserved or latent variable that has other unobserved variables or
constructs as its “indicators.” Generally, the second order factor model is one with one
or more latents whose indicators are themselves latents (Gefen et al., 2000).
151
In this study, the competency factors are the observed variables; the competency
domains are the latent variables, and the competency categories are the latent
constructs. The relationship of the latent variables with the observed variables involves
first order analysis of the latent variables. The primary emphasis of the study was to
carry out the second order analysis of the latent constructs which involves the
relationship of the latent constructs (i.e., competency categories) with the latent
variables (i.e., competency domains).
3.9.4 Structural Examination of Hypothesised, Generated, First (1st) Re-
specified, and Final Re-specified Model
Hypothesised or specified model refers to the initial theoretical model the researcher
formulates (Schumacker and Lomax, 1996). The model was hypothesised based on
review of the academic literature. Then, generated and re-specified models were
established to determine the structural interaction among the variables that existed the
models based on CFA and 2nd order analysis results.
In the study, for the hypothesised model, the basic concepts of factor analysis were
initially studied to understand the paths that lead to SEM. The research framework of
the study (i.e., hypothesised model) as given in Figure 23 was constructed using 12
latent variables (i.e., competency domains) from the three latent constructs (i.e.,
competency categories). The latent variables are: leadership, building work
relationship, personal credibility and attributes, self development, entrepreneurial and
business acumen, strategic orientation, customer orientation, essential performance
enablers, resourcing and talent management, learning and development, rewards and
performance management, and employee relations and compliance. The latent
constructs are the generic/behavioural competency category, business competency
152
category, and technical HR competency category. In the study, the endogenous
variable is the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
3.9.5 The Advantage of Using Structural Equation Modeling
Structural equation modeling (SEM) grows out of and serves purposes similar to
multiple regression, but in a more powerful way which takes into account the
modeling of interactions, nonlinearities, correlated independents, measurement error,
correlated error terms, multiple latent independents each measured by multiple
indicators, and one or more latent dependents also each with multiple indicators
(Byrne, 2001). SEM may be used as a more powerful alternative to multiple
regression, path analysis, factor analysis, time series analysis, and analysis of
covariance (Byrne, 2001). That is, these procedures may be seen as special cases of
SEM, or, to put it another way, SEM is an extension of the general linear model
(GLM) of which multiple regression is a part (Ferdinand, 2002; and Imam, 2003).
Advantages of SEM compared to multiple regression include more flexible
assumptions (i.e., particularly allowing interpretation even in the face of
multicollinearity), use of confirmatory factor analysis to reduce measurement error by
having multiple indicators per latent variable, the attraction of SEM's graphical
modeling interface, the desirability of testing models overall rather than coefficients
individually, the ability to test models with multiple dependents, the ability to model
mediating variables rather than be restricted to an additive model, the ability to model
error terms, the ability to test coefficients across multiple between subjects groups, and
ability to handle difficult data such as non-normal data, and incomplete data
(Ferdinand, 2002).
153
The results feature overall indexes of model fit as well as parameter estimates,
standard errors, and test statistics for each free parameter in the model. SEM has a
number of attractive virtues (Ferdinand, 2002) such as assumptions underlying the
statistical analyses are clear and testable, giving the investigator full control, and
potentially furthering understanding of the analyses. Graphical interface software
boosts creativity and facilitates rapid model debugging (a feature limited to selected
SEM software packages). Structural equation modeling programmes also provide
overall tests of model fit and individual parameter estimate tests simultaneously (Nik
Kamariah and Ilham, 2008).
Regression coefficients, means, and variances may be compared simultaneously, even
across multiple between-subjects groups. Measurement and confirmatory factor
analysis models can be used to purge errors, making estimated relationships among
latent variables less contaminated by measurement error. The ability to fit non-
standard models includes flexible handling of longitudinal data, databases with
autocorrelated error structures (i.e., time series analysis), and databases with non-
normally distributed variables and incomplete data (Nik Kamariah and Ilham, 2008).
SEM provides a unifying framework under which numerous linear models may be fit
using flexible and powerful software.
Through the output of SEM, goodness-of-fit is considered as a measure of the
correspondence of the actual or observed input (correlation or covariance) matrix with
that predicted from the proposed model (Hair et al. 2006). As chi-square is a “badness-
of-fit” measure in the sense that a small chi-square corresponds to “good fit” and a
large chi-square to “bad fit”, it is widely accepted that a ratio of chi-square to degree
154
of freedom in the range of 2 to 1, or 3 to 1 is an indicative of an acceptable fit between
the hypothetical model and the sample data (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007).
In practice however some interpret ratios as high as 3.00, 4.00, or even 5.00 as still
representing a sound data-model fit (Byrne, 2001; and Bollen, 1990). In addition, a
non-significant chi-square with a “P” value greater than 0.05 is required to indicate a
good model- fit between the observed data and the theoretically specified structural
model. A statistically significant chi-square could indicate that model is significantly
different from the data, resulting in an inadequate model fit. Furthermore, the chi-
square goodness-of-fit statistic will be high with a large sample size, and the effect is
to increase the statistical power to detect model-data discrepancies (Ferdinand, 2002).
The non normed fit index (NNFI), also known as the Tucker-Lewis index (TLI),
compares a proposed model’s fit to a nested baseline or null model. Additionally,
NNFI measures parsimony by assessing the degrees of freedom from the proposed
model to the degrees of freedom of the null model. NNFI also seems resilient against
variations in sample size and, thus is highly recommended. An acceptable threshold
for this index is 0.90 or greater. Bentler (1990) developed the comparative (CFI) as a
noncentrality parameter-based index to overcome the limitation of sample size effects.
This index ranges from 0 to 1, with 0.90 or greater representing an acceptable fit. Root
mean square approximation of error (RMSEA) is an extremely informative criterion in
evaluating model fit. The RMSEA index measures the discrepancy between the
observed and estimated covariance matrices per degree of freedom (Byrne, 2001). It
measures the discrepancy in terms of the population and not the sample. Thus, the
value of this fit index is expected to better approximate or estimate the population and
not be affected by sample size. Values less than 0.05 indicate good fit, values up to
155
0.08 reasonable fit, and those between 0.08 and 0.10 indicate mediocre fit (Byrne,
2001).
Chi-square (�2) is the most common method of evaluating goodness-of-fit. A low �2
value, indicating insignificance, would point to a good fit. This is because chi-square
test is used to assess actual and predicted matrices. Thus, non-significance means that
there is no considerable difference between the actual and predicted matrices (Hair et
al., 2006). Therefore, low �2 values, which result in significance levels greater than
0.05 or 0.01, indicate that actual and predicted inputs are not statistically different. The
significance levels of 0.1 or 0.2 should be exceeded before non significance is
confirmed (Fornell, 1999).
In terms of a model’s goodness-of-fit, P-values indicate whether the model is
significantly different than the null model. In statistics, the null is usually “0”. This,
however, is not necessarily so in SEM. The null hypothesis is the hypothesised model
in which the parameters were set up for the hypothesised model, indicating whether a
path should exist or not between variables. A high P-value, or a value larger than zero,
would mean that the null hypothesis is rejected leading to a high probability that it
would be wrong in doing so (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007). Thus, a high “P” is good
as it indicates that the observed model is not significantly different from what was
expected (Nik Kamariah and Ilham, 2008). Conversely, a low P-value or one close to
zero, implies a “bad model” because the null hypothesis is rejected with a low
probability of being wrong in reaching that conclusion.
156
This study also provides the discriminant validity which measures the construct
exhibit uniqueness and does not simply reflect some other variables (Bollen, 1990). It
can be assessed by determining whether the correlation between two different
measures of the same variable is higher than the correlation between the measure of
that variable and that of any other variables (Cavanna et al., 2000). Another method of
assessing discriminant validity is to determine whether the average variance extracted
(AVE) for each construct is higher than the squared correlation between that construct
and any other construct (Fornell and Larcker, 1981).
This study describes the result of the calculated variance extracted (VE) to support
discriminant validity of constructs. Average variance extracted (AVE) is the average
VE values of two constructs. According to Fornell and Larcker (1981), AVE should
be more than the correlation squared of the two constructs to support discriminant
validity. Each AVE value expected was found to be more than correlation squared,
thus discriminant validity is supported, or multicollinearity is absent (Nik Kamariah
and Ilham, 2008).
3.9.6 Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) of Generated (Specified)
Model
Theories and models are explicitly integrationist in perspective, their empirical testing
requires that data analytical strategies consider not only the main or simple effects of
variables, but also the way in which such variables interact in explaining variance in
outcomes of interest (Imam, 2003). To be empirically tested, the research question is
transformed into a theoretical model, consisting of theoretical constructs (latent
variables), causal relationships, and measures (observed variables) (Hair et. al., 2006).
157
The theoretical model forms the basis both for collecting and analysing data, and may
be modified as a result of the research (Ferdinand, 2002).
Typically, a hypothesised model is tested with a linear equation system through SEM.
This method of study investigates the extent to which variations in one variable
corresponds to variations in one or more variables based on correlation coefficient
(Jöreskog and Yang, 1996). Structural equation modeling is usually used because it
permits the measurement of several variables and their interrelationships
simultaneously. It is more versatile than other multivariate techniques because it
allows for simultaneous, multiple dependent relationships between variables.
The hypothesised causal relationships can be tested among the theoretical constructs
using software programs such as AMOS and Equivalent Structural Modeling (EQS)
(Bentler, 1990; and Byrne, 2001) to estimate and evaluate the structural portion of the
model. The raw data for the variables are input into the software to generate the
iterations, goodness-of-fit indices, and standardised paths. The various variables are
usually summated scales where the attributes measuring a common underlying
construct are summed and divided by the number of items.
Ferdinand (2002) suggests that it is important to determine the minimum sample size
required in order to achieve a desired level of statistical power with a given model
prior to data collection. Imam (2003) asserts that although sample size needed is
affected by the normality of the data and estimation method that researchers use, the
generally agreed-on value is ten participants for every free parameter estimated.
Although there is little consensus on the recommended sample size for SEM, Jöreskog
158
(1993), Fornel (1999), Byrne (2001), Ferdinand (2002), and Imam (2003) proposes a
“critical sample size” of 200. In other words, as a rule of thumb, any number above
200 is understood to provide sufficient statistical power for data analysis.
Testing structural equation models is viewed as a way testing a specified theory about
the relationships between theoretical constructs which constitute the structural
equation part of the model (Kaplan, 2000; Nik Kamariah and Ilham, 2008) as shown in
Figure 25. In addition, it is also viewed as a way of testing the theoretical relationships
between the observable indicators and the theoretical constructs which constitute the
measurement part of the model (Ferdinand, 2002).
Therefore, the measurement model is highly recommended to be estimated prior to the
testing of a structural model (Goldstein, 1995). A two step modeling approach is used
in testing the models measurement and structural models (see Figure 25). It is widely
accepted that both of those assessments of fit should be conducted.
159
Hypothesised Model
Theory
Instrument Construction
Data Collection
Model Testing
Results
Interpretation
Generated / Re-Specified
Model
Figure 25. Structural Equation Modeling Procedures (Nik Kamariah and Ilham, 2008)
In model testing, the first step entails developing a confirmatory measurement model
for scale purification and assessing the properties of the measures (Byrne, 2001; and
Imam, 2003). This first assessment aims to identify the fit of the observed variables to
the latent variables (also referred to as measurement model). The second step entails
developing a structural equation model that specifies the hypothesised causal
relationship among the latent variables (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007). With
convergent and discriminate validity established in the confirmatory measurement
model, the test of the structural model then constitutes a confirmatory assessment of
nomological validity (Imam, 2003; Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007; and Nik Kamariah
and Ilham, 2008).
160
Structural equation modeling can include two kinds of variables: observed and latent.
Observed variables have data, the numeric responses to a rating scale item on a
questionnaire. Observed variables in SEM are continuous (Bollen, 1990). Latent
variables are those that are not directly observed. To observe latent variables, models
were built to determine the latent variables in terms of observed variables. Structural
equation modeling is an extension of the general linear model (GLM) that enables a
researcher to test a set of regression equations simultaneously (Hair et al., 2006).
Structural equation modeling software can test traditional models, but it also permits
examination of more complex relationships and models, such as confirmatory factor
analysis and time series analyses (Bollen, 1990).
There are several indicators of goodness-of-fit and most SEM scholars recommend
evaluating the models by observing more than one of those indicators (Fornell and
Larker, 1981; and Jöreskog, 1993). Hair et al. (2006) proposes that the criteria for
ideal fit indices are relative independent of sample size, accuracy and consistency to
assess different models, and ease of interpretation aided by a well defined pre-set
range. Based on this stated criteria, Fornell (1992) recommends the NNFI; CFI, and
RMSEA. Therefore, the commonly applied fit indices are NNFI and CFI (>0.90
indicates good fit), RMSEA (<0.08 indicates acceptable fit), and commonly used �2
statistic (�2 / d.f. ratio of 3.0 or less).
The regression weights predicted by the model are compared with the observed
correlation matrix for the variables, and a goodness-of-fit statistic is calculated (Byrne,
2001). The best-fitting of two or more models is selected by the researcher as the best
161
model for advancement of theory (Ferdinand, 2002; and Imam, 2003). Furthermore,
path analysis requires the usual assumptions of regression. It is particularly sensitive to
model specification because failure to include relevant causal variables or inclusion of
extraneous variables often substantially affects the path coefficients, which are used to
assess the relative importance of various direct and indirect causal paths to the
dependent variable (Ferdinand, 2002; and Mallery, 2005).
When the variables in the model are latent variables measured by multiple observed
indicators, path analysis is termed structural equation modeling and treated separately
(Byrne, 2001). It follows the conventional terminology by which path analysis refers
to single-indicator variables. After having validated the measurement model, an
assessment of model fit is undertaken to identify the degree to which the specified
indicators represent the hypothesised constructs in the confirmatory factor analysis and
the path coefficients of hypothesised relationships between theoretical constructs in
the structural equation model (Kline, 1998; and Nik Kamariah and Ilham).
Due to the confirmatory nature of SEM, the model was constructed with the model
specification to the measurement model stage. In the generated or specified model,
every variable in the model was labelled either as an independent or dependent
variable. The parameters estimated in the generated or specified model were:
� Regression coefficients, and
� Variances and the covariances of the independent variables in the model
(Bentler, 1995).
162
Specification of the confirmatory model requires making formal and explicit statement
about:
� The number of latent constructs and latent variables,
� The number of observed variables,
� The variances and covariances among the latent variables,
� The relationships among observed variables, latent variables, and latent
constructs,
� The relationship among errors in variables or residual variables, and
� The variances and covariances among the residual variables (Jöreskog and
Sörbom, 1989).
As missing data is usually a problem in research, in this study, the researcher used
case deletion to the data. For the HR consultants, there was no issue with the data.
However for the HR practitioners, case deletion was used to the data since the sample
size was adequate (N = 369 reduced to N = 328 observations) for statistical operation
with default settings.
3.9.7 First (1st) and Final Re-specified Models
Upon testing the hypothesised model, model modifications were performed in an
attempt to develop a better fitting and a more parsimonious model. This was necessary
as the ultimate goal of the study was to determine the model which generates the
sample covariance matrix (Schumacker and Lomax, 1996).
Often an initial model does not fit the data well. Many potential causes for low
measures of overall fit exist, but the most common cause is a misspecified model. The
error can range from incorrect inclusion or exclusion of a specific parameter to using a
163
fundamentally flawed model. This can however be overcome by re-specifying the
model (Bollen, 1989).
3.9.8 Direct and Indirect Effects of Hypothesis Testing
Direct and indirect analysis as path analysis of SEM is an extension of the regression
model used to test the fit of the correlation matrix against two or more causal models
which are being compared by the researcher. The model is usually depicted in a circle-
and-arrow figure in which single arrows indicate causation. A regression is done for
each variable in the model as a dependent on others which the model indicates are
causes (Byrne, 2001).
The regression weights predicted by the model are compared with the observed
correlation matrix for the variables, and a goodness-of-fit statistic is calculated (Byrne,
2001). The best-fitting of two or more models is selected by the researcher as the best
model for advancement of theory (Ferdinand, 2002). Underpinning theory is the
fundamental thought in SEM and as the guideline for a researcher to decide on their
modification on the proposed model (Byrne, 2001).
Furthermore, path analysis requires the usual assumptions of regression. It is
particularly sensitive to model specification because failure to include relevant causal
variables or inclusion of extraneous variables often substantially affects the path
coefficients, which are used to assess the relative importance of various direct and
indirect causal paths to the dependent variable (Ferdinand, 2002). Such interpretations
should be undertaken in the context of comparing alternative models, after assessing
their goodness-of-fit. When the variables in the model are latent variables measured by
164
multiple observed indicators, path analysis is termed structural equation modeling,
treated separately (Byrne, 2001).
Path analysis distinguishes three types of effects namely the direct, indirect, and total
effects. The direct effect is that influence of one variable on another that is unmediated
by any other variables in a path model. The indirect effects of a variable are mediated
by at least one intervening variable (Bollen, 1989).
In the study, indirect effects were estimated statistically as a product of direct effects.
The sum of all direct and indirect effects of one variable on another which is total
effects, too, was interpreted. The AMOS package version 17.0 was used to compute
the direct and indirect effects. The standard error for standardised total effects and
total indirect effects was estimated (Kline, 2005). Since this study undertaken uses a
quantitative approach, it employs the testing of seven hypotheses. It involves the
process of testing theoretical models (i.e., hypotheses testing) involving unobserved
variables, latent variables, and latent constructs. These unobserved or latent variables
have multiple items (observed) measures.
The approaches used in the study for the process of testing hypothetical models
containing these variables were based on a review of substantive articles in social
sciences with generally accepted procedures for testing these models using survey
data. The study, too, employed solutions in SEM and model-to-data fit, with suggested
remedies including additional procedures for achieving model-to-data fit using SEM.
It, too, includes error-adjusted regression, the use of single summed indicators in
SEM.
165
The steps involved in testing the model using unobserved variables, latent variables,
and latent constructs with multiple item measures of those unobserved variables
involve:
� Defining model constructs,
� Stating relationships among those constructs,
� Developing appropriate measures of those constructs,
� Gathering data using those measures, and
� Validating the model (i.e., testing the stated relationships among the
constructs).
3.9.9 Goodness to the Model Fit
Model fit determines the degree to which the structural equation model fits the sample
data. The determination of model fit in SEM is not as straight forward as in other
statistical approaches (Schumacker and Lomax, 1996). Goodness to the model fit
indicates how well the specified model reproduces the observed covariance matrix
among the “indicator” items (Hair et al., 2009).
Values of fit indices indicate only the average or overall fit of a model. As a single
index reflects only a particular aspect of the model fit, a favourable value of that index
does not itself indicate a good fit. SEM fit indices have no single statistical test of
significance that identifies a correct model given in the sample data (Schumacker and
Lomax, 1996). This is also why model fit is usually assessed based on the values of
more than one index. In other words, there is no single standard index that can provide
a standard for all models (Kline, 2005). However, Hair et al. (2009) asserts that the
166
most fundamental absolute fit index is the chi-square statistic (�2). It is the only
statistically based SEM fit measure.
Kline (1998) recommends reporting at least four tests such as chi – square; Goodness-
of-fit Index (GFI), Normed Fit Index (NFI) or Comparative Fit Index (CFI); Non-
Normed Fit Index (NNFI); and Standardised Root Mean Residual (SRMR).
Schumaker and Lomax (2004) recommends chi – square with degrees of freedom (df)
and “P” level, normed fit index (NFI), GFI, CFI, and Root Mean Square Error of
Approximation (RMSEA).
Juhary and Ilham (2008) in the study, The mediating effect of good governance on the
relationship between managerial roles and personal development: A structural
equation modeling (SEM) approach have used the indices: chi – square (MIN), df,
CMIN/df, P-value, GFI, CFI, Tucker and Lewis index (TLI), and RMSEA. In this
particular study, multiple Goodness-of-fit tests as those employed by Juhary and Ilham
(2008) were used and these include: CMIN, df, CMIN/df, P-value, GFI, and RMSEA.
CMIN/df estimates how many times larger the chi-square estimate is than its expected
value (Bollen, 1989).
Apart from the use of assessment of fit statistics for identifying a good fit between the
data and the model, it is highly recommended that the individual item reliability and
internal consistency of the measurement scale should be examined (Byrne, 2001).
Individual item reliability can be assessed by examining indicator loadings and the t-
value associated with each of the loadings for the purpose of identifying statistical
significance. Hair et al. (2006) suggests the t-value of each factor loading should
167
exceed the critical value of 1.96 for a two-tailed test and 1.645 for one-tailed test for
0.05 significance level in order to be statistically significant for the proposed
construct. In addition, the magnitude of standardised regression weight or factor
loading should be equal to or greater than 0.5 for adequate individual item reliability,
providing support for convergent validity (Bagozzi and Yi, 1989).
Significantly high factor loading is an indicator verifying the posited relationship
among indicators and constructs. In addition, Squared Multiple Correlation (SMC) for
each variable, which shows the amount of variance in the respective measures due to
the hypothesised component, is another indicator to be examined. Squared Multiple
Correlation is recommended to be equal to or greater than 0.5 to which indicates the
extent to which the variable concerned acts as an indicator of latent construct (Byrne,
2001). Thus, items with non-significant t-values and SMC less than 0.5 are subjected
to exclusion for model modification. This item-deletion procedure has been suggested
as a method for re-specifying indicators that do not work out (Ferdinand, 2002).
Furthermore, Fornell and Larcker (1981) stresses the importance of examining
composite reliability and variance extracted measures for each construct in assessing
the internal consistency of the measurement scale.
Another complementary measure to the construct reliability value is the variance
extracted measure (Byrne, 2001; and Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007). This measure
reflects the overall amount of variance in the indicators accounted for by the latent
construct. Higher variance extracted values occur when the indicators are truly
representative of latent construct (Ferdinand, 2002). Recommendation typically
suggests that variance extracted value for a construct should be greater than or equal to
168
0.50 (Fornell and Larcker, 1981) which is interpreted to mean that the variance
accounted for each of the constructs is greater than the variance accounted for by the
measurement error.
Model modification is used to improve the model fit through adding or deleting
estimated parameters from the original model (Nik Kamariah and Ilham, 2008). The
empirical indicators of model modification comes from examination of the residuals of
predicted covariance or the correlation matrix. Residual values greater than ± 2.58 are
considered to be statistically significant at the 0.05 level, indicating a substantial
prediction error for a pair of indicators (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007).
Another indicator of model modification is modification index (MI) in conjunction
with associated expected parameter change statistics (EPC) which corresponds to the
reduction of chi-square in order to obtain a better fit of the data (Hair et al. 2006).
Steiger (1990) suggests that a fixed parameter with a large MI and EPC should be
freed, which would make substantive sense in improving the overall data-model fit. If
chi-square is large relative to the standard, the parameter with the largest modification
index should be relaxed if this parameter can be interpreted substantively to improve
the data-model fit (Jöreskog and Lopez, 1999). Nonetheless, all post-hoc and the
modified model should be reevaluated after the modification of estimated parameters
(Ferdinand, 2002).
After having validated the measurement model, an assessment of model fit should be
undertaken to identify the degree to which the specified indicators represent the
hypothesised constructs in the confirmatory factor analysis and the path coefficients of
169
hypothesised relationships between theoretical constructs in the structural equation
model (Nik Kamariah and Ilham, 2008). In general, goodness-of-fit is considered as a
measure of the correspondence of the actual or observed input (correlation or
covariance) matrix with that predicted from the proposed model (Hair et al., 2006).
Byrne (2001) argues that it is widely accepted that a chi-square to degree of freedom
ratio in the range of 2 to 1, or 3 to 1 is indicative of an acceptable fit between the
hypothetical model and the sample data.
Chi-square statistic is quite sensitive to sample size and model complexity, therefore
rejection of a model on the basis of this evidence alone is inappropriate (Bagozzi and
Yi, 1989; and Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007). Accordingly, other measures of fit
compensating for sample size also need to be evaluated on how well the confirmatory
factor analysis model reproduces the observed variables covariance matrix.
Consequently, other goodness-of-fit measures have been suggested to determine the
model fit apart from an insignificant chi-square. Specifically, other goodness-of-fit
measures can be represented by absolute, incremental, and parsimonious fit measures
(Hair et al., 2001).
First, absolute fit measures assess only the overall model fit with no adjustment for the
degree of “over fitting” that might occur. Second, the incremental fit measures
compare the proposed model to a comparison between models with differing numbers
of estimated coefficients; the purpose being to determine the amount of fit achieved by
each estimated coefficient (Nik Kamariah and Ilham, 2008).
170
Table 5. Goodness-of-Fit (GOF) Criteria and Acceptable Fit Interpretation
G-O-F Measure Acceptable Level Descriptions Absolute Fit Measures Chi-square statistic Goodness –of- Fit Index (GFI) Root Mean Square Residual (RMSR or RMR) Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA)
Probability Level (P) > 0.05 Value close to or > 0.9 Value < 0.08 Values up to 0.08 are reasonable < 0.05 a very close fit
Non-significant chi-square test provides support for the model. 0 (poor fit) to 1 (perfect fit). Closer the RMSR to 0, the better the model fit. RMSEA less than or equal to 0.08 indicates a reasonable error of approximation while a value above 0.1 indicates a significant problem.
Incremental Fit Measures Adjusted Goodness-of-fit Index (AGFI) Tucker - Lewis Index (GFI) Normed Fit Index (NFI) Comparative Fit Index (CFI) Incremental Fit Index (IFI)
Value close to or > 0.9 Value close to or > 0.9 Value close to or > 0.9 Value close to or > 0.9 Value close to or > 0.9
Value adjusted for df, with 0.90 a good model fit. Lower coefficient (closer to 0.50) indicates that the relationship amongst variables is more complex than can be represented by that number of common factor. NFI close to 1 indicates a very good fit. CFI close to 1 indicates a very good fit. IFI close to 1 indicates a very good fit.
Parsimonious Fit Measures Normed chi-square (CMIN/df) Akaike’s Information Criterion (AIC)
Ratio between 1 to 2 Smaller, positive values indicate better fit and greater parsimonious.
Wheaton et al. (1977) suggests a ratio of approximately 5 or less as beginning to be reasonable. Carmines and McIver (1981) suggests the ratio in the range of 2 to 1 or 3 are indicative of an acceptable fit between the hypothetical model and the sample data.
AIC close to 0 indicates a very good fit.
Adapted from Ilham (2007) and Hair et al. (2007)
171
Table 5 above sets out the Goodness-of-Fit (GOF) criteria and acceptable fit
interpretation. Overall model fit measures include the Goodness-of-fit index (GFI)
(Jöreskog and Yang, 1996); a descriptive overall absolute fit measure, which does not
depend on the sample size explicitly and measure how much better the model fits
compared with no model at all. A minimum value of 0.9 for these two measures
usually is considered acceptable and unity indicates a perfect fit (Bagozzi and Yi,
1989). The same threshold value can be applied to the Adjusted Goodness-fit-index
(AGFI), Comparative fit index (CFI), the Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), and the Normed
fit index (NFI); and four incremental fit indexes suggested by Bentler (1990). The
Root Mean Square Residual (RMSR), Root Mean Square Error of Approximation
(RMSEA), and measures of discrepancy per degree of freedom are fit measures based
on the concept of non centrality (Steiger, 1990). Usually values up to 0.08 are
considered to indicate a reasonable model fit and represent reasonable errors of
approximation in the population, while values of about 0.05 or less indicate a close fit
in relation to the degree of freedom (Byrne, 2001).
3.9.10 Composite Reliability
Due to the complexity of the study involving three competency categories as latent
constructs and 12 competency domains as latent variables, composite reliability was
carried out. Composite scores were computed from the data in multiple variables in
order to form reliable and valid measures of latent and theoretical constructs. The
variables that have relationship with one another were combined to form a composite
score. This was tested through exploratory factor analysis and reliability analysis.
172
Composite reliability represents the shared variance among a set of observed variables
that measure an underlying construct (Nik Kamariah and Ilham, 2008). It can be
defined as the proportion of true variances in total variance (true plus error variance).
The reliability of an individual measurement can be assessed through SMC between
the observed score and the true score. Bagozzi and Yi (1989) suggests as an acceptable
threshold of these two criteria, and desirable composite reliability should be greater
than or equal to 0.60. Most recently it is recommended to be greater than or equal to
0.70 (Hair et al., 2006).
3.9.11 Discriminant Validity Using Average Variance Extracted (AVE)
Average variance extracted (AVE) is the average value extracted of two constructs. In
this study, AVE values of the constructs were obtained to find out if discriminant
validity is supported or multicollinearity is absent (Byrne, 2001). Discriminant validity
is the extent to which a construct is truly distinct from other constructs (Hair et al.,
2009).
3.9.12 Multicollinearity
Hair et al. (2009) asserts that multicollinearity refers to the correlation among three or
more independent variables (evidenced when one is regressed against the others). As
collinearity increases, the unique variance explained by each independent variable
decreases. Multicollinearity is a problem with a correlation matrix that occurs when
variables are too highly correlated. Multicollinearity causes both logical and statistical
problems when redundant variables are included in the analysis as it inflates the size of
error terms and weakens the analysis (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007).
173
Multicollinearity, too, can have substantive effects not only on the predictive ability of
regression model but also on the estimation of the regression coefficients and their
statistical tests. As multicollinearity increases, it complicates the interpretation of
relationships because it becomes difficult to ascertain the effect of any single construct
owing to their interrelationship (Hair et al., 2009). In this study, multicollinearity was
computed using the comparison between average variance extracted value and
correlation square among variables (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007).
174
CHAPTER 4
RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Introduction
This chapter discusses the findings of the study through statistical analysis. The
chapter begins with an overview of the data collection and description of the profile of
respondents. In this chapter, multivariate outliers, normality test, the reliability, and
validity of measurements are also discussed. This chapter, too, discusses in detail the
analysis of the findings. This is systematically presented through addressing the
formulated research questions.
The data were input into SPSS Windows version 17.00 software programme and
analysed using AMOS package version 17.0. Several advanced statistical validity tests
and analysis including composite reliability tests, validity tests using confirmatory
factor analysis (CFA) for construct validity, discriminant validity for multicollinearity
treatment using average variance extracted (AVE), descriptive analysis, correlation,
and structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis using AMOS package version 17.0
were carried out. CFA and path analysis to verify the validity of the scales and
structural relationships among exogenous, and endogenous variables, too, were carried
out as described in Chapter 3.
The fundamental findings of the competency categories based on 2nd order analysis of
latent construct measurement confirmed the domains of the competency categories as
exogenous variables in the hypothesised model (as given in Figure 23). The model was
then used to test hypotheses and to confirm the interactional effects among variables in
175
the hypothesised, generated, and the 1st Re-specified Model. The chapter then
proceeds with CFA on the hypothesised model through the use of SEM. The
goodness-of-model fit, direct and indirect effect of variables through path analysis,
and correlation among variables are also discussed. Finally, the results of hypotheses
testing are elaborated. The chapter ends with a summary of the findings.
4.2 Profile of Respondents
A population is a complete group of entities sharing some common set of
characteristics (Sekaran, 2008; and Zikmund, 2003). In the study, the population
includes HR practitioners and HR consultants in Malaysia. The study treated the
responses of each HR practitioner and HR consultant as an individual data source.
A sample is a subset or some part of a larger population (Cavanna et al., 2000;
Zikmund, 2003; and Sekaran, 2008). Several researchers including Bentler (1993),
Anderson and Gerbing (1988), and Byrne (2001) suggests that sample sizes should
range from 150 to 250. Anderson and Gerbing (1988) suggests sample sizes of 150 or
more. Bentler (1993) recommends a sample size of at least 5 cases per parameter.
Byrne (2001) recommends a sample size of 200. Hoelter (1983) suggests a critical
sample size of between 200 and 250. In general, a sample size of 200 is recommended
as the critical sample size (Byrne, 2001). In the study, all the 380 samples of HR
practitioners and HR consultants were homogeneous and as such a representative
sample was likely have been achieved.
Table 6 below sets out the summary of profiles of respondents (profile of respondents
are given in Appendix 6). From Table 6, it was observed that the majority of the
176
sample comprised of HR practitioners (86.3%) compared to HR consultants (13.7%).
In terms of the gender, 57.6% were males and 42.4% were females. It was also
observed that the majority of the sample possessed master’s qualification (35.8%),
followed by PhD degree (26.6%), diploma (17.1%), bachelor degree (10.0%),
professional/others (6.0%), and secondary education (4.5%). Altogether 72.4% of all
the respondents possessed a minimum of a bachelor’s degree. Over 37.6% of the
respondents were between the age of 30 to 40 years and 32.1% were between 41 to 50
years. Altogether, 69.7% of the respondents were 30 years and above of age. From the
above, it can be deduced that the above sample in terms of gender, age, and education
level produced moderately homogenous sample pool for this research.
177
Table 6. Summary of Profile of Respondents (N=380)
HR Category HR practitioners HR consultants Total
N
328 52
380
%
86.3 13.7 100
Gender Male Female Total
219 161 380
57.6 42.4 100
Age < 30 years 30 – 40 years 41 – 50 years > 50 years Total
37 143 122 78
380
9.7 37.6 32.1 20.5 100
Education Level Secondary Education Diploma Degree Bachelor Degree Master Degree PhD Degree Professional/Others Total
17 65 38
136 101 23
380
4.5 17.1 10.0 35.8 26.6 6.0 100
Years of Organisation in Operation Less than 1 year 1 – 5 years 6 – 10 years More than 10 years Total
8 61 58
253 380
2.1 16.1 15.3 66.6 100
Years of Working Experience Less than 5 years 5 – 10 years 11 – 20 years More than 20 years Total
30 81
137 132 380
7.9 21.3 36.1 34.7 100
Years of Working Experience with HR Less than 5 years 5 – 10 years 11 – 20 years More than 20 years Total
103 111 112 54
380
27.1 29.2 29.5 14.2 100
Number of Employees in Organisation Less than 100 100 – 500 501 – 1000
94
101 36
149
24.7 26.6 9.5
39.2
178
More than 1000 Total
380 100
Category of Economic Sectors Manufacturing Services Total
225 155 380
59.2 40.8 100
Job Category in Organisation Top Management Middle Management Supervisory Others Total (1) Missing Total (2)
64 175 37 52
328 52
380
16.8 46.1 9.7
13.7 86.3 13.7 100
Current Job Title/Designation Executive/Administrator Senior Executive/Administrator Manager Senior Manager General Manager Director Others Total (1) Missing Total (2)
66 38 91 34 41 12 46
328 52
380
17.4 10.0 23.9 8.9
10.8 3.2
12.1 86.3 13.7 100
179
With reference to the profile of the companies in operation, this study shows that 253
(66.6%) respondents indicated that their organisations had been in operation for more
than 10 years. The size of the workforce represented by the companies in which the
HR practitioners were working in were: more than 1000 employees (39.2%), 100 to
500 (26.6%), and less than 100 employees (24.7%). The job categories of the HR
practitioners in organisations were: top management (16.8%), middle management
(46.1%), supervisory (9.7%), and others (13.7%). From the above, altogether 62.9% of
the HR practitioners represented middle management and higher positions.
Most of the respondents i.e., 137 (36.1%) have had working experience of between 11
to 20 years; 34.7% or 132 respondents had working experience of more than 20 years;
21.3% or 81 respondents of between 5 to 10 years, and 7.9% or 30 respondents had
working experience less than 5 years. Altogether, 70.8% of the total respondents had
working experience of more than 10 years. A total of 29.5% or 112 respondents had
working experience in HR of between 11 to 20 years; 29.2% or 111 respondents had
working experience in HR of between 5 to 10 years; 27.1% or 103 respondents had
worked in HR for less than 5 years, and 14.2% or 54 respondents have had working
experience in HR for more than 20 years. Altogether, 72.9% of all the respondents had
HR working experience of more than 5 years.
Tables 7, 8, and 9 show the crosstabulated procedure forming two-way and multiway
tables and providing a variety of tests, and measures of association for two -way
tables. The structure of the tables and the categories were ordered to determine the
dominant character among respondents. Crosstabulated statistics and measures of
180
association were computed for two-way tables only. This study specifies a total value
of two categories of respondents’ profiles based on the categorical data.
Each cell of the table can contain any combination of counts and percentages selected.
The percentages of the total number of cases represented in the table (one layer) were
also available. The summarised procedure calculates subgroup statistics for variables
within categories of one or more grouping variables. All levels of the grouping
variables were crosstabulated. The case processing summary as given in Table 7
indicates that there are no participants with missing data.
Table 7 below shows the comparison of profiles of HR practitioners and HR
consultants. The crosstabulation table includes the variables and each cell also has a
percentage of total number per category. Altogether, 184 or 48.4% of the 328 HR
practitioners were males and 144 or 37.9% were females. With reference to the HR
consultants, 35 (9.2%) were male respondents and 17 (4.5%) were female respondents.
The representation of the gender of the males to the females in the study was in the
ratio of 57.6% : 42.4% respectively. Based on age, 127 (33.4%) of HR practitioners
were in the age category between 30 to 40 years, and 59 (15.5%) were more than 50
years old. From the above, 77.3% of the HR practitioners were 30 years and above of
age.
181
Table 7. Profile of HR Practitioners and HR Consultants
HR practitioner HR consultant Description N % N % Gender
9.2 35 48.4 184 Male 4.5 17 37.9 144 Female
13.7 52 86.3 328 Total Age < 30 years 30 – 40 years 41 – 50 years > 50 years Total
8.9 33.4 28.4 15.5 86.3
3 16
34 127
14 108 59
328 19 52
0.8 4.2 3.7 5.0
13.7 Education Level Secondary Education Diploma Degree Bachelor Degree Master Degree PhD Degree Professional/Others Total
17 59 33
127 74 18
328
4.5 15.5 8.7
33.4 19.5 4.7
86.3
0 6 5 9
27 5
52
0 1.6 1.3 2.4 7.1 1.3
13.7 Years of Working Experience Less than 5 years 5 – 10 years 11 – 20 years More than 20 years Total
25 67
121 115 328
6.6 17.6 31.9 30.3 86.3
5 14 16 17 52
1.3 3.7 4.2 4.5
13.7 Years of Working Experience in HR Less than 5 years 5 – 10 years 11 – 20 years More than 20 years Total
99 105 85 39
328
26.1 27.6 22.4 10.3 86.3
4 6
27 15 52
1.1 1.6 7.1 3.9
13.7 Category of Economic Sectors Manufacturing Services Total
224 104 328
58.9 27.4 86.3
1 51 52
0.3 13.4 13.7
182
Based on the education level, most of HR practitioners i.e., 127 (33.4%) possessed
master’s degree and 27 (7.1%) of HR consultants possessed PhD degree. In terms of
working experience, most of the HR practitioners (31.9%) had 11 to 20 years of
working experience and 17 (4.5%) HR consultants had more than 20 years of working
experience. In relation to working experience in HR, most of HR practitioners i.e., 105
(27.6%) had working experience of between 5 to 10 years, and 27 (7.1%) HR
consultants had their previous experience in HR of between 11 to 20 years. Based on
the categories of economic sectors, most of the HR practitioners i.e., a total of 224
(58.9%) were from the manufacturing sector whereas 104 (27.4%) were from the
services sector.
A summary on the profiles of respondents based on their age categories is tabulated in
Table 8. A total of 99 (26.1%) of the HR practitioners in the age category of 41-50
years stated that their organisations had been in operation for more than 10 years. A
total of 69 (18.2%) of the HR practitioners in the age category of 30 – 40 years have
had total working experience of 11-20 years. In terms of working experience in HR,
most of the respondents i.e., 58 (15.3%) were in the age category of 41-50 years.
Based on the job category in organisations, most of the respondents i.e., 75 (22.9%)
were in middle management and in the age category of 30- 40 years.
183
Table 8. Profile of Respondents Based on Age Categories
< 30
Years 30 – 40 Years
41 – 50 Years
> 50 Years Description
N % N % N % N % Years of Organisation in Operation Less than 1 year 1 – 5 years 6 – 10 years More than 10 years Total
3 17 5
12 37
0.8 4.5 1.3 3.2 9.7
4 28 34 77
143
1.1 7.4 8.9 20.3 37.6
1 8
14 99
122
0.3 2.1 3.7
26.1 32.1
0 8 5
65 78
0 2.1 1.3 17.1 20.5
Years of Working Experience Less than 5 years 5 – 10 years 11 – 20 years More than 20 years Total
17 16 4 0
37
4.5 4.2 1.1 0
9.7
10 47 69 17
143
2.6 12.4 18.2 4.5 37.6
3 8
57 54
122
0.8 2.1
15.0 14.2 32.1
0 10 7
61 78
0 2.6 1.8 16.1 20.5
Years of Working Experience in HR Less than 5 years 5 – 10 years 11 – 20 years More than 20 years Total
22 8 6 1
37
5.8 2.1 1.6 0.3 9.7
51 49 30 13
143
13.4 12.9 7.9 3.4 37.6
19 34 58 11
122
5.0 8.9
15.3 2.9
32.1
11 20 18 29 78
2.9 5.3 4.7 7.6 20.5
Job Category in Organisation Top Management Middle Management Supervisory Others Total
1 18 8 7
34
0.3 5.5 2.4 2.1
10.4
12 75 16 24
127
3.7 22.9 4.9 7.3 38.7
31 63 10 4
108
9.5 19.2 3.0 1.2
32.9
20 19 3
17 59
6.1 5.8 0.9 5.2 18.0
Current Job Title/ Designation Executive/Administrator Senior Executive/Administrator Manager Senior Manager General Manager Director Others Total
19 2 7 1 2 0 3
34
5.8 0.6 2.1 0.3 0.6 0
0.9 10.4
25 24 41 8
11 3
15 127
7.6 7.3 12.5 2.4 3.4 0.9 4.6 38.7
16 9
33 20 13 7
10 108
4.9 2.7
10.1 6.1 4.0 2.1 3.0
32.9
6 3
10 5
15 2
18 59
1.8 0.9 3.0 1.5 4.6 0.6 5.5 18.0
184
Table 9 shows the description of profiles of respondents based on education level for
both the HR practitioners and HR consultants. Most of the respondents i.e., 68 (17.9%)
who had 11-20 years of working experience possessed master’s degree. Most of the
HR practitioners i.e., 48 (12.6%) who had 11 to 20 years of working experience
possessed master’s degree. Based on job category in organisations, most of the HR
respondents i.e., 84 (25.6%) who are in middle management positions possessed
Master’s degree.
185
Table 9. Profile of Respondents Based on Education Level
SPM STPM Diploma Degree Master PhD Others Description N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Years of Working Experience Less than 5 years 5 – 10 years 11 – 20 years More than 20 years Total
0 1 3 4 8
0
0.3 0.8 1.1 2.1
4 1 4 0 9
1.1 0.3 1.1 0
2.4
4
20 22 19 65
1.1 5.3 5.8 5.0 17.1
3 9
12 14 38
0.8 2.4 3.2 3.7 10
15 29 68 24 136
3.9 7.6 17.9 6.3 35.8
4
19 28 50 101
1.1 5.0 7.4 13.2 26.6
0 2 0
21 23
0
0.5 0
5.5 6.1
Years of Working Experience in HR Less than 5 years 5 – 10 years 11 – 20 years More than 20 years Total
1 4 3 0 8
0.3 1.1 0.8 0
2.1
7 2 0 0 9
1.8 0.5 0 0
2.4
24 19 15 7
65
6.3 5.0 3.9 1.8 17.1
7
14 11 6
38
1.8 3.7 2.9 1.6 10.0
37 41 48 10 136
9.7 10.8 12.6 2.6 35.8
22 27 29 23 101
5.8 7.1 7.6 6.1 26.6
5 4 6 8
23
1.3 1.1 1.6 2.1 6.1
Job Category in Organisation Top Management Middle Management Supervisory Others Total
0 4 3 1 8
0
1.2 0.9 0.3 2.4
1 4 1 3 9
0.3 1.2 0.3 0.9 2.7
12 31 7 9
59
3.7 9.5 2.1 2.7 18.0
9
16 4 4
33
2.7 4.9 1.2 1.2 10.1
19 84 10 14 127
5.8 25.6 3.0 4.3 38.7
17 33 11 13 74
5.2 10.1 3.4 4.0 22.6
6 3 1 8
18
1.8 0.9 0.3 2.4 5.5
Current Job Title/Designation
Executive/Administrator Senior Executive/Adm Manager Senior Manager General Manager Director Others Total
3 0 0 1 0 0 4 8
0.9 0 0
0.3 0 0
1.2 2.4
2 1 4 0 1 0 1 9
0.6 0.3 1.2 0
0.3 0
0.3 2.7
15 5
18 4 6 2 9
59
4.6 1.5 5.5 1.2 1.8 0.6 2.7 18.0
5 6
12 4 4 0 2
33
1.5 1.8 3.7 1.2 1.2 0
0.6 10.1
35 18 38 12 8 4
12 127
10.7 5.5 11.6 3.7 2.4 1.2 3.7 38.7
5 6
19 12 19 6 7
74
1.5 1.8 5.8 3.7 5.8 1.8 2.1 22.6
1 2 0 1 3 0
11 18
0.3 0.6 0
0.3 0.9 0
3.4 5.5
4.3 Results of Preliminary Testing
4.3.1 Multivariate Outliers
Cohen and Cohen (1983) suggests that, as a rule of thumb, multivariate outliers =
Mahalanobis Distance > chi-square value. Hair et al. (1998) suggests that Mahalanobis
distance should not exceed the critical chi-squared value with degrees of freedom
equal to number of predictors and alpha = 0.001, while Tabachnick and Fidell (2007)
suggests that the Mahalanobis distance should be interpreted as �2 statistic with the
degree of freedom equal to the number of items. It is recommended that a criterion of
P < 0.001 is used to evaluate whether a case is judged to be a multivariate outlier.
186
In this study, a test for multivariate outliers was conducted using the techniques
prescribed by Tabachnick and Fidell (2007) using the 380 data of respondents from a
set of 30 items on generic/behavioural competency factors, 25 items on technical HR
competency factors, 35 items on business competency factors, and 13 items on HR
Practitioner Competency Model Development. The Mahalanobis distance was
calculated based on a total of 103 items. The criterion of P < 0.001 and critical value
of �2 = 140.90 was used. The tests conducted identified 37 cases with Mahalanobis
values above 140.90. The Mahalanobis distance succeeded in identifying the
multivariate outliers. These 37 cases which were identified as outliers were thus
deleted. This study confirmed that 343 cases (respondents) were used for further
analysis such as confirmatory factor analysis, measurement model, structural model,
and hypothesis testing.
4.3.2 Normality Test
Normality of variables was assessed by statistical methods: skewness and kurtosis.
Skewness and kurtosis values were, on average, smaller than one, and deviations from
normality were very minimal. Logarithm, square, and square root transformations of
the data did not lessen these deviations, and therefore the data were retained in their
original form. Tabachnick and Fidell (2007) states the impact of small skewness and
kurtosis deviations from zero disappears in a sample of 200 or more. Since the sample
size in this study was 328, slight skewness and kurtosis should not influence the
overall analyses and results.
Linearity was assessed based on residual plots from the regression analyses. Normally
and independently distributed residuals indicated independence of error terms.
187
Bivariate scatterplots between variables shows relationships were homoscedastic and
evenly distributed (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007; and Hair et al., 2006). In
combination, these analyses indicated that the data were reliable and appropriate for
further analyses.
Normality of the distribution of the scores of the variables was investigated. The value
of skewness and kurtosis was calculated to identify the distribution of scores for each
item in the variables. The value of skewness can also be obtained by dividing the
standard error of the skewness. A total of 17 items were found to be non normal.
These items are: flexibility, high integrity, strong initiative, ability to change,
persistence, adaptability, career planning, staff welfare, discipline, HR strategy,
innovation, creativity, handling conflict, decision making, accountability,
responsibility, and consulting skills.
Table 10 below shows the identification of the non normal items among the
generic/behavioural competency factors, technical HR competency factors, and
business competency factors.
188
Table 10. Identification of Non Normal Items
Value of Original Items
Items Skewness Std. Error of Skewness
Normal Items (Skewness / Std. Error <
2.58)
Kurtosis Std. Error of Kurtosis
Normal Items
(Kurtosis / Std. Error <
7) Flexibility
(sqrt) 0.618 0.168 3.678 0.560 0.334 1.676 High Integrity
(sqrt) 0.465 0.168 2.767 1.920 0.334 5.748 Strong
Initiative (sqrt)
0.507 0.168 3.017 0.915 0.334 2.739
Ability to Change (sqrt)
0.734 0.168 4.369 1.872 0.334 5.604
Persistence (sqrt) 0.845 0.168 5.029 1.597 0.334 4.781
Adaptability (sqrt) 1.096 0.168 6.523 3.476 0.334 10.407 Career
Planning (sqrt)
0.652 0.168 3.880 2.105 0.334 6.302
Staff Welfare (sqrt) 0.862 0.168 5.130 1.651 0.334 4.943
Discipline (sqrt) 0.883 0.168 5.255 1.928 0.334 5.772
HR strategy (sqrt) 1.079 0.168 6.422 2.168 0.334 6.491
Innovation (sqrt) 0.608 0.168 3.619 -0.191 0.334 -0.571
Creativity (ln10) 1.128 0.168 6.714 1.003 0.334 3.002
Handling Conflict (sqrt)
1.059 0.168 6.303 1.832 0.334 5.485
Decision Making (sqrt)
1.099 0.168 6.541 2.303 0.334 6.895
Accountability (sqrt) 0.459 0.168 2.732 0.298 0.334 0.892
Responsibility (sqrt) 0.530 0.168 3.154 0.196 0.334 0.586
Consulting Skills (sqrt)
0.730 0.168 4.345 1.058 0.334 3.167
Note: Sqrt = Square Root; Ln10 = Log 10.
189
The scores for these variables were first reflected, then a square root transformation
was applied. To maintain the rank order of the original raw scores, the scores were
again reflected to produce a normal data of a new variable. This yielded a “z-score” or
critical ratio of 2.58. Thus, all constructs in the variables were normalised as the
critical score of 2.58 fell within the skewness value lower than 2.0, and kurtosis value
smaller than 7.0 as suggested by Tabachnick and Fidell (2007). Thus, it could be
concluded that all the given variables were normally distributed as given in Table 11
below.
190
Table 11. Final Transformation of Non Normal Items
Value of Normal Items
Items Skewness Std. Error of Skewness
Normal Items
(Skewness / Std. Error <
2.58)
Kurtosis Std. Error of Kurtosis
Normal Items (Kurtosis / Std.
Error < 7)
Flexibility (sqrt) -0.103 0.168 -0.613 0.653 0.334 1.955
High Integrity (sqrt) 0.249 0.168 1.482 1.673 0.334 5.008 Strong
Initiative (sqrt)
0.091 0.168 0.541 0.838 0.334 2.508
Ability to Change (sqrt)
0.162 0.168 0.964 0.756 0.334 2.263
Persistence (sqrt) -0.058 0.168 -0.345 1.883 0.334 -5.637
Adaptability (sqrt) 0.285 0.168 1.696 1.681 0.334 5.032 Career
Planning (sqrt)
0.342 0.168 2.035 2.322 0.334 6.952
Staff Welfare (sqrt) 0.086 0.168 0.511 1.546 0.334 4.628
Discipline (sqrt) -0.294 0.168 -1.750 1.967 0.334 -5.889
HR strategy (sqrt) 0.198 0.168 1.178 1.643 0.334 3.526
Innovation (sqrt) -0.321 0.168 -1.910 1.659 0.334 4.967
Creativity (ln10) -0.252 0.168 -1.500 -0.077 0.334 0.230
Handling Conflict (sqrt)
0.032 0.168 0.190 1.401 0.334 4.194
Decision Making (sqrt)
0.259 0.168 1.541 1.921 0.334 5.751
Accountability (sqrt) 0.101 0.168 0.601 2.095 0.334 6.272
Responsibility (sqrt) 0.020 0.168 0.119 0.577 0.334 1.727
Consulting Skills (sqrt)
0.042 0.168 0.250 0.574 0.334 1.718
Note: Sqrt = Square Root; Ln10 = Log 10.
191
4.3.3 Reliability of Measurements
All variables were subjected to reliability analysis to assess the dimensionality of the
measurement scale. Cronbach’s alpha was used to determine the internal consistency
of the measurement scale. The test results show that all measures or cases exhibited
high reliabilities which exceeded the acceptable level of .70 (Hair et al., 2006). These
results are given in Tables 12 – 15.
Table 12. Reliability of Generic/Behavioural Competency Measurement ( � = 0.930 )
Code Items Corrected Item-
Total Correlation
Cronbach's Alpha Description
B1 process management ,339 ,929 High Reliable B2 commitment ,558 ,927 High Reliable B3 Flexibility ,521 ,928 High Reliable B4 results orientation ,574 ,927 High Reliable B5 Directiveness ,440 ,929 High Reliable B6 information seeking ,526 ,927 High Reliable B7 high integrity ,528 ,927 High Reliable B8 strong initiative ,647 ,926 High Reliable B9 pride at work ,571 ,927 High Reliable B10 cross cultural sensitivity ,423 ,929 High Reliable B11 pro-activeness ,586 ,927 High Reliable B12 personal effectiveness ,562 ,927 High Reliable B13 ability to change ,513 ,928 High Reliable B14 conceptual thinking ,517 ,928 High Reliable B15 communication skills ,574 ,927 High Reliable B16 team work ,599 ,927 High Reliable B17 Leadership ,609 ,927 High Reliable B18 interpersonal skills ,556 ,927 High Reliable B19 relationship building ,610 ,926 High Reliable B20 continuous learning ,621 ,926 High Reliable B21 Tolerance ,585 ,927 High Reliable B22 Resilience ,534 ,927 High Reliable B23 Persistency ,551 ,927 High Reliable B24 Adaptability ,611 ,926 High Reliable B25 changing composition of workforce ,301 ,931 High Reliable B26 professional image ,512 ,928 High Reliable B27 analytical thinking ,568 ,927 High Reliable B28 team leadership ,538 ,927 High Reliable B29 Loyalty ,455 ,929 High Reliable B30 motivation and drive ,573 ,927 High Reliable
192
Table 13. Reliability of Technical HR Competency Measurement ( � = 0.888 )
Code Items Corrected Item-Total Correlation
Cronbach's Alpha if Item
Deleted Description
C1 recruitment and selection ,495 ,883 High Reliable C2 human resource development ,470 ,884 High Reliable C3 performance management and
development ,483 ,883 High Reliable
C4 employment laws and legislation ,466 ,884 High Reliable C5 salary and payroll administration ,449 ,885 High Reliable
C6 HR planning and acquisition ,565 ,881 High Reliable C7 talent management system ,496 ,883 High Reliable C8 compensation and benefits ,580 ,881 High Reliable C9 organisation development ,569 ,881 High Reliable C10 HR performance management ,516 ,883 High Reliable
C11 career planning ,595 ,881 High Reliable C12 succession planning ,599 ,881 High Reliable C13 staff welfare ,563 ,881 High Reliable C14 human performance improvement ,524 ,882 High Reliable C15 human performance technology ,561 ,881 High Reliable C16 Discipline ,467 ,884 High Reliable C17 HR strategy ,495 ,883 High Reliable C18 occupational safety and health ,317 ,887 High Reliable C19 rewards management ,387 ,886 High Reliable C20 talent retention ,358 ,886 High Reliable C21 employee relations ,428 ,885 High Reliable C22 policy formulation ,402 ,885 High Reliable C23 termination and separation ,301 ,887 High Reliable C24 human resource information systems ,158 ,890 High Reliable C25 security management ,186 ,890 High Reliable
The purpose of the reliability testing was to examine the properties of measurement
scales and the items in order to obtain the overall index of internal consistency of the
scales by excluding problematic items (Hair et al., 2006). Cronbach's alpha of
variables and items were included to the reliability test to test the internal consistency
of the measurement. According to Sekaran (2006), the value of alpha between ±.41
and ±.70 denotes moderate reliable while alpha greater than ±.71 denotes high
reliability (Sekaran, 2006).
193
Table 14. Reliability of Business Competency Measurement ( � = 0.933 )
Code Items Corrected Item-Total Correlation
Cronbach's Alpha Description
D1 financial knowledge ,157 ,934 High Reliable D2 customer satisfaction ,510 ,931 High Reliable D3 knowledge of product/services ,472 ,931 High Reliable D4 strategy alignment ,364 ,932 High Reliable D5 globalisation awareness ,356 ,932 High Reliable D6 managing resources ,564 ,930 High Reliable D7 negotiation skills ,505 ,931 High Reliable D8 Innovation ,522 ,931 High Reliable D9 Creativity ,509 ,931 High Reliable D10 consciousness towards quality ,523 ,931 High Reliable D11 entrepreneurial skills ,476 ,931 High Reliable D12 problem solving skills ,589 ,930 High Reliable D13 decision making ,578 ,930 High Reliable D14 information and communication
technology ,624 ,930 High Reliable
D15 professionalism and ethics ,544 ,930 High Reliable
D16 knowledge management ,577 ,930 High Reliable D17 management skills ,530 ,931 High Reliable D18 technology awareness ,632 ,929 High Reliable D19 sales and marketing ,457 ,932 High Reliable D20 strategic thinking ,544 ,930 High Reliable D21 strategic planning ,603 ,930 High Reliable D22 project management ,583 ,930 High Reliable D23 handling conflict ,524 ,931 High Reliable D24 accounting knowledge ,501 ,931 High Reliable D25 business process design ,472 ,931 High Reliable D26 responsiveness ,626 ,930 High Reliable D27 persuasion skills ,594 ,930 High Reliable D28 influencing skills ,584 ,930 High Reliable D29 command of English language ,419 ,932 High Reliable D30 presentation skills ,550 ,930 High Reliable D31 writing skills ,565 ,930 High Reliable D32 Accountability ,491 ,931 High Reliable D33 Responsibility ,496 ,931 High Reliable D34 facilitation skills ,552 ,930 High Reliable D35 consulting skills ,441 ,932 High Reliable
The data from the research was collected through questionnaires and was analysed
using SPSS windows version 17.00 and AMOS package version 17.0. The research
was conducted through the analysis of reliability to ascertain the reliability of the data
194
collected and the correlations between the independent variables and the dependent
variables by using Cronbach’s alpha. All measures exhibited high reliabilities with
coefficient alphas ranging from 0.7 up to 0.9, exceeding or approaching the acceptable
level of 0.70 (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007; and Hair et al., 2006).
Table 15. Reliability of HR Practitioner Competency Model Development Measurement (� = 0.778)
Code Items Corrected Item-Total Correlation
Cronbach's Alpha if Item
Deleted Descriptions
E1 currently, no HR Practitioner competency model (s) exist in Malaysia ,205 ,790 High Reliable
E2 HR Practitioner competency model is important for HR practitioners to attain professionalism
,484 ,757 High Reliable
E3 having an HR Practitioner competency model will support in human resource development
,615 ,749 High Reliable
E4 having an HR Practitioner competency model will support in talent development ,644 ,746 High Reliable
E5 having an HR Practitioner competency model will support in succession planning
,632 ,747 High Reliable
E6 HR Practitioner competency model should comprise of only technical HR competencies
,328 ,776 High Reliable
E7 HR Practitioner competency model should comprise of technical HR and business competencies
,483 ,756 High Reliable
E8 HR Practitioner competency model should comprise of technical HR and generic/behavioural competencies
,517 ,755 High Reliable
E9 competencies including generic/ behavioural, technical HR, and business competencies should be the key composition of the HR Practitioner competency model
,418 ,763 High Reliable
E10 business competencies are more important than generic/behavioural competencies
,279 ,780 High Reliable
E11 generic/behavioural competencies are more important than business competencies
,279 ,777 High Reliable
E12 both business, and generic/behavioural competencies are equally important ,366 ,768 High Reliable
E13 there is an urgent need to develop an HR Practitioner competency model ,390 ,766 High Reliable
195
4.4 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Latent Variables
Structural equation modeling is a powerful statistical technique that combines
measurement model or confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and structural model into a
simultaneous statistical test (Imam, 2003). Structural equation modeling is particularly
valuable in inferential data analysis and hypothesis testing where the pattern of inter-
relationships among the study constructs are specified a priori and grounded in
established theory (Byrne, 2001). It has the flexibility to model relationships among
multiple predictor and criterion variables, and statistically tests a priori theoretical
assumptions against empirical data through CFA (Chin, 1998). In this study, the
method was applied to test “causal” relationships among variables in the hypothesised
model.
Confirmatory factor analysis models in SEM do not have causal paths (straight arrows
in the diagram) connecting the latent variables (independent or dependent variable).
The latent variables may be allowed to correlate (oblique factors) or be constrained to
0 covariance (orthogonal factors). Confirmatory factor analysis in SEM usually
focuses on analysis of the error terms of the indicator variables (Byrne, 2001).
In a standard CFA model, each indicator is specified to load only on one factor,
measurement error terms are specified to be uncorrelated with each other, and all
factors are allowed to correlate with each other. One-factor standard model is
identified if the factor has three or more indicators (Hair et al., 2006). Multi-factor
standard models are identified if each factor has two or more indicators. In the
confirmatory factor analysis, the chi-square is significant in the presence of a large
sample size but based on the Maximum Likehood Indicator (MLI) of factor loadings,
196
goodness-of-fit indexes, and normalised residuals, etc.. All model fit indices show a
good fit between the model and data. Based on the paradigm of Gerbing and Anderson
(1988), all measures survived an exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, and
also have an unidimensional property.
4.4.1 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of HR Practitioner Competency Model
Development
The CFA of HR Practitioner Competency Model Development was conducted by
constraining the original 13 items of the endogenous constructs. Based on the
modification index and error elimination. The CFA of HR Practitioner Competency
Model Development confirmed there were 5 valid items in the development of the
model.
The CFA of HR Practitioner Competency Model Development constructs produced a
relatively good fit as indicated by the goodness-of-fit indices such as CMIN/df ratio
(<2); P-value (>0.05); the Goodness-of-Fit Index (GFI) of >.90; and RMSEA of
values less than .08 (<.08). The measurement model had a good fit with the data based
on assessment criteria such as GFI, CFI, TLI, and RMSEA (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988; and
Anderson and Gerbing, 1988). Figure 26 below shows the goodness-of-fit of the HR
Practitioner Competency Model Development.
197
e1 e01
,45
,06
e2 e02
,25
Standardised estimatesChi-Square : 9,835df : 5Ratio : 1,967P Value : ,080GFI : ,989RMSEA : ,053
,25
e3 e03
e5 e04,63
,55
e6 e05
,74
,50,40
,20
HR Practitioner Competency Model Development
Figure 26. Confirmatory Factor Analysis of HR Practitioner Competency Model
Development
The CFA of HR Practitioner Competency Model Development carried out confirmed
the fit of the model (P = 0.080) with the 5 valid items. The 5 valid items given are:
� Currently, no HR Practitioner Competency Model(s) exist in Malaysia (e1),
� HR Practitioner Competency Model is important for HR practitioners to attain
professionalism (e2),
� Having an HR Practitioner Competency Model will support in human resource
development (e3),
� Having an HR Practitioner Competency Model will support in succession
planning (e5), and
� HR Practitioner Competency Model should comprise of only technical HR
competencies (e6).
198
4.4.2 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Generic/Behavioural Competency
Category
The CFA determines if the number of factors and the loadings of items on them
conform to what is expected on the basis of pre-established theory on scale
assessment. Structural Equation Modeling techniques were used to perform the CFA.
The AMOS 17.0 version computer programme was used to examine if the proposed
factor solutions fit the data. No cross loadings were allowed. All scale items used for
the CFAs are outlined in this section. A number of measures were used in SEM to
assess the model fit.
The CFA is a confirmatory technique, and it is theory driven (Byrne, 2001). Therefore,
the planning of this analysis is driven by the theoretical relationships among the
observed and unobserved variables. CFA of latent variables was conducted to confirm
the variable constructs and the researcher used a hypothesised model to estimate a
population covariance matrix which was compared with the observed covariance
matrix (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007). Technically, this study envisions to minimise
the differences between the estimated and observed matrices of latent variables as
given in Figures 27 – 41.
4.4.2.1 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Leadership Domain
The results of CFA of leadership domain is shown in Figure 27 below. The results
took into account the actual factor loadings rather than assuming that each item is
equally weighted in the composite load determination.
199
Standardised estimatesChi-Square : 5,941df : 2Ratio : 2,970P Value : ,051GFI : ,991RMSEA : ,076
,68
,65
b14e04
,80
,67
,54
b5e02 ,74
b2
,82
e01
b12
,82
e03
Leadership
Figure 27. Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Leadership Domain
Confirmatory factor analysis was then conducted on the 4 items. The results shows
that factor loadings exceeded or were greater than 0.5, and all convergent reliability
extracted measures for the items exceeded the recommended levels of 0.74 to 0.82.
The data fitted the model richly as displayed by the measurement model fit indices.
The 4 items for competency factors as given in the leadership domain were:
leadership (b2), directiveness (b5), personal effectiveness (b12), and conceptual
thinking (b14).
4.4.2.2 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Building Work Relationship
Domain
The CFA of building work relationship was conducted by constraining these 4 items
as the constructs and indicating the internal consistency and all factor loadings were
statistically significant (> 0.5). The model fit indices shows that the data fit of the
measurement model fitted perfectly (chi-square/df = 0.311, P=0.577, GFI=1, and
RMSEA=0.000). The overall fit of the model was satisfactory. All other fit indices
were acceptable levels indicating a good fit of building work relationship domain. The
measurement model is shown in Figure 28 below. The 4 items as given in the building
200
work relationship domain were: process management (b1), flexibility (b3),
information seeking (b6), and strong initiative (b8).
Building workrelationship
,30
b3e02 ,55
,34
b1e01
,59Standardised estimatesChi-Square : ,311df : 1Ratio : ,311P Value : ,577GFI : 1,000RMSEA : ,000
,65
,42
b6e03 ,64
,76
b8
,87
e04
Figure 28. Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Building Work Relationship Domain
4.4.2.3 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Personal Credibility and
Attributes Domain
The CFA was conducted by constraining these 4 items as the personal credibility and
attributes constructs. The convergent validity was greater than or near to the
recommended minimum standard, indicating the internal consistency and all factor
loadings were statistically significant (� >0.5). The model fit indices show a perfect fit
of the data fit of the measurement model (P = 0.554; GFI=0.999; and RMSEA=0.000).
The 4 items as given in the personal credibility and attributes domain were: pride at
work (b9), pro-activeness (b11), ability to change (b13), and leadership (b17). The
measurement model is shown in Figure 29 below.
201
,43
PersonalCredibility &attributes
b9 e01
,66 ,56
b11 e02,75
,40
b13 e03
,63
Standardised estimatesChi-Square : ,350 df : 1Ratio : ,350P Value : ,554GFI : ,999 RMSEA : ,000
,41
b17 e04
,64,86
Figure 29. Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Personal Credibility and Attributes
Domain
4.4.2.4 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Self- Development Domain
The CFA was conducted by constraining 4 items as the self-development constructs.
The results show that factor loadings were greater than 0.5 and all convergent
reliability extracted measures for the items exceeded the recommended levels of 0.71.
The data fitted the model richly as displayed by the measurement model fit indices.
CFA of self-development confirmed the perfect measurement model fit (chi-square/df
= 2.948, P=0.052, GFI=0.991, and RMSEA=0.075). All other fit indices were at the
acceptable levels indicating a good fit of the variable of competence. The
measurement model is given in the Figure 30. The 4 items as given in the self
development domain were: high integrity (b7), cross cultural sensitivity (b10),
communication skills (b15), and team work (b16).
202
Standardised estimatesChi-Square : 5,897df : 2Ratio : 2,948P Value : ,052GFI : ,991RMSEA : ,075
,51
,51
b16e04
,71
,50
b15e03 ,71
,50
b10e02 ,71
b7
,71e01
Self- development
Figure 30. Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Self - Development Domain
4.4.3 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Business Competency Category
4.4.3.1 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Entrepreneurial and
Business Acumen Domain
The CFA of the entrepreneurial and business acumen domain was conducted by
constraining 5 items as the construct and indicating the internal consistency. Only 3
items with factor loadings (>0.5) were statistically significant. The model fit indices
show that the data fit of the measurement model fitted reasonably well (chi-
square/df=2,194, P=0.052, GFI>=0.987, and RMSEA=0.059). The overall fit of the
model was satisfactory. The measurement model is given in Figure 31.
203
,15
Entrepreneurial andbusiness acumen
,33
d3 e03 ,57
,34
e01 d1
d2 e02 ,58
,38
Standardised estimatesChi-Square : 10,970df : 5,22 Ratio : 2,194,47P Value : ,052GFI : ,987RMSEA : ,059
d5 e04 ,58
,33
d6 e05
Figure 31. Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Entrepreneurial and Business Acumen
Domain
The 3 valid items were: customer satisfaction (d2), knowledge of products/services
(d3), and managing resources (d6). The 2 non valid items were: financial knowledge
(d1), and globalisation awareness (d5) and these still existed in the CFA as the
fulfillment of the model fit indicators. This study confirmed that financial knowledge
and globalisation awareness must be calculated in order to construct entrepreneurial
and business acumen domain.
4.4.3.2 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Strategic Orientation Domain
The CFA of the strategic orientation domain was carried out by constraining 5 items as
the constructs and indicating internal consistency. Only 4 items with factor loadings
(>0.5) were statistically significant. The model fit indices show that the data fit of the
measurement model fitted reasonably well (chi-square/df=2,151, P=0.056, GFI=0.987,
and RMSEA=0.058). The overall fit of the model was satisfactory. The measurement
model is given in Figure 32.
204
,24
Figure 32. Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Strategic Orientation Domain
The 4 valid items were: negotiation skills (d7), innovation (d8), consciousness towards
quality (d10), and entrepreneurial skills (d11). The non-valid item with factor loading
(< 0.5) was strategy alignment (d4).
4.4.3.3 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Customer Orientation Domain
The CFA of the customer orientation domain was carried out by constraining 4 items
as the constructs and indicating the internal consistency. Only 3 items with factor
loadings (>0.5) were statistically significant. The model fit indices show that the data
fit of the measurement model fitted well (chi-square/df=0.491, P=0.612, GFI=0.999,
and RMSEA=0.000). The overall fit of the model was satisfactory, and the
measurement model is given in Figure 33.
Strategic orientation
,32
d8e03 ,57
,34e01 d4
d7e02
,58
,49
Standardised estimatesChi-Square : 10,755df : 5
,32 Ratio : 2,151,57 P Value : ,056
GFI : ,987RMSEA : ,058
d10e04,55
,30
d11e05
205
Standardised estimatesChi-Square : ,983df : 2Ratio : ,491P Value : ,612GFI : ,999RMSEA : ,000
,46
,38
,42
d11e02 ,64
d9
,68
e01
d12e03
,62
,24
d15
,49
e04
Customerorientation
Figure 33. Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Customer Orientation Domain
The 3 valid items were creativity (d9), entrepreneurial skills (d11), and problem
solving skills (d12). The non-valid item was professionalism and ethics (d15).
4.4.3.4 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Essential Performance
Enablers Domain
The CFA of the essential performance enablers domain was conducted by constraining
5 items as the construct and indicating the internal consistency. Only 3 items with
factor loadings (>0.5) were statistically significant. The model fit indices show that the
data fit of the measurement model fitted reasonably well (chi-square/df=1,714,
P=0.128, GFI=0.990, and RMSEA=0.046). The overall fit of the model was
satisfactory, and the measurement model is given in Figure 34.
206
,45
Figure 34. Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Essential Performance Enablers Domain
The 3 valid items were: decision making (d13), information and communication
technology (d14), and knowledge management (d16). The non-valid items were
management skills (d17) and technology awareness (d18).
4.4.4 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Technical HR Competency Category
4.4.4.1 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Resourcing and Talent
Management Domain
The CFA of resourcing and talent management was conducted by constraining those 5
items as the constructs and indicating the internal consistency and all factor loadings
were statistically significant (>0.5). The model fit indices show that the data fit of the
measurement model fitted perfectly (chi-square/df=1,279, P=0.270, GFI =0.992, and
RMSEA=0.029). The overall fit of the model was satisfactory. All other fit indices
were acceptable levels indicating a good fit of the resourcing and talent management
domain. The measurement model is given in Figure 35.
Essentialperformance
enablers
,31
d16e03,56
,50
e01 d13
,67d14e02
,71 Standardised estimatesChi-Square : 8,568df : 5Ratio : 1,714P Value : ,128GFI : ,990RMSEA : ,046
,18
d17e04
,43
,12
d18e05
,34
207
RMSEA : ,029
Standardised estimatesChi-Square : 6,396df : 5 Ratio : 1,279P Value : ,270GFI : ,992
,76
c4 e03 ,87
,56
,85
c5 e04
,92
,70
c6
,84
e05
c3 e02 ,75
,74
c1 e01 ,86
Resourcing andtalent management
Figure 35. Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Resourcing and Talent Management
Domain
The 5 valid items are: recruitment and selection (c1), performance management and
development (c3), employment laws and legislation (c4), salary and payroll
administration (c5), and HR planning and acquisition (c6).
4.4.4.2 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Learning and Development
Domain
Parameters equal the number of unconstrained arrows from the latent variables to the
indicator variables [an unconstrained arrow is the one per latent variable constrained to
1.0, used to set the metric for that latent variable], plus the number of two-headed
arrows in the model [indicating correlation of factors and/or of measurement errors],
plus the number of variances [which equals the number of indicator variables plus the
number of latent variables]. Figure 36 shows the significant process of CFA for 5
items as constructs.
208
All the factor loadings were statistically significant (>0.5). The model fit indices show
that the data fit of the measurement model fitted perfectly (chi-square/df=0.429,
P=0.828, GFI=0.997, and RMSEA=0.000).
Standardised estimatesChi-Square : 2,147df : 5 Ratio : ,429P Value : ,828GFI : ,997RMSEA : ,000
,83
,88
c8e03,94
,93
c7e02 ,96
c2
,91e01
,85
c15e04
,92
,82
c17
,91
e05
Learning anddevelopment
Figure 36. Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Learning and Development Domain
The 5 valid items were: human resource development (c2), talent management system
(c7), compensation and benefits (c8), human performance technology (c15), and HR
strategy (c17).
4.4.4.3 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Rewards and Performance
Management Domain
Confirmatory factor analysis models in SEM have no causal paths (straight arrows in
the diagram) connecting the latent variables. The latent variables may be allowed to
correlate (oblique factors) or be constrained to 0 covariance (orthogonal factors). The
CFA analysis in SEM usually focuses on analysis of the error terms of the indicator
variables. Alike other measurement models, The CFA of rewards and performance
management model in the study identified an unique solution and confirmed 5 items as
constructs of latent.
209
In a standard CFA of rewards and performance management model, each indicator is
specified to load only on one factor, measurement error terms are specified to be
uncorrelated with each other, and all factors are allowed to correlate with each other.
Ratio : 1,673P Value : ,137GFI : ,991RMSEA : ,044
Standardised estimatesChi-Square : 8,367df : 5
,36
,34
c11e03 ,48
c12e04
,70
,42
c13
,65
e05
,58
,30
c10e02 ,55
c9
,60e01
Rewards andperformancemanagement
Figure 37. Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Rewards and Performance Management
Domain
The 5 valid items of the rewards and performance management domain were:
organisational development (c9), HR performance management (c10), career planning
(c11), succession planning (c12), and staff welfare (c13).
4.4.4.4 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Employee Relations and
Compliance Domain
The CFA of employee relations and compliance domain show that the primary focus
of the estimation process in SEM was to yield parameter values such that the
discrepancy (i.e., the residual) between the sample covariance matrix and the
population covariance matrix implied by the model is minimal (Byrne, 2001).
Confirmatory factor analysis succeeded by constraining items as latent variables. All
210
factor loadings were more than 0.5 and were statistically significant. The overall fit of
the model was satisfactory. The measurement model is given in Figure 38.
,46
e01 c14
,68,42
Figure 38. Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Employee Relations and Compliance
Domain
All the 4 items of the employee relations and compliance domain were valid and these
include: human performance improvement (c14), discipline (c16), occupational safety
and health (c18), and rewards management (c19).
The most commonly reported measures are the �2 likelihood ratio test, the
Standardised Root Mean Residual (SRMR), the Goodness-of-Fit Index (GFI), the
Comparative Fit Index (CFI) (Bentler, 1990), and the Incremental Index of Fit (IFI)
(Bolen, 1989). A brief overview is provided for each of the reported measures to
explain on the decisions made on the CFA models.
Overall, the CFA shows that the constructs for all exogenous and endogenous
variables are significantly confirmed. CFA tables set out several different indications
Employeerelations
& compliance
Standardised estimates,65e02 c16Chi-Square : 1,619df : 2,62 ,78 Ratio : ,809P Value : ,445GFI : ,998RMSEA : ,000
c18e03 ,59
,34
c19e04
211
of model fit including chi-square and its associated degrees of freedom, the
comparative fit index (CFI), the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)
index, and the standardised root mean squared residual (SRMR) index.
4.5 Second (2nd) Order Analysis of Latent Constructs
4.5.1 Generic/ Behavioural Competency Category
The 2nd order analysis was conducted by constraining the 8 items in the
generic/behavioural competency category. The CFA results of building work
relationship, and personal credibility and attributes were confirmed as the domains of
the latent construct with a relatively good fit as indicated by the goodness-of-fit
indices such as CMIN/df ratio (<2); P-value (>0.05); Goodness-of-Fit Index (GFI) of
>.90; and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) of value less than .08.
The measurement model has a good fit with the data based on assessment criteria such
as GFI, CFI, TLI, and RMSEA (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988; and Anderson and Gerbing,
1988).
Loading of the paths show that readings were positive and good, ranging from 0.29 to
0.71 for the significance of standardised regression weights. The overall fit of the
model was satisfactory, indicating a good fit of generic/behavioural competency
category construct. Figure 39 below shows the goodness-of-fit of the generic/
behavioural competency category.
212
Figure 39. Second (2nd) Order Analysis of the Generic/Behavioural Competency
Category
The 2nd order analysis of the generic/behavioural competency category confirmed the
building work relationship domain and the 4 valid items were: process management
(b1), flexibility (b3), information seeking (b6), and strong initiative. For the personal
credibility and attributes domain, the 4 valid items were: pride at work (b9), pro-
activeness (b11), ability to change (b13), and leadership (b17). The model fit (P =
0.189; GFI = 0.984; and RMSEA = 0.029) confirmed building work relationship, and
personal credibility and attributes as significant domains of the generic/behavioural
competency category.
4.5.2 Business Competency Category
The 2nd order analysis of the business competency category was conducted by
constraining 7 items in the business competency category. The CFA results of
213
entrepreneurial and business acumen, and essential performance enablers were
confirmed as the domains of the latent construct with a relatively good fit as indicated
by the goodness-of-fit indices such as CMIN/df ratio (<2 ); P-value (>0.05);
Goodness-of-Fit Index (GFI) of > .90; and RMSEA of value less than .08. The
measurement model has a good fit with the data based on assessment criteria such as
GFI, CFI, TLI, and RMSEA (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988; and Anderson and Gerbing,
1988). Loading of the paths show that readings were positive and good ranging from
0.31 to 0.71 for the significance of standardised regression weights.
The overall fit of the model was satisfactory. All other fit indices were acceptable
levels indicating a good fit of the business competency category construct. Figure 40
below shows the goodness-of-fit of the business competency category. The model fit
(P = 0.207; GFI = 0.991; and RMSEA = 0.034) confirmed entrepreneurial and
business acumen, and essential performance enablers as significant domains of the
business competency category.
Figure 40. Second (2nd) Order Analysis of the Business Competency Category
214
For the entrepreneurial and business acumen domain, the 3 valid items were: creativity
(d9), entrepreneurial skills (d11), and problem solving skills (d12). For the essential
performance enablers, the 3 valid items were: decision making (d13), information and
communication technology (d14), and knowledge management (d16).
4.5.3 Technical HR Competency Category
The 2nd order analysis of the technical HR competency category as exogenous
construct measurement model was conducted to assess the unidimensionality of the
measures (Byrne, 2001).
The CFA results of resourcing and talent management, and employee relations and
compliance were confirmed as the domains of the latent construct with a relatively
good fit as indicated by the goodness-of-fit indices such as CMIN/df ratio (<2); P-
value (>0.05); Goodness-of-Fit Index (GFI) of > .90; and RMSEA of value less than
.08.
The measurement model had a good fit with the data based on assessment criteria such
as GFI, CFI, TLI, and RMSEA. Loading of the paths show that readings were positive
and good, ranging from 0.18 to 0.50 for the significance of standardised regression
weights. The overall fit of the model was satisfactory. All other fit indices were
acceptable levels indicating a good fit of the business competency category construct.
Figure 41 shows the goodness-of-fit of the technical HR competency category.
215
T chnical HRe Competency
Category
,50Resourcing &
talentmanagement
,03Employeerelations
& compliance4,42
c12
e18
2,10 ,02
c11
e17
,15 ,02
c9
e16
,14,83
c16
e20
,61
c14
e19
,71 ,18r6r5
Standardised estimatesChi-Square : 9,062df : 8Ratio : 1,133P Value : ,337,81 GFI : ,991RMSEA : ,034
,78 ,91 ,66
c18
e21
Figure 41. Second (2nd) Order Analysis of the Technical HR Competency Category
For the resourcing and talent management domain, the 3 valid items were:
organisation development (c9), career planning (c11), and succession planning (c12).
For the employee relations and compliance domain, the 3 valid items were: discipline
(c16), occupational safety and health (c18), and human performance improvement
(c14).
4.6 Measurement Model of Exogenous Variables
In the study, the structural equation model is a complete path model and this is
depicted in a path diagram. It differs from simple path analysis in which all variables
are latent variables measured by multiple indicators that have associated error terms in
addition to the residual error factor associated with the latent endogenous variables.
Figure 42 below shows a measurement model for three exogenous constructs of the
competency categories (each measured by indicators). The correlation among
exogenous variables shows the values are less than 0.9. The relationship among
216
exogenous variables confirmed that the three competency categories were significantly
different as non multicollinearity testing was achieved.
Figure 42. Measurement Model of Exogenous Variables
The measurement model is given in Figure 42 with standardised path coefficients on
causal paths, between exogenous variables. For the competency category constructs,
the measurement model was within the acceptable levels, indicating a sound fit of the
data to the model as given in Table 16. CFA was conducted among endogenous
variables to confirm the construct of the three competency categories. The CFA
among exogenous variables has an advantage to avoid the multicollinearity issue (Hair
et al., 2006).
217
Table 16. Model Fit Statistics of Exogenous Constructs
CFA �2 df Ratio P GFI RMSEA Highest Covariance
Multicollinearity Issue
Generic/ Behavioural, Business, and Technical HR competency categories
153.495 157 0.978 0.564 0.905 0.048 0.65 Null
The goodness of model fit among endogenous variables confirmed the significance of
the model. Table 16 shows that P level (P=0.564) of the model was significant (i.e.,
more than 0.05) and RMSEA (0.048) was less than 0.08 confirming the significance of
the measurement of exogenous model.
4.7 The Generated Model
A diagram of SEM in the study has certain standard elements: latents are ellipses,
indicators are rectangles, error and residual terms are circles, single-headed arrows are
causal relations (note: causality goes from a latent to its indicators), and double-
headed arrows are correlations between indicators or between exogenous latents.
Path coefficient values may be placed on the arrows from latents to indicators, or
from one latent to another, or from an error term to an indicator, or from a residual
term to a latent. The implied covariance matrix is computed from the path coefficients
in the model using the multiplication rule in path analysis: the effect size of a path is
the product of its path coefficients. The multiplication rule for any given model
generates the implied matrix, from which the actual sample covariance matrix is
subtracted, yielding the residual matrix (Hair et al., 2006).
218
The smaller the value in the present residual matrix, the better it is the fitting of the
model. Jaccard and Wan (1996) states that regression may be preferred to SEM when
there are substantial departures from the assumptions of SEM of multivariate
normality of the indicators and/or small sample sizes, and when measurement error is
less of a concern. This is because the measures have high reliability. The hypothesised
model is given below in Figure 43 (note: this, too, is the research framework of the
study as given in Figure 23 in Chapter 3).
The hypothesised model as given in Figure 43 was employed as the guiding
framework in developing the HR Practitioner Competency Model. The generated
model output given in Figure 44 shows that the model failed to explain a substantial
portion of the variance in all the endogenous variables (Squared Multiple Correlation -
SMC). The P-value (0.000) represents the non fit of the model, and based on the rule
of thumb of SEM, modification indices (MI) of the model was employed to achieve
the significance of the 1st Re-specified Model as given in Figure 45.
219
Figure 43. Hypothesised Model of HR Practitioner Competency Model
As given in Figure 45 based on the modification index of the CFA, measurement
model of exogenous and endogenous; the 1st Re-specified Model as the examination of
the hypothesised model confirmed the constructs of generic/behavioural competency
category, business competency category, and technical HR competency category.
Figure 45 sets out the 1st Re-specified Model which is based on the modification index
of CFA and the movement model of exogenous and endogenous variables.
The 1st Re-specified Model as a result of the examination of the hypothesised model
confirmed the constructs of the domains: relationship building and process drivers
(note: this domain has been renamed); personality credibility and attributes;
entrepreneurial and business acumen; essential performance enablers; resourcing and
talent management; and employee relations and compliance of the hypothesised paths.
Generic/ BehaviouralCompetency
Category
BusinessCompetency
Category
Te hnical HRclCompetency
Category
HR PractitionerCompetency Model
Self-developmentPersonal credibility &attributes
Building workrelationship
Strategic orientation
Customer orientation
Essential performanc e
enablers
Resourcing and talent management Learning and
development
Rewards and
Leadership
performancemanagement
Entrepreneurial & business acumen
Employee relations& compliance
220
In SEM, factor analysis and hypotheses are tested in the same analysis. SEM
techniques also provide extensive information about the extent to which the research
model is supported by the data.
Figure 44. Generated Model of HR Practitioner Competency Model
To reduce the sensitivity of the chi-square statistics to sample size, Wheaton (1998)
recommends using a rule to decide the acceptable �2 value: the value of �2 / df being
lower than 3. For the 1st Re-specified Model (as given in Figure 45), chi-square value
(CMIN= 247.725) achieved the fit criteria, �2 / df equalled to 1.152, and this, too,
confirmed the fit criteria. All of the other fit indices were also within the acceptable
221
ranges, suggesting that the 1st Re-specified Model of the HR Practitioner Competency
Model offers a good fit to the data.
Chi-square/degrees of freedom of the 1st Re-specified Model (1.152) indicated a
goodness-of-fit of the model. Jöreskog and Sörbom (1993) suggests an appropriate
basis for choosing the hypothesised models by considering model parsimony and fit.
The use of three measures- Akaike’s Information Criterion (AIC), Expected Cross –
Validation Index (ECVI), and Consistent Akaike’s Information Criterion (CAIC)
which are functions of model chi-square and degree of freedom are suggested (Akaike,
1987). The model with the smallest value of those three measures should be chosen. In
addition, the parsimonius normed fit index (PNFI) is another useful measure for
determining model parsimony with higher values reflecting greater model parsimony
(Hair et. al., 2006).
4.8 The First (1st ) Re-specified Model
The 1st Re-specified Model output is given in Figure 45. The 1st Re-specified Model
explains a substantial portion of the variance of the three competency categories to the
endogenous variables (Squared Multiple Correlation - SMC). Table 20 indicates that
the three exogenous variables jointly explained a total of 49.5% variance in the
development of the HR Practitioner Competency Model. The SMCs among the
endogenous variables are given in Table 20.
222
Figure 45. First (1st) Re-specified Model of HR Practitioner Competency Model
The findings indicate that the latent constructs of exogenous variables of the model
significantly relate to the development constructs of the HR Practitioner Competency
Model. Specifically, all hypotheses were supported and the final structural equation
model, indicated that the four hypothesised paths in the theoretical model were at
significant level (P>0.05).
223
4.8.1 General Discussion on First (1st ) Re-specified Model
4.8.1.1 Latent Construct of Generic/Behavioural Competency Category
In the 1st Re-specified Model (Figure 45), the latent constructs of the exogenous
variables were generic/behavioural competency category, business competency
category, and the technical HR competency category. The endogenous variables (i.e.,
the competency domains) in the latent construct - generic/behavioural competency
category were: “relationship building and process drivers,” and “personal credibility
and attributes.” In the 1st Re-specified Model, the domain “relationship building and
process drivers” was used in place of the domain “building work relationship.” The
justification for this is given in Section 4.8.1.4 of this study.
a. Relationship Building and Process Drivers Domain
In the domain “relationship building and process drivers,” “process management,”
“flexibility,” “information seeking,” and “strong initiative” were the only significant
competency factors.
In the industry, these competency factors are generally mapped out in the generic
competency models/frameworks in large organisations. These competency factors are
somewhat strategic in nature and are important in driving the organisations forward.
HRM in Malaysia recognises that acquisition of knowledge of the competency factors
“process management,” “flexibility,” “information seeking,” and “strong initiative”
are important for HRM to steer the organisations forward. This is primarily
recognisable in large organisations and multinational corporations (MNCs).
This could possibly be due to the changing paradigm and the influence of the western
competency models/frameworks on the HR profession in Malaysia. The continuing
224
pressure of globalisation, foreign direct investment, keen competition, etc. contribute
to the recognition of the importance of these competency factors. Ulrich (1997) asserts
that the new market dynamics that are driven by combined impact of globalisation,
deregulation, technology convergence, and “customer militancy” are radically
changing the structure, boundaries, and even definition of many industries.
The larger organisations and the MNCs have over the years mapped out
generic/behavioural competency models/frameworks. Generally, the
models/frameworks used in the west are used as references and this could be the main
reason for the prominence of these competency factors.
According to Malhi (2006), “a process is essentially a sequence of tasks or activities
that transforms inputs into desired outputs.” All work ranging from administrative to
engineering is a “process.” This means that all jobs including HRM are involved in
managing processes. HR profession in Malaysia takes cognisance of this as the
competency factor “process management” was significant in the study.
Spencer and Spencer (1993) lists competencies such as flexibility, information
seeking, and initiative as those commonly used competencies in generic or core
competency models in organisations. Laming (1995) observes that the competency-
process mastery which is closely related to process management was among one of the
four components set out in the HR Competency Model of General Electric of USA.
Unlike flexibility, information seeking, and initiative, process management is not a
commonly found competency in generic or core competency models. All the
competencies clustered (i.e., grouped) well in the given competency domain
225
“relationship building and process drivers” as they are centred on having a good
relationship in the organisations. Possessing these competencies enable individuals to
enhance organisational effectiveness at work.
b. Personal Credibilty and Attributes Domain
In the domain “personal credibility and attributes,” the competency factors such as
“pride at work,” “pro-activeness,” “ability to change,” and “leadership” were the only
significant competency factors.
Alike the competency factors in the competency domain “relationship building and
process drivers,” the competency factors “pride at work,” “pro-activeness,” “ability to
change,” and “leadership,” are commonly found in the generic competency
models/frameworks in organisations.
The HR profession in Malaysia observes the importance of the competency factor
“pride at work.” This competency factor is not set out in most of the HR competency
models/frameworks that were reviewed in the literature. This competency factor is
somewhat closely associated with “loyalty” and “belongingness.” Possibly in the
Malaysian work environment, the “sense of belongingness,” or “loyalty” are regarded
as important competencies. This could possibly be due to the inculcation of the eastern
work culture and values, especially that of the Japanese. Japan has a significant large
foreign direct investment in Malaysia. According to Bucknall and Ohtaki (2005),
“loyalty” is a virtue needed in most of the organisations and Japan has a lot to teach
the world about this.
226
The competency factors “pro-activeness,” “ability to change,” and “leadership” are
somewhat very commonly found in most of the western HR competency
models/frameworks. The western HR competency models/frameworks somewhat have
influenced the HR practices in Malaysia.
Issues like globalisation, business transformation, emphasis on knowledge economy,
etc. appear to have impact upon the HR profession in Malaysia. According to Malhi
(2006), the twenty first century Malaysian workforce is undergoing dramatic
transformation due to increasing globalisation, fast changing technology, emergence
of a knowledge-based economy, etc..
The competencies “pro-activeness,” and “ability to change” have somewhat gained
more importance in the organisations since the last Asian financial crises in late 1990s.
Since 1990s, a number of organisations in Malaysia have gone through business
transformation and massive organisational structural changes. It means that the HR
profession in Malaysia acknowledges the importance of these competency factors as
they enable organisational sustainability and viability. According to Malhi (2006),
change is the only constant in organisations as a result of increased global competition,
rapidly changing technology, and economic uncertainty. Every manager is expected to
have a clear understanding of how to manage change successfully.
The competency factor “leadership,” too, is is regarded as an important competency
factor. Steering the HR team is fundamentally important as with the leadership, vision,
mission, and the changing business strategy of an organisation can be realised. Besides
this, it is also the responsibility of HR department to nurture and develop future
227
leaders of the organisation. This is generally done by having career development plans
and road maps for the employees. Bucknall and Ohtaki (2005), too, asserts that human
resource department plays a vital role in ensuring that the leadership pool the
organisation is nurturing is aligned with the requirements of the organisation.
Spencer and Spencer (1993) lists competencies such as pro-activeness, ability to
change, and leadership as those commonly used competencies in generic or core
competency models in organisations. However “pride at work” appears to be more of a
“shared value” often practiced by organisations. However, Goleman (1998) lists “pride
in accomplishments” as an important competency that employers look for and hope for
from employees. The acquisition of these competencies may assist an HR practitioner
to enhance his/her personal credibility at work. The competency domain, “credible
activist” which is somewhat similar in its meaning to “personal credibility and
attributes” domain is mapped in the 2007 Human Resource Competency of Ulrich et
al. (2008). Personal credibility, too, is among one of the competency domains that is
set out in the Human Resource Competency Models of the research carried out by the
University of Michigan’s Business School from 1987 to 2002 (Ulrich et al.,2008).
4.8.1.2 Latent Construct of the Business Competency Category
The endogenous variables (i.e., competency domains) in the latent construct “business
competency category” were: “entrepreneurial and business acumen,” and “essential
performance enablers.” The significant measured variables (i.e., competency factors)
in the “entrepreneurial and business acumen” competency domain were: “creativity,”
“entrepreneurial skills,” and “problem solving skills.” The variables that measured
significantly in the “essential performance enablers” competency domain were:
228
“decision making,” “information and communication technology,” and “knowledge
management.”
The measured variable (i.e., competency factor) “problem solving skills” was
incorporated into the endogenous variable “essential performance enablers” as
suggested by the structural modeling procedures. This is appropriate as problem
solving skills (represented by d12 in the 1st Re-specified Model) is very closely
associated with the competency factor “decision making” (represented by d13 in the
1st Re-specified Model). Often in management, both are integrated and commonly
referred to as “problem solving and decision making” and therefore it is appropriate to
shift “problem solving skills” into the “essential performance enablers” competency
domain.
a. Entrepreneurial and Business Acumen Domain
In the domain “entrepreneurial and business acumen,” only “creativity” and
“entrepreneurial skills” were significant. Creativity and entrepreneurial skills are
strategic related competencies.
It appears that the HR job scope today has changed and has become challenging. HR
practitioners recognise the importance of possessing entrepreneurial skills. This could
possibly be in line with the changing concept of the HR departments from “cost
centre” to “profit centre” orientation. This has been the trend since mid 1990s in
Malaysia. The HR profession, too, has adopted the “strategic business partnership”
concept since late 1990s from the western HR competency models. The “profit centre”
229
concept and the “business partnership” orientation could possibly be the influencing
factor for the entrepreneurial thinking in HRM.
In a number of organisations in Malaysia, the HR practitioners have taken the role
more as internal consultants. As internal consultants, they provide HR consultancy
services to the line managers. The day to day, or the mundane HR operations are
carried out by the line managers themselves. Besides this, a number of organisations
over the years have set up training academies or centres of management excellence
that are championed by the HR personnel. Revenue is generated from the training
activities offered to both the staff of the organisation and other organisations. The
orientation towards “profit centres,” training academies, or centres of management
excellence are characteristics of entrepreneurial thinking in HRM practice in Malaysia
today.
The importance of the competency factor “entrepreneurial skills” is emphasised by
Malhi (2006). Malhi (2006) cites that in a study carried out by Greaves Sim and
Manickavasagam in 1980, it was found that “entrepreneurial skills” are needed by
Malaysian managers to perform effectively.
“Entrepreneurial skills or entrepreneurship” as a competency domain does not appear
in most of the HR competency models or academic literature that were researched.
However to some extent, entrepreneurial skills as a competency was found in several
studies including that carried out by Spencer and Spencer (1993) and Chua (2009).
Lately, the competency “business acumen” has been widely used in the academic
230
literature on Human Resource competencies (Brewster et al., 2000; Boselie and
Paauwe, 2005; and Chua, 2009).
The competency factor “creativity” is not emphasised in most of the HR competency
models/frameworks globally. The HR profession in Malaysia is progressive as the HR
practitioners recognise the importance of creativity at work. The importance of
creativity could be attributed to its significance in setting out competitive salary and
benefits programmes, hiring and retaining of talent, employee relations programmes
for the staff, setting up right career progression roadmaps, organisation development,
etc.. This is important as the HR profession is facing a lot of challenges today with
issues like stiff competition in retaining the best talent, changing business strategy,
providing the right organisational work environment, promotions and upgrading, etc..
The importance of the competency factor “creativity,” too, is emphasised by Malhi
(2006). Malhi (2006) cites that in a study carried out by Sharon Ann De Souza in
1995/1996 involving corporate managers and senior executives with significant years
of working experience in human resource, and training and development, “creativity”
was identified as one of the important managerial skills needed to become competent
managers.
Creativity or creativity skills has been identified as an important workplace
competency in the American Society for Training and Development/Department of
Labour, USA study of workplace basics (ASTD/DOL, 1988) and in the United
Nation’s Competency Model (Kearns, 2001).
231
b. Essential Performance Enablers Domain
In the domain “essential performance enablers,” the competency factors “information
and communication technology,” “knowledge management,” “problem solving skills,”
and “decision making” were significant. The competencies “information and
communication technology,” “problem solving skills,” and “decision making” are
generally competencies associated with operations and appear to be common
competencies. This indicates that the HR profession in Malaysia is still largely
operations oriented. The services economic sector and the manufacturing sector are
largely operations-based. The findings indicate that HR in Malaysia is highly
operationally focused.
However, “knowledge management” and “information and communication
technology” are strategic related competency factors and these were significant in this
study. This could possibly be influenced by the advent of the knowledge economy era
that gained importance in Malaysia since mid 1990s. The importance of building
“knowledge workers” to face the challenges of the knowledge economy is presently
emphasised by both the government and the privates sectors. The significance of
“information and communication technology” competency factor, too, could be
contributed to the importance given to knowledge economy today.
By emphasising on the importance of the competency factors such as “information and
communication technology,” and “knowledge management,” the HR profession in
Malaysia is current with the development that is occurring in the developed nations.
Lengnick-Hall and Lengnick-Hall (2003) asserts that knowledge economy came into
existence as a result of the commercialisation of information technology and
232
communication technologies-what is collectively known as “information technology.”
Knowledge economy encompasses all jobs, companies, and industries in which the
knowledge and capabilities of people rather than the capabilities of the machine or
technologies, determines competitive advantage (Lengnick-Hall and Lengnick-Hall,
2003).
Competencies especially like information and communication technology, problem
solving, and decision making are generally associated with operations and appear to be
common. These competencies, too, are often present in the competency
models/frameworks of organisations and personnel standards/models (Brewster et al.,
2000; Chen et al., 2005; EOSC, 1994; McLagan, 1989; and Smilansky, 1997).
However, the competency factor “knowledge management” does not appear in any of
the HR competency models that were researched except for the 2004 American
Society for Training and Development (ASTD) Competency Model (Bernthal et al.,
2004).
4.8.1.3 Latent Construct of the Technical HR Competency Category
The endogenous variables (i.e., competency domains) in the latent construct “technical
HR competency category” were: “resourcing and talent management,” and “employee
relations and compliance.” The significant measured variables (i.e., competency
factors) in the “resourcing and talent management” domain were: “organisation
development,” “career planning,” and “succession planning.” The significant
measured variables in the “employee relations and compliance” domain were:
233
“discipline,” “occupational safety and health,” and “human performance
improvement.”
The technical HR competency category is represented as “HR delivery” in the HR
Competency Models developed by the University of Michigan’s Business School from
1987 to 2002 (Ulrich et al., 2008). And in the 2007 HR Competency Model developed
by the RBL Group and the University of Michigan’s Business School (Ulrich et al.,
2008), it is represented by the competency domain “Operational Executor.”
Traditionally this is the area where focus and concentration had been given to over the
years. The “Human Resource Wheel” (McLagan, 1989) illustrates the various HRD
and HRM functions, and it covers most of the HRM functions as set out in the
technical HR competency category.
a. Resourcing and Talent Management
In the domain “resourcing and talent management,” the competency factors that were
significant were “organisation development,” “career planning,” and “succession
planning.”
The competency factor “organisation development” is closely related to the
competency factor “ability to change” in the competency domain “personal credibility
and attributes.” Organisation development is heavily emphasised in the HR
competency models/frameworks in the west and this shows that HRM in Malaysia is
progressive. This indicates that HRM in Malaysia advocates the typical activities of
“organisation development” that include change, process intervention skills, employee
engagement, team development, organisational transformation, and high performing
234
systems (Brown and Harvey, 2006). This finding is in parallel with some of the
research carried out globally (Brewster et al., 2000; EOSC, 1994; and Mc Lagan,
1989).
The other two competency factors “career planning,” and “succession planning” are
somewhat related to one another. Both globally and locally, these are areas in HRM
that are currently being emphasised. The HR profession in Malaysia, too, is facing the
same challenge alike in the west in developing and retaining its talent which by and
large is the primary objective of “career planning” and “succession planning.”
Systematic talent management processes are necessary as in the past, most businesses
do not appear to have a map of possible career choices, and high-potential individuals
were left to build their own career maps. Even succession plans that were created in
the past do not really reflect the needs of the businesses (Smilansky, 2006).
Looking at the finding positively, the competency factors “career planning,” and
“succession planning” are needed today in Malaysia. This is due to the increased
mobility of the workforce and greater need to retain the talent. Alike other developing
countries, organisations in Malaysia, too, are facing a “war on talent.” The pool of key
talent is limited and is in demand. Having good career planning can somewhat assist in
retaining the talent. And having good succession planning, too, can somewhat ensure
viability and sustenance of organisations.
Resourcing and talent management in most of the HR competency models/frameworks
is represented by the terms such as: recruitment and selection, HR planning, HR
235
procurement, HR planning and analysis, HR planning and acquisition, resourcing,
talent management, staffing, etc. (Abdul Hamid, 2004; EOSC, 1994; Mathis and
Jackson, 2002; McLagan, 1989; and Stafford, 2008). The competency factors in the
“resourcing and talent management” competency domain, i.e., “organisation
development” and “career planning” are commonly found in most of the HR
competency models (Abdul Hamid, 2004; Brewster et al., 2000; EOSC, 1994; Mathis
and Jackson, 2002; McLagan, 1989; and Stafford, 2008).
However, none of the HR competency models/frameworks researched included
“succession planning” as a competency. Succession planning appears to be an area
that has been emphasised only recently. In the UK, its practice in the 1990s dwindled
due to growing business uncertainty, increasing speed of change in business
environment and the establishment of lean organisations. But with the skills shortages
and the lack of confidence in the leadership potential of the existing workforce,
interest in succession planning appears to have revived (CIPD, 2009). A number of
researchers (Hamner, 2005; Rothwell, 2005; and Seymour, 2008), too, emphasise on
the growing importance of succession planning in HRM.
b. Employee Relations and Compliance Domain
In the domain “employee relations and compliance,” the competency factors
“discipline,” “occupational safety and health,” and “human performance
improvement” were the only significant competency factors.
Discipline is still significant in HR practice in Malaysia today although it is a
traditional and conservative function/activity of HRM since the days of welfare and
236
personnel management. Disciplinary practices are heavily emphasised in the
employment legislation in Malaysia i.e., in the Employment Act, 1955, and the
Industrial Relations Act, 1967. Possibly due to the need to comply with the laws and
legislation, “discipline” is regarded as an important competency factor in HRM in
Malaysia. Due to its importance, even till today, training courses on “discipline and
employment legislation” are popular among the HR practitioners in Malaysia.
Little significance appears to be given to “discipline” in the western HR competency
models/frameworks. Only a few researched HR competency models/frameworks
included discipline as a competency. This is however included in the Employment
Occupational Standards of the UK (EOSC, 1994) and in the 14 management principles
as outlined in the classical management (organisation) theory propounded by Henri
Fayol (Pepitone, 2000).
The competency factor “occupational safety and health” is regarded as an important
competency factor both in the west and in Malaysia. In the west, “employee safety and
health” continues to be an important concern in organisations (Byars and Rue, 2003).
Occupational safety and health, too, is included in a number of HR competency
models/frameworks (Abdul Hamid, 2004; Butteriss, 1998; EOSC, 1994; HRCI, 2003;
Mathis and Jackson, 2002; and Stafford, 2008).
In Malaysia, “occupational safety and health” continues to be an important concern
and generally, it among one of the duties and responsibilities of the HR practitioners.
This is necessary as it is important to install safety standards and good work practices
at the work place. The need to comply with the Occupational Safety and Health Act,
237
1994 makes “occupational safety and health” even more important. Possibly because
of the enforcement of the said legislation and the need to comply with it, the
competency factor “occupational safety and health” is regarded as an important
competency factor by HR profession in Malaysia.
The competencies “discipline,” and “occupational safety and health” are traditional
areas of HRM and it is not surprising that both of these competencies were significant
in the study.
“Human performance improvement” is an interesting competency factor which is
closely associated with human resource development. Its significance shows that HR
profession in Malaysia is progressive, forward thinking, and it looks beyond
performance management which used to be the emphasis in HRM.
Rothwell et al. (1999) defines human performance improvement as “a systematic
process of discovering and analysing important human performance gaps, planning
for future improvements in human performance, designing and developing cost-
effective and ethically justifiable interventions to close performance gaps,
implementing the interventions, and evaluating the financial and nonfinancial
results.”
The goal in today’s dynamic organisations is achieving results and improving
performance. And human performance improvement is a means to achieving improved
results (Rothwell et al., 2007). Human performance improvement has only been
emphasised recently in the west and it does not appear in most of the HR competency
238
models/frameworks that were researched. Being significant in the study clearly shows
that the HR profession in Malaysia keeps abreast of the latest development in the field.
This is important as HRM is an important catalyst in ensuring the optimum
performance of the human resource in the organisations.
Human performance improvement, too, is not mentioned in most of the HR
competency models/frameworks researched. Human performance improvement is
however emphasised in the 2004 ASTD Competency Model where it is labelled as
“improving human performance” (Bernthall et al., 2004; and Rothwell, 1999).
4.8.1.4 Renaming of the Competency Domain “Building Work
Relationship” to “Relationship Building and Process Drivers”
Boroski and Blancero (1994) defines relationship building as “able to establish
relationships and network across a broad range of people and groups.” Spencer and
Spencer (1993) defines relationship building as “working to build or maintain friendly,
warm relationship or networks of contacts with people who are, or might someday be
useful in achieving work-related goals.” Spanyi (2009) posits that the terms that are
generally used to refer to process leadership include those such as champions, process
owners, process stewards, and process drivers. The competency factors that were
found significant for the competency domain “building work relationship” in the study
were “process management,” “flexibility,” “information seeking,” and “strong
initiative.” Boroski and Blancero (1994) defines initiative as “being able to go beyond
the obvious requirements for a solution.” The Workitect’s Competency Dictionary,
Workitect (2007) defines initiative as “identifying what needs to be done and doing it
before being asked to or required by the situation.” Spencer and Spencer (1993) on the
239
other hand defines initiative as “a preference for taking action and it is doing more
than is required or expected in the job which will improve or enhance job results.”
Spencer and Spencer (1993) defines information seeking as “an underlying curiousity,
a desire to know more about things and it implies making an effort to get more
information, not accepting situations at face value.” Workitect’s Competency
Dictionary (Workitect, 2007) defines flexibility as “openness to different and new
ways of doing things or willingness to modify one’s preferred way of doing things.”
Spencer and Spencer (1993) defines flexibility specifically for managers as “the
willingness and ability to change managerial structures and processes when needed to
implement organisational change strategies.”
Wikipedia (2009) offers the definition of process management as “the application of
knowledge, skills, tools, techniques and systems to define, visualise, measure, control,
report, and improve processes with the goal to meet customer requirements
profitably.”
Due to the rearrangement of all the valid measured (observed) variables through the
application of SEM, the domain “building work relationship” does not appear to be
semantically appropriate. The researcher is of the opinion that a more suitable name
for the said domain is “relationship building and process drivers.”
This is because all the competency factors listed in the domain from the given
definitions require good organisational relationship building skills and they catalyse a
lot of dynamic actions in an organisation. For instance, information seeking is about
240
having the desire to know more and this, too, is closely related to initiative which is
about going beyond requirements. By possessing initiative, and being an information
seeker, only then is it possible to execute flexibility, which is somewhat important in
managing change. However all the above will only be possible if the right processes
are in place.
From the above, it can thus be established that all the competency factors “strong
initiative,” “information seeking,” “flexibility,” and “process management” are
somewhat supportive and related to one another and would befit a different name i.e.,
“relationship building and process drivers.” Since process management has been
included in the said domain, the respondents recognise the importance of the
application of knowledge, skills, tools, techniques, and the right systems. All the given
competency factors in one way or another are responsible for driving and improving
all the HRM activities and i.e., they can be referred to as process drivers, too, besides
enhancing relationship building.
4.9 Goodness-of-Fit Indices of the Model
Table 17 sets out the Structural Model fit indicators. The “P” value is more than 0.05,
GFI is more than 0.9 (Acceptable fit criteria), and RMSEA is less than 0.08. The
measurement model has a good fit with the data based on assessment criteria such as
GFI, P level, and RMSEA (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988). Table 17 summarises the model fit
of the three competency categories, exogenous, generated, and 1st Re-specified Model.
241
Table 17. Summary of the Goodness-of-Fit to the Structural Model
Model Fit
Indicator
Generic/ Behavioural
Competencies
Business Competencies
Technical HR Competencies
Exogenous Model
Generated Model
1st Re-specified Model
�2
df
CMIN/df
P
GFI
RMSEA
21.891
12
1.228
0.189
0.984
0.029
9.963
7
1.385
0.207
0.991
0.034
9.062
8
1.133
0.337
0.991
0.020
153.495
157
0.978
0.564
0.959
0.000
413.620
161
2.569
0.000
0.886
0.068
247.725
215
1.152
0.062
0.943
0.021
The Table shows the journey to the goodness-of-model-fit of the structural model. The
testing of the endogenous structural models and testing of endogenous variables
(generic/behavioural competency category, business competency category, and
technical HR competency category) show the significance of P level ( P > 0.05), GFI
(GFI > 0.90) and fulfills the RMSEA criteria (less than 0.08). The comparison
between generated model (Figure 44) and the 1st Re-specified Model (Figure 45)
confirmed that the final hypothesised model (i.e., H7) fits the 1st Re-specified Model,
where the probability (P=0.062) and GFI (0.943) achieved the significant level of the
goodness-of-fit index of the model. Thus Hypothesis 7 was accepted. This means the
HR practitioners and HR consultants have interactional effect with regards to the
constructs of the generic/behavioural competency category, the business competency
category, the technical HR competency category, and the HR Practitioner Competency
Model. These three exogenous constructs jointly explained a total variance of 49.5%
of the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
242
4.10 Standardised Regression Weights of the First (1st) Re-specified Model
4.10.1 Factor Loadings
Goodness of loading for the paths show that the research objectives (i.e., Objectives 1
to 6) of study were achieved. Loading of the paths show that the readings were
positive and good ranging from 0.323 to 0.966 for the significance of standardised
regression weights. Table 18 shows the loading of the paths among the three
competency categories in the model.
Table 18. Results of Standardised Regression Weights of the (1st) Re-specified Model
Objectives
&
Hypothesis
Endogenous Exogenous �
Relationship building and process
drivers <---
Generic/Behavioural Competency
Category 0.784
Obj.1
Personal credibility and attributes <---Generic/Behavioural Competency
Category 0.941
Entrepreneurial and business acumen <--- Business Competency Category 0.896Obj.2
Essential performance enablers <--- Business Competency Category 0.966
Resourcing and talent management <--- Technical HR Competency Category 0.772Obj.3
Employee relations and compliance <--- Technical HR Competency Category 0.899
Obj.4 - Hy1 HR Practitioner Competency Model <---
Generic/Behavioural Competency
Category 0.323
Obj.5 - Hy2 HR Practitioner Competency Model <--- Business Competency Category 0.044
Obj.6 - Hy3 HR Practitioner Competency Model <--- Technical HR Competency Category 0.411
243
4.10.1.1 General Discussion on Standardised Regression Weights
a. Research Objective 1: To determine the latent variables in the construct of the
generic/behavioural competency category.
From the four given competency domains in the generic/behavioural competency
category, only two competency domains were significant in the study. These include:
relationship building and process drivers, and personal credibility and attributes. Both
endogenous variables relationship building and process drivers, and the personal
credibility and attributes were significant and loaded positively onto the exogenous
variable “generic/behavioural competency category.” The covariance (�) of
relationship building and process drivers was 0.784 and it contributed to 78% of
significance level of standardised regression weight (Table 18). The covariance (�) of
the personal credibility and attributes was 0.941 and it reached to 94% of significance
level of standardised regression weight (Table 18). Thus, Research Objective 1 was
achieved as the latent variables fitted into the construct of the generic/behavioural
competency category.
On the whole, the competency domain “relationship building and process drivers”
contributed to 78% of significance of standardised regression weight, and the personal
credibility and attributes domain contributed to 94 % of significance level of
standardised regression weight. The competency factors in the relationship building
and process drivers domain were: “process management,” “flexibility,” “information
seeking,” and “strong initiative” whereas the competency factors in the “personality
credibility and attributes” domain were “pride at work,” “pro-activeness,” “ability to
change,” and “leadership.”
244
Relationship Building and Process Drivers
Park et al. (2004) asserts that flexibility is a necessary competency to deal with
competition. Chiu (1999) asserts the HR leaders need to be flexible to alter existing
plans and accommodate sudden and long term changes. Flexibility is among one of the
eight core competencies established by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP,
1997).
Initiative under the cluster of core competencies emerged in the competency model in
studies carried out on future competency requirements of HR professionals (Blancero
et al., 1995). Information search skill which is actually information seeking is among
one of the competencies identified in the model for HRD practices by McLagan
(1989) which is important for HRM professionals (Dare and Leach, 1999). Spencer
and Spencer (1993) lists out information seeking as an important competency for
managers in their generic competency model.
Laming (1995) observes that the competency “process mastery” which is closely
related to “process management” was among one of the four components set out in the
HR Competency Model of General Electric of USA. Selmer and Randy (2004) reports
that as HRM responsibilities change from a function oriented to process – oriented
culture, HR managers need to initiate and coordinate business processes or subsystems
in order to offer services that contribute to organisational and business successes. In
the HR competency framework suggested by Schoonover (2003), process excellence
is listed as one of the important competencies. The terms “process mastery,” “process-
oriented,” and “process excellence” are similar and closely related to process
management. The HR profession – both globally and locally recognise the importance
245
of the competency factor “process management.” Process management was significant
in the study.
Personal Credibility and Attributes
According to Selmer and Randy (2004), in a study that surveyed 3000 HR
professionals, consultants, line executives, and academicians, “continuous change”
was among one of the competencies that tomorrow’s HR leaders should master. The
consultants and the chief executive officers (CEOs) in particular in the survey
identified the “ability to change” as the most important competency for HR
performance.
In the ranking of competency levels by the participants, the “ability to manage
change” was among one of the highest ranked competencies (Boudreau and Ramstad,
2003). Ulrich (1999) asserts that the “ability to manage change” is a competency that
is required if the modern HR practitioner is to be successful. Laming (1995), Fitz-enz
and Phillips (1998), and Schweyer (2004), too, agree that change management skills
are needed for an HR professional. HR professionals who do not function as agents
for change are not perceived by executive management to be strategic partners
(Pietersen and Engelbrecht, 2005).
The International Public Management Association for Human Resource of the USA
(IPMA, 2005) establishes change agent as one of the competency domains in the
model. Ramlall (2006) observes that HR professionals ranked their own competency
levels in a survey and the ability to manage change was among the highest ranked
competencies. In the 2007 HR Competency Model developed by the RBL Group, and
246
the University of Michigan’s Business School, the competency “change” was
integrated together with culture and “culture and change” was an important
competency area in the study (Ulrich et al., 2008). Junaidah (2007) carried out an
empirical study with the objective of identifying competencies among human resource
managers as perceived by the top management in the manufacturing sector in
Malaysia. In the study, Junaidah (2007) observed the need for the human resource
managers to equip themselves with the skills and knowledge to develop “managing
change” competencies. The findings of Junaidah (2007) are in parallel with the
findings of this study as both studies observe the importance of the competency factor
“ability to change” for the HR profession in Malaysia.
Leadership style emerged as one of the important competencies in a study on HR skills
carried out by Schoonover (1997). A study carried out by Chen et al. (2005) shows
that leadership is among one of the current important competencies of Taiwan’s HRD
practitioners. The study, too, predicts a further strong importance of leadership in the
next five years. Wharton and Browne (2006) carried out an empirical study on
competencies required for HR professionals in Australia and observed leadership as an
important competency. The project carried out by the World Federation of Personnel
Management Associations (WFPMA), too, observes the importance of leadership and
change management competencies (Brewster et al., 2000).
Both change management and leadership competencies were included in the HR
Competency Model for HR managers of Eli Lilly and company (Mc Daniel, 1998). In
a study conducted by the PricewaterHouseCoopers (PwC, 2005) for the World
Federation of Personnel Management on Global HR challenges, it was observed that
247
leadership development and change management were among two key issues expected
to pose a challenge in the future. In her book, Going Glocal, Asma (1996) writes that
“proactiveness” is an important shared value in multinationals operating in Malaysia.
It could possibly be due to this that competency factor was significant in this study.
Malhi (2006) in his book, Enhancing Managerial Performance cites Boyatzis, G.
Morgan and J. B. Quinn observing proactive managers as superior. Goleman (1998)
lists “pride in accomplishments” as an important competency that employers look for
and hope for. Apparently, limited empirical studies were found in particular for the
competency factors “pro-activeness” and “pride.” More research is needed to
understand the importance of the competency factors “pro-activeness” and “pride at
work.” However, interestingly the significance of these two competency factors
indicate the positive strategic outlook of the HR profession in Malaysia. The HR
profession in Malaysia recognises the importance of “pro-activeness” and “pride at
work.” The citations of Asma (1996), Malhi (2006), and Goleman (1998) further
strengthens the importance of these competency factors at work.
b. Research Objective 2: To determine the latent variables in the construct of the
business competency category.
From the four given competency domains in the business competency category, only
two competency domains were significant in the study. These include:
“entrepreneurial and business acumen” and “essential performance enablers.” Both
endogenous variables “entrepreneurial and business acumen,” and “essential
performance enablers” were significant and loaded positively onto the exogenous
variable: business competency category.
248
The covariance (�) of entrepreneurial and business acumen was 0.896 and it reached
to 90% of significance level of standardised regression weight. The covariance (�) of
the essential performance enablers was 0.966 and it reached to 97% of significance
level of standardised regression weight. Thus Research Objective 2 was achieved as
the latent variables fitted into the construct of the business competency category.
a. Entrepreneurial and Business Acumen Domain
In the domain “entrepreneurial and business acumen,” only “creativity” and
“entrepreneurial skills” were significant. According to Becker and Huselid (2002), the
strategic role of human resource (HR) leaders in firms has changed considerably,
especially during the last five years. This could be the reason why competencies like
entrepreneurial skills and creativity are being emphasised.
According to Chua (2009), entrepreneurship is among one of the leadership
competencies important for the HR profession in both North and South Asia. Boselie
and Paauwe (2005) asserts that in the future, an HR manager is expected to be an
“entrepreneur” who is willing to take risks, is customer oriented, has business
knowledge, and has specific HR knowledge. Blancero et al. (1995) found creativity to
be among the important competencies in the competency model for tomorrow’s HR.
With keen competition and uncertainties in business, future HR leaders must be
creative to appreciate volatility and sudden changes (Chiu, 1999).
b. Essential Performance Enablers Domain
In the domain “essential performance enablers,” the competency factors “information
and communication technology,” “knowledge management,” “problem solving skills,”
249
and “decision making” were significant. The importance of information and
communication technology is given in the map of the personnel standards (Smilansky,
1997; and EOSC, 1994). However, it is labelled as information technology.
In the establishment of the work place learning and performance competency groups
important for Taiwan’s HR practitioners, technological competency group was among
one of the six competency groups set out. It however includes: computer mediated
communication, technological literacy, and electronic performance support systems.
Computer competence and electronic systems skills are among technical competencies
identified in the model for HRD practice by McLagan (1989) which is important for
HRM professionals (Dare and Leach, 1999).
Selmer and Randy (2004) asserts that leaders in Hong Kong should be proponents of
knowledge management and build the HR function as the company’s heart for
knowledge management to become a learning organisation. Fisher and Albuquerque
(2005) posits that knowledge management is an important management principle and
found that it is still relevant in current Brazilian organisations. It is also urgent for
Taiwan HRD practitioners to develop proficiency in knowledge management (Chen et
al., 2005).
Schweyer (2004) asserts that both problem solving and decision making are important
general competencies required by HR practitioners. In Human Resource Competency
Study (HRCS) carried out in 2002, strategic decision making was among the
competency factors included in the strategic contribution domain (Brockbank and
Ulrich, 2003). The HR Competency Model for HR managers of Eli Lilly and company
250
includes the creative problem solving competency (Mc Daniel, 1998). Lawson and
Limbrick (1996) identifies proactive decision making skills among the list of skills and
personal attributes required of HR managers. Ulrich (1997) asserts that as a strategic
partner, HR must get involve in decision making on mergers, acquisitions, and
downsizing.
c. Research Objective 3: To determine the latent variables in the construct of the
technical HR competency category.
From the four given competency domains in the technical HR competency category,
only two competency domains were significant in the study. These include:
“resourcing and talent management,” and “employee relations and compliance.” Both
endogenous variables “resourcing and talent management,” and “employee relations
and compliance” were significant and loaded positively onto the exogenous variable:
“technical HR” competency category (Table 18). The covariance (�) of the
“resourcing and talent management” domain was 0.772 and it reached to 77% of
significance level of standardised regression weight. The covariance (�) of the
“employee relations and compliance” domain was 0.899 and it contributed to 90% of
significance level of standardised regression weight. Thus Research Objective 3 was
achieved as the latent variables fitted onto the construct of the technical HR
competency category.
a. Resourcing and talent management
In the domain “resourcing and talent management,” the competency factors that were
significant were “organisation development,” “career planning,” and “succession
planning.” Organisation development is closely related to the “ability to change” in the
251
domain “personal credibility and attributes.” The results show that the respondents
were true advocates of change and organisation development, and this is in parallel
with some of the research done elsewhere.
All the given three competency factors “organisation development,” “career
planning,” and “succession planning” are areas where a lot of emphasis is given today.
The findings show that these are important competencies in line with the challenges
faced by organisations in an era where talent management is critical. Armstrong
(2002), and Lengnick-Hall and Lengnick-Hall (2003) emphasise that effective HR
practitioners of tomorrow need to be experts on organisation analysis, design and
development. This is because with this knowledge, HR managers can enhance their
roles in developing strategy-oriented, establishing flexible organisation structure,
measuring value creation, and applying state-of-the art change management solutions.
Organisation design and development is an important competency necessary to carry
out the HR generalist role (Schoonover, 2003).
In the study project carried out by WFPMA, organisation design and development was
among those that were studied (Brewster et al., 2000). In the 2002 Human Resource
Competency Model, organisational structure was among one of the competency
factors included in the HR delivery domain (Brockbank and Ulrich, 2003).
Organisation development is one of the competencies identified in the model for HRD
practice by McLagan (1989) which is important for HRM professionals (Dare and
Leach, 1999).
252
The Human Resource Certification Institute (HRCI, 2003) includes career planning as
a sub-area in its body of knowledge of HR for certification of HR professionals.
Mathis and Jackson (2002) illustrates that career planning is among one of the
activities carried out by HR professionals. Schweyer (2004) asserts that career
planning is among one of the general competencies required by HR practitioners.
Career development which is synonymous with career planning is among the technical
competencies identified in the model for HRM practice by McLagan (1989). Seymour
(2008) asserts that succession planning can be an opportunity to refresh or revitalise an
enterprise in a rapidly changing world. The future of any company relies on the
thoroughness and vigour of today’s succession planning. According to Rothwell
(2005), today’s dynamic environment is filled with global competition and business
discontinuities define the arena in which succession planning must flourish.
Succession planning is one of the most crucial activities an organisation can undertake
to ensure its long term viability (Hamner, 2005).
Succession planning appears to be an area that has been emphasised only recently.
Very little emphasis was given to this area in the past and it does not appear to be
included in any of the HR competency models that were studied. The researcher is of
the view that it will gain importance over the years. Both competency factors “career
planning,” and “succession planning” are important strategic related competencies for
organisations in the future.
Career planning and succession planning are important practices that have an impact
upon the sustainability and viability of an organisation. Career planning enables
253
individuals to be prepared with the knowledge, skills, and attributes that are important
for both the current situation and the future. Succession planning ensures that the right
people are always placed in the organisations and the vision, mission, and business
strategy continues with minimal setbacks. The significance of both of these
competencies indicate that the HR professionals in Malaysia have a positive strategic
outlook. The HR profession understands that strategic imperatives like career planning
and succession planning can ensure the business continuity of the organisations.
b. Employee Relations and Compliance Domain
In the domain “employee relations and compliance,” the competency factors
“discipline,” “occupational safety and health,” and “human performance
improvement” were the only competency factors that were significant. Discipline has
different connotations. According to Oxford Dictionary (Soanes and Stevenson, 2004),
discipline is “the practice of training people to obey rules or a code of behaviour.”
Torrington et al., (2005) defines discipline as “a regulation of human activity to
produce a controlled performance.”
The Personnel Standards Lead Body in the UK includes both discipline and health and
safety as important activities in personnel work (Smilansky, 1997; and EOSC, 1994).
Under the technical competency area of HR competencies, Butteriss (1998), has
includes health and safety as one of the necessary competencies. The Human Resource
Certification Institute (HRCI, 2003) includes health and safety as an important
competency in its body of knowledge for certification of HR.
254
The “Model of Excellence” of the Australian Human Resources Institute identifies
“occupational health and safety standards and policies” as one of the areas of
responsibility of HR managers (Stafford, 2008). Mathis and Jackson (2002) illustrates
that “health and safety” is among one of the typical activities carried out by the HR
professionals.
In the competency domain “employee relations and compliance,” the significant
competency factors were “discipline,” “occupational safety and health,” and “human
performance improvement.” The researcher is of the view that in the “employee
relations and compliance” domain, the competency factor “employment laws and
legislation,” too, should have been significant. The competency factor “employment
laws and legislation” was not significant because the HR profession could be of the
opinion that understanding of laws and legislation is already well established in the
organisations and do not view its importance.
A lot of emphasis has been given to employment laws and regulations in the
organisations in the past. The observation in the study is different compared to the
observation of Tyler. Tyler (2006) asserts that knowledge about employment laws and
enforcement is important in manufacturing environment as human resource in
manufacturing is more rule - driven and consistent in applying rules.
255
d. Research Objective 4: To examine the influence of the generic/behavioural
competency category on the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
Hypothesis 1: The generic/behavioural competency category has a direct and positive
relationship with the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
As given in Table 18, the covariance of the generic/behavioural competency category
was 0.323 and it reached to 32% of significance level of standardised regression
weight. Thus objective 4 was achieved as the generic/behavioural competency
category influences the HR Practitioner Competency Model. Hypothesis 1 is a
significant hypothesis path (P= .003) (as given in Table 21) and therefore H1 was
asserted. Therefore, the generic/behavioural competency category has a direct and
positive relationship with the HR Practitioner Competency Model. The findings show
that both the competency domains “relationship building and process drivers,” and
“personal credibility and attributes” contributed to the significance of the standardised
regression weight of the generic/ behavioural competency category and have a direct
and positive relationship with the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
e. Research Objective 5: To examine the influence of the business competency
category on the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
Hypothesis 2: The business competency category has a direct and positive relationship
with the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
256
As given in Table 18, the covariance of the business competency category was 0.044
and it reached to 4% of significance level of standardised regression weight. The
Research Objective 5 was achieved but found that the business competency category
was not significant in the establishment of the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
This is because Hypothesis 2 was a non significant hypothesis path (P=0.741) (as
given in Table 21) and therefore H2 was rejected. Therefore the business competency
category does not have a direct and positive relationship with the HR Practitioner
Competency Model.
The findings show that both the competency domains “entrepreneurial and business
acumen,” and “essential performance enablers” did not contribute significantly to the
standardised regression weight of the business competency category and did not have
a direct and positive relationship with the HR Practitioner Competency Model. The
findings is contrary to the findings of similar research elsewhere. Ulrich et al. (2008)
observes its importance and the competency domain “business ally” is included in the
2007 HR Competency Model developed by the RBL Group and the University of
Michigan’s Business School. The HR practitioners are expected to have knowledge
with regards to business customers, products or services, etc..
The ASTD Competency Model (Bernthal et al., 2004) maps out business/management
as one of the three clusters of competencies necessary for all workplace learning and
performance (WLP) professionals which also includes the HR practitioners. Among
one of the important roles of HR is business HR. The main objective of business HR is
to translate business strategy into people strategy (Chua, 2009). According to Becker
and Huselid (1998), business related competencies have strongest influence on
257
corporate financial performance. Unfortunately HR practitioners do not possess an
adequate working knowledge of what business is all about or the strategic goals of the
organisations.
Choi and Wan Khairuzzaman (2008) in a study on competencies carried out in
Malaysia posits that HR professionals are lacking in business related human resource
competencies. Paauwe (2004) observes that HRM function has become more business
oriented, more strategic, and more oriented towards organisational change. From the
studies done in the west, it appears that HRM has become more business – oriented.
In the study, the “business” competency category does not influence the HR
Practitioner Competency Model. This somewhat shows that HRM in Malaysia is still
in its traditional mode of practice. In the west, the emphasis on HR professionals in
becoming “strategic partners” has somewhat influenced and transformed the HRM
practices. Possibly, the concept “strategic partnership” catalysed the integration of the
business related human resource competencies in the HR competency
models/frameworks in the west. Possibly, the concept “strategic partnership” is either
in its infancy stage or misunderstood in HRM practices in Malaysia.
More research should be carried out to understand this aspect much better. In
particular related to this study, the items used in the business competency category
should be restudied.
258
f. Research Objective 6: To examine the influence of the technical HR
competency category on the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
Hypothesis 3: The technical HR competency category has a direct and positive
relationship with the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
As given in Table 18, the covariance of the technical HR competency category was
0.411 and it reached to 41% of significance level of standardised regression weight.
Thus Research Objective 6 was achieved as the technical HR competency category
influences the HR Practitioner Competency Model. The Hypothesis 3 was a significant
hypothesis path (P= .008) (as given in Table 21) and therefore H3 was asserted.
Therefore, the technical HR competency category has a direct and positive relationship
with the HR Practitioner Competency Model. The findings show that both the
competency domains “resourcing and talent management,” and “employee relations
and compliance” contributed to the significance of the standardised regression weight
of the technical HR competency category and have a direct and positive relationship
with the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
4.10.2 Correlation Among Variables
Structural equation modeling (SEM) seeks to explain the relationships among multiple
variables and examines the structure of interrelationships expressed in a series of
multiple regression equations (Hair et al., 2006). It is a combination of multiple
regression and factor analysis. Likewise, SEM allows sets of relationships between
one or more exogenous variables (IVs), either continuous or discrete, and one or more
259
endogenous variables (DVs), either continuous or discrete, to be examined
(Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007).
Table 19 below shows the relationship among variables in the framework based on the
correlation output of SEM. Correlation at the significant level 0.05 (2–tailed) indicates
that the business competency category and technical HR competency category have a
strong relationship (P=0.758). Other values were 0.615 and 0.656, and these, too,
indicate a strong relationship. Furthermore, all correlation values show “P” is less than
0.9, and it can thus be concluded as being significant and indicating a good
relationship between the two exogenous variables. Also, as all correlation values show
“P” is less than 0.9, it can be concluded that it has an insignificant violation to the
“non multicollinearity” assumptions among variables.
Table 19. Correlation Among Exogenous Variables
Endogenous Exogenous �
Generic/ Behavioural Competency Category <--> Technical HR Competency Category 0.656
Generic/Behavioural Competency Category <--> Business Competency Category 0.615
Business Competency Category <--> Technical HR Competency Category 0.758
4.10.3 Squared Multiple Correlation (SMC) of Endogenous Variables
The 1st Re-specified Model output as given in Figure 45 shows that the model explains
a substantial portion of the variance in all the endogenous variables (squared multiple
correlation). Table 20 below shows that the three exogenous variables jointly
explained a total variance of 49.5% of the HR Practitioner Competency Model. In
more detail, the breakdown is: employee relations and compliance (80.7%); resourcing
260
and talent management (59.6%); personal credibility and attributes (88.5%);
relationship building and process drivers (61.5%); essential performance enablers
(93.3%); and entrepreneurial and business acumen (80.3%). Thus it confirms that the
study achieved the construction of competency categories in the HR Practitioner
Competency Model.
Table 20. Squared Multiple Correlation (SMC) Among Endogenous Variables
Objectives Hypotheses Variables SMC Adj. R2 Description
Obj. 7 Personal credibility & attributes 0.885 88.5% Accepted
Obj. 7
Hy. 4 Generic/
Behavioural Competency
Category
Relationship building & process
drivers 0.615 61.5% Accepted
Obj. 8 Essential performance enablers 0.933 93.3% Accepted
Obj. 8
Hy. 5 Business
Competency Category
Entrepreneurial and business
acumen 0.803 80.3% Accepted
Obj. 9 Employee relations & compliance 0.807 80.7% Accepted
Obj. 9
Hy. 6 Technical HR Competency
Category
Resourcing and talent management 0.596 59.6% Accepted
Obj.10 Hy.7 HR Practitioner Competency
Model 0.495 49.5% Accepted
261
4.10.3.1 General Discussion on Squared Multiple Correlation (SMC)
a. Research Objective 7: To determine the interactional effect between the
construct of the generic/behavioural competency category and the HR
Practitioner Competency Model.
Hypothesis 4: HR practitioners and HR consultants have interactional effect with
regards to the constructs of the generic/behavioural competency category and the HR
Practitioner Competency Model.
In the generic/behavioural competency category, the “relationship building and
process drivers” domain show a variance of 61.5%; the personal credibility and
attributes domain shows a variance of 88.5%. Both of the endogenous variables were
correlated and the objective was achieved. Thus Hypothesis 4 was asserted. The
Square Multiple Correlation (SMC) confirmed “personal credibility and attributes”
and “relationship building and process drivers” as competency domains of the
generic/behavioural competency category. As constructs of the generic/behavioural
competency category, these domains influence the HR Practitioner Competency
Model significantly. This is because the SMC confirmed more than 50% of the latent
constructs in the HR Practitioner Competency Model. Squared Multiple Correlation
contribution of more than 50% variance is an indication of a high level of contribution
in explaining the generic/behavioural competency category (Cohen et al., 2003).
262
b. Research Objective 8: To determine the interactional effect between the
construct of the business competency category and the HR Practitioner
Competency Model.
Hypothesis 5: HR practitioners and HR consultants have interactional effect with
regards to the constructs of the business competency category and the HR Practitioner
Competency Model.
In the business competency category, the “entrepreneurial and business acumen”
domain show a variance of 80.3% (Table 20). The “essential performance enablers”
domain shows a variance of 93.3% (Table 20). Both of the endogenous variables were
correlated and the objective was achieved. Thus Hypothesis 5 was asserted. The
Square Multiple Correlation confirmed “essential performance enablers,” and
“entrepreneurial and business acumen” as competency domains of the business
competency category. As constructs of the business competency category, these
domains influence the HR Practitioner Competency Model significantly. This is
because the SMC confirmed more than 50% of the latent constructs in the HR
Practitioner Competency Model. Squared Multiple Correlation contribution of more
than 50% variance is an indication of a high level of contribution to explain the
business competency category (Cohen et al., 2003).
263
c. Research Objective 9: To determine the interactional effect between the
construct of the technical HR competency category and the HR Practitioner
Competency Model.
Hypothesis 6: HR practitioners and HR consultants have interactional effect with
regards to the constructs of the technical HR competency category and the HR
Practitioner Competency Model.
In the technical HR competency category, the “resourcing and talent management”
domain shows a variance of 59.6%, the “employee relations and compliance” domain
shows a variance of 80.7% (Table 20). Both of the endogenous variables were
correlated and the objective was achieved. Thus Hypothesis 6 was asserted. The SMC
confirmed “resourcing and talent management” and “employee relations and
compliance” as competency domains of the technical HR competency category. As
constructs of the technical HR competency category, these domains influence the HR
Practitioner Competency Model significantly. This is because the SMC confirmed
more than 50% of the latent constructs in the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
Squared Multiple Correlation contribution of more than 50% variance is an indication
of a high level of contribution in explaining the technical HR competency category
(Cohen et al., 2003).
4.11 Summary of Hypotheses Testing and Research Objectives
The hypotheses testing were accomplished by examining the completely standardised
parameter estimates and their associated t-values. Two-tailed test of significance was
used to determine the significance of each path coefficient. Three of the direct
264
relationships and three indirect relationship hypotheses were consistent with
expectations and statistically significant as expected.
Following the recommendation of Anderson and Gerbing (1988), the study used a
comprehensive, two stage analysis, in which the measurement model was first,
confirmed using confirmatory factor analysis and then structural equation modeling
was performed based on the measurement model of exogenous (as given in Figure 42)
to estimate the fit of the hypothesised model (as given in Figure 43) and 1st Re-
specified Model (Figure 45) to the data.
The measurement model, which specifies and tests the relationships between the
observed measures and their underlying constructs, provides a confirmatory
assessment of construct validity (Bentler, 1978). The structural model then tests the
direct causal relationships among the latent constructs, as posited by the theory
(Anderson and Gerbing, 1982; 1988). Accomplishing the task of building the model
through a two- steps procedure is believed to be an improved approach over a one -
step analysis (Anderson and Gerbing, 1988).
The confirmatory analysis of each dimension was done to confirm the construct of the
generic/behavioural competency category, the technical HR competency category, and
the business competency category. The findings indicated that all exogenous
constructs were significantly related to the constructs of the three competency
categories. The findings confirm the validity of the model and all the hypothesised
paths in the theoretical model were at the significant level of model fit (P >0.05). The
composite reliability and the average variance extracted (AVE) were conducted to
265
confirm the validation of the measurements. The CFA, 2nd order analysis of latent
construct variables, and the measurement of exogenous and endogenous variables of
the structural model shows the significance of the goodness of the indexes. The 1st Re-
specified Model confirmed the interaction of the items, variables, and the hypothesis
paths with significant results. The findings of the results of the 1st Re-specified Model
shows the validity of the structural model as hypothesised.
Table 21. Summary of Research Objectives and Hypotheses Testing
Objectives and
Hypotheses Endogenous Exogenous Estimate Std. Error Critical Ratio P Description
Obj.1 Relationship building and process drivers
<---
Generic/ Behavioural Competency Category
0.320 0.039 8.296 *** Asserted
Obj.1 Personal credibility & attributes <---
Generic/ Behavioural Competency Category
0.451 0.041 10.986 *** Asserted
Obj.2 Entrepreneurial & business acumen <---
Business Competency Category
0.437 0.043 10.105 *** Asserted
Obj.2 Essential performance enablers <---
Business Competency Category
0.390 0.041 9.544 *** Asserted
Obj.3 Resourcing and talent management <---
Technical HR Competency Category
0.374 0.039 9.642 *** Asserted
Obj.3 Employee relations & compliance <---
Technical HR Competency Category
0.418 0.040 10.498 *** Asserted
Obj.4 - Hy.1 HR Practitioner Competency Model <---
Generic/ Behavioural Competency Category
0.152 0.052 2.936 ,003 Asserted
Obj.5 - Hy.2 HR Practitioner Competency Model <---
Business Competency Category
0.021 0.063 0.330 ,741 Rejected
Obj.6 - Hy.3 HR Practitioner Competency Model <---
Technical HR Competency Category
0.194 0.073 2.643 ,008 Asserted
The empirical results are discussed systematically for each hypothesis in the following
section. In the study, all of the hypothesised relationships were supported based on the
266
structural equation of the 1st Re-specified Model results (as given in Figure 45). The
path estimates for the hypothesised testing in the model shows that all of the four
hypothesised paths were found to have a positive relationship with the HR Practitioner
Competency Model (i.e., Hypothesis 1 through Hypotheses 7) except for Hypothesis 2
(P= 0.741; rejected). As P >.05, Hypothesis 2 was rejected. The Hypothesis 2 (P =
0.741) was found as a non significant hypothesis path. It means that there is no
significant influence of the business competency category on the HR Practitioner
Competency Model. It also implies that the business competency category is not
significant in the study. Table 21 given above sets out the details of hypotheses testing
results. Table 21 confirms the significant Hypothesis 1 (P = 0.003) and Hypothesis 3
(P = 0.008). Research Objectives 4, 5, and 6 of this study examined the influence of
the three competency categories on HR Practitioner Competency Model. Table 21
given above, too, confirms low standard error loadings for all the relationships (std.
error <0.1).
4.11.1 General Discussion on Research Objectives and Hypothesis Testing
Results
a. As given in the structural model of the 1st Re-specified Model (Figure 45), for
the exogenous variable “generic/behavioural competency category” construct,
only two endogenous variables (latent variables) were significant namely the
“relationship building and process drivers,” and “personal credibility and
attributes.” For “relationship building and process drivers,” the loading of the
path (Table 18) was 0.784 and the standard error was low (<0.1). Similarly, for
the “personal credibility and attributes,” the loading of the path was 0.941 and
the standard error was low (<0.1) (Table 18). Thus Research Objective 1 was
267
achieved as both the latent variables “relationship building and process
drivers,” and “personal credibility and attributes” were significant in the
generic/behavioural competency category construct.
b. For the exogenous variable “business competency category” construct, only
two endogenous variables (latent variables) were significant namely the
“entrepreneurial and business acumen,” and “essential performance enablers.”
For “entrepreneurial and business acumen,” the loading of the path (Table 18)
was 0.896 and the standard error was low (<0.1). Similarly, for the “essential
performance enablers,” the loading of the path was 0.966 (Table 18) and the
standard error was low (<0.1). Thus Research Objective 2 was achieved as
both the latent variables “entrepreneurial and business acumen,” and “essential
performance enablers” were significant in the business competency category
construct.
c. For the exogenous variable “technical HR competency category” construct,
only two endogenous variables (latent variables) were significant namely, the
“resourcing and talent management,” and “employee relations and
compliance.” For “resourcing and talent management,” the loading of the path
was 0.772 (Table 18) and the standard error was low (<0.1). Similarly, for the
“essential performance enablers,” the loading of the path was 0.899 and the
standard error was low (<0.1). Thus Research Objective 3 was achieved as
both the latent variables “resourcing and talent management,” and “employee
relations and compliance” were significant in the technical HR competency
category construct.
268
d. The loading of the path of exogenous variable “generic/behavioural
competency category” construct on the endogenous variable HR Practitioner
Competency Model was 0.323 (Table 18) and therefore the exogenous variable
had a positive influence on the endogenous variable. The hypothesis path was
significant (P = 0.003) (Table 21) and the standard error was low (<0.1). Thus
Research Objective 4 was achieved and Hypothesis 1 (H1) was asserted.
e. The loading of the path of exogenous variable “business competency category”
construct on the endogenous variable HR Practitioner Competency Model was
0.044 (Table 18) and therefore the exogenous variable did not have an
influence on the endogenous variable. The hypothesis path was non significant
(P = 0.741 ) (Table 21) and the standard error was low (<0.1). The Research
Objective 5 was achieved, but however the Hypothesis 2 (H2) was rejected.
f. The loading of the path of exogenous variable “technical HR competency
category” construct on the endogenous variable HR Practitioner Competency
Model was 0.411 (Table 18) and therefore the exogenous variable had a
positive influence on the endogenous variable. The hypothesis path was
significant (P = 0.008) (Table 21) and the standard error was low (<0.1). Thus
Research Objective 6 was achieved and Hypothesis 3 (H3) was asserted.
g. As given in the 1st Re-specified Model (Figure 45), the loading of the path of
the exogenous variable “generic/behavioural competency category” construct
to the endogenous variable HR Practitioner Competency Model was 0.32 and it
269
explained a variance of 32% (P=0.000). Thus the Research Objective 7 was
achieved and Hypothesis 4 (H4) was asserted.
h. As given in the 1st Re-specified Model (Figure 45), the loading of the path of
the exogenous variable “business competency category” construct to the
endogenous variable HR Practitioner Competency Model was 0.66 and it
explained a variance of 66% (P= 0.000). Thus the Research Objective 8 was
achieved and the Hypothesis 5 (H5) was asserted.
i. As given in the 1st Re-specified Model (Figure 45), the loading of the path of
the exogenous variable “technical HR competency category” construct to the
endogenous variable HR Practitioner Competency Model was 0.41, and it
explained a variance of 41% (P= 0.000). Thus the Research Objective 9 was
achieved and the Hypothesis 6 (H6) was asserted.
j. As given in Table 20, the three exogenous variables “generic/behavioural
competency category” construct, “business competency category” construct,
and the “technical HR competency category” construct jointly explained a total
variance of 49.5% of the HR Practitioner Competency Model. The final
hypothesised model (H7) fitted the 1st Re-specified Model where the
probability (P= 0.062) (Tables 17 and 20) achieved the significant level. Thus
the Research Objective 10 was achieved and the Hypothesis 7 (H7) was
asserted.
270
4.11.2 Direct Effect of Hypothesis Testing
H1. The generic/behavioural competency category has a direct and positive
relationship with the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
The study found that the generic/ behavioural competency category has a direct and a
positive relationship with the HR Practitioner Competency Model. The generic/
behavioural competency category contributed to 32% of significance of standardised
regression weight (P=0.003) (Tables 18 and 21).
However not all the competency domains were significant. Only two competency
domains namely the “relationship building and process drivers,” and “personal
credibility and attributes” were significant. The significant measured variables (i.e.,
the competency factors) in the “relationship building and process drivers” were:
“process management,” “flexibility,” “information seeking,” and “strong initiative.”
The significant measured variables (i.e., competency factors) in the “personal
credibility and attributes” competency domain were: “pride at work,” “pro-
activeness,” “ability to change,” and “leadership.”
The competency factors “flexibility,” “information seeking,” and “strong initiative”
are in the “relationship building and process drivers” competency domain. These are
commonly found in the academic literature and commonly practiced in organisations.
However, process management does not occur commonly and it was significant in the
study and this is an important contribution to the Human Resource Body of
Knowledge. Even the competency domain “relationship building and process drivers”
is unique. In most of the research and HR competency models/frameworks, it is
271
generally labelled as “relationship building.” But in this research, it was renamed as
“relationship building and process drivers” from its original name, “building work
relationship.” This was primarily done to accommodate the various competency
factors that were included into the competency domain as result of the development of
the structural model. This, too, is a contribution to the Human Resource Body of
Knowledge.
In the “personal credibility and attributes” competency domain, the competency
factors such as “pro-activeness,” “ability to change,” and “leadership” are those that
are commonly found in the academic literature and commonly practiced in
organisations. However, “pride at work” does not occur commonly but it was
significant in the competency domain. In most organisations, it is commonly labelled
as a shared value and this is an important contribution to the Human Resource Body of
Knowledge.
H2. The business competency category has a direct and positive relationship with
the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
The study found that the business competency category was not significant (P=0.741)
and it contributed to only 4% of significance level of standardised regression weight to
the HR Practitioner Competency Model. As a result of the above, Hypothesis 2 was
rejected. Only two competency domains namely the “entrepreneurial and business
acumen,” and “essential performance enablers” were significant in the business
competency category. The significant measured variables (i.e., competency factors) in
the entrepreneurial and business acumen domain were: “creativity” and
272
“entrepreneurial skills.” The significant measured variables in the essential
performance enablers were: “problem solving skills,” “decision making,” “information
and communication technology,” and “knowledge management.”
The competency factors “creativity” and “entrepreneurial skills” are commonly found
in academic literature and are mapped out as generic or core competencies in
management. However for HRM, entrepreneurial skills are not commonly found in the
HR competency models/frameworks. It appears that in the study, entrepreneurial skills
were found to be important and significant. This, too, is an important contribution to
the Human Resource Body of Knowledge.
For the competency domain “essential performance enablers,” the competency factors
such as problem solving skills, decision making, and information and communication
technology, are commonly found in the literature and are mapped out as generic or
core competencies in HR competency models/frameworks in organisations. However
for HRM, knowledge management is not commonly found in the HR competency
models/frameworks and this is given in the preceding sections. It appears that in the
study, knowledge management is found to be important and significant. Most of the
available HR competency models are those that were developed in the 1980s and early
1990s. Knowledge management may not have been significant then and this may
possibly be the reason why it was not found in those models. This, too, is an important
contribution to the Human Resource Body of Knowledge.
H3. The technical HR competency category has a direct and positive relationship
with the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
273
The study found that the technical HR competency category contributed to HR
Practitioner Competency Model. The technical HR competency category contributed
to 41% of significance level of standardised regression weight (P = 0.008) (Tables 18
and 21). Thus, it has a direct and positive relationship with the HR Practitioner
Competency Model. However not all the competency domains were significant. Only
two competency domains namely the “resourcing and talent management,” and
“employee relations and compliance” domains were significant. The significant
measured variables (i.e., competency factors) in the “resourcing and talent
management” domain were: “organisation development,” “career planning,” and
“succession planning.” The significant measured variables in the “employee relations
and compliance” domain were: “discipline,” “occupational safety and health,” and
“human performance improvement.”
For the competency domain “resourcing and talent management,” the competency
factors such as “organisation development” and “career planning” are commonly
found in academic literature and are mapped out as generic or core competencies in
HR competency models/frameworks in organisations. However “succession planning”
is not commonly found in the HR competency models/frameworks. It appears that in
the study, “succession planning” was found to be important and significant. This, too,
is an important contribution to the Human Resource Body of Knowledge.
In the competency domain “employee relations and compliance,” human performance
improvement, too, was found to be important and significant. However “human
performance improvement” is not commonly found in the HR competency
274
models/frameworks. This, too, is an important contribution to the Human Resource
Body of Knowledge.
4.11.3 Indirect Effect of Hypothesis Testing
Direct and indirect effects in this study were shown through the path analysis of the
variables. Path analysis is the statistical technique used to examine causal relationships
between two or more variables (Byrne, 2006). It is based upon a linear equation
system and it is used mainly in an attempt to understand comparative strengths of
direct and indirect relationships among a set of variables.
In this way, path analysis is unique from other linear equation models. In path
analysis, mediated pathways (i.e., those acting through a mediating variable, “Y,” in
the pathway X � Y � Z) can be examined. Path analysis is a subset of SEM, the
multivariate procedure that allows examination of a set of relationships between two
or more exogenous variables, either continuous or discrete, and one or more
endogenous variables, either continuous or discrete (Ferdinand, 2000).
4.11.3.1 Research Findings of Indirect Effect on the Structural Model
H4. HR practitioners and HR consultants have interactional effect with regards to
the constructs of the generic/behavioural competency category and the HR
Practitioner Competency Model.
In the generic/behavioural competency category, the “relationship building and
process drivers” domain explained a variance (Squared Multiple Correlation) of 61.5%
and the “personal credibility and attributes” domain explained a variance of 88.5%
(Table 20). Both of the endogenous variables are correlated and the objective was
275
achieved. Thus Hypothesis 4 was asserted. The SMC confirmed “personal credibity
and attributes,” and “relationship building and process drivers” as domains of the
generic/behavioural competency category. As constructs of the competency category,
these domains have significant effect on the generic/behavioural competency that
indirectly influences the HR Practitioner Competency Model. The structural equation
model with interactional effects confirmed the relationship between the
generic/behavioural competency category and the HR Practitioner Competency
Model.
H5. HR practitioners and HR consultants have interactional effect with regards to
the constructs of the business competency category and the HR Practitioner
Competency Model.
In the business competency category, the “entrepreneurial and business acumen”
domain explained a variance (Squared Multiple Correlation) of 80.3%. The essential
performance enablers domain explained a variance of 93.3% (Table 20). Both of the
endogenous variables were correlated and the objective was achieved. Thus
Hypothesis 5 was asserted. The SMC confirmed “essential performance enablers,”
and “entrepreneurial and business acumen” as domains of the business competency
category. As constructs of the business competency category, the two domains
influence the HR Practitioner Competency Model. The structural equation model with
interactional effects confirmed the relationship between the business competency
category and the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
276
H6. HR practitioners and HR consultants have interactional effect with regards to
the constructs of the technical HR competency category and the HR
Practitioner Competency Model.
In the technical HR competency category, the “resourcing and talent management”
domain explained a variance (Squared Multiple Correlation) of 59.6% and the
“employee relations and compliance” domain explained a variance of 80.7%. Both of
the endogenous variables were correlated and the objective was achieved. Thus
Hypothesis 6 was asserted. The SMC confirmed “resourcing and talent management,”
and “employee relations and compliance” as domains of the technical HR competency
category. As constructs of the technical HR competency category, these domains have
significant effect on the technical HR competency category that indirectly influences
the HR Practitioner Competency Model. The significant standardised factor loading
allows the researcher to arrange the order of entry of variables based on causal
priority, and is one of the most useful tools for assessing interactional effects among
constructs and latent constructs in the structural model (Imam, 2003).
4.11.3.2 General Discussion on the Exogenous and Endogenous
Variables
The study shows that all the endogenous variables (i.e., the competency domains) in
the respective exogenous latent constructs (i.e., the competency categories) were
correlated in varying variance explained varying from 61.5 % to 93.3 %. This is given
in Table 20. As given in Table 21, the various endogenous variables, too, show
correlation and influence of exogenous on endogenous variables.
277
The study shows that the competency domains “relationship building and process
drivers,” “personal credibility and attributes,” “resourcing and talent management,”
and “employee relations and compliance” are important and significant competency
domains of the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
In the empirical studies done by other researchers in the past, several different
observations were made. The two significant findings that have influenced HRM
globally are those carried out by the University of Michigan’s Business School in
2002 and that carried out by the RBL Group and the University of Michigan’s
Business School in 2007. It must be emphasised that the approach used in this study
was however slightly different compared to those two studies. Both of the two studies
involved a large sample size and the respondents were not limited to HR practitioners
only. Besides HR practitioners, the studies also involved peers of HR practitioners,
line management personnel, academic institutions, internal customers, etc..
The research methodology used, too, was different as the questions in the survey
questionnaire covered a broad spectrum- identifying important competency factors,
performance, and functions carried out by HR practitioners, etc.. But the present study
only involved identification of important competency factors in different competency
categories. The clustering of the competency domains was not made known upfront to
the respondents. The three competency categories were: generic/ behavioural,
business, and technical HR competency categories. However in this study and those
two other studies carried out globally, the approach of using the competency domains
was similar.
278
In the study carried out by Brockbank and Ulrich (2003), five competency categories
(equivalent to competency domains in the present study) were identified. These
include: “strategic contribution,” “personal credibility,” “business knowledge,” “HR
delivery”, and “HR technology.” In the HRCS studies carried out in in 2007 (Ulrich et
al., 2008), six competency categories (equivalent to competency domains in the
present study) were identified. These include: “credible activist,” “culture and
change,” “talent manager/organisation designer,” “strategy architect,” “operational
executor,” and “business ally.”
The present study carried out by the researcher is interesting as it sets out the different
competency categories, competency domains, and the various competency factors that
were significant in the research. This is a contribution to the HR Body of Knowledge
as studies using this approach have not been done in Malaysia and elsewhere.
Furthermore, the study is an empirical study and a lot of HR competency models
developed by consultants and organisations are merely qualitative models/frameworks.
The researcher is of the opinion that the findings can be transformed into an ontology
and pragmatic HRM model. The HR Practitioner Competency Model which is the
result of the study comprises of the three competency categories and their
corresponding significant competency domains, and with the competency factors. The
major difference of this empirically tested HR Practitioner Competency Model
compared with other HR competency models/frameworks is that this model is an
empirically tested model and it only outlines the important and significant competency
domains and the corresponding competency factors.
279
This is a significant contribution to the HR Body of Knowledge as these competency
domains and the competency factors in the respective competency categories can be
emphasised in developing future HR practitioners. The HR Practitioner Competency
Model, too, can be used in developing curriculum in academic programmes in HRM.
It, too, can be used in learning and developing programmes for the HR practitioners.
Also, it will be useful in developing key performance indicators (KPIs) for the
organisations. The HR Practitioner Competency Model is an up to date and
progressive model as it has taken into consideration all the latest developments in
HRM incorporating elements such as business strategy, human performance
improvement, talent management, succession planning, creativity, knowledge
management, work place learning competencies, etc..
The study somewhat is comprehensive as it covers both the “soft” and “hard” part of
HRM. The “soft” part primarily refers to the work place learning and performance-
based competencies which include competencies from both the generic/behavioural
competency category and the business competency category. The “hard” part refers to
the functional perspective of HRM which primarily comprises of the competencies
from technical HR competency category. Most of the HR competency
models/frameworks developed by organisations and consultants in Malaysia are not
comprehensive. Even the National Occupational Skills Standards (NOSS) and
National Competency Standards (NCS) for HRM have yet to be developed. The
results of the study are somewhat useful in establishing both the NOSS and NCS.
280
4.11.4 Structural Model of Hypothesis Testing
In the study, path analysis of the hypothesised models was tested (Figure 43). In the 1st
Re-specified Model, three competency categories were mere predictors to HR
Practitioner Competency Model. Indices were used to assess the goodness-of-fit of the
covariance structural models: (1) chi-square, (2) degree of freedom, (3) ratio, (4) P-
value, (5) RMSEA, (6) Tucker-Lewis index (TFI), (7) Goodness-of-fit index (GFI),
and (8) Comparative fit index (CFI). The most common goodness-of-fit index is the
chi-square value. The rule of thumb is that if the P-value of the chi-square statistic is
greater than 0.05 (i.e., the chi-square value is not significant), then the proposed model
is acceptable (Hair et. al, 2006; and Ilham, 2007).
Thus, the null hypothesis is that the sample covariance matrix (S) equals to the
population covariance matrix () of the population of the implied model. Since the
traditional chi-square test is very sensitive to sample size, Bollen, (1989), Hair et. al,
(1998), and Imam (2003) suggest using the RMSEA as the principal goodness-of-fit
index (GFI). A value of RMSEA of less than 0.08 indicates a close fit and represents a
reasonable error of approximation in the population. The GFI is similar to the “R”-
squared multiple regression coefficient because it represents the proportion of the
observed covariance explained by the model-implied covariance (Kline, 1998). The
values of GFI, IFI, and CFI can vary between 0 and 1; with values closer to 1
indicating a close fit between data and model (Arbuckle and Wothke, 1995; Hair, et.
al., 1998; and Jöreskog and Sörbom, 1993).
By using a structural relations model that combines factor analysis, regression
analysis, and path analysis (Bollen, 1989), in this study, it was able to evaluate the
281
significance and direction of the relationships between the three exogenous and
endogenous variables. To accomplish these two purposes, recommended two -steps
procedure as suggested by Anderson and Gerbing (1988) was used. First, the
measurement models were tested. Then, the fit of the models was evaluated and then
the best model was selected based on the criteria cited above. Then, second step was
followed to examine the significance of the relationships among the endogenous and
exogenous variables. The covariance matrix for the observed variables was used as
input for all models (Bollen, 1989). All data were normally distributed.
Structural equation modeling in the study was divided into two parts: a measurement
model and a structural model. The measurement model deals with the relationships
between measured variables and latent variables (Hypotheses 1 – 6). The 1st Re-
specified Model of the structural model deals with the relationships between latent
variables only (Hypothesis 7). One of the advantages of SEM is that the latent
variables are free of random error. This is because error has been estimated and
eliminated, leaving only a common variance.
Structural equation model developed confirmed that the HR practitioners and HR
consultants have interactional effect with regards to the constructs of generic/
behavioural competency category, the business competency category, the technical
HR competency category, and the HR Practitioner Competency Model (Hypothesis
7 was asserted). The 1st Re-specified Model output is given in Figure 45. The model
explained a substantial portion of the variance in all the endogenous variables on SMC
value. The SMC confirmed the significance of the HR Practitioner Competency Model
with a total variance explained of 0.495 (i.e., 49.5%).
282
Structural equation modeling results suggest that the 1st Re-specified Model fits the
data well: �2 = 247.725, df = 215, �2/df = 1.152, P-value = 0.062, Comparative Fit
Index (CFI) = 0.989, Goodness-of-Fit Index (GFI) = 0.943, Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI)
= 0.987, Incremental Fit Index (IFI) = 0.989, Standardised Root Mean Squared
Residual (SRMR) = 0.021, and Root Mean Squared Error of Approximation
(RMSEA) = 0.021. The chi-square statistic is non significant (P > 0.05), and this
statistic is well-known to be oversensitive to sample size and may even be significant
with the slightest difference between observed and model-implied covariances (Imam,
2003).
4.12 Interpretation of the First (1st ) Re-specified Model
4.12.1 Research Objectives
After assessing the measurement scales from the reliability and validity of research
measurement, the construct assessment of the study was conducted using confirmatory
factor analysis and measurement model (Byrne, 2001). Scale purification was
undertaken by means of CFA of individual latent constructs to examine the theoretical
relationships between the observable (measureable) indicators and the theoretical
constructs, and how well a data set fits a hypothesised CFA model. CFA was also
conducted to assess the properties of measures in terms of testing convergent and
discriminate validity and the reliability properties of the measures to identify internal
consistency and adequate fit of scale items (Kline, 1998).
To assess the fit of the observed variables to the latent variables, overall model fit
indices were evaluated. In addition, measurement models of both exogenous and
endogenous constructs were also constructed to assess the unidimensionality of the
283
measurement scale. Items with low factor loadings and high residuals were eliminated
through an iterative process to gain better model fit and more reliable constructs for
further analysis of SEM. After the measures were estimated, the values of covariance
among exogenous were examined to identify any multicollinearity problems among
predictors in the model (Byrne, 2001).
All the research objectives as given above were achieved in the study.
a. Research Objective 1
With regards to the Research Objective 1, two competency domains (latent variables)
were significant in the construct of the generic/behavioural competency category.
Thus the Research Objective 1 was achieved as the latent variables befitted into the
construct of the generic/behavioural competency category.
The significant competency domains were: “relationship building and process
drivers,” and “personal credibility.” Most of the competency factors were those that
are commonly mapped in most of the HR competency models/frameworks.
Competency factors such as “process management” and “pride at work” that emerged
in the study are rather unique and not commonly found in most of the HR competency
models/frameworks. This is an important contribution of the study.
b. Research Objective 2
With regards to the Research Objective 2, two competency domains (latent variables)
were significant in the construct of the business competency category. Thus the
284
Research Objective 2 was achieved as the latent variables befitted into the construct of
the business competency category.
The significant competency domains were “entrepreneurial and business acumen” and
“essential performance enablers.” Most of the competency factors were those that are
commonly mapped in most of HR competency models/frameworks. Competency
factors such as “creativity” and “knowledge management” that emerged in the study
are rather unique and not commonly found in most of the HR competency
models/frameworks. This is an important contribution of the study.
c. Research Objective 3
With regards to the Research Objective 3, two competency domains (latent variables)
were significant in the construct of technical HR competency category. Thus the
Research Objective 3 was achieved as the latent variables befitted into the construct of
the technical HR technical competency category.
The significant competency domains were “resourcing and talent management” and
“employee relations and compliance.” Most of the competency factors are those that
are commonly mapped in most of HR competency models/frameworks. Competency
factors such as “succession planning” and “human performance improvement” that
emerged in the study are rather unique and not commonly found in most of the HR
competency models/frameworks. This is an important contribution of the study.
285
d. Research Objective 4
With regards to the Research Objective 4, the Hypothesis 1 was asserted (H1: The
generic/behavioural competency category has a direct and positive relationship with
the HR Practitioner Competency Model). Thus the Research Objective 4 was
achieved as the generic/behavioural competency category influences the HR
Practitioner Competency Model.
The study shows that the generic/behavioural competency category influences the HR
Practitioner Competency Model. It simply means that the respective competency
factors are important and significant in the development of the HR Practitioner
Competency Model. Often, HR competency models/frameworks are developed for
organisations and academic purposes based on some qualitative studies and not based
on empirically tested studies. In this study, units of analysis were HR practitioners and
HR consultants and the contribution made by them is important.
e. Research Objective 5
With regards to the Research Objective 5, the Hypothesis 2 was not asserted (H2: The
business competency category has a direct and positive relationship with the HR
Practitioner Competency Model). The business competency category therefore does
not have a direct and positive relationship with the HR Practitioner Competency
Model. The Research Objective 5 was achieved but however the Hypothesis 2 was not
asserted.
The study shows that the business competency category does not influence the HR
Practitioner Competency Model. It simply means that the respective competency
286
factors are not important and are non significant in the establishment of the HR
Practitioner Competency Model. This is rather unusual as most of the research and the
academic literature strongly indicate the importance of business competencies in
HRM.
f. Research Objective 6
With regards to the Research Objective 6, Hypothesis 3 was asserted (H3: The
technical HR competency category has a direct and positive relationship with the HR
Practitioner Competency Model). Thus the Research Objective 6 was achieved as the
technical HR technical competency category influences the HR Practitioner
Competency Model.
The study shows that the technical HR competency category influences the HR
Practitioner Competency Model. It simply means that the respective competency
factors are important and significant in the development of the HR Practitioner
Competency Model. Research shows that the importance of the respective competency
factors has been the traditional thinking in HRM. It appears that the thought still has
not changed much with the HR profession in Malaysia. In most of the HR competency
models/frameworks, this is well developed.
g. Research Objective 7
With regards to the Research Objective 7, the Hypothesis 4 was asserted (H4: HR
practitioners and HR consultants have interactional effect with regards to the
constructs of the generic/behavioural competency category and the HR Practitioner
Competency Model). In the generic/behavioural competency category, both the
287
competency domains explained positive variances and the Hypothesis 4 was asserted.
Thus the Research Objective 7 was achieved.
The finding of the study is rather interesting as both units of analysis i.e., the HR
practitioners and HR consultants contributed significantly to the importance and
significance of the generic/behavioural competency category in the development of the
HR Practitioner Competency Model.
h. Research Objective 8
With regards to the Research Objective 8, the Hypothesis 5 was asserted (H5: HR
practitioners and HR consultants have interactional effect with regards to the
constructs of the business competency category and the HR Practitioner Competency
Model). In the business competency category, both the competency domains explained
positive variances and the Hypothesis 5 was asserted. Thus the Research Objective 8
was achieved.
In the study, both units of analysis i.e., the HR practitioners and HR consultants
contributed significantly to the importance and significance of the business
competency category in the development of the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
i. Research Objective 9
With regards to the Research Objective 9, the Hypothesis 6 was asserted (H6: HR
practitioners and HR consultants have interactional effect with regards to the
constructs of the technical HR competency category and the HR Practitioner
Competency Model). In the technical HR competency category, both the competency
288
domains explained positive variances and the Hypothesis 6 was asserted. Thus the
Research Objective 9 was achieved.
In the study, both units of analysis i.e., the HR practitioners and HR consultants
contributed significantly to the importance and significance of the technical HR
competency category in the development of the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
j. Research Objective 10
With regards to the Research Objective 10, the Hypothesis 7 was asserted. (H7: HR
practitioners and HR consultants have interactional effect with regards to the
constructs of the generic/behavioural competency category, the business competency
category, the technical HR competency category, and the HR Practitioner Competency
Model). All the three competency categories: generic/behavioural competency
construct, business competency construct, and the technical HR competency construct
jointly explained a total variance of 49.5% of the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
The Hypothesis 7 was asserted as it befitted the 1st Re-specified Model (P= 0.062)
(Table 17). Thus the Research Objective 10 was achieved.
This is important as the HR Practitioner Competency Model developed in the study is
a valid, important, and a significant model. Both units of analysis i.e., the HR
practitioners and HR consultants contributed to the development of the HR
Practitioner Competency Model. However, the model is an empirically tested model
that comprises of only those selected competencies that are deemed important to the
HR practitioners and HR consultants. This is an epistemology model and different
289
from an ontology model where the latter comprises of a list of all the competencies
(i.e., qualtitative and/or quantitative) that are deemed necessary in HRM.
4.12.2 Research Questions
4.12.2.1 Research Question 1
Research Question 1: To what extent all the latent variables (competency domains)
befit into the corresponding constructs of the generic/behavioural competency
category, the business competency category, and the technical HR competency
category?
In the conceptual/theoretical framework of the study (Figure 22 and Table 2), all the
competency factors were clustered (grouped) into the competency domains (latent
variables). The competency domains for each of the competency categories are given
as follows:
� Generic/behavioural competency category: The competency domains are:
“leadership,” “relationship building and process drivers” (note: this was
renamed), “personal credibility and attributes,” and “self-development.”
� Business competency category: The competency domains are: “entrepreneurial
and business acumen,” “strategic orientation,” “customer orientation,” and
“essential performance enablers.”
� Technical HR competency category: The competency domains are: “resourcing
and talent management,” “learning and development,” “rewards and
performance management,” and “employee relations and compliance.”
290
In the study, for the generic/behavioural competency category construct, only two
competency domains were significant namely the “relationship building and process
drivers,” and “personal credibility and attributes.” However the competency “building
work relationship” was renamed to “relationship building and process drivers.” This
was necessary as the competency factors that were significant do not befit well into the
name of the original competency domain. The 2nd order analysis of latent construct
reorganised the significant competency factors into those competency domains (latent
variables) that were appropriate in the structural model.
In the business competency category construct, only two competency domains were
significant namely the “entrepreneurial and business acumen,” and “essential
performance enablers.” In this domain, too, some of the competency factors were
reorganised in the development of the structural model.
In the technical HR competency category construct, only two competency domains
were significant namely the “resourcing and talent management,” and “employee
relations and compliance.” In this domain, too, some of the competency factors were
reorganised in the development of the structural model.
As given above, only six out of the twelve latent variables (competency domains)
fitted into the three corresponding constructs of the competency categories.
291
4.12.2.2 Research Question 2
Research Question 2: Is the HR Practitioner Competency Model influenced by the
constructs of the generic/behavioural competency category, the business competency
category, and the technical HR competency category?
In the study, it was found that both the constructs: generic/behavioural competency
category and technical HR competency category influenced the HR Practitioner
Competency Model. The business competency category however is not significant as
determined through SEM procedures, and therefore it does not influence the HR
Practitioner Competency Model.
The finding on the non significance of the business competency construct is however
contrary to the findings of similar research elsewhere. Ulrich et al. (2008) observed its
importance and the competency domain “business ally” was included in the 2007 HR
Competency Model developed by the RBL Group and the University of Michigan’s
Business School. The HR practitioners are expected to have knowledge with regards
to the business customers, products or services, etc..
The ASTD Competency Model (Bernthal et al., 2004) maps out business/management
as one of the three clusters of competencies necessary for all workplace learning and
performance (WLP) professionals whom also includes the HR practitioners.
The Harvard Model or commonly referred to as Harvard map (Beer et al., 1984), and
the Model of Strategic Change and Human Resource Management (Hendry and
Pettigrew, 1990) to some extent indicate the importance of strategic elements in HRM.
292
In the study, these elements were included as competency factors in the business
competency category construct.
Among one of the important roles of HR is business HR. The main objective of
business HR is to translate business strategy into people strategy (Chua, 2009).
According to Becker and Huselid (1998), business related competencies have
strongest influence on corporate financial performance. Unfortunately HR
practitioners do not possess an adequate working knowledge of what business is all
about or the strategic goals of the organisations. Graddick – Weir (2005) asserts that
HR professionals must be competent not only in their field, but also as business
professionals. To earn a set at the “strategic table,” HR professionals must understand
the business operations. Ulrich et al. (2009) in their book, HR Transformation:
Building Human Resources from the Outside In, posits that the biggest challenge for
HR professionals today is to support their respective organisations to succeed.
Organisations expect HR professionals to play an important role in reducing costs,
supporting the people in the organisation in innovating new products or services, etc..
Choi and Wan Khairuzzaman (2008) in a study on competencies carried out in
Malaysia observes that HR professionals lack the competencies related to business.
Paauwe (2004) asserts that HRM function has become more business oriented, more
strategy, and more oriented towards organisational change. From the studies done in
Malaysia and elsewhere, it appears that HRM is become more business–oriented.
More research should be carried out to understand this aspect much better. In
particular related to this study, the items used in the business competency category
should perhaps be restudied.
293
According to Bucknall and Ohtaki (2005), HRM professionals in Asia are still largely
viewed as “administrators” and generally their opinions relating to operational, or
business strategy matters are not respected by top management. This could possibly be
due to the lack of understanding of the business operations on part of the HR
practitioners. As a result of this, the HR practitioners may not appreciate the
importance of the business operations and its relationship with HRM. Possibly due to
this, “business competencies” were not found to be important and significant in the
study.
4.12.2.3 Research Question 3
Research Question 3: To what extent the interactional effect of the HR practitioners
and the HR consultants on the constructs of the generic/behavioural competency
category, the business competency category, and the technical HR competency
category influence the HR Practitioner Competency Model?
The Research Objectives (7 – 10) and the corresponding Research Hypotheses (4 – 7)
show that the interactional effect of the HR practitioners and HR consultants on the
constructs of the generic/behavioural competency category, the business competency
category, and the technical HR competency category influence the HR Practitioner
Competency Model. Both units of analysis, i.e., the HR practitioners and HR
consultants contributed to the development of the empirically tested HR Practitioner
Competency Model. The 1st Re-specified Model confirmed the complex interaction
amongst the HR practitioners and HR consultants with regards to the three
competency categories and the influence on the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
294
The fit of the 1st Re-specified Model represents the end of the journey of determination
of the competency domains and competency categories.
4.13 Conclusion
This study confirms the examination of the hypothesised model using the indices: the
Standardised Root Mean Squared Residual (SRMR), and the Root-Mean Squared
Error of Approximation (RMSEA). SRMR is a standardised summary of the average
covariance residuals. A favourable value of the SRMR is less than .10 (Kline, 1998).
RMSEA also indicates the extent to which the residuals in the model differs from zero.
In general, models with RMSEA of less than .08 are considered to reflect a good fit
and models with RMSEA of between .05 and .08 are considered to have a fair fit to
the data (Browne and Cudeck, 1993). It is further suggested that RMSEA of .08 to .10
indicates mediocre fit, and RMSEA of above .10 indicates poor fit of the model to the
data (MacCallum et al., 1996). Also, the significant level of the factor loadings
between all variables in the model confirms the three competency categories and the
interaction with the endogenous variables. Path analysis and hypothesis testing show
the total direct and indirect effects of interaction of variables and indicates the
goodness-of-model fit of the 1st Re-specified Model.
The results of the structural equation modeling in assessing the validity of the
empirical relationship between constructs of competency categories were positively
related to the HR Practitioner Competency Model. Through 2nd order analysis of
competency categories, path analysis, direct and indirect analysis, the 1st Re-specified
295
Model confirms this study and achieved the structural model of HR Practitioner
Competency Model with significant competency domains and competency factors.
296
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Introduction
This chapter draws upon the salient findings and results of the study. This chapter
begins with discussion and general observation of the findings, status of HRM in
Malaysia and then proceeds on to contributions, and limitations of the study. The
chapter ends with suggestions for further research.
5.2 General Observations of the Study
Based on the 1st Re-specified Model (Figure 45), the business competency category
was a non significant competency category in the structural model as Hypothesis 2
was rejected. Business competency category was thus eliminated from the structural
model. Thus only the generic/behavioural and technical HR competency categories
were significant in the structural model. Modification was done through the
elimination of the latent variables and latent constructs. The Final Re-specified Model
(as given in Figure 46) was established with all the significant competency categories,
competency domains and the competency factors. This was confirmed and supported
with the goodness of indexes of the structural model.
Goodness of model fit shows the chi-square value (CMIN= 119.675); �2/df = 1.088; P
value = 0.249; GFI = 0.960; and RMSEA = 0.016. The Final Re-specified model of
HR Practitioner Competency Model confirmed the significance of the
generic/behavioural competency category (�=0.31) and the technical HR competency
category (�=0.46) in the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
297
Generic /BehaviouralCompetency
Category
Technical HR
CompetencyCategory
,50
HR Practitioner Competency Model
,63,33
b3 e02 ,57
,37
b1 ,63
e01 ,61
,45
b6 e03 ,67
,69
b8 e04 ,83
Relationshi pbuilding &
process drivers
,86Personal
credibility &attributes
,65
,49
c12e18 ,70
,36c11e17 ,60
,33
c9e16 ,58Resou cing & rtalent management
,74Employeerelations
& compliance
,51
b9 e05 ,71 ,50
b11 e06 ,71,38
b13 e07 ,62
,38
b17
,61
e08 ,86
,35
e3 e23,59
,59
e5 e24,77
,48
e6 ,69
e25
,44
c16 e20 ,55
c14 e19
,80 ,93
,81 ,86
,31
,46
r7
,74,66
,49
c18,70 e21
Standardised estimatesChi-Square : 119,675df : 110Ratio : 1,088P Value : ,249GFI : ,960RMSEA : ,016
,67
r6
r1 r2
r5
Figure 46. Final Re-specified Model of HR Practitioner Competency Model
The significant competency domains in both the generic/behavioural competency
category and the technical HR competency category that make up the HR Practitioner
Competency Model are further discussed below. The empirical findings of the non
significant business competency category and the corresponding domains, too, are
discussed below.
5.2.1 Generic/Behavioural Competency Category
In the generic/behavioural competency category, only two competeny domains i.e.,
“relationship building and process drivers,” and “personal credibility and attributes”
were significant in the study.
298
A. Significant Domains
a. Relationship Building and Process Drivers Domain
In the domain “relationship building and process drivers,” “process management,”
“flexibility,” “information seeking,” and “strong initiative” were the only significant
competency factors. In the industry, these competency factors are generally mapped
out in the generic competency frameworks of the organisations.
b. Personal Credibility and Attributes Domain
In the domain “personal credibility and attributes,” the competency factors such as
“pride at work,” “pro-activeness,” “ability to change,” and “leadership” were the only
significant competency factors. These, too, in the industry are generally included in
the generic competency frameworks of the organisations.
B. Non Significant Domains and Competency Factors
a. Leadership Domain
The researcher is of the view that the competency domain “leadership” should have
been significant as it includes competency factors such as “directiveness,” “team
leadership,” and “motivation and drive.” Right leadership is important in steering the
organisations to greater heights of excellence. Good leadership supports in realising
the vision, mission, values, and strategy (i.e., corporate and business strategy) of the
organisations. Team leadership appears to be heavily emphasised today. Chua (2009)
asserts that teamwork and collaboration is an important generic competency for HR
professionals in both North and South Asia. Mc Daniel (1998) and the International
Public Management Association for HR of USA (IPMA, 2005), too, observe the
299
importance of team leadership for HR practitioners. Selmer and Randy (2004), too,
observes that tomorrow’s HR leaders should master skills such as team development.
Charan et al. (2001) in their book, The leadership Pipeline: How to Build The
Leadership Powered Company, quote that “companies that grow their own leadership
at all levels and recognise the unique requirements at each level will have a unique
edge. Unfortunately many companies today fail to establish leadership as a special
requirement; they also fail to differentiate leadership requirements based on an
individual’s specific leadership position. And, one of the problems faced by companies
today is that there are not enough leaders and few are being grown internally.”
The findings of Charan et al. (2001) have created a great deal of interest in
organisations over the years. Development of internal leaders as quoted by Charan et
al. (2010) in the opinion of the researcher is a responsibility of HRM and therefore
leadership competencies are important in HRM.
The study indicates that the HR profession in Malaysia does not observe the
importance of the “leadership” competency domain. However, “leadership” was
significant only as a competency factor in the competency domain “personal
credibility and attributes.” This could possibly be due to the common scenario
whereby HR issues are always seen to be placed “on the table” rather than having its
representation “at the strategic table” (Ulrich et al., 2009). It means that HR profession
in Malaysia generally lacks strong leadership in the organisations. Human resource
professionals do not get involve into the organisational mainstream activities in
particular making strategic decisions. Human resource merely accepts decisions that
300
are made by other members of the top management. The ability to influence others
could be lacking and this could possibly be due to lack of leadership skills, confidence,
understanding of organisational business concept and strategy, etc..
b. Self- Development Domain
In the “self- development” competency domain, the competency factors “ability to
change” and “information seeking” were reorganised by SEM’s analytical processes
to other significant competency domains. However, the competency factors “analytical
thinking,” “conceptual thinking,” and “continuous learning” in the “self-development”
domain were not significant. Generally, the competency factors “analytical thinking”
and “conceptual thinking” are found in most of the generic competency frameworks of
most of the organisations. It appears that the HR profession in Malaysia does not
observe the importance of these competency factors. This could possibly be due to the
heavy operational orientation of the HR profession. Both of these competency factors
have some strategic orientation and the acquisition of these competencies is important
in strategising the operations of an organisation. The competency factor “conceptual
thinking” in particular has some visionary elements and its knowledge is somewhat
important in steering an organisation forward.
Due to the emphasis on life-long learning and the establishment of learning
organisation, it would be expected that the competency factor “continuous learning”
would have been significant and important. Employees are expected to enhance and
hone their knowledge, skills, and practices over time and this is possible through
continuous learning. However, it was not significant in the study. This appears to be
rather strange as a great deal of emphasis today is given by the government on human
301
capital development and life long learning. The study shows that either the HR
profession does not value the importance of continuous learning today, or the
emphasis is not given to it due to economic situation.
The researcher is of the opinion that during the period of the study, Malaysia was
going through economic slowdown which was a global problem. Employers cut back
their budget on training. This situation was further amplified by a temporary freeze of
the mandatory contribution of the levy by the employers towards the Human
Resources Development Fund.
C. Other Competency Factors
The competency factors such as “interpersonal skills” and “commitment,” too, were
not significant in the study. These are included in the competency domain
“relationship building and process drivers.” Interpersonal skills is one of the
workplace learning and performance (WLP) competencies important for Taiwan HR
practitioners (Chen et al., 2005). Gray (1999), too, asserts on the importance of
interpersonal skills for HRD practitioners in New Zealand. The 2004 ASTD
Competency Model (Bernthal et al., 2004) outlines interpersonal competencies as an
important cluster. Butteriss (1998) recognises interpersonal skills as an important HR
general competency. Spencer and Spencer (1993), too, lists out interpersonal
understanding as an important competency for managers in their generic competency
model.
In carrying out a study of key competencies required to run tomorrow’s human
resource organisation at Eastman Kodak, Blancero et al. (1995) found “commitment”
302
as a significant core competency. Chua (2009), too, posits on the importance of
“commitment” as a generic competency for HR professionals in North Asia.
Schoonover (2003), too, posits “commitment” as an important competency in his HR
competency framework.
5.2.2 Business Competency Category
As given in Figure 46 (Final Re-specified Model of Human Practitioner Competency
Model), the “business competency category” was found to be non significant. From
the study, it can be concluded that the HR profession in Malaysia does not observe the
importance of the “business competency category” that include the competency
domains “entrepreneurial and business acumen,” strategic orientation,” “customer
orientation,” and essential performance enablers.”
a. Entrepreneurial and Business Acumen Domain
The competency factors included in the domain “entrepreneurial and business
acumen,” are those that provide the necessary knowledge and skills for entrepreneurial
and business acumen orientation. Included in this list of competency factors are
“financial knowledge,” “sales and marketing,” “globalisation awareness,” “consulting
skills,” “entrepreneurial skills,” “project management,” “knowledge management,”
etc.. In becoming a “strategic partner,” understanding and executing business strategy,
the researcher is of the opinion that it would be important for the HR practitioners to
have knowledge on these competency factors. These competencies today are
somewhat found in most of the HR models/frameworks developed in the west.
Unfortunately, the HR profession does not recognise their importance in Malaysia.
This could possibly be due to the highly operational nature of the HR profession and
303
the lack of the foresight to recognise competencies that are deemed necessary for the
future.
Chen et al. (2005) outlines the importance of knowledge of project management for
Taiwan’s HR practitioners. Mc Daniel (1998), and Selmer and Randy (2004) reports
on the importance given to the acquisition of project management competencies.
The importance of project management knowledge has only been emphasised recently.
Its importance is emphasised in training and certifying HR managers and those in
higher job positions in Malaysia (Abdul Hamid, 2004).
The importance of financial knowledge is outlined in the research carried out by the
Hong Kong Institute of Human Resource Management in 1998 (Selmer and Randy,
2004). The improved “Human Resource Wheel” (Bernthal et al., 2004), too,
emphasises on the importance of finance for HR practitioners. The importance of
globalisation awareness for the HR has been emphasised by studies carried out by the
Society for Human Resource Management, USA (SHRM, 2002) and Selmer and
Randy (2004). The term “globalisation” has been emphasised in the HR literature only
recently.
b. Essential Performance Enablers Domain
The competency factors included in the domain are those that are related to basic
managerial skills that will assist the HR practitioners to enhance the work
productivity. These include competency factors such as “problem solving,” “decision
making,” “presentation skills,” “creativity,” “handling conflict,” ‘writing skills,”
304
“influencing skills,” “negotiation skills,” etc.. Most of these competencies are
generally found in most of the generic competency frameworks in the west.
Unfortunately, the HR profession does not recognise their importance in Malaysia.
This could possibly be due to the highly operational nature of the HR profession, and
employees are expected to acquire these competencies on their own. It, too, indicates
that the HR professionals do not keep abreast of the changes occurring in the west.
c. Strategic Orientation
The competency factors included in the domain are those that are somewhat related to
strategic management. These include competency factors such as “strategic
alignment,” “strategic thinking,” and “strategic planning.” The researcher is of the
view that some of the competency factors included in the strategic orientation domain
such as “strategic planning” and “strategic thinking” should have been significant.
These competency factors are generally found in most of the generic competency
frameworks and HR competency models/frameworks established in the west. These
competencies are necessary in steering the organisations forward. It appears that the
HR profession is still behind the west. This could be due to the highly operational
nature of the HR profession in Malaysia. This,too, clearly indicates that the HR
profession has yet to command a “strategic seat” at the management table.
In the 2007 HR Competency Model developed by Ulrich et al. (2008), “strategy
architect” was identified as one of the competency domains. Brockbank and Ulrich
(2003), too, posits on the importance of strategic contribution in 2003 HR Competency
Model. Ulrich (1997) identified strategic planning as an important area for HR in
becoming a strategic partner.
305
d. Customer Orientation
The competency factors included in the domain are “customer satisfaction,”
“consciousness toward quality,” “knowledge of products/services,” and
“responsiveness.” The non significance of “customer orientation” domain could be
attributed to the notion that the customers who the HR practitioners are serving are
mainly internal customers i.e., the top management, Heads of Department, and the
line managers unlike the personnel in sales and marketing, public relations, etc.. This
is parallel with the thoughts expounded by Ulrich et al. (2009) in their book, HR
Transformation: Building Human Resources from the Outside In. Ulrich et al. (2009)
asserts that HR professionals often focus internally on the function of HR rather than
externally on what customers and investors need HR to deliver. To serve as “business
partners,” the goals of the HR professionals must be the goals of the business. It could
possibly be because of this reason why this domain is not regarded important by the
HR profession in Malaysia.
5.2.3 Technical HR Competency Category
In the technical HR competency category, only domains i.e., “resourcing and talent
management,” and “employee relations and compliance” were significant.
A. Significant Domains
a. Resourcing and talent management
In the domain “resourcing and talent management,” the competency factors that were
significant in the study were “organisation development,” “career planning,” and
“succession planning.”
306
Organisation development is somewhat closely related to the “ability to change” in the
domain “personal credibility and attributes.” The findings show that the HR profession
in Malaysia is progressive and advocates change and organisation development. This
is in parallel with the development in the west.
The three competency factors “organisation development,” “career planning,” and
“succession planning” are areas where a lot of emphasis is given today in the west. It
shows that the thinking of the HR profession in line with the challenges faced by their
organisations in an era where talent management is critical; and where the business
strategy is changing speedily.
b. Employee Relations and Compliance Domain
In the domain “employee relations and compliance,” the competency factors
“discipline,” “occupational safety and health,” and “human performance
improvement” were the only competency factors that were significant.
In the study, it was found that “discipline” is still a significant competency factor. It is
a traditional and conservative function/activity of human resource management.
Discipline is unlike the other competency factors such as “organisation development,”
“career planning,” and “succession planning” in the domain “resourcing and talent
management” that are basically strategic oriented competencies.
The findings indicate that the HR profession in Malaysia is still conservative unlike in
the west where “positive discipline is emphasised.”
307
The competency factor, “occupational safety and health,” too, was significant. This
could be significant due to the mandatory legal compliance requirements. Even in the
west, this competency still commands its importance.
Human performance improvement was reorganised as a significant domain into the
“employee relations and compliance” competency domain by the structural modeling
procedures. However, the researcher is of the opinion that this competency factor may
best befit either in the “resourcing and talent management” competency domain, or the
“rewards and performance management” competency domain. This appears to be
somewhat an anomaly. This should be further researched.
However, its significance in the study is interesting as even in the west, it is not
prominent in most of the notable HR competency models/frameworks that were
researched. Human performance improvement is somewhat more closely related to
“performance management” and surprisingly, “performance management,” too, was
not significant in the study. Possibly, the HR profession observes that the performance
management practices are already well established in the organisations and currently,
the emphasis needs to be given to human performance improvement.
B. Non Significant Domains
The researcher is of the view that the two other competency domains “learning and
development,” and “rewards and performance management,” too, should have been
significant considering that all the four competency domains are activities, or primary
functions carried out both at strategic and operational level by the HR practitioners.
308
In the 2007 HR Competency Model (Ulrich et al., 2008), the “technical HR”
competency category was represented by the competency area “Operational
Executor.” It was among one of the six competency areas included in the model. In all
the Human Resource Competency Models developed in 1987, 1992, 1997, and 2002,
the “technical HR” competency category, too, was represented by HR delivery
(Brockbank and Ulrich, 2003; and Ulrich et al., 2008). All the competency factors
given except for talent management system, talent retention, career planning,
succession planning, human performance improvement, human performance
technology were mapped out in Eli Lilly company’s HR Competency Model
(Mc Daniel, 1998).
The Personnel Standards Leads Body in the UK includes almost all of the competency
factors in its map of personnel standards (Smilansky, 1997; and EOSC, 1994). The HR
competency framework of Schoonover (2003) covers most of the competency factors
under the heading: HR core competencies. The “Human Resource Wheel” of
McLagan (1989), too, includes all of the competency factors. The “Human Resource
Wheel” appears to be a complete framework outlining all of the “technical HR”
competency factors as given in the all the four competency domains.
In the “resourcing and talent management domain,” only “organisation development,”
“career planning,” and “succession planning” were significant. Surprisingly
competency factors such as “recruitment and selection,” “HR planning and
acquisition,” “talent management system,” and “talent retention” were not significant
at all in the study.
309
The term “ talent ” has been popular since the 1990s and its importance continues to
grow steadily. However the definition of talent and talent management system varies
from one authority to another. Two of the practical definitions that are somewhat
relevant to this study are those offered by Smilansky (2006) and Chowdhury (2002).
Smilansky (2006) defines talent management as “an integrated set of corporate
integrated set of corporate initiatives aimed at improving the calibre, availability, and
flexibility utilisation of exceptionally capable (high potential) employees who can
have a disproportionate impact on business performance. Talent management
processes are designed to ensure that the business improves its competitive advantage
through the effective utilisation of a small number of exceptional individuals in key
leadership positions.”
Chowdhury (2002) offers the definition of talent as “talent are relatively few people
who contribute the most to the organisation who need to be recognised, nurtured, and
leveraged to maximise the positive results they can achieve. They are stars and need to
be treated as stars.” The Society for Human Resource Management of USA (SHRM,
2002) posits that the need for effective talent management has enormous implications
for HR professionals. Ulrich et al., (2008) includes the competency area “talent
manager/organisation designer” into the 2007 HR Competency Model. Both of the
above given citations indicate the significance and importance of “talent management”
and “talent retention.” The HR Competency Framework of Schoonover (2003), too,
outlines the importance of “talent management.”
The importance of recruitment and selection, and HR planning and acquisition cannot
be understated as both of these competency factors are included in several HR
310
competency models and frameworks (Bernthal et al., 2004; Mathis and Jackson, 2002;
McLagan, 1989; Stafford, 2008; HRCI, 2003; Abdul Hamid, 2004; Mc Daniel, 1998;
EOSC, 1994; and Brewster et al., 2000).
In the study, the competency domain “learning and development” was not significant.
The competency factors included in the “learning and development” domain are
“human resource development,” “career planning,” and “succession planning.”
However, the competency factors “career planning” and “succession planning” were
reorganised by the SEM analytical procedures into the “resourcing and talent
management” domain. It can well be said that the only competency factor that was not
significant from the “learning and development’ domain was “human resource
development.” Human resource development is closely associated to “training” and
“continuous learning.” During the period of the study, Malaysia was going through
economic slowdown and the employers cut back their budget on training. It could be
for this reason why the competency factor “human resource development,” too, was
not significant.
In the study, the competency domain “rewards and performance management” was not
significant. The competency factors included in the domain are “salary and payroll
administration,” “rewards management,” “HR performance measurement,” “human
performance technology,” “compensation and benefits,” and “performance
management and development.” Most of these competency factors are traditional
technical HR competencies and are prominent in most of the HR competency
models/frameworks esatablished in the west. The reason for the non signifance of
these competencies could possibly be due to their reasonable development,
311
establishment and maturity of practices in the organisations, and the HR profession
does not view its importance any longer.
In the competency domain “employee relations and compliance,” the competency
factors that were significant were “discipline,” “occupational safety and health,” and
“human performance improvement.” The researcher is of the view that the
competency factor “employment laws and legislation,” too, should have been
significant. The reason for the non signifance of this competency factor could possibly
be due to its reasonable development, establishment and maturity of practices in the
organisations, and the HR profession does not longer view its importance any longer.
Generally in the organisations, in the past a lot of emphasis was given to
“employment laws and legislation.”
5.3 Research Findings on HR Practitioner Competency Model Development
5.3.1 Out of a total of 13 items, only 5 items were valid and the valid items
are given as follows:
a. Currently, no HR Practitioner Competency Model(s) exist in Malaysia.
This clearly supports the usefulness of the study as the HR profession in Malaysia
agrees with this statement. Some related competency studies as those carried out by
Junaidah (2007), Choi and Wan Khairuzzaman (2008) were merely extending their
studies based on the Human Resource Competency Studies carried out by Brockbank
and Ulrich (2003) and Ulrich et al. (1995) which were derived in the USA. These two
studies carried out in Malaysia did not result in the development of HR Practitioner
Competency Model in the Malaysian environment. Furthermore, the model developed
in the USA may not be operationally appropriate and viable in Malaysia. This, too,
312
supports the views given by Hsu and Seat (2000) on the need to develop models of
HRM elsewhere i.e., besides the USA and Europe.
b. HR Practitioner Competency Model is important for HR practitioners to attain
professionalism
The HR profession agrees that the HR Practitioner Competency Model can support in
elevating professionalism of the HR practitioners. Possibly, by having the significant
HR competency domains and competency factors established, HR practitioners will
understand the functions and activities of HRM much better and can better equip
themselves with the knowledge, skills, and competencies.
The HR Competency Model of the Australian Human Resources Institute (AHRI)
(Stafford, 2008); competency frameworks (Levels 1-3) for Certification of HR
practitioners in Malaysia (Abdul Hamid, 2004); and the assessment of HR
professionals as carried out by the Human Resource Certification Institute, USA
(Bogardus, 2004) were developed primarily in attaining some kind of HR
professionalism. All the given models comprise of generic/behavioural competencies,
business competencies, and technical HR competencies, although in varying degree of
emphasis.
e. Having an HR Practitioner Competency Model will support in human
resource development.
Human resource development involves education, training, and development. This
statement is related to that on HR practitioners attaining professionalism. In having the
HR Practitioner Competency Model, the HR practitioners can better understand the
313
roles, functions, and the activities undertaken by the HR practitioners. Gaps of
knowledge, skills, and competencies can be addressed through systematic education
and training programmes. The “Human Resource Wheel” (McLagan, 1989), too, sets
out human resource development as one of the primary functions of HRM. Thus it
justifies that the analysis gave emphasis on the enhancement of human resource
development.
f. Having a HR Practitioner Competency Model will support in succession
planning.
Hills (2009) defines succession planning as “doing all you can to ensure you have the
right people in the right job at the right time.” Hamner (2005) asserts that succession
planning is one of the most crucial activities an organisation can undertake to ensure
its long term viability. Succession planning is an important strategic related function
undertaken by HR practitioners today. In the study, the competency factor “succession
planning,” too, was significant in the domain “resourcing and talent management.”
The HR Practitioner Competency Model can be used to systematically train, coach, or
mentor those who have been placed in organisational succession plans.
g. HR Practitioner Competency Model should comprise of only technical HR
competencies.
The researcher was expecting results of the analysis favouring the importance of all
the three competency categories namely generic/behavioural competency category,
business competency category, and technical HR competency category. However, the
analysis indicated the importance and significance of only the technical HR
competency category. This has been the traditional or conservative thinking of most of
314
the HR practitioners in the past. However, this thinking has changed over the years as
besides the technical HR competencies, some weightage in varying degree is also
given to the generic/behavioural competencies as found in the study. The significance
of the generic/behavioural competency category indicates that, it, too, is important
besides the technical HR competency category.
According to Becker and Huselid (2006), research shows that HR managers are much
more effective at the technical, or operational aspects of HR’s role than they are at
strategy execution. In a study carried out by Choi and Wan Khairuzzaman (2008) in
Malaysia, HR delivery (i.e., which is actually technical HR competency category) was
among the top ranking competency factors. Empirical studies carried out by Boudreau
and Ramstad (2003), too, found that HR delivery was among one of the most
important areas for HR professionals. The significance of the above statements is
justified with the findings of the research.
5.4 Non significance of the Business Competency Category
Hypothesis 2 (P = 0.741) was rejected (Table 21). Hypothesis testing shows that the
“business” competency category did not have a direct and positive relationship with
the HR Practitioner Competency Model, and therefore it does not have any influence
on the HR Practitioner Competency Model. This is contrary to the findings of similar
research elsewhere. Ulrich et al. (2008) observes its importance and the competency
domain “business ally” was included in the 2007 HR Competency Model developed
by the RBL Group and the University of Michigan’s Business School. The HR
practitioners are expected to possess knowledge with regards to the business
customers, products or services, etc.. The ASTD Competency Model (Bernthal et al.,
315
2004) maps out business/management as one of the three clusters of competencies
necessary for all workplace learning and performance (WLP) professionals that also
includes the HR practitioners.
Chua (2009) asserts that among one of the important roles of HR is “business HR” and
the main objective of “business HR” is to translate business strategy into people
strategy. According to Becker and Huselid (1998), business related competencies have
strongest influence on corporate financial performance. Unfortunately HR
practitioners do not possess an adequate working knowledge of what business is all
about, or the strategic goals of the organisations.
From the studies done in Malaysia and elsewhere, it appears that HRM has become
more business–oriented. More research should be carried out to understand this aspect
much better. In particular related to this study, the items used in the business
competency category should possibly be restudied.
5.5 Significance of the Competency Factors in the Study and their Relationship
Most of the competency factors including “flexibility,” “information seeking,” “strong
initiative,” “pro-activeness,” “ability to change,” “leadership,” “organisation
development,” and “career planning” are also present in other HR competency
models/frameworks globally. It appears that the overall findings do not differ that
much from other studies done elsewhere.
Competency factors such as “pride at work,” “discipline,” “human performance
improvement,” “process management,” and “succession planning,” were significant in
316
this study unlike other HR competency studies. This was discussed in the preceding
sections.
The competency factor “succession planning” which is closely related to “leadership”
and “talent management,” too, was significant in this study. Succession planning is an
important competency for the future. Hamner (2005) observes that “leadership” and
“succession planning” are continuously coupled. And succession planning, leadership,
and strategy will forever be coupled in complex ways. In this study, both “leadership”
and “succession planning” were significant albeit in different competency domains.
Hills (2009) posits that a succession strategy will inevitably be a mix of buying and
building talent. However the competency factor “discipline,” too, was significant in
this study unlike other similar studies elsewhere. The competency factors “ability to
change” and “organisation development” are somewhat closely related. Both were
significant and it shows how important these are to the HR profession in Malaysia.
Human performance improvement, too, does not appear in most of the HR
competency models/frameworks that were researched. Human performance
improvement is however emphasised in the 2004 ASTD Competency Model
(Bernthall et al., 2004; Rothwell, 1999).
5.6 Status of HRM in Malaysia
The findings of the study shows that the present HRM practices in Malaysia are of
mixed mode. Some of the HRM practices appear to be still traditional, or conservative,
and highly operational (i.e., the significance of the technical HR competency
317
category); whereas others are somewhat progressive and forward thinking (i.e., the
significance of the generic/behavioural competency category).
The signifance of the competency factors “discipline,” and “occupational safety and
health” in the study strongly indicate that HRM practices in Malaysia are highly
traditional and operational. And the significance of the competency factors “process
management,” “information seeking,” “ability to change,” “organisation
development,” “succession planning,” and “human performance improvement” in the
study somewhat shows that the HR profession is progressive and forward thinking
However, the non significance of the business competency category indicates that the
HR profession in Malaysia is somewhat not a “strategic business partner” as it does
not get involve into the mainstream of the business strategy of the organisations. With
regards to this, the HR profession in Malaysia lags behind the practices in the west.
Other researchers who have carried out similar studies in Malaysia, too, are of the
same opinion. According to Ulrich et al. (2008), the HR profession is moving towards
being more aligned with the business.
5.7 Contributions of the Study
5.7.1 Contributions to the Knowledge of HRM
The contribution of the study to the HR Body of Knowledge are as follows:
1. The HR Practitioner Competency Model with only the significant competency
domains and competency factors derived from the tested model are illustrated
in form of a pie graph (Figure 47) as given below:
318
Figure 47. Human Resource Practitioner Competency Model with the Significant
Competencies
The pie graph illustrates only the competency domains and competency factors
that were significant in the study. With the given pie graph as above, the study
has met the aim of the research which was to develop an empirically
substantiated HR Practitioner Competency Model.
2. The research model including the survey instrument was developed by the
researcher himself, and this is a contribution.
3. The study is comprehensive as it covers a broad spectrum of competencies
(i.e., the generic/behavioural, business, and technical HR competencies).
319
4. The established epistemology model can be used by other researchers to
develop ontology and pragmatic models. This will useful for the HR
consultants, academia, HR practitioners, HRD practitioners, etc..
5. The primary statistical analytical technique used in the research was Structural
equation modeling (SEM). This itself is a contribution.
6. With regards to the competency domains and competency factors, a new
competency domain “relationship building and process drivers” was coined.
This is a contribution. In the research, too, a few uncommon competency
factors were significant in the study. These include: “process management,”
“pride at work,” “succession planning,” and “human performance
improvement.” The given competencies are not significant in other global HR
competency models/frameworks that were researched.
5.7.2 Contributions to the Improvement of Practical Perspectives of HRM
The contributions of the study to the improvement of practical HRM are as follows:
1. The study resulting in empirically tested HR Practitioner Competency Model
complements the work done by other researchers in the USA or Europe. As it
is done in a local Malaysian cultural setting, it should benefit the HR
practitioners, HR consultants, the academia, organisations, and other related
individuals in Malaysia.
2. In developing the HR Practitioner Competency Model, the units of analysis
were both HR practitioners and HR consultants. This gives an important
blended view of both the operational and strategic perspectives of HRM.
320
3. The HR Practitioner Competency Model is an empirically tested model. This is
important as it is valid. Most of the available HR Competency Models are
generally done through qualitative studies.
4. In the study, the respondents were chosen from two primary sectors namely the
manufacturing and services. This is important as both of the economic sectors
in total contributed to 83.6% of GDP in 2007. Therefore, a balanced view is
given in the research.
5. The HR Practitioner Competency Model can be used in elevating
professionalism for the HR practitioners. The HR Practitioner Competency
Model will also be useful for the Human Resource Development (HRD)
personnel. It, too, can be used in establishing the National Occupational Skills
Standards (NOSS) and/or the National Competency Standards (NCS) for the
HR practitioners in Malaysia.
5.8 Limitations of the Study
5.8.1 Alike any other studies, the findings obtained in this study, too, has its own
limitations. The researcher however tried his level best to overcome the limitations.
The limitations are discussed below:
1. The database of HR consultants is limited. Due to this, “purposive sampling
procedures” were used in the study. That may not have been a good
representation of the sample for the study. The sample size of the HR
consultants was only 100 and the rate of response was 52%. Even to get a
321
2. The rate of response from the manufacturing sector was 34% and the rate of
response from services sector was 24%. To get a much more balanced view, an
equal number of survey questionnaires should be sent to the services sector,
too. Also the response from some of the industries in services economic sector
was poor. Unlike the manufacturing sector, there is limited reliable database of
the services economics sector.
3. The addresses of some of the organisations for both the manufacturing and
services were not updated in the directories, and it was for this reason as to
why some of the survey questionnaires were returned. This was in spite of
confirming the addresses from several reliable sources. Perhaps more latest
reliable sources of database are necessary to mitigate the problem.
4. In the opinion of the researcher, some of responses were not received due to
confidentiality reasons. The respondents could be worried of the information
given falling into the wrong hands. Better assurance may need to be given to
the respondents.
5.9 Suggestions for Further Research
Based on the limitations of the present study, it is proposed that further research
should consider the following perspectives or areas:
322
1. The study may be extended widely to include the CEOs, Directors, General
Managers, Line Managers, peers of HR practitioners, academia, and all
customers of the HR practitioners.
2. The present study was carried out jointly for both the manufacturing and
services sectors. The same study can be done for both of the sectors separately.
3. The study is a quantitative (i.e., empirically tested) study. Perhaps a qualitative
approach such as in-depth interviews or the use of Delphi technique can be
used to further validate the findings.
4. Future research may want to examine the effectiveness of human resource
leadership in organisations.
5. Competency framework comprising detailed capability (mastery) levels of the
behavioural indicators may be established using the competencies that were
significant in the study. The competencies that were significant in the study,
too, may be used in developing job designs, job models, or job descriptions of
the HR practitioners.
6. Research may be replicated in the government sector, and small and medium
scale industries.
7. Research may be replicated in other Asian countries such as Indonesia,
Singapore, and Brunei since these countries have cultural background similar
323
to Malaysia. Except for Singapore, very little HRM work related to human
resource competencies has been carried out in those countries.
8. Further studies may examine how culture and diversity influence perceptions
of human resource competencies.
9. Further research on the relationship between human resource competencies and
performance is suggested.
10. Further research on the influence and impact of Multinational corporations on
HRM in Malaysia is suggested.
11. Further research on the “business competencies” is suggested. This is
necessary as the “business” competency category was non significant in the
present study.
5.10 Concluding Remarks
The research was carried out by reviewing the previous studies done by other
researchers. Three competency categories, 12 competency domains, and 90
competency factors were studied.
The latent variables significant in the “generic/behavioural competency category”
were “relationship building and process drivers,” and “personal credibility and
attributes;” the latent variables significant in the “business competency category” were
324
“entrepreneurial and business acumen,” and “essential performance enablers;” and the
latent variables significant in the “technical HR competency category” were
“resourcing and talent management,” and “employee relations and compliance.”
It was found that only the “generic/behavioural competency category” and the
“technical HR competency category” influenced the development of the HR
Practitioner Competency Model.
The “generic/behavioural competency category,” the “technical HR competency
category,” and the “business competency category” show interaction effect with the
HR Practitioner Competency Model. This is because all the loading of the paths
contribute to the standardised regression weights.
All the three competency categories: “generic/behavioural competency category,”
“technical HR competency category,” and the “business competency category” show
interaction effect with the HR Practitioner Competency Model. This is because all the
three competency categories jointly explain a total variance of 49.5% in the
development of the HR Practitioner Competency Model.
An epistemology model comprising of the significant competency categories,
competency domains, and competency factors was developed. From the above, it can
thus be concluded that the study met its objectives.
325
REFERENCES
Abdul Hamid, A. (2004). Competencies mapping and certification program
for human resource practitioners, Paper presented at 3rd STCEX, Riyadh, KSA.
Ackermann, Karl-Friedrich (1986). A contingency model of HRM strategy:
Empirical research findings reconsidered, 6th Management Forum, pp. 65-93.
Agnes, Michael (Eds.). (1996). Webster’s New World Dictionary and Thesaurus.
Ohio: Simon & Schuster Inc..
Agut S., Grav R., & Peiro, J. M. (2003). Individual and Contextual influences on
managerial competency needs. Journal of Management Development, Vol. 22,
No. 10, pp. 906-918.
Ahmad, S. (1993). Malaysia’s Vision 2020: Understanding the concept, implications
and challenges. Malaysia: Pelanduk Publications (M) Sdn. Bhd..
Akaike, H. (1987). "Factor analysis and AIC," Psychometrika, Vol. 52, No.3, pp.
317-332.
Albanese, R. (1989). Competency-based management education. Journal of
Management Development, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 67-76.
Albers-Mohrman, S., & E. Lawler (1997). Transforming the Human Resources
Function. In D. Ulrich, M. Losey, & G. Lake (Eds.), Tomorrow’s HR
management. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
American Society for Training and Development/Department of Labour
(ASTD/DOL), (1988). Workplace basics: The skills employers want, Alexandria:
ASTD.
326
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1982). “Some methods for respecifying
measurement models to obtain unidimensional construct measurement.” Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. 19, pp. 453-460.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). “Structural equation modeling in practice:
A review and recommended two-step approach.” Psychological Bulletin, Vol.
103, No. 3, pp. 411-423.
Arbuckle, J. L., & Wothke, W. (1995). AMOS 4.0 user’s guide. United States of
America: Smallwaters Corporation.
Arbuckle, J. L. & Wothke, W. (1999). AMOS 4.0 user’s guide. Chicago, JL:
Smallwaters Corporation.
Arbuckle, J. L. (2008). AMOS 17 user’s guide. Chicago: SPSS Inc..
Armstrong, M. (2001). A handbook of human resource management practice. London:
Kogan Page.
Armstrong, M. (1992). Human resource management: Strategy and action. London:
Kogan Page.
Armstrong, A. (2002). Ethics in HR. Paper presented to the Quorum United Seminar,
HR Management 2002 National Conference, November 28-29, held at the Park
Royal, Melbourne.
Armstrong, J. Scoot & Overton, Terry, S. (1977). Estimating Non- response Bias in
Mail Surveys. Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 14, pp. 396-402.
Asma, A. (1996). Going glocal: Cultural dimensions in Malaysian
management. Kuala Lumpur: Malaysian Institute of Management, p. 157.
Bagozzi, Richard P., & Youjae Yi (1988). "On the evaluation of structural equation
models." Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 16 (Spring), pp. 74-
94.
327
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1989). “On the use of structural equation models in
experimental designs.” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 26, pp. 271-284.
Bank Negara Malaysia (2007). Bank Negara Malaysia Annual Report 2007. Retrieved
March 23, 2009, from
http://www.bnm.gov.my/view.php?dbIndex=08website_id=18id=655
Becker (1993). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis, with special
reference to education (3rd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Becker, B. E., M. A. Huselid, P. S. Pickus & M. F. Spratt (1997). Human resources as
a source of shareholder value: Research and recommendations. In D. Ulrich, M.
Losey, & G. Lake (Eds.), Tomorrow’s HR management. New York: John Wiley
& Sons.
Becker, B. E., & Huselid, M. A. (1998). High performance work systems and firm
performance. A synthesis of research and managerial implications. Research in
Personnel and Human Resource Management, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 53-101.
Becker, B. Huselid, M., & Ulrich, D. (2002). The HR scorecard: Linking people,
strategy and performance. Boston: Harvard Business School.
Becker, Brian E., & Huselid, Mark A. (2006). Strategic Human Resources
Management: Where do we go from here? Journal of Management, Vol. 32, No.
6, pp. 898-925.
Beer, M., Spector, B., Lawrence, P., Mills, Q., & Walton, R. (1984). Managing human
assets. New York, NY: Free Press.
Beer, M., Laurence, P. R., Mills, Q. N., & Walton, R. E. (1985). Human resource
management. New York: Free Press.
Bennet R. (1992). Dictionary of personnel & human resources management. London:
Pitman Publishing.
328
Bentler, P. M. (1978). The interdependence of theory, methodology, and empirical
data: Causal modeling as an approach to construct validation. In D. B. Kandel
(Ed.), Longitudinal research on drug use: Empirical findings and methodological
issues (pp. 267-302). New York: Wiley.
Bentler, P. M. (1990). ESQ: Structural equation program manual. Los Angeles:
BMDP Statistical Software.
Bentler, P. M. (1993). EQS structural equations program manual, Multivariate
Software, Encino, CA.
Bentler, P. M. (1995). On the fit models to covariances and methodology.
Psychological Bulletin, 112, pp. 400-404.
Berge, Zane, de Verniel, Marie, Berge, Nancy, Davis, Linda & Smith, Donna (2002).
The increasing scope of training and development competency. An International
Journal, Vol. 9, No.1, UK: MCB UP Limited, pp. 43-61.
Bernthal, Paul R., Colteryahn, Karen, Davis, Patty, Naughton, Jennifer, Rothwell
William T., & Wellins, Rich (2004). ASTD competency study: Mapping the
future. Virginia: ASTD Press.
Blancero, Donna, Boroski, John & Dyer, Lee (1995). Transforming human resource
organisations: A field study of future competency requirements, Center for
Advanced Human Resource Studies. Retrieved October 6, 2009 from
http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cahrswp/218.
Boam, R., & Sparrow, P (1992). Designing and achieving competency: A competency-
based approach to developing people and organisations. New York: The
McGraw-Hill Training Series.
Bogardus, Anne M. (2004). PHR/SPHR: Professional in Human Resources
Certification. California: Sybex, Inc..
329
Bollen, Kenneth A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York:
John Wiley & Sons Inc..
Bollen, K. A. (1990). Overall fit in covariance structure models. Two types of sample
size effects. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), pp. 256-259.
Bontis, N. Dragonetti, N.C., Jacobsen, K., & Roos, G. (1999). The Knowledge
Toolbox: A Review of the Tools Available to Measure and Manage Intangible
Resources, European Management Journal, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 391-402.
Boroski, J., Blancero, D., & Dyer, L. (1994). Competency implications of changing
human resource roles. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, School of Industrial and
Labor Relations, Center for Advanced Human Resource Studies. Retrieved
October 27, 2009, from http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cahrswp/256
Boselie, Paul & Paauwe, Jaap (2005). Human resource function competencies in
European companies. Personnel Review, Vol. 34, No. 5, pp. 550-566.
Boudreau, J., & Ramstad, P. M. (2003). From professional business partner to
strategic talent leader: What's next for human resource management. Ithaca, NY:
Cornell Center for Advanced Human Resource Studies.
Boudreau, J., & Ramstad, P. M. (2007). Beyond HR: The new science of human
capital. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Bowden, J. A., & Masters, G. N. (1993). Implications for higher education of a
competency-based approach to education and training. Canberra: Australian
Government Publishing Service.
Boxall P., & Dowling, P. J. (1990). Human Resource management and the industrial
relations. Tradition, labour and industry, Vol. 3, pp. 27-42.
Boyatzis, R. E. (1982). The competent manager: A model for effective performance.
New York: John Wiley & Sons.
330
Brewster, Chris (1995). Towards a “European” model of human resource
management. Journal of International Business Studies.
Brewster C., Farndale, Elaine & Ommeren, Jos van (2000). HR Competencies and
Professional Standards. World Federation of Personnel Management
Associations, CIPD, UK.
Brockbank, Wayne, Ulrich, David, Johnson, Dani, Sandholtz, Kurt & Younger, Jon
(2002). The New HR Agenda: HRCS Executive Summary. University of Michigan
Business School, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Brockbank, W., & Ulrich D. (2003). Competencies of new HR. Arlington, VA: Society
of Human Resource Management.
Brown, Donald R., & Harvey, Don (2006). An experiential approach to organisation
development (7th ed.). New Jersey, USA: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Brown, M. P., Sturman, M. C., & Simmering, M. J. (2003). Compensation policy and
organisational performance: The efficiency, operational and financial implications
of pay levels and pay structure. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 46, pp.
752-762.
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K.
A. Bollen & J. Scott Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models, Newbury
Park, CA: Sage, pp. 136-162.
Bucknall, Hugh & Ohtaki, Reiji (2005). Mastering business in Asia: Human resource
management. Singapore: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 36-52.
Budhwar, Pawan, S. & Debrah, Yaw, A. (2001). Human resource management in
developing countries. London: Routledge.
Butteriss, Margaret (1998). Re-inventing HR: Changing roles to create the high-
performance organizations. Canada: John Wiley & Sons Canada Limited.
331
Burke, R. T., & Cooper, C. L (2004). Leading in turbulent times. Oxford: Blackwell
Publishers Inc..
Byars, Lloyd L., & Rue, Leslie W. (2003). Human resource management (7th ed.).
New York: McGraw-Hill, p. 409.
Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concept
application and programming. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Byrne, B. M. (2006). Structural equation modeling with EQS: Basic concepts,
applications, and programming (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Carmines, Edward G., & McIver, John P. (1981). "Analysing Models with
Unobserved Variables: Analysis of Covariance Structures." In George W.
Bohrnstedt & Edgar F. Borgatta (Eds.), Social measurement: Current issues.
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, pp. 65-115.
Carrol, S. J. (1991). The new HRM roles, responsibilities and structures. In Schuler,
R. S. (Ed.), Managing Human Resources in the Information Age, Washington,
DC: Bureau of National Affairs, pp. 204-226.
Cavanna, R. Y., Delahaye, B. L., & Sekaran, U. (2000). Applied business research:
Qualitative and quantitative methods. Singapore: John Wiley and Sons Ltd..
Charan, Ram, Drotter, Stephen, Noel, James (2001). The leadership pipeline: How to
build the leadership – powered company. San Francisco, CA, USA: John Wiley
& Sons.
Chen, Angela Shin-yih, Bian, Min-dau & Hom, Yi-ming (2005). Taiwan HRD
Practitioner Competencies: An application of the ASTD WLP Competency
model. International Journal of Training and Development, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 21-
32.
332
Chin, W. W. (1998). “The Partial Least Squares Approach for Structural Equation
Modeling.” In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.). Modern Methods for Business Research,
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 295-336.
Chiu, R. (1999). Employee involvement in total quality management program:
Problems in Chinese firms in Hong Kong. Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 14,
pp. 8-11.
Choi, S. L., & Wan Khairuzzaman Wan Ismail (2008). Understanding the
Relationships of HR Competencies and Roles of Malaysian Human Resource
Professionals. European Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 88-103.
Chowdhury, Subir (2002). The talent era: Achieving a high return on talent. New
Jersey, USA: Prentice-Hall Inc..
Chua, Elizabeth Martin (2009). Maximizing human capital in Asia: From the inside
out. Singapore: John Wiley & Sons (Asia).
CIPD (2009). Succession Planning. Retrieved on November 12, 2009 from
http://www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/hrpract/general/successplan.htm
Cohen, Jacob & Patricia, Cohen (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlational
analysis for the behavioral science (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Cohen, Jacob, Cohen, Patricia, West Stephen G., & Aiken, Leona S. (2003). Applied
multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioural sciences (3rd ed.).
New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Compton, R. (2009). Towards and Integrated Model of Strategic Human Resource
Management – An Australian Case Study, Research and Practice in Human
Resource Management, 17(2), pp. 81-93.
Cooper, Kenneth Carlton (2000). Effective competency modeling & reporting.
AMACOM.
333
Cooper, Donald R., & Schindler, Pamela S. (2003). Business research methods (8th
ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
Comrey, A. L., & Lee, H. B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis (2nd ed.). New
Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Csoka, L., & Hackett, B. (1998). Transforming the HR function for global business
success (Report No. 1209- 98-RR). Conference Board, New York.
Dare, Donna E., & Leach, James A. (1999). Preparing Tomorrow’s HRD
Professionals: Perceived Relevance of the 1989 Competency Model. Journal of
Vocational and Technical Education, Vol.15, No. 2.
Davenport Thomas O. (1999). Human capital: What it is and why invest it. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Dentzin, N.K. (1970). The Research Act in Sociology. Chicago: Aldine.
Dentzin, N.K. (1978). Sociological Methods: A Source book (2nd ed.). McGraw Hill.
DeSimone, R. L., Werner, J. M., & Harris, D. M. (2002). Human resource
development (3rd ed.). Ohio: Southwestern.
Dictionary of Human Resources and Personnel Management (3rd ed.) (2006). A & C
Black Publishers.
Divanna, Joseph A., & Rogers, Jay (2005). The new asset on the balance sheet. New
York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Draganidis F., & Mentzas G. (2006). Competency Based Management: A Review of
Systems and Approaches. Information Management and Computer Security, Vol.
14, No. 1, pp. 51-64.
Dubois, D. (1998). The competency case book. Amherst, MA: HRD Press.
Economic Report 2008/2009. (2008, August, 30), New Straits Times, pp. 2-5.
334
Edvinsson L., & Malone, M. S. (1997). Intellectual capital: Realising your company’s
true value by finding its hidden brainpower. New York: Harper Business.
Engle, A. D., M. E. Mendenhall, R. L. Powers, & Y. Stedham. (2001).
Conceptualising the Global Competency Cube: A Transnational Model of Human
Resource. Journal of European Industrial Training, Vol. 25, No. 7.
Employment Occupational Standards Council (EOSC), (1994).
Competencies/Assessment, Level 4 Qualification in Personnel, UK.
Fabrigar, Leandre R., MacCallum, Robert C., Wegener, Duane T., & Strahn, Erin J.
(1999). Evaluating the Use of Exploratory Factor Analysis in Psychological
Research. Psychological Methods, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 272-299.
Federation of Malaysian Manufacturers (FMM), (2007). Directory of Malaysian
Industries (38th ed.). Subang Jaya, Selangor: Percetakan Okid Sdn. Bhd..
Ferdinand, A. (2000). Structural Equation Model Dalam Penelitian Manajemen
Dasar-Dasar Permodelan. Semarang: Universitas Dipenogoro Publisher.
Ferdinand, A. (2002). Struktural equation modelling dalam penelitian manajemen -
aplikasi model-model rumit dalam penelitian untuk thesis magister & thesis
doctor. Semarang, Indonesia: Seri Pustaka Kunci 03/2002.
Ferris, G. R., Hochwarter, W. A., Buckley, M. R., Harrell-Cook, G., & Frink, D. S.
(1999). Human resources management: Some new directions, Journal of
Management, Vol. 25, pp. 385-415.
Fischer, Andre Luiz & Albuquerque, Lindolfo Galvao (2005). Trends of the human
resources management model in Brazilian Companies: A forecast according to
opinion leaders from the area. The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, Vol. 16, No. 7, pp. 1211-1227.
335
Fitz-enz, Jac (2000). The ROI of human capital: Measuring the economic value of
employee performance. New York: AMACOM.
Fitz-enz, Jac & Phillips, Jack J. (1998). A new vision for human resources. Crisp
Learning.
Flamholtz, Eric (2005). Human Resource Accounting, Human Capital Management,
and the Bottom Line. In D. Ulrich, M. Losey, & G. Lake (Eds.), Tomorrow’s HR
management. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Fombrun, C., Tichy, N. M., & Devanna, M. A. (1984). Strategic human resource
management. London: John Wiley & Sons.
Fornell, C. (1992). A National Customer Satisfaction Barometer. The Swedish
Experience. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56, pp. 6-21.
Fornell, C. (1999). Issues in the application of covariance structure analysis: A
comment, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 443-448.
Fornell, C., & Larcker D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with
unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research,
Vol. 18, pp. 39-50.
Fowler F. J. Jr. (2002). Survey research methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Galang, Maria Carmen (2008). Best practices in HRM: Convergence in Beliefs across
nine countries. International Journal of Organisational Behaviour, Vol. 13, No. 1,
Jan-June 2008.
Garret –Owens, Sabrina, Gurgevich, Pamela, Katz, Jan, Mulay, Barbara, Deborah,
Nystrom & William, Eric (2003). Human Resources Competency Model for
Human Resources Professionals at the University of Michigan, Human Resource
336
Academy. Retrieved January 30, 2008, from
http://www.hr.umich.edu/hra/HRA.pdf.
Gefen, David, Straub, Detmar W., & Boudreau Marie-Claude (2000). “Structural
Equation Modeling Techniques and Regression: Guidelines for Research
Practice,” Communications of the Association for Information Systems, Vol. 4,
Article 7.
Gerbing, D. W., & Anderson, J. C. (1988). "An updated paradigm for scale
development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment." Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. 25, pp. 186-192.
Gerbing, D. W., & Jöreskog, G. (1996). Viability of Exploratory Factor Analysis as a
Precursor to Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Structural Equation Modeling, Vol. 3,
No. 1, pp. 62-72.
Gerhart, Barry, Wright, Patrick M., & McMahan, Gary C. (2000). Measurement error
in research on the human resource and performance relationship: further evidence
and analysis. Personal Psychology, Vol. 53, No. 4, pp: 855-872.
Goldstein, H. (1995). Multilevel statistical models (2nd ed.). London: Edward Arnold.
Goleman D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.
Graddick-Weir & Mirian M (2005). Life after Outsourcing: Lessons Learned and the
Role of Human Resources as a Strategic Business Partner. In D. Ulrich, M. Losey,
and G. Lake (Eds.). Tomorrow’s HR management. New York: John Wiley &
Sons.
Gray, L. (1999). New Zealand HRD Practitioner Competencies: Application of the
ASTD Competency Model. International Journal of Human Resource
Management Vol. 10, No. 6, pp. 1046-1059.
337
Grzeda M. M. (2004). “In Competence we trust? Addressing conceptual ambiguity.”
Journal of Management Development, Vol. 24, pp. 530-545.
Guest, D. (1987). Human resource management and industrial relations. Journal of
Management Studies, Vol. 24, No. 5, pp. 503-521.
Guest, D. E. (1999). "Human resource management – the workers' verdict." Human
Resource Management Journal, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp. 5-26.
Hager, P, Athanasou & J., Gonczi, A. (1994). Assessment technical manual. Canberra:
AGPS.
Hair, J. F., William, C. B., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R.L. (2001).
Multivariate data analysis (3rd ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc..
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate data
analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Hair, J. F., Samuel, H. M., & Page, M. (2007). Research methods for business.
England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd..
Hair J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black W. C. (1998). Multivariate data
analysis with readings (5th ed.). Eaglewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Hair, Joseph F. Jr., Black, William C., Babin Berry J., & Anderson Rolph E. (2009).
Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Hamner, Marvine. (2005). “The importance and challenges of succession planning.”
26th American Society for Engineering Management (ASEM) National
Conference Proceedings, October 2005. Retrieved October 21, 2009, from
http://www.asem.org/conferences/2005conferenceproceedings/179.pdf
Heffernan, M., & Flood, P. (2000). An exploration of relationships between the
adoption of managerial competencies, organisational characteristics, human
338
resource sophistication and performance in Irish organisations. Journal of
European Industrial Training, Vol. 24, No. 2-4, pp. 128-136.
Hendry, C., & Pettigrew, A. (1990). Human Resource Management an agenda for the
1990s. International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 1, pp. 17-25.
Heneman, R. L. Eskew, D., & Fox, J. (1998). Using employee attitudes to evaluate a
new incentive program. Compensation & Benefits Review, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 40-
44.
Hills, Angela. (2009). Succession planning – or smart talent management? Industrial
and Commercial Training, Vol. 41, No. 1, pp.3-8.
Hirano, A. (1991). Comment. In S. Yamashita (Ed.), Transfer of Japanese technology
and management to the ASEAN countries, Tokyo, Japan: University of Tokyo
Press. Retrieved June 12, 2008, from
http://rphrm.curtin.edu.au/2005/issue2/malaysia.html
Hoelter, J. W. (1983), "The Analysis of Covariance Structures: Goodness-of-Fit
Indices," Sociological Methods and Research, Vol. 11, pp. 325-344.
Hoffmann, T., (1999). The meanings of competency. Journal of European Industrial
Training, Vol. 23, No. 6, pp. 275-285.
Hofstede, Geert (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviours,
institutions and organisations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Hofstede, Geert & Hofstede, Gert Jan (2005). Culture and organisations: Software of
the mind (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Hondeghem, A. (2002). The State of the Art in the Public Sector? In S. Horton (Ed.).
Competency Management in the Public Sector. IOS Press, pp. 173-180.
339
Horton, Sylvia (2000). Introduction – the competency movement: its origins and
impact on the public sector. International Journal of Public Sector Management,
Vol. 13 Issue: 4.
Human Resource Certification Institute (HRCI), (2003). (HRCI Certification Guide),
Virginia, USA.
Human Resources Development Council (HRDC), (2006). Kuala Lumpur. Malaysia.
Hsu, Yu-ru, & Seat, Mike (2000). A study of HRM and recruitment and selection
policies and practices in Taiwan. The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 413-415.
Ilham, S. (2007). Roles of public sector managers in personal development in West
Sumatera provincial government in Indonesia. Unpublished dissertation,
Universiti Utara Malaysia.
Imam, G. (2003). Model Persamaan Struktural - Konsep dan Aplikasi dengan
Program AMOS Ver. 5.0. Semarang, Indonesia: Badan Penerbit Universitas
Dipenogoro.
International Public Management Association for Human Resources (IPMA), (2005).
IPMA-HR Competency Model, Virginia, USA. Retrieved September 12, 2007,
from http://www.ipma-hr.org/content.cfm?pageid=278.
Jaccard, J., & Wan, C. K. (1996). LISREL approaches to interaction effects in multiple
regression. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Jackson, S. E., & Schuler, R.S. (2003). Managing human resources through strategic
partnerships (8th ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western.
Järvalt, Jane & Veisson, Mariann (2002). Leadership and competency management in
Estonian senior civil service. Retrieved January 15, 2008, from
http://soc.kuleuven.be/io/egpa/HRMbern/Jarvalt & Veisson.pdf.
340
Jöreskog, K., (1993). LISREL 8 User's Reference Guide. Chicago: Scientific Software
International.
Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1989). LISREL 7: A guide to program and
applications (2nd ed.). Chicago: SPSS.
Jöreskog, K.G., & Sörbom, D. (1993), LISREL 8: Structural Equation Modeling with
the SIMPLIS Command Language, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.
Jöreskog, K. G., & Yang, F. (1996). Non-linear structural equation model: The
Kenny-Judd Model with Interaction Effects. Mhwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Jöreskog K.G., & Lopez, J. (1999). Non-linear structural equation model: The Kenny-
Judd Model with Interaction Effects. Thousand Oaks: CA: Sage-Publication.
Juhary, A., & Ilham, S. (2008). The mediating effect of good governance on
the relationship between managerial roles and personal development: A structural
equation modeling (SEM) approach. Journal of US-China Public Administration,
Vol. 5, No. 6, pp. 1-15.
Junaidah, K. (2007). Examining Human Resource Managers’ Competencies. Journal
of Malaysian Institute of Management, Vol. 42, No. 1, pp. 123-141.
Kanungo, R. N. & S. Misra (1992). Managerial resourcefulness: A reconceptualization
of management skills. Human Relations, Vol. 45, pp. 1311-1332.
Kaplan, R. S. (2000). “Having trouble with your strategy? Then map it.” Harvard
Business Review (September-October): pp. 167-176.
Kearns, P. (2001). Generic skills for the new economy: A review of research relating
to generic skills, NCVER, Adelaide.
Kenton, Barbara & Yarnall, Jane (2005). HR-the business partner: shaping a new
direction. UK: Butterworth Heinemann.
341
Keppel G. (1991). Design and Analysis: A Researcher's Handbook. (3rd ed.).
Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Ker�ien�, Kristina & Savaneviciene, Asta (2005). Defining and understanding
organisation multicultural competence. Engineering Economics, Vol. 42, No. 2.
Khatri, N. (1999). Emerging issues in Strategic HRM in Singapore. International
Journal of Manpower, Vol. 20, No. 8, pp. 516-529.
Kline, P. (1993). An easy guide to factor analysis. New York: Routledge.
Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New
York: Guildford Press.
Kline, Rex B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd
ed.). New York: Guildford Publications Inc..
Laabs, J. (1996). Downshiffers. Personnel Journal, pp. 62 -76.
Laming, Michael S. (1995). The General Electric Model, Presentation at the National
Academy of Public Administration. New HRM Competencies Workshop.
Lawson, T., & Limbrick, V. (1996). Critical competencies and developmental
experiences for top HR executives. Human Resource Management, Vol. 35, No.
2, pp. 67-85.
Legge, K. (1978). Power, innovation and problem-solving in personnel management.
London: McGraw-Hill.
Lengnick-Hall, Mark L., & Lengnick-Hall, Cynthia (2003). Human resource
management in the knowledge economy (1st ed.). San Francisco, California, USA:
Berret-Koehler Publications.
Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of
Psychology, No. 140.
Long, J. (1983). Confirmatory factor analysis.California: Sage University Press.
342
Lucia, Anntoinette D., & Lapsinger, Richard (1999). The art and science of
competency models. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.
MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). “Power analysis and
determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling,” Psychological
Methods, (1), pp. 130-149.
Maimunah, A. (1997). Human resource management (2nd ed.). Shah Alam:
Penerbit Fajar Bakti.
Malhi, Singh R. (2006). Enhancing managerial performance. Kuala Lumpur: TQM
Consultants Sdn. Bhd..
Mallery, D. (2005). SPSS for windows step by step: A simple guide and reference.
Boston, US: Pearson Education, Inc..
Mansfield, R. S. (1996). Building competency models, Human Resource Management,
Vol. 35, p. 718.
Mathis, Robert L., & Jackson, John H. (2002). Human resource management:
Essential perspectives (2nd ed.). South Western Thomas Learning.
McClelland, D. C. (1973). Testing for competence rather than for intelligence.
American Psychologist, Vol. 28, pp. 1-14.
Mc Daniel, Debra L. (1998). A Competency Model for Human Resources. In Dubois,
David (Eds.), The competency case book. Massachusetts: HRD Press.
Mc Dermeit, Melissa, Funk, Rodney, Foss, Mark, & Dennis, Michael (2000).
Exploratory factor analysis, Illinois, USA. Retrieved February 8, 2009, from
www.chestnut.org..
McLagan, P. (1996). Competency Models. Training and Development, Vol. 50, pp.
60-64.
343
McLagan, P.A. (1997). Competencies: The Next Generation. Training and
Development, Vol. 51, No. 5, pp. 40-47.
McLagan, P. A. (1989). “Models for HRD Practice.” Training and Development
Journal, Vol. 43, No. 9, pp. 49-59.
McLagan, P., & Suhadolnik, D. (1989). Models for HRD practice: The research.
Alexandria: American Society for Training and Development.
Meetoo, Danny & Temple, Bogusia (2003). Issues in Multi-Method Research:
Constructing Self Care, International Journal of Qualitative Methods,Vol. 2,
No.3, UK.
Mohd. Khairuddin, H. (2007). SMEs in Malaysia: A brief handbook. Petaling Jaya:
August Publishing Sdn. Bhd..
Mondy, Wayne R. (2008). Human resource management (10th ed.). New Jersey:
Pearson Prentice Hall, pp. 13-39.
Monks, K. (1993). “Careers in personnel management”, Personnel Review, Vol. 22,
pp. 55-66.
Mustafa M. (1999). Organisational excellence through the development of core
competencies, Paper presented at the Fourth Public Administration National
Conference, Kuala Lumpur.
Nankervis, Alan, R., Compton, Robert, L., & McCarthy, Terence, E. (1999). Strategic
human resource management (3rd ed.). Nelson Australia Pty Limited, pp. 16-17.
National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA), (1996). A Guide for Effective
Strategic Management of Human Resources, Washington, DC.
National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER), (2000). Survey of
employer views on vocational education and training, NCVER, Adelaide,
Australia.
344
National Skills Task Force (NSTF), (2000). Skills for all: Proposal for a National
Skills Agenda, Sheffield, UK.
Nelson, C., N. Lurie, J. Wasserman, & S. Zakowski (2007). Conceptualising and
defining public health emergency preparedness. American Journal of Public
Health, Vol. 97 (Suppl 1), pp. 9-11.
Neuman, Lawrence W. (2006). Social research methods (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson
Education Group, pp. 6-210.
Nik Kamariah, N. M., & Ilham, S. (2008). The Integration of Technology Acceptance
Model and Technology of Purchasing Behaviour (A Structural Equation Modeling
Approach). Proceeding Asia Pacific Conference on Management of Technology
and Technology Entrepreneurship, October, 29, 2008, Melaka: Malaysia.
Noe, R. A., Hollenbeck, J. R., Gerhart, B., & Wright (2000). Human resource
management. Singapore: McGraw-Hill.
Nokelainen, P. (1999). Introduction to structural equation modeling. Hämeenlinna:
RCVE.
North Carolina State University (NCSU), (1996). Structural equation modeling, pp. 1-
34. Retrieved February 10, 2009, from
http://faculty.chass.ncsu.edu/garson/PA765/structur.htm.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978) Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), (2001). The Well-
Being of Nations: The role of human social capital, p. 18.
Paauwe, J. (2004). HRM and Performance: Achieving long-term viability. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Palan R. (2003). Competency management: A practitioner’s guide. SMR Sdn. Bhd.
345
Park, Hyeon Jeong, Gardner, Timothy M., Wright, & Patrick M. (2004). HR practices
or HR capabilities: which matters? Insights from the Asia Pacific region.
[Electronic version]. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 42, No. 3,
pp. 260-273.
Parry, S. B. (1998). Just what is a competency? (And why should you care?). Training,
Vol. 35, No.6, pp. 58-64.
Pepitone, James S., (2000). Human performance consulting. Houston, Texas: Gulf
Publishing Company.
Pfeffer, J. (1994). Competitive advantage through people. Boston, MA: Harvard
Business School Press.
Pfeffer, J. (1998). The human equation: Building profits by putting people first.
Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Phillips, Jack J. (2005). Investing in your company’s human capital. New York:
AMACOM, p. 1.
Pietersen, F. L., & Engelbrecht, A. S. (2005). The strategic partnership role of senior
Human Resource managers in South African organisations. In the Management
Dynamics: Southern African Institute For Management Scientists. 14(4), 47-58.
Retrieved February, 23, 2009 from
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa5465/is_200510/ai_n21386651/?tag=conte
nt;col1.
Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, Gary (1990). The Core Competence of the Corporation.
Harvard Business Review (May – June, 1990), pp. 70-91.
PricewaterHouseCoopers (PwC), (2005). Survey of Global HR Challenges: Yesterday,
today and tomorrow. (Study conducted by Pricewaterhouse Coopers on behalf of
346
the World Federation of Personnel Management Associations. (WFPMA)).
Retrieved October 23, 2009 from
http://www.wfpma.com/PDFs/hrglobalchallenges.pdf.
Ramlall S. J. (2006). Identifying and understanding HR competencies and their
relationship to organisational practices. Applied H.R.M. Research, Vol. 11, No. 1,
pp. 27-38.
Roberts, G. (1997). Recruitment and selection: A competency approach. London:
Institute of Personnel Development.
Robinson, Dana Gaines & Robinson, James C. (2004). Strategic business partner (1st
ed.). San Francisco: Berret-Koehler Publishers Inc..
Rothwell, William J., Sanders, Echan S. & Soper Jeffrey G., (Ed.) (1999). ASTD
model for workplace learning and performance: Roles, competencies and outputs.
ASTD, AVA: USA, pp. 3-10.
Rothwell, William J., Hohne, Coralyn K., & King, Stephen B. (2007). Human
performance improvement (2nd ed.). Massachusetts, USA: Butterworth-
Heinemann Publication.
Rothwell, W. J. (2005). Effective succession planning: Ensuring continuity and
building talent from within (3rd ed.). American Management Association
(AMACOM).
Rowley, C. & Benson, J. (2004). The management of human resources in the Asia
Pacific Region: Convergence reconsidered. London: Frank Cass.
Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), (1997). Core competencies. Retrieved July
3, 2008, from http://www.rcmp-learning.org/docs/ecdd1166.htm..
Rumsey, D. (1994). Assessment practical guide. Canberra: AGPS.
Rutherford, P (1995). Competency based assessment. Melbourne: Pitman.
347
Safety, Health & Environment Directory (2003). National Institute of Occupational
Safety and Health (NIOSH), Ministry of Human Resources, Malaysia.
Santo, M. (1998). “How to recruit and retain top-level talent”, Agency sales magazine,
Vol. 28, No.5, pp. 39-41.
Scarborough, H., & Elias, I. (2002). Evaluating human capital. CIPD, London.
Schoonover S. (1997). New HR skills needed for a new work environment.
Employment Relation Today, Autumn: pp. 21-32.
Schoonover, S. C. (1998). Human resource competencies for the year 2000. US:
SHRM Foundation.
Schoonover, S. C. (2003). Human resource competencies for the new century.
Falmouth, MA: Schoonover Associates.
Schuler, R. S., & Jackson, S. E. (1987). Organizational strategy and organizational
level as determinants of Human Resource Management practices, Human
Resource Planning, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 125-142.
Schultz, Theodore, W. (1981). Investing in people: The economics of population
quality. California: University of California Press.
Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (1996). A beginner’s guide to structural equation
modeling. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Schumacker, R., & Lomax R. (2004). A beginner’s guide to structural equation
modeling. New York: Erlbaum Mahwah.
Schweyer, Allan (2004). Talent management systems: Best practices in technology
solutions for recruitment, retention and workforce planning. Canada: John Wiley
& Sons.
Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills (SCANS), (1991). What work
requires from Schools, Department of Labor, Washington D.C.
348
Sekaran, Uma (2003). Research methods for business: A skill building approach (4th
ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Sekaran, Uma (2006). Research methods for business: A skill building approach (4th
ed.). New Delhi: Wiley India Pvt. Ltd.
Sekaran, Uma (2008). Research methods for business: A skill building approach (4th
Rev. ed.). New Delhi: Wiley India Pvt. Ltd.
Selmer, Chiu & Randy K. (2004). Developing Human Competencies: The Hong Kong
Case, BRC Papers on Human Resource Studies, Hong Kong Baptist University.
RetrievedFebruary 18, 2009 from
http://net.2hkbv.edu.hk/ brc/HRSWP200403.PDF.
Selznick, Philip (1957). Leadership in administration. New York: Harper & Row.
Seymour, F. (2008). “Conservation, Displacement, and Conservation.” In Michael
Cernea & Hari Mohan Mathur (Eds.), Can compensation prevent
impoverishment? New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Shandler, Donald (2000). Competency and the learning organization. Canada: Crisp
Learning.
Shippman, J. S., Ash, R. A., Battista, M. Carr, L., Eyde, L. D., Hesketh, B., Kehoe, J.
Pearlman, K., & Sanchez, J. I. (2000). The practice of competency modeling,
Personnel Psychology, Vol. 53, pp. 703-740.
SMI Malaysia – Web Guide 2006, SMI association of Malaysia (1st ed.). Subang Jaya,
Selangor, Malaysia.
Smilansky, Jonathan. (2006). Developing executive talent: Best practices from global
leaders. England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd..
Smilansky, Jonathan (1997). The new HR. London: International Thomas Business
Press, pp. 1-3.
349
Soanes, Catherine & Stevenson, Angus (Eds.), (2004). Concise Oxford English
dictionary (11th ed.). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), (2002). The Future of HR
Profession. Retrieved October 23, 2009 from
http://www.shrm.org/about/pressroom/Documents/future_of_hr.pdf
Society for Human Resources Management (SHRM), (2008). Human Resource
Strategy: SHRM Foundation’s Effective Practice Guidelines Series. Retrieved
October 2, 2009 from
http://www.shrm.org/about/foundation/products/Documents/HRStrategyEPG-
Final Online.pdf
Spanyi, Andrew (2009). Leading Process Change, Business Process Trends. Retrieved
October 25, 2009 from http://www.businessprocesstrends.com/publicationfiles
/09%2D09%2DART%2DLeading%20Process%20Change%2DSpanyi%2Epdf.
Sparrow, P., Schuler, R. & Jackson, S. (1994). Convergence and divergence: Human
resource practices and policies for competitive advantage worldwide, Journal of
Human Resource Management, 5(2), pp. 267-299.
Spector, P. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application, assessment causes and
consequences. CA: SAGE Publications, Inc..
Spencer, Lyle M., & Spencer, Signe M. (1993). Competence at work: Models for
superior performance. USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc..
Stafford, John (2008). Australian Master Human Resources Guide (6th ed.). CCH
Australia Ltd., Mc Pherson’s Printing Group.
Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval
estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioural Research, p. 25.
350
Sternberg, R., & Kolligian, J. (1990). Competence considered. New Haven, CT: Yale
University Press.
Storey, J. (1989). New perspectives in human resource management. London:
Routledge.
Strebler, M. T., M. Thomson & P., Heron (1997). Skills, competencies and gender:
Issues for pay and training. Brighton: Institute for Employment Studies, Report
333.
Tabachnick, Barbara, G., & Fidell, Linda S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th
ed.). Boston: Pearson Education Inc..
Tabachnick, B. G., & L. S. Fidell. (1996). Using multivariate statistics. (3rd ed.). New
York: HarperCollins College Publishers.
Tacq J. (1997). Multivariate analysis techniques in social science research. London,
England: Sage Publications, pp. 183-206.
The Accounting For People Task Force (2003). Accounting for People, DTI, London.
Tichy, N., Fombrun, C. & Devanna, M. A. (1982). “Strategic human resource
management”, Sloan Management Review, Winter: pp. 47-61.
Torrington, Derek, Hall, Laura & Taylor, Stephen (2005). Human resource
management (6th ed.). London: Prentice Hall.
Tyler, Kathryn (2006, August). HR Magazine: HR in Manufacturing. Vol. 51, No. 8.
Retrieved October 22, 2009 from
http://www.shrm.org/Publications/hrmagazine/EditorialContent/Pages/0806
cover.aspx.
Tyson, S (1979). The study of personnel management as an occupation, using
repertory grid. Personnel Management, Vol. 8, pp. 34-39.
351
Tyson, S., & Fell, A. (1986). Evaluating the personnel function. London: Hutchinson
Education.
Tyson, S. (1987). The management of the personnel function. Journal of Management
Studies, Vol. 24, pp. 523-532.
Tyson, Shaun (1995). Human resource strategy: Towards a general theory of human
resource management.Great Britain: Pitman Publishing.
Ulrich, D. (1997). Human resource champions. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School
Press.
Ulrich, Dave (1999). Result based leadership. Harvard Business School Press.
Ulrich, D., & R. W., Eichinger (1998). Delivering HR with an attitude. HR Magazine.
Ulrich, D., & Beatty, D. (2001). From Partners to Players: Extending the HR Playing
Field. Human Resource Management, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 293-308.
Ulrich, D., Brockbank, W., Yeung, A. & Lake, D. (1995). Human resource
competencies: an empirical assessment, Human Resource Management, Vol. 34,
No. 4, Winter, pp. 473-495.
Ulrich, Dave & Brockbank, Wayne (2005). The HR value proposition. USA: Harvard
Business School Press.
Ulrich, Dave, Brockbank, Wayne, Johnson, Dani & Younger, Jon (2008). HR
competencies: Mastery in the intersection of people and business. Alexandria,
Virginia, USA: SHRM.
Ulrich, Dave, Allen, Justin, Brockbank, Wayne, Younger, Jon, & Nyman, Mark
(2009). HR Transformation: Building human resources from the outside in. New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Vogt, W. P. (1999). Dictionary of statistics & methodology: A nontechnical guide for
the social sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
352
Walker, David M. (1998). Delivering on the promise. New York: The Press.
Walkin, L. (1991). The assessment of performance and competence. Cheltenham:
Stanley Thornes (Publishers) Ltd..
Wall, S. (2000). The Art and Science of Competency Models, HR Magazine, Vol. 45,
No. 1, pp. 140-142.
Wharton, Jennifer & Brown, Janine (2006). Competencies of Strategic Human
Resource Professionals in Australia: A comparison of a competency model in
American Human Resource Management literature to an Australian Company,
The Australian Journal of Business & Informatics, Vol. 4, No. 1. Retrieved
October 10, 2009 from http://www.library.acu.edu.au/research/carpediem.
Wheaton, William C. (1998). Land Use and Density in Cities with Congestion.
Journal of Urban Economics, Vol. 43, No. 2, pp. 258-72.
Wikipedia (2009, July 15). Process management. Retrieved May 6, 2009, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Process_management.
Winter, G. (1966). Elements for a social ethic. New York: Macmillan.
Woodruffe, C. (1993). What is meant by a competency? Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, Vol. 14, No.1, pp.29-36.
Workitect, Inc. (Workitect's Competency Dictionary) (2007). Retrieved May 6, 2009,
from http://www.workitect.com/pdf/Competency_Dictionary.pdf.
Wright, P., McMhan, G. C., & McWilliams, A. (1994). Human resources and
sustained competitive advantage: A resource-based perspective, International
Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 5, pp. 301-327.
Wright, P. M., & Boswell, W. R. (2002). Desegregating HRM: A review and synthesis
of micro and macro human resource management research, Journal of
Management, Vol. 28, pp. 247-276.
353
354
Yong, Alex K. B. (2003). Malaysian human resource management. Shah Alam,
Selangor, Malaysia : Malaysian Institute of Management.
Yu, J., & Cooper H. (1983). A qualitative review of research design effects on
response rates to questionnaires. Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 20, pp. 36 -
44.
Zhu, Y. Warner, M. & Rowley C. (2007). Human resource management with “Asian”
characteristics: A hybrid people-management system in East Asia, International
Journal of Human Resource, 18(5), pp. 745-768.
Zikmund, W. G. (2003). Business research methods. USA: Thomson Southwestern.
Appendix 1. Results of Pilot Test
Reliability Case Processing Summary
50 100,00 ,0
50 100,0
ValidExcludeda
Total
CasesN %
Listwise deletion based on allvariables in the procedure.
a.
Reliability Statistics
,922 30
Cronbach'sAlpha N of Items
Item Statistics
4,42 ,499 504,64 ,598 504,06 ,712 504,34 ,688 504,02 ,742 504,34 ,593 504,76 ,476 504,46 ,646 504,24 ,625 504,28 ,640 504,30 ,647 504,42 ,575 504,46 ,646 504,40 ,535 504,66 ,557 504,52 ,614 504,60 ,535 504,58 ,538 504,48 ,614 504,42 ,609 504,16 ,681 504,02 ,685 504,04 ,638 504,16 ,710 50
4,26 ,664 50
4,34 ,557 504,44 ,501 504,62 ,490 504,24 ,744 504,52 ,614 50
process managementcommitmentflexibilityresults orientationdirectivenessinformation seekinghigh integritystrong initiativepride at workcross cultural sensitivitypro-activenesspersonal effectivenessability of changesconceptual thinkingcommunication skillsteam workleadershipinterpersonal skillsrelationship buildingcontinuous learningtoleranceresiliencepersistencyadaptabilitychanging compositionof workforce (gender,age or race)professional imageanalytical thinkingteam l adershipeloyaltymotivation and drive
Mean Std. Deviation N
355
Item-Total Statistics
126,78 102,257 ,270 ,923126,56 97,721 ,604 ,919127,14 96,776 ,567 ,919126,86 95,756 ,668 ,917127,18 99,906 ,321 ,923126,86 99,919 ,418 ,921126,44 99,680 ,559 ,919126,74 96,931 ,620 ,918126,96 96,733 ,659 ,918126,92 99,136 ,445 ,921126,90 96,582 ,647 ,918126,78 97,440 ,657 ,918126,74 98,278 ,510 ,920126,80 99,796 ,482 ,920126,54 98,294 ,599 ,919126,68 99,202 ,462 ,921126,60 98,286 ,628 ,918126,62 98,689 ,584 ,919126,72 96,818 ,664 ,918126,78 96,828 ,669 ,918127,04 97,182 ,565 ,919127,18 98,436 ,465 ,921127,16 97,198 ,606 ,918127,04 95,917 ,633 ,918
126,94 104,058 ,054 ,927
126,86 100,572 ,388 ,921126,76 100,553 ,439 ,921126,58 101,555 ,347 ,922126,96 100,202 ,300 ,923126,68 96,998 ,649 ,918
process managementcommitmentflexibilityresults orientationdirectivenessinformation seekinghigh integritystrong initiativepride at workcross cultural sensitivitypro-activenesspersonal effectivenessability of changeconceptual thinkingcommunication skillsteam workleadershipinterpersonal skillsrelationship buildingcontinuous learningtoleranceresiliencepersistencyadaptabilitychanging compositionof workforce (gender,age or race)professional imageanalytical thinkingteam leadershiployaltymotivation and drive
Scale Mean ifItem Deleted
ScaleVariance ifItem Deleted
CorrectedItem-TotalCorrelation
Cronbach'sAlpha if Item
Deleted
356
Reliability Case Processing Summary
50 100,00 ,0
50 100,0
ValidExcludeda
Total
CasesN %
Listwise deletion based on allvariables in the procedure.
a.
Reliability Statistics
,886 25
Cronbach'sAlpha N of Items
Item Statistics
4,36 ,631 50
4,50 ,580 50
4,54 ,542 50
4,34 ,626 50
4,08 ,601 50
4,32 ,653 50
4,46 ,579 50
4,40 ,535 50
4,32 ,653 50
4,18 ,596 50
4,20 ,670 504,34 ,557 504,28 ,701 50
4,36 ,563 50
4,14 ,729 50
4,50 ,580 504,40 ,571 50
4,42 ,499 50
4,42 ,499 504,52 ,544 504,52 ,505 504,44 ,501 50
4,40 ,495 50
4,44 ,541 50
4,58 ,538 50
recruitment and selectionhuman resourcesdevelopmentperformancemanagement anddevelopmentemployment laws andlegislationsalary and payrolladministrationHR planning andacquisitiontalent managementsystemcompensation andbenefitsorganisationaldevelopmentHR performancemanagementcareer planningsuccession planningstaff welfareHuman performanceimprovementhuman per rmancefotechnologydisciplineHR strategyoccupational safety andhealthrewards managementtalent retentionemployee relationspolicy formulationtermination andseparationhuman resourceinformation systemsecurity management
Mean NStd. Deviation
357
Item-Total Statistics
105,10 ,62850,663 ,877
,593104,96 51,427 ,878
,641104,92 51,422 ,877
,484105,12 51,944 ,881
,502105,38 51,996 ,880
,559105,14 51,062 ,879
,397105,00 53,020 ,883
,582105,06 51,935 ,878
,423105,14 52,286 ,882
,551105,28 51,634 ,879
105,26 ,66149,992 ,875105,12 ,63451,332 ,877105,18 ,49851,212 ,880
,343105,10 53,561 ,884
,444105,32 51,528 ,882
104,96 ,45152,570 ,881105,06 ,51352,139 ,880
,450105,04 53,182 ,882
105,04 ,40453,509 ,883104,94 ,37853,404 ,883104,94 ,43553,241 ,882105,02 ,21254,877 ,887
105,06 54,058 ,330 ,884
105,02 53,898 ,317 ,885
104,88 56,761 -,043 ,893
recruitment and selectionhuman resourcesdevelopmentperformancemanagement anddevelopmentemployment laws andlegislationsalary and payrolladministrationHR planning andacquisitiontalent managementsystemcompensation andbenefitsorganisationaldevelopmentHR performancemanagementcareer planningsuccession planningstaff welfareHuman performanceimprovementhuman performancetechnologydisciplineHR strategyoccupational safety andhealthrewards managementtalent retentionemployee relationspolicy formulationtermination andseparationhuman resourceinformation systemsecurity management
Scale Mean ifItem Deleted
ScaleVariance ifItem Deleted
CorrectedItem-TotalCorrelation
Cronbach'sAlpha if Item
Deleted
358
Reliability Case Processing Summary
50 100,00 ,0
50 100,0
ValidExcludeda
Total
CasesN %
Listwise deletion based on allvariables in the procedure.
a.
Reliability Statistics
,932 35
Cronbach'sAlpha N of Items
Item Statistics
4,50 ,505 504,24 ,716 50
4,14 ,700 50
4,30 ,463 504,32 ,471 504,38 ,602 504,38 ,602 504,30 ,544 504,24 ,591 50
4,34 ,479 50
3,88 ,824 504,58 ,609 504,62 ,530 50
4,06 ,620 50
4,50 ,544 50
4,16 ,548 504,40 ,606 504,00 ,571 503,62 ,805 504,36 ,631 504,28 ,640 504,08 ,601 504,46 ,646 503,62 ,830 50
3,70 ,647 50
4,34 ,717 504,22 ,679 504,38 ,602 50
4,36 ,663 50
4,34 ,626 504,48 ,580 504,50 ,505 504,64 ,485 504,28 ,607 504,32 ,653 50
financial knowledgecustomer sati factionsknowledge ofproduct/servicesstrategy alignmentglobalisation awarenessmanaging resourcesnegotiatio sn skillinnovationcreativityconsci usness towardsoqualityentrepreneurial skillsproblem solving skillsdecision makinginformation andcommunicationtechnologyprofessionalism andethicsknowledge manag mentemanagement skillstechnology awarenesssales and marketingstrategic thinkingstrategic planningproject managementhandling conflictaccounting knowledgebusiness progressdesignresponsivenesspersuasion skillsinfluencing skillscommand of englishlanguagepresentation skillswriting skillsaccountabilityresponsibilityfacilitation skillsconsulting skills
Mean Std. Deviation N
359
360
Item-Total Statistics
144,82 140,069 ,159 ,933145,08 131,708 ,609 ,929
145,18 132,926 ,545 ,930
145,02 135,000 ,651 ,929145,00 138,000 ,361 ,932144,94 134,058 ,559 ,930144,94 136,588 ,374 ,932145,02 138,061 ,302 ,932145,08 137,340 ,327 ,932
144,98 137,612 ,390 ,931
145,44 132,415 ,481 ,931144,74 132,441 ,671 ,929144,70 133,561 ,684 ,929
145,26 133,502 ,582 ,930
144,82 134,640 ,577 ,930
145,16 134,504 ,583 ,930144,92 136,483 ,379 ,932145,32 133,936 ,602 ,929145,70 136,704 ,259 ,934144,96 133,182 ,593 ,929145,04 131,958 ,670 ,929145,24 132,635 ,667 ,929144,86 134,000 ,522 ,930145,70 134,949 ,341 ,933
145,62 134,485 ,488 ,931
144,98 130,755 ,668 ,929145,10 132,541 ,590 ,929144,94 133,853 ,574 ,930
144,96 133,141 ,565 ,930
144,98 132,959 ,614 ,929144,84 133,239 ,646 ,929144,82 135,620 ,540 ,930144,68 136,222 ,509 ,930145,04 133,264 ,612 ,929145,00 134,408 ,488 ,931
financial knowledgecustomer satisfactionknowledge ofproduct/servicesstrategy alignmentglobalisation awarenessmanaging resourcesnegotiation skillsinnovationcreativityconsciousness towardsqualityentrepreneurial skillsproblem solving skillsdecision makinginformation andcommunicationtechnologyprofessionalism andethicsknowledge managementmanagement skillstechnology awarenesssales and marketingstrategic thinkingstrategic planningproject managementhandling conflictaccounting knowledgebusiness progressdesignresponsivenesspersuasion skillsinfluencing skillscommand of englishlanguagepresentation skillswriting skillsaccountabilityresponsibilityfacilitation skillsconsulting skills
Scale Mean ifItem Deleted
ScaleVariance ifItem Deleted
CorrectedItem-TotalCorrelation
Cronbach'sAlpha if Item
Deleted
Reliability Case Processing Summary
50 100,00 ,0
50 100,0
ValidExcluded a
Total
CasesN %
Listwise deletion based on allvariables in the procedure.
a.
Reliability Statistics
,816 13
Cronbach'sAlpha N of Items
Item Statistics
4,50 ,505 50
Mean Std. Deviationno HR practitioner competencymodel currently exists inMalaysia
4,24 ,716 50
HR practitioner competency model isimportant for HRpractitioners to attainprofessionalism
4,14 ,700 50
having a HR practitioner competencymodel will support inhuman resourcedevelopment
4,30 ,463 50having a HR practitioner competencymodel will support intalent development
4,32 ,471 50having a HR practitioner competencymodel will support insuccession planning
4,38 ,602 50
HR practitioner competency modelshould comprise of onlytechnical/functionalcompetencies
4,38 ,602 50
HR practitioner competency modelshould comprise oftechnical/functional, andbusiness competencies
4,30 ,544 50
HR practitioner competency modelshould comprise oftechnical/functional andgeneric & behaviouralcompetencies
4,24 ,591 50
competencies includinggeneric and behaviouraltechnical/functional andbusiness competenciesshould be the keycomposition of the HR practitionercompetency model
4,34 ,479 50
business competenciesare more important thangeneric and behaviouralcompetencies
3,88 ,824 50
generic and behaviouralcompetencies are moreimportant than business competencies
4,58 ,609 50
both business andgeneric and behaviouralcompetencies areequally importantthere is an urgent needto develop a HR practitioner 4,62 ,530 50competency model
N
361
362
Item-Total Statistics
51,72 17,920 ,134 ,825
51,98 14,796 ,624 ,788
52,08 15,055 ,589 ,791
51,92 16,606 ,511 ,801
51,90 17,194 ,341 ,812
51,84 15,851 ,528 ,798
51,84 16,790 ,323 ,814
51,92 16,565 ,426 ,806
51,98 16,387 ,420 ,806
51,88 16,638 ,481 ,803
52,34 15,413 ,410 ,812
51,64 15,704 ,553 ,795
51,60 15,918 ,602 ,793
no HR practitioner competencymodel currently exists inMalaysiaHR practitioner competency model is important for HRpractitioners to attainprofessionalismhaving a HR practitionercompetency model will support in human resourcedevelopmenthaving a HR practitioner competency model will support in talent developmenthaving a HR practitionercompetency model will support In succession planningHR practitioner competency model should comprise of onlytechnical/functionalcompetenciesHR practitioner competency model should comprise oftechnical/functional andbusiness competenciesHR practitioner competency model should comprise oftechnical/functional andgeneric & behaviouralcompetenciescompetencies includinggeneric and behaviouraltechnical/functional andbusiness competenciesshould be the keycomposition of the HR practitionercompetency modelbusiness competenciesare more important thangeneric and behaviouralcompetenciesgeneric and behaviouralcompetencies are moreimportant than business competenciesboth business andgeneric and behaviouralcompetencies areequally importantthere is an urgent needto develop a HR practitionercompetency model
Scale Mean ifItem Deleted
ScaleVariance ifItem Deleted
CorrectedItem-Total
Correlation
Cronbach'sAlpha if Item
Deleted
363�
Appendix 2
364�
365�
366�
367�
368�
369�
Appendix 3
370�
371�
371�
372�
372�
373�
374�
374�
375�
375�
376�
376�
377�
Appendix 4 Appendix 4
378378
379379
380
Appendix 5
�
381�
�
382�
�
383�
Appendix 6. Profile of Respondents
Frequency Table
HR Category
328 86,3 86,3 86,352 13,7 13,7 100,0
380 100,0 100,0
HR PractitionerHR ConsultantTotal
ValidFrequency Percent Valid Percent
CumulativePercent
Age
37 9,7 9,7 9,7143 37,6 37,6 47,4122 32,1 32,1 79,5
78 20,5 20,5 100,0380 100,0 100,0
below 30yrs30-40 yrs41-50 yrsabove 50 yrsTotal
ValidFrequency Percent Valid Percent
CumulativePercent
Gender
219 57,6 57,6 57,6161 42,4 42,4 100,0380 100,0 100,0
malefemaleTotal
ValidFrequency Percent Valid Percent
CumulativePercent
Education Level
8 2,1 2,1 2,19 2,4 2,4 4,5
65 17,1 17,1 21,638 10,0 10,0 31,6
136 35,8 35,8 67,4101 26,6 26,6 93,923 6,1 6,1 100,0
380 100,0 100,0
spm/mcestpmdiplomadegreemasterphdprofessional/ othersTotal
ValidFrequency Percent Valid Percent
CumulativePercent
384
385
Category of Economic Sectors
225 59,2 59,2 59,2155 40,8 40,8 100,0380 100,0 100,0
manufacturingservicesTotal
ValidFrequency Percent Valid Percent
CumulativePercent
Statistics
328 328 32852 52 52
ValidMissing
NJob Level
PresentPosition
Department /Division
Job Category in Organisation
64 16,8 19,5 19,5175 46,1 53,4 72,937 9,7 11,3 84,152 13,7 15,9 100,0
328 86,3 100,052 13,7
380 100,0
top managementmiddle managementsupervisoryothersTotal
Valid
SystemMissingTotal
Frequency Percent Valid PercentCumulative
Percent
Current Job Title / Designation
66 17,4 20,1 20,1
38 10,0 11,6 31,7
91 23,9 27,7 59,534 8,9 10,4 69,841 10,8 12,5 82,312 3,2 3,7 86,046 12,1 14,0 100,0
328 86,3 100,052 13,7
380 100,0
executive/administratorseniorexecutive/administratormanagersenior managergeneral managerdirectorothersTotal
Valid
SystemMissingTotal
Frequency Percent Valid PercentCumulative
Percent
386
Years of Working Experience with HR
99 30,2 30,2 30,2105 32,0 32,0 62,285 25,9 25,9 88,139 11,9 11,9 100,0
328 100,0 100,0
below 5yrs5-10 yrs11-20 yrsabove 20yrsTotal
ValidFrequency Percent Valid Percent
CumulativePercent
Years of Organisation in Operations
8 2,1 2,1 2,161 16,1 16,1 18,258 15,3 15,3 33,4
253 66,6 66,6 100,0380 100,0 100,0
less than 1yr1-5 yrs6-10 yrsmore than 10 yrsTotal
ValidFrequency Percent Valid Percent
CumulativePercent
Years of Working Experience
30 7,9 7,9 7,981 21,3 21,3 29,2
137 36,1 36,1 65,3132 34,7 34,7 100,0380 100,0 100,0
below 5yrs5-10 yrs11-20 yrsabove 20 yrsTotal
ValidFrequency Percent Valid Percent
CumulativePercent
Years of Working Experience with HR
103 27,1 27,1 27,1111 29,2 29,2 56,3112 29,5 29,5 85,854 14,2 14,2 100,0
380 100,0 100,0
below 5yrs5-10 yrs11-20 yrsabove 20yrsTotal
ValidFrequency Percent Valid Percent
CumulativePercent
387
Number of Employees in Organisation
94 24,7 24,7 24,7101 26,6 26,6 51,336 9,5 9,5 60,8
149 39,2 39,2 100,0380 100,0 100,0
less than 100100-500501-1000>1000Total
ValidFrequency Percent Valid Percent
CumulativePercent
388
CrosstabsCase Processing Summary
380 100,0% 0 ,0% 380 100,0%HR Category *
N Percent N Percent N PercentValid Missing Total
Cases
Category of Economic Sectors
Category of Economic Sectors
225 59,2 59,2 59,2155 40,8 40,8 100,0380 100,0 100,0
manufacturingservicesTotal
ValidFrequency Percent Valid Percent
CumulativePercent
HR Category * Category of Economic Sectors Crosstabulation
224 104 32868,3% 31,7% 100,0%
99,6% 67,1% 86,3%
1 51 521,9% 98,1% 100,0%
,4% 32,9% 13,7%
225 155 38059,2% 40,8% 100,0%
100,0% 100,0% 100,0%
Count% within HR Category% within Types ofBusinessCount% within HR Category% within Types ofBusinessCount% within HR Category% within Types ofBusiness
HR Practitioner
HR Consultant
HR Category
Total
manufacturing services
Category of Economic Sectors
Total
389
Crosstabs
Case Processing Summary
Crosstabs
380 100,0% 0 ,0% 380 100,0%HR Category *Category of Economic Sectors
N Percent N Percent N PercentValid Missing Total
Cases
HR Category * Category of Economic Sectors Crosstabulation
224 104 32868,3% 31,7% 100,0%
1 51 521,9% 98,1% 100,0%
225 155 38059,2% 40,8% 100,0%
Count% within HR CategoryCount% within HR CategoryCount% within HR Category
Category of Economic Sectors
servicesManufacturing Total
HR PractitionerHR Category
HR Consultant
Total
Case Processing Summary
380 100,0% 0 ,0% 380 100,0%HR Category *Category of Economic Sectors
N Percent N Percent N PercentValid Missing Total
Cases
HR Category * Category of Economic Sectors Crosstabulation
224 104 32858,9% 27,4% 86,3%
1 51 52,3% 13,4% 13,7%225 155 380
59,2% 40,8% 100,0%
Count% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of Total
HR Practitioner
HR Consultant
HR Category
Total
manufactCategory of Economic Sectors
servicesuring Total
390
Crosstabs
Case Processing Summary
380 100,0% 0 ,0% 380 100,0%
380 100,0% 0 ,0% 380 100,0%
380 100,0% 0 ,0% 380 100,0%
328 86,3% 52 13,7% 380 100,0%
328 86,3% 52 13,7% 380 100,0%
Age * Years ofOrganisation in OperationAge * Years of WorkingExperienceAge * Years of WorkingExperience with HRAge * Job Category in Organisation Age * Current Job Title /Designation
N Percent N Percent N PercentValid Missing Total
Cases
Age * Years of Organisation in Operations Crosstabulation
3 17 5 12 37,8% 4,5% 1,3% 3,2% 9,7%
4 28 34 77 1431,1% 7,4% 8,9% 20,3% 37,6%
1 8 14 99 122,3% 2,1% 3,7% 26,1% 32,1%
0 8 5 65 78,0% 2,1% 1,3% 17,1% 20,5%
8 61 58 253 3802,1% 16,1% 15,3% 66,6% 100,0%
Count% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of Total
below 30yrs
30-40 yrs
41-50 yrs
above 50 yrs
Age
Total
less than 1yr 1-5 yrs 6-10 yrsmore than
Years of Organisation in Operation
10 yrs Total
391
392
Age * Years of Working Experience Crosstabulation
17 16 4 0 374,5% 4,2% 1,1% ,0% 9,7%
10 47 69 17 1432,6% 12,4% 18,2% 4,5% 37,6%
3 8 57 54 122,8% 2,1% 15,0% 14,2% 32,1%
0 10 7 61 78,0% 2,6% 1,8% 16,1% 20,5%
30 81 137 132 3807,9% 21,3% 36,1% 34,7% 100,0%
Count% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of Total
below 30yrs
30-40 yrs
41-50 yrs
above 50 yrs
Age
Total
below 5yrs 5-10 yrs 11-20 yrs above 20 yrsYears of Working Experience
Total
Age * Years of Working Experience with HR Crosstabulation
22 8 6 1 375,8% 2,1% 1,6% ,3% 9,7%
51 49 30 13 14313,4% 12,9% 7,9% 3,4% 37,6%
19 34 58 11 1225,0% 8,9% 15,3% 2,9% 32,1%
11 20 18 29 782,9% 5,3% 4,7% 7,6% 20,5%
103 111 112 54 38027,1% 29,2% 29,5% 14,2% 100,0%
Count% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of Total
below 30yrs
30-40 yrs
41-50 yrs
above 50 yrs
Age
Total
below 5yrs 5-10 yrs 11-20 yrs above 20yrsYears of Working Experience with HR
Total
Age * Job Title/ Designation Crosstabulation
1 18 8 7 34,3% 5,5% 2,4% 2,1% 10,4%12 75 16 24 127
3,7% 22,9% 4,9% 7,3% 38,7%31 63 10 4 108
9,5% 19,2% 3,0% 1,2% 32,9%20 19 3 17 59
6,1% 5,8% ,9% 5,2% 18,0%64 175 37 52 328
19,5% 53,4% 11,3% 15,9% 100,0%
Count% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of Total
below 30yrs
30-40 yrs
41-50 yrs
above 50 yrs
Age
Total
topmanagement
middlemanagement supervisory others
Job Level
Total
Age * Current Job Title / Designation Crosstabulation
19 2 7 1 2 0 3 345,8% ,6% 2,1% ,3% ,6% ,0% ,9% 10,4%
25 24 41 8 11 3 15 1277,6% 7,3% 12,5% 2,4% 3,4% ,9% 4,6% 38,7%
16 9 33 20 13 7 10 1084,9% 2,7% 10,1% 6,1% 4,0% 2,1% 3,0% 32,9%
6 3 10 5 15 2 18 591,8% ,9% 3,0% 1,5% 4,6% ,6% 5,5% 18,0%
66 38 91 34 41 12 46 32820,1% 11,6% 27,7% 10,4% 12,5% 3,7% 14,0% 100,0%
Count% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of Total
below 30yrs
30-40 yrs
41-50 yrs
above 50 yrs
Age
Total
executive/administrator
seniorexecutive/administrator manager
seniormanager
generalmanager director
Present Position
others Total
393
394
Crosstabs
Case Processing Summary
380 100,0% 0 ,0% 380 100,0%
380 100,0% 0 ,0% 380 100,0%
380 100,0% 0 ,0% 380 100,0%
328 86,3% 52 13,7% 380 100,0%
328 86,3% 52 13,7% 380 100,0%
Education Level*Years of Organisation inOperationEducation Level*Years of WorkingExperienceEducation Level*Years of WorkingExperience with HREducation Level*Job LevelEducation Level*Current Job Title/ Designation
N Percent N Percent N PercentValid Missing Total
Cases
Education Level * Years of Organisation in Operation Crosstabulation
0 1 1 6 8,0% ,3% ,3% 1,6% 2,1%
0 4 2 3 9,0% 1,1% ,5% ,8% 2,4%
3 11 15 36 65,8% 2,9% 3,9% 9,5% 17,1%
0 4 8 26 38,0% 1,1% 2,1% 6,8% 10,0%
4 24 19 89 1361,1% 6,3% 5,0% 23,4% 35,8%
0 17 13 71 101,0% 4,5% 3,4% 18,7% 26,6%
1 0 0 22 23,3% ,0% ,0% 5,8% 6,1%
8 61 58 253 3802,1% 16,1% 15,3% 66,6% 100,0%
Count% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of Total
spm/mce
stpm
diploma
degree
master
phd
professional/ others
EducationLevel
Total
less than 1yr 1-5 yrs 6-10 yrsmore than
10 yrs
Years of Organisation in Operations
Total
395
Education Level * Years of Working Experience Crosstabulation
0 1 3 4 8,0% ,3% ,8% 1,1% 2,1%
4 1 4 0 91,1% ,3% 1,1% ,0% 2,4%
4 20 22 19 651,1% 5,3% 5,8% 5,0% 17,1%
3 9 12 14 38,8% 2,4% 3,2% 3,7% 10,0%
15 29 68 24 1363,9% 7,6% 17,9% 6,3% 35,8%
4 19 28 50 1011,1% 5,0% 7,4% 13,2% 26,6%
0 2 0 21 23,0% ,5% ,0% 5,5% 6,1%
30 81 137 132 3807,9% 21,3% 36,1% 34,7% 100,0%
Count% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of Total
spm/mce
stpm
diploma
degree
master
phd
professional/ others
EducationLevel
Total
below 5yrs 5-10 yrs 11-20 yrs above 20 yrsYears of Working Experience
Total
Education Level * Years of Working Experience with HR Crosstabulation
1 4 3 0 8,3% 1,1% ,8% ,0% 2,1%
7 2 0 0 91,8% ,5% ,0% ,0% 2,4%
24 19 15 7 656,3% 5,0% 3,9% 1,8% 17,1%
7 14 11 6 381,8% 3,7% 2,9% 1,6% 10,0%
37 41 48 10 1369,7% 10,8% 12,6% 2,6% 35,8%
22 27 29 23 1015,8% 7,1% 7,6% 6,1% 26,6%
5 4 6 8 231,3% 1,1% 1,6% 2,1% 6,1%
103 111 112 54 38027,1% 29,2% 29,5% 14,2% 100,0%
Count% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of Total
spm/mce
stpm
diploma
degree
master
phd
professional/ others
EducationLevel
Total
below 5yrs 5-10 yrs 11-20 yrs above 20yrsYears of Working Experience with HR
Total
396
Education Level* Job Category in Organisation Crosstabulation
0 4 3 1 8,0% 1,2% ,9% ,3% 2,4%
1 4 1 3 9,3% 1,2% ,3% ,9% 2,7%
12 31 7 9 593,7% 9,5% 2,1% 2,7% 18,0%
9 16 4 4 332,7% 4,9% 1,2% 1,2% 10,1%
19 84 10 14 1275,8% 25,6% 3,0% 4,3% 38,7%
17 33 11 13 745,2% 10,1% 3,4% 4,0% 22,6%
6 3 1 8 181,8% ,9% ,3% 2,4% 5,5%
64 175 37 52 32819,5% 53,4% 11,3% 15,9% 100,0%
Count% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of Total
spm/mce
stpm
diploma
degree
master
phd
professional/ others
EducationLevel
Total
topmanagement
middlemanagement supervisory others
Job Category in Organisation
Total
Education Level* Current Job Title/ Designation Crosstabulation
3 0 0 1 0 0 4 8,9% ,0% ,0% ,3% ,0% ,0% 1,2% 2,4%
2 1 4 0 1 0 1 9,6% ,3% 1,2% ,0% ,3% ,0% ,3% 2,7%15 5 18 4 6 2 9 59
4,6% 1,5% 5,5% 1,2% 1,8% ,6% 2,7% 18,0%5 6 12 4 4 0 2 33
1,5% 1,8% 3,7% 1,2% 1,2% ,0% ,6% 10,1%35 18 38 12 8 4 12 127
10,7% 5,5% 11,6% 3,7% 2,4% 1,2% 3,7% 38,7%5 6 19 12 19 6 7 74
1,5% 1,8% 5,8% 3,7% 5,8% 1,8% 2,1% 22,6%1 2 0 1 3 0 11 18
,3% ,6% ,0% ,3% ,9% ,0% 3,4% 5,5%66 38 91 34 41 12 46 328
20,1% 11,6% 27,7% 10,4% 12,5% 3,7% 14,0% 100,0%
Count% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of Total
spm/mce
stpm
diploma
degree
master
phd
professional/ others
EducationLevel
Total
executive/administrator
seniorexecutive/
administrator managersenior
managergeneral
manager director others
Current Job Title/ Designation
Total
Crosstabs
Case Processing Summary
Age * HR Category Crosstabulation
34 3 378,9% ,8% 9,7%
127 16 14333,4% 4,2% 37,6%
108 14 12228,4% 3,7% 32,1%
59 19 7815,5% 5,0% 20,5%
328 52 38086,3% 13,7% 100,0%
Count% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of Total
below 30yrs
30-40 yrs
41-50 yrs
above 50 yrs
Age
Total
HRPractitioner
HRConsultant
HR Category
Total
380 100,0% 0 ,0% 380 100,0%380 100,0% 0 ,0% 380 100,0%
380 100,0% 0 ,0% 380 100,0%
380 100,0% 0 ,0% 380 100,0%
380 100,0% 0 ,0% 380 100,0%
380 100,0% 0 ,0% 380 100,0%
380 100,0% 0 ,0% 380 100,0%
380 100,0% 0 ,0% 380 100,0%
Age * HR CategoryGender * HR CategoryEducation Level*HR CategoryYears of Organisation inOperation * HR CategoryYears of WorkingExperience * HR CategoryYears of WorkingExperience with HR * HRCategoryNumbers of Employee inOrganisation * HRCategoryCategory of Economic Sectors * HR Category
N Percent N Percent N PercentValid Missing Total
Cases
397
Gender * HR Category Crosstabulation
184 35 21948,4% 9,2% 57,6%
144 17 16137,9% 4,5% 42,4%
328 52 38086,3% 13,7% 100,0%
Count% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of Total
male
female
Gender
Total
HRPractitioner
HRConsultant
HR Category
Total
Education Level * HR Category Crosstabulation
8 0 82,1% ,0% 2,1%
9 0 92,4% ,0% 2,4%
59 6 6515,5% 1,6% 17,1%
33 5 388,7% 1,3% 10,0%
127 9 13633,4% 2,4% 35,8%
74 27 10119,5% 7,1% 26,6%
18 5 234,7% 1,3% 6,1%
328 52 38086,3% 13,7% 100,0%
Count% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of Total
spm/mce
stpm
diploma
degree
master
phd
professional/ others
EducationLevel
Total
HRPractitioner
HRHR Category
Consultant Total
398
Years of Organisation in Operations * HR Category Crosstabulation
7 1 81,8% ,3% 2,1%
58 3 6115,3% ,8% 16,1%
42 16 5811,1% 4,2% 15,3%
221 32 25358,2% 8,4% 66,6%
328 52 38086,3% 13,7% 100,0%
Count% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of Total
less than 1yr
1-5 yrs
6-10 yrs
more than 10 yrs
Years ofOrganisationin Operation
Total
HRPractitioner
HRHR Category
Consultant Total
Years of Working Experience * HR Category Crosstabulation
25 5 306,6% 1,3% 7,9%
67 14 8117,6% 3,7% 21,3%
121 16 13731,8% 4,2% 36,1%
115 17 13230,3% 4,5% 34,7%
328 52 38086,3% 13,7% 100,0%
Count% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of Total
below 5yrs
5-10 yrs
11-20 yrs
above 20 yrs
Years ofWorkingExperience
Total
HRPractitioner
HRHR Category
Consultant Total
399
Years of Working Experience with HR * HR Category Crosstabulation
Appendix 7. Structural Equation Modeling Using AMOS Package
99 4 10326,1% 1,1% 27,1%
105 6 11127,6% 1,6% 29,2%
85 27 11222,4% 7,1% 29,5%
39 15 5410,3% 3,9% 14,2%
328 52 38086,3% 13,7% 100,0%
Count% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of Total
below 5yrs
5-10 yrs
11-20 yrs
above 20yrs
Years of WorkingExperience with HR
Total
HRPractitioner
HRHR Category
Consultant Total
Number of Employees in Organisation * HR Category Crosstabulation
81 13 9421,3% 3,4% 24,7%
84 17 10122,1% 4,5% 26,6%
31 5 368,2% 1,3% 9,5%
132 17 14934,7% 4,5% 39,2%
328 52 38086,3% 13,7% 100,0%
Count% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of TotalCount% of Total
less than 100
100-500
501-1000
>1000
Number ofEmployees inOrganisation
Total
HRPractitioner
HRHR Category
Consultant Total
400
Appendix 7. Structural Equation Modeling Using AMOS package
Generic/BehaviouralCompetencyCategory
BusinessCompetencyCategory
Techni alcHR
CompetencyCategory
,49
HR PractitionerCompetency Model
,62
Relationshipbuilding &
process drivers
,88
Personalcredibility&attributes
,80
Entrepreneurial& business acumen
,93
Essentialperformance
enablers
,60 ,81
,42
d12e11
,65
,39
d11e10,63
,45
d9e09 ,67
,33
d16e14
,58
,55
d14e13 ,74
,38
d13e12 ,62
,32
b3e02 ,57
,37
b1e01 ,61
,49
b9 e05,70 ,51
b11 e06,72,38
b13 e07
,62
,36
e3 e23,60
,58
e5 e24,76
36
,34
c9e16 ,58 45
,78 ,94
,90
,97
,77 ,90
,32
,41
r7
r3
r1 r2
,64
,45
r4
,66
,61
,76
,04
,67b6e03
,49
c18 e21,70
,69,83
b8e04
,61 ,38
,48
e6 e25
,69
b17 e08,86
,36
401
Variable counts (Group number 1)
Number of variables in your model: 63Number of observed variables: 23Number of unobserved variables: 40Number of exogenous variables: 33Number of endogenous variables: 30
Parameter summary (Group number 1)
Weights Covariances Variances Means Intercepts TotalFixed 37 0 3 0 0 40
Labeled 0 0 0 0 0 0Unlabeled 25 6 30 0 0 61
Total 62 6 33 0 0 101
Computation of degrees of freedom (Default model)
Number of distinct sample moments: 276Number of distinct parameters to be estimated: 61
Degrees of freedom (276 - 61): 215
Result (Default model)
Minimum was achieved Chi-square = 247,725 Degrees of freedom = 215 Probability level = ,062
402
Assessment of normality (Group number 1)
Variable min max skew c.r. kurtosis c.r.b17 2,000 5,000 -,881 -6,662 ,477 1,802e6 1,000 5,000 -1,202 -9,089 2,569 9,710b8 1,000 5,000 -,979 -7,399 ,926 3,501c18 2,000 5,000 -,485 -3,665 -,381 -1,440b6 2,000 5,000 -,676 -5,108 ,297 1,124c14 2,000 5,000 -,511 -3,864 -,347 -1,313c16 2,000 5,000 -,823 -6,224 ,077 ,290c9 1,000 5,000 -1,173 -8,869 2,688 10,160c11 1,000 5,000 -1,267 -9,580 3,289 12,434c12 1,000 5,000 -1,044 -7,893 2,369 8,955e5 1,000 5,000 -,961 -7,267 2,624 9,918e3 1,000 5,000 -1,504 -11,372 3,474 13,132b13 2,000 5,000 -,729 -5,515 ,056 ,210b11 2,000 5,000 -,630 -4,766 -,101 -,383b9 1,000 5,000 -,606 -4,584 ,653 2,469b1 2,000 5,000 -,702 -5,307 ,283 1,071b3 1,000 5,000 -,871 -6,589 1,335 5,046d13 1,000 5,000 -1,383 -10,456 2,843 10,747d14 2,000 5,000 -,365 -2,763 -,031 -,117d16 2,000 5,000 -,520 -3,931 ,022 ,085d9 2,000 5,000 -,464 -3,505 -,143 -,540d11 2,000 5,000 -,435 -3,291 -,362 -1,368d12 1,000 5,000 -1,371 -10,364 2,657 10,043Multivariate 246,882 67,415
403
Scalar Estimates (Group number 1 - Default model)
Maximum Likelihood Estimates
Regression Weights: (Group number 1 - Default model)
Estimate S.E. C.R. P LabelRelationship_Building &_Process Drivers <--- Generic&_Behavioural_Co
mpetency_Category ,320 ,039
8,296
***
par_11
Personal_credibility&_attributes <--- Generic&_Behavioural_Co
mpetency_Category ,451 ,041
10,986
***
par_12
Entrepreneurial &_Business Acumen <--- Business_Competency_Cate
gory ,437 ,043
10,105
***
par_13
Essential_performance_enablers <--- Business_Competency_Cate
gory ,390 ,041
9,544
***
par_14
Rewardsand_performance_management
<---HRTechnical/_Functional_Competency_Category
,374 ,039
9,642
***
par_15
Employee_relations_& compliance <---
HRTechnical/_Functional_Competency_Category
,418 ,040
10,498
***
par_16
HRPractitioner_Competency Model
<--- Generic&_Behavioural_Competency_Category ,152 ,05
22,93
6,0
03par_17
HRPractitioner_Competency Model
<---HRTechnical/_Functional_Competency_Category
,194 ,073
2,643
,008
par_18
HRPractitioner_Competency Model
<--- Business_Competency_Category ,021 ,06
3 ,330 ,741
par_22
d12 <--- Entrepreneurial &_Business Acumen 1,000
d11 <--- Entrepreneurial &_Business Acumen 1,025 ,11
78,75
1*** par_1
d9 <--- Entrepreneurial &_Business Acumen ,935 ,10
39,11
5*** par_2
d16 <--- Essential_performance_enablers 1,000
d14 <--- Essential_performance_enablers 1,267 ,13
99,11
4*** par_3
d13 <--- Essential_performance_enablers 1,124 ,13
78,20
8*** par_4
b3 <--- Relationship_Building &_Process Drivers 1,000
404
Estimate S.E. C.R. P Label
b1 <--- Relationship_Building &_Process Drivers 1,057 ,07
613,9
39*** par_5
b9 <--- Personal_credibility&_attributes 1,000
b11 <--- Personal_credibility&_attributes ,987 ,09
510,4
21*** par_6
b13 <--- Personal_credibility&_attributes ,910 ,09
79,38
0*** par_7
e3 <---HRPractitioner_Competency Model
1,000
e5 <---HRPractitioner_Competency Model
1,056 ,118
8,916
*** par_8
c12 <---Rewardsand_performance_management
1,000
c11 <---Rewardsand_performance_management
,913 ,110
8,329
*** par_9
c9 <---Rewardsand_performance_management
,901 ,111
8,105
***
par_10
b6 <--- Relationship_Building &_Process Drivers 1,213 ,13
88,78
2***
par_23
c14 <--- Employee_relations_& compliance 1,013 ,09
810,3
06***
par_24
c16 <--- Employee_relations_& compliance 1,000
c18 <--- Employee_relations_& compliance ,970 ,09
310,4
75***
par_25
b8 <--- Relationship_Building &_Process Drivers 1,584 ,16
79,50
8***
par_26
e6 <---HRPractitioner_Competency Model
1,040 ,117
8,874
***
par_27
b17 <--- Personal_credibility&_attributes ,961 ,10
39,35
5***
par_28
405
Standardized Regression Weights: (Group number 1 - Default model)
Estimate Relationship_Building &_Process Drivers <--- Generic&_Behavioural_Competency_Category ,784
Personal_credibility&_attributes <--- Generic&_Behavioural_Competency_Category ,941Entrepreneurial &_Business Acumen <--- Business_Competency_Category ,896
Essential_performance_enablers <--- Business_Competency_Category ,966Rewardsand_performance_management <--- HR
Technical/_Functional_Competency_Category ,772
Employee_relations_& compliance <--- HR
Technical/_Functional_Competency_Category ,899
HR Practitioner_Competency Model <--- Generic&_Behavioural_Competency_Category ,323
HR Practitioner_Competency Model <--- HR
Technical/_Functional_Competency_Category ,411
HR Practitioner_Competency Model <--- Business_Competency_Category ,044
d12 <--- Entrepreneurial &_Business Acumen ,646d11 <--- Entrepreneurial &_Business Acumen ,627d9 <--- Entrepreneurial &_Business Acumen ,671d16 <--- Essential_performance_enablers ,576d14 <--- Essential_performance_enablers ,740d13 <--- Essential_performance_enablers ,620b3 <--- Relationship_Building &_Process Drivers ,568b1 <--- Relationship_Building &_Process Drivers ,607b9 <--- Personal_credibility&_attributes ,703b11 <--- Personal_credibility&_attributes ,717b13 <--- Personal_credibility&_attributes ,620e3 <--- HR Practitioner_Competency Model ,597e5 <--- HR Practitioner_Competency Model ,763c12 <--- Rewards and_performance_management ,697c11 <--- Rewards and_performance_management ,598c9 <--- Rewards and_performance_management ,583b6 <--- Relationship_Building &_Process Drivers ,671c14 <--- Employee_relations_& compliance ,736c16 <--- Employee_relations_& compliance ,672c18 <--- Employee_relations_& compliance ,700b8 <--- Relationship_Building &_Process Drivers ,833e6 <--- HR Practitioner_Competency Model ,692b17 <--- Personal_credibility&_attributes ,614
406
Covariances: (Group number 1 - Default model)
Estimate S.E. C.R. P Label
Generic&_Behavioural_Competency_Category <-->
HRTechnical/_Functional_Competency_Category
,656 ,060
10,952
***
par_19
Generic&_Behavioural_Competency_Category <-->Business_Competency_Cate
gory ,615 ,057
10,838
***
par_20
Business_Competency_Category <-->
HRTechnical/_Functional_Competency_Category
,758 ,051
14,742
***
par_21
e02 <-->e01 ,212 ,025
8,431
***
par_29
e11 <-->e12 ,121 ,024
5,107
***
par_30
e07 <-->e08 ,282 ,028
9,952
***
par_31
Correlations: (Group number 1 - Default model)
Estimate
Generic&_Behavioural_Competency_Category <-->
HRTechnical/_Functional_Competency_Category
,656
Generic&_Behavioural_Competency_Category <--> Business_Competency_Cat
egory ,615
Business_Competency_Category <-->HRTechnical/_Functional_Competency_Category
,758
e02 <--> e01 ,636e11 <--> e12 ,364e07 <--> e08 ,863
407
Variances: (Group number 1 - Default model)
Estimate S.E. C.R. P LabelGeneric&_Behavioural_Competency_Category 1,000Business_Competency_Category 1,000HRTechnical/_Functional_Competency_Category 1,000
r7 ,112 ,024 4,707 *** par_32r6 ,042 ,019 2,190 ,028 par_33r5 ,095 ,025 3,821 *** par_34r3 ,047 ,019 2,456 ,014 par_35r4 ,011 ,013 ,835 ,404 par_36r1 ,064 ,016 3,915 *** par_37r2 ,026 ,021 1,276 ,202 par_38e11 ,332 ,032 10,256 *** par_39e10 ,386 ,037 10,404 *** par_40e09 ,253 ,026 9,776 *** par_41e14 ,329 ,029 11,354 *** par_42e13 ,216 ,026 8,434 *** par_43e12 ,331 ,031 10,830 *** par_44e02 ,349 ,030 11,534 *** par_45e01 ,318 ,028 11,215 *** par_46e05 ,235 ,024 9,602 *** par_47e06 ,212 ,023 9,234 *** par_48e07 ,305 ,028 10,881 *** par_49e23 ,401 ,037 10,806 *** par_50e24 ,178 ,023 7,594 *** par_51e18 ,248 ,029 8,399 *** par_52e17 ,351 ,034 10,369 *** par_53e16 ,369 ,035 10,568 *** par_54e20 ,264 ,026 10,263 *** par_55e19 ,188 ,021 9,090 *** par_56e03 ,300 ,029 10,477 *** par_57e21 ,212 ,022 9,771 *** par_58e04 ,184 ,030 6,050 *** par_59e25 ,261 ,027 9,487 *** par_60e08 ,351 ,032 10,920 *** par_61
408
Squared Multiple Correlations: (Group number 1 - Default model)
Estimate Employee_relations_& compliance ,807Rewards and_performance_management ,596HR Practitioner_Competency Model ,495Personal_credibility&_attributes ,885Relationship_Building &_Process Drivers ,615Essential_performance_enablers ,933Entrepreneurial &_Business Acumen ,803b17 ,376e6 ,479b8 ,693c18 ,490b6 ,450c14 ,542c16 ,451c9 ,340c11 ,357c12 ,486e5 ,582e3 ,356b13 ,384b11 ,514b9 ,494b1 ,368b3 ,323d13 ,384d14 ,548d16 ,331d9 ,451d11 ,393d12 ,417
409
Covariances: (Group number 1 - Default model)
M.I. Par Change r3 <--> r5 7,673 -,032e25 <--> r4 9,035 -,032e25 <--> r3 7,650 ,037e21 <--> e25 4,451 -,033e24 <--> e17 4,580 ,037e23 <--> r4 8,831 ,037e23 <--> r3 5,361 -,037e05 <--> r1 4,878 ,023e12 <--> e25 4,117 -,036e12 <--> e04 4,426 ,036e12 <--> e23 4,006 ,041e12 <--> e05 6,911 -,044e13 <--> e08 5,523 ,020e13 <--> e07 5,815 -,020e14 <--> e25 5,042 -,042e14 <--> e23 7,390 ,060e09 <--> r6 4,481 ,026e09 <--> r5 5,409 -,035e11 <--> r2 6,735 ,035e11 <--> e23 8,018 -,060e11 <--> e06 4,451 ,034
410
Minimization History (Default model)
Iteration Negativeeigenvalues
Condition#
Smallesteigenvalue Diameter F NTries Ratio
0 e 18 -,578 9999,000 3535,495 0 9999,0001 e* 15 -2,777 1,153 2453,082 18 ,9852 e 12 -,335 ,356 2148,700 5 ,9573 e 5 -,321 ,564 1780,108 6 ,8444 e 7 -,383 1,631 1173,612 7 ,6465 e* 1 -,228 1,867 608,019 5 ,5906 e 0 939,548 ,845 351,158 5 ,8487 e 0 774,302 ,592 277,138 2 ,0008 e 0 965,753 ,538 250,106 1 1,1149 e 0 1307,009 ,206 247,795 1 1,068
10 e 0 1406,029 ,040 247,725 1 1,01711 e 0 1413,364 ,002 247,725 1 1,00112 e 0 1413,157 ,000 247,725 1 1,000
411
Model Fit Summary
CMIN
Model NPAR CMIN DF P CMIN/DFDefault model 61 247,725 215 ,062 1,152Saturated model 276 ,000 0Independence model 23 3318,482 253 ,000 13,117
RMR, GFI
Model RMR GFI AGFI PGFIDefault model ,021 ,943 ,927 ,734Saturated model ,000 1,000Independence model ,142 ,347 ,287 ,318
Baseline Comparisons
Model NFIDelta1
RFIrho1
IFIDelta2
TLIrho2 CFI
Default model ,925 ,912 ,989 ,987 ,989Saturated model 1,000 1,000 1,000Independence model ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000
Parsimony-Adjusted Measures
Model PRATIO PNFI PCFIDefault model ,850 ,786 ,841Saturated model ,000 ,000 ,000Independence model 1,000 ,000 ,000
NCP
Model NCP LO 90 HI 90 Default model 32,725 ,000 75,857Saturated model ,000 ,000 ,000Independence model 3065,482 2883,225 3255,077
412
413
FMIN
Model FMIN F0 LO 90 HI 90 Default model ,724 ,096 ,000 ,222Saturated model ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000Independence model 9,703 8,963 8,430 9,518
RMSEA
Model RMSEA LO 90 HI 90 PCLOSEDefault model ,021 ,000 ,032 1,000Independence model ,188 ,183 ,194 ,000
AIC
Model AIC BCC BIC CAICDefault model 369,725 378,933 603,827 664,827Saturated model 552,000 593,660 1611,214 1887,214Independence model 3364,482 3367,953 3452,749 3475,749
ECVI
Model ECVI LO 90 HI 90 MECVIDefault model 1,081 ,985 1,207 1,108Saturated model 1,614 1,614 1,614 1,736Independence model 9,838 9,305 10,392 9,848
HOELTER
Model HOELTER.05
HOELTER.01
Default model 346 368Independence model 31 32
