Can high-performance work practices influence employee career competencies? There is a need for better employee outcomes in the banking industry.

It is essential for organizations to invest and improve employee outcomes to enhance organizational competitiveness and growth in today's world. However, most organizations place management objectives above the career competencies of employees. Therefore, this study investigated 1. the effect of high-performance work practices on employee career competencies in the banking industry. 2. the mediating effect of employee career competencies on the relationship between high-performance work practices and employee outcomes in the banking sector. The study adopted a quantitative approach with a total of 340 respondents from various banks in Tanzania. The data was analyzed using Covariance Based Structural Equation Modelling (CB-SEM). The results of the finding indicate that high-performance work practices have a significant effect on employee career competencies. Similarly, employee career competencies significantly impact service quality, creative performance, and extra-role performance in banks. Also, employee career competency does not mediate the relationship between high-performance work systems and service quality in the banking industry.

Introduction

Strategic human resource management (SHRM) has researchers assessing the conceivable share of using high-performance work systems (HPWSs) as a method to expand an organizations’ competitive advantage [1-4]. HPWS refers to an interconnected group of HR policies and practices that involves thorough selective staffing, general training and development, incentive rewards, good work-life balance, adequate empowerment, job security and, great career opportunities, which are calculated to improve employees’ career competencies and achieve organizational objectives [1, 5–9]. Although, the preceding HPWS study has displayed a relationship between employee well-being and organization performance [1, 10, 11]. The new HPWS research is often critiqued for its extensive management-centric viewpoint, prioritizing objectives over employee well-being [12]. This viewpoint is apparent in its limited economic outlook of HPWS research, which centers around improving the competence of HR practices [13, 14], while employee’s effects on HPWS have not been given the appropriate attention [15].

As a result, some researchers have requested studies centered on employee research and also features the managerial and functionalist viewpoints, which is a well-adjusted tactic that seeks to evade the sidelining of employee outcomes in HPWS [12, 16, 17]. Lepack et al. [8] also stated that the HR systems should be aimed at organizations’ tactical objectives and should function well by managing employees at work, especially planning and handling their careers [18]. Arguable, human factors are the most esteemed factors in modern organizations, and offering employees a long-term secure career is a win-win position for organizations and their employees. Szabó-Bálint [19] described a career as a lasting course, which comprises a series of actions, mindsets, or behaviors in a person’s work life. Career development relates to the development of employees that is deemed advantageous to both the individual and organization [20], which also encompasses a structured, official, and well-calculated effort to accomplish equilibrium between the individual’s career prerequisites and the organization’s workforce requests. Employees must take responsibility for their employability by acquiring experience and career competencies.

To maintain a job in this dynamic labor market, individuals need progressive career competencies that can help them in their careers [21]. When an organization provides the appropriate HPW practices, employees discover that their job competencies meet the organization’s standards; they would likely exhibit employee outcomes such as service quality, creative performance, and extra-role behavior. No study has been able to propose this conceptualization. Therefore, a conceptual framework was developed to examines the effects of high-performance work practices on career competencies. Furthermore, the career competencies relationship between service quality, creative performance, and extra-role behavior was examined. Lastly, the career competencies construct is examined as a mediator between service quality, creative performance, and extra-role behavior.

Literature reviews

HPWPs and career competencies

This study focuses more on employee-driven HPWP, which has not received enough attention. Studies relating to the effect of HPWP on employees’ pro-organizational behavior are habitually grounded on the social exchange theory (SET). This denotes that employees feel responsible for responding to the organization’s benefits when they receive favorable treatments from organizations [22]. Social exchange connections spur affirmative job or organizational conclusions when the organization cares for its employees [23]. Employees that attain economic and socio-emotional capabilities in a workspace are usually compelled to reimburse the organization in several ways. In the absence of specific tactical goals within an organization, the HR work systems would not lead the employees. An organization must select and design the appropriate HR practices that are not only allied with each other but also affiliated with the organization’s plan to accomplish the suitable organizational outcomes [1, 10], such as several components of HPWSs and the assessment of social responsibility in employment relations [24-26]. This can be stated that HPWPs are exhibited through the organization’s prominence on these components. Organizations that partake in HPWPs often foster motivation amongst their employees, resulting in positive outcomes for organizations [26]. There is a growing need for employees to manage their careers actively; it is gradually becoming essential for them to acquire the crucial competencies that empower them to succeed [27]. Therefore, they must become prolific in the career-related competencies that can help them steer through their career. Career competencies concern an individual’s entire career and could be distinguished from job skills and work capabilities geared towards effectively executing a job [28]. It can be said that career competencies relate to knowledge, skills, and abilities. Career construction theory positions that persons build their careers by enforcing meaningful experiences to their vocational and occupational performances [29]. Employees should acquire the necessary resources to deal with career loads and pressures [30]. With HPWPs in place, employees relish working for the organization while following their objectives and building their career competencies. This occurs when organizations carefully recruit the appropriate personnel to boost their productivity. According to Kong et al. [31], employee empowerment promotes competence and growth and helps employees reach their goals as long as the organization sticks to training them in line with their qualifications. This increases their capacity and provides them with the opportunity to use their empowerment in their work successfully. Also, encourage them to effectively manage their job requirements while working in an environment where remuneration, career development, and job security are highly considered [32]. Oliinyk [26] stated that HPWPs have a significant relationship with career adaptability. Therefore, we hypothesize that:

H1: HPWPs significantly influence Career competencies.

Career competencies on employee outcomes

Career competencies are presumed to play a vital role in upholding the employee’s worth to the organization [33]. Service quality, creative performance, and extra-role performance are the three imperative employee outcomes of career competencies tested in this study. This study concentrates on these outcomes because no empirical study has tested them with career competencies. Previous research examined career adaptability in terms of meeting expectations, creative performance, and extra-role performance [26]. Whereas service quality is the process of delivering a service and the value of the service outcome. It is the gap between the expectation of the service and satisfaction derived.

Service quality is a determining factor in the provision of service. It does not only become a source of identity by customers, but it becomes an image of the organization. When employees have the knowledge, skills, and abilities required to carry out their job, they can provide supreme service to their customers [34]. Creative performance is the activity that influences "products, ideas, or procedures that satisfy two conditions, namely, they are novel or original, and they are potentially relevant for, or useful to an organization” [35, 36]. An employee that is curious about new ways to carry out their work efficiently and effectively can successfully run their careers [28]. When employees are confident in their careers, they search for opportunities for personnel development by solving problems and gaining new skills [37]. Extra-role performances are employee work behaviors that involve providing services to customers that stretch farther than their formal role requirements. Employees who possess career competencies are willing to go above and beyond the line to satisfy their customers. Organizations prefer to recruit employees who perform extra-role behavior. Due to the limited empirical evidence on these relationships, we hereby propose the following hypothesis:

H2a: Career competency significantly influences service quality.

H2b: Career competency significantly influences creative performance.

H2c: Career competency significantly influences extra-role performance.

Career competencies as a mediator

Organizations that operate with HR practices motivate the employees to go the extra mile to satisfy the customers and explore new ways to carry on their responsibilities to achieve their goals, which inadvertently boosts service quality. An organization with HPWPs incorporates employees who possess the knowledge, skills, and abilities to provide extra-role and creative performances [26]. This notion gives rise to these hypotheses:

H3: Career competencies significantly influence a relationship between HPWP on (a) service quality, (b) creative performance (c) extra-role performance.

Methodology

The research model of this study is depicted in Fig 1. based on the effect of high-performance work practices on employee career competencies and the mediating effect of employee career competencies on the relationship between high-performance work practices and employee outcomes in the banking sector.

Fig 1

Conceptual model.

Data collection and sample

This study was conducted according to the guidelines laid down in the Declaration of Helsinki, and the Cyprus International University Review Committee approved all procedures involving human subjects. The hard-copy questionnaire was distributed, and data from this survey were collected from banking employees across Tanzania—main cities of Dar es Salaam, Arusha, Mwanza, Moshi, and Dodoma. Dar es Salaam has 290 branches, followed by Arusha, 68 branches, Mwanza, 67, Moshi, 46, and Dodoma, 41. Available data from the Bank of Tanzania annual report shows that in 2020, banking supervisors and managers in this region have a total of 1,198 employees. Therefore, Yamane [38] sample size calculator was used to establish the minimum sample size for the survey, and the result shows that 301 participants are required for the survey. Also, we ensured that prospective respondents were eligible to participate in this survey, and only primary staff with years of experience in the field were selected. Micro-finance bankings were avoided in order to improve the generalization of the findings. Purposive quantitative research was employed for this study, and respondents were assured that their responses would be kept confidential. We contacted the supervisors and managers of each bank branch to seek their approval. In addition, 534 bank employees agreed to participate in the survey and, due to the current global situation, we mailed the questionnaires to the supervisors and managers. A total of 340 respondents responded to the survey, which represents a 63.7% response rate. A total of 6 incomplete questionnaires were deleted, and 334 valid questionnaires were used for the data analysis. The sample of the employees consists of 195 (59.58%) male and 139 (40.42%) female. A total of 41.91% were between 25 and 34 years of age, and 59.8% were supervisors with bachelor’s degrees (44.91%). The banking employees’ highest work experience is between 7–9 years at 29.94% as shown in Table 1.

Table 1

The demographic characteristics of the sample.

		Frequency	%
Gender	Female	139	40.42
	Male	195	59.58
Age	18–24 years	39	11.68
	25–34 years	140	41.91
	35–44 years	97	29.04
	45 and above	58	17.36
Marital Status	Single	30	8.98
	Married	294	88.02
	Divorced/Widowed	10	2.99
Position	Marketing Manager	33	9.88
	Accounting Manager	110	59.88
	Supervisors	145	43.41
	Operational Manager	90	2.69
	HR Manager	8	2.39
Educational level	Primary education	10	2.99
	Secondary education	23	6.89
	Diploma	115	34.43
	Bachelor Degree	150	44.91
	Master’s Degree	26	7.78
	Ph.D.	10	2.99
Organization work experience	<4 years	75	22.45
	4–6	68	20.36
	7–9	100	29.94
	> 9years	91	27.24

Measurement scales

High-performance work practices were measured using seven items adapted from previous literature [32]. The items focused on the key factors of high-performance work practices that have been extensively used in many kinds of literature, including training, empowerment, work-life balance, rewards, selective staffing, job security, and career opportunities [24, 25]. Employees were asked about the extent to which their organizations used high-performance work practices. The reliability test showed that the Cronbach’s alpha value was 0.899, indicating acceptable reliability of the construct. Career competencies were measured using four items adapted from Akkermans et al. [28]. Employees were asked to assess their career competencies in the organization. Cronbach’s alpha was .879, indicates acceptable reliability of the construct. Service quality was measured using four items, adapted from Bettencourt et al. [39]. Service quality has been studied extensively [40-42]. The items include the quality of the service received within the organization. The overall reliability value was .879, indicating good reliability of the construct.

Creative performance was adapted from the scale developed by Ali and Razi [42]. In line with previous studies, Four items were used to assess the working environment, in line with previous studies [27, 43]. These items capture employees’ perceptions of routine tasks in several ways. A reliability test using Cronbach’s coefficient was conducted. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.882, indicating acceptable reliability of the construct. Extra-role performance was measured and adapted from Ozturk and Karatepe [44]. The extra-role performance has been extensively studied [45-48]. Employees were asked to make constructive suggestions to improve the organization’s operations. The Cronbach’s coefficient was 0.869, indicating acceptable reliability of the construct.

The questionnaire was measured on a five-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). We instructed bank employees to provide information on their high-performance work practices, career’ competencies, creative performance, service quality, and extra-role performance. This ensured that this study adopted an approach to reduce common bias, as suggested by Weer and Greenhaus [49]. We ensured that respondents’ responses were anonymous and confidential.

Data analysis

This study carried out different tests to confirm the study proposed model. First, the model fit and other measurement factors were tested using CFA (Confirmatory Factor Analysis) as suggested by Podsakoff et al. [50] and Bentler [51]. Furthermore, we tested the research model relationships with Covariance-Based Structural Equation Modelling (CB-SEM) using the JASP 10.0.0.13 statistical software tool that measures relationships of direct and indirect effects of variables [52, 53].

Results and findings

Measurement model

The measurement model assesses the item’s internal consistency and convergent validity. First, a preliminary test was performed. We checked the eigenvalues of components extracted. The analysis provided that some of the eigenvalues are above or equal to a value of one, as shown in Fig 2. The initial factor component (34%) of the total variance was explained. The eigenvalue component factors range from 1.263 to 7.146, and the percentage of total variance explained ranged from 34.8% to 71.6%. As a result, the variance of the common method does not reveal any serious problems in this study.

Fig 2

Scree plots showing principal components and benchmark eigenvalue.

Furthermore, the results of skewness and kurtosis indices indicate that there is data normality of the model. As indicated, skewness and kurtosis indices should not exceed |2.3| to check for data normality. The value of skewness and kurtosis indices are between |2.3|. Hence, the respondent’s data in this study indicate appropriateness for further factor analysis. In addition, Bartlett’s test of sphericity was employed to measure the adequacy of the sampling and Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO). The results shown significant statistics of χ2 (210) = 4018.258 and the KMO measure = 0.879 > 0.500 respectively.

Second, we assess the measurement model based on internal consistency and convergent validity. The measurement model evaluates the factor loadings (γ), composite reliability (CR), average variance extracted (AVE), and Cronbach’s alpha (α). As suggested by Han et al. [54], the recommended value for the reliability of each construct must be > 0.70. Therefore, the values of Cronbach’s alpha (α) of the study ranged from 0.882 to 0.899, and values of each construct exceed 0.7 threshold value [54, 55], suggesting good internal consistency. Also, the factor loadings (γ), composite reliability (CR), and average variance extracted (AVE) were evaluated. The value of standard factor loading < 0.4 were deleted as recommended by [54]. Table 2 indicates that all values of factor loading are above 0.40. Also, the acceptable CR values for each construct should be > 0.70, while [54] recommended that the AVE values should also be > 0.50. The Cronbach’s alpha and CR values exceed the 0.7 thresholds, and AVE exceeds the 0.5 threshold value. Thus, the value of standard factor loading, AVE, CR, and Cronbach’s alpha satisfy the suggested thresholds. Table 2 presents a summary of the exploratory analyses (AVE, CR, Cronbach’s alpha, skewness and kurtosis).

Table 2

Summary of exploratory analyses.

Construct	Factor Loading (λ)	Skewness	Kurtosis
High-Performance Work Practices (HP)
CR = 0.878, AVE = 0.590, α = 0.899
HP1	0.735	-1.17	0.808
HP2	0.799	-1.14	1.39
HP3	0.844	-1.12	1.20
HP4	0.702	-0.735	0.095
HP5	0.753	-1.38	1.67
Career’ competencies (CC)
CR = 0.799, AVE = 0.500, α = 0.879
CC1	0.718	-0.649	-0.103
CC2	0.658	-1.341	-0.434
CC3	0.764	-0.571	-0.298
CC4	0.683	-1.223	-0.516
Service quality (SQ)
CR = 0.814, AVE = 0.525, α = 0.790
SQ1	0.739	0.132	-0.820
SQ2	0.630	0.192	-0.769
SQ3	0.811	-0.096	-1.798
SQ4	0.706	-0.140	-0.611
Creative performance (CP)E
CR = 0.826, AVE = 0.544, α = 0.882
CP1	0.700	-0.766	0.198
CP2	0.702	-1.20	1.430
CP3	0.776	-0.469	-0.194
CP4	0.768	-0.385	-0.374
Extra-role performance (ERP)
CR = 0.842, AVE = 0.577, α = 0.869
ERP1	0.795	-0.943	0.882
ERP 2	0.916	-0.950	0.546
ERP 3	0.710	-1.34	1.86
ERP4	0.578	-0.579	-0.265

We conducted a correlation analysis to evaluate the relationships between the constructs [55]. Accordingly, the results show a positive and significant relationship between the constructs, as shown in Table 3. This implies that the correlation coefficients of the constructs satisfy the requirement acceptable for the structural model procedure. The mean, standard deviation, and bivariate correlations in Table 3 indicate a positive correlation between variables.

Table 3

Descriptive statistics and correlation coefficient of the constructs.

Constructs	Mean	SD	HP	CC	SQ	ERP	CP
HP	3.822	0.128	-
CC	3.379	0.139	0.497	-
SQ	3.715	0.179	0.310	0.485	-
ERP	3.827	2.242	0.258	0.289	0.133	-
CP	2.848	0.149	0.265	0.354	0.233	0.561	-

* p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001.

The structural model

To further test the validity of the latent constructs, we used confirmatory factor analysis to confirm the model fit. Table 4 presents the results for the overall model fit. The chi-square/degree of freedom (χ2/df), Goodness of Fit Index (GFI), Bentler-Bonett Non-normed Fit Index (NNFI), Normed Fit Index (NFI), Root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), Comparative Fit Index (CFI), and Standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) values were assessed based on range of recommended values [56, 57]. This results suggest that the research model is suitably fit.

Table 4

Model fit summary of the research model (confirmatory factor analysis).

Fit index	Recommended value	Research model
Chi-square/degree of freedom (χ2/df)	≤ 3.00	2.138
Goodness of Fit Index (GFI)	≥ 0.80	0.897
Bentler-Bonett Non-normed Fit Index (NNFI)	≥ 0.80	0.939
Normed Fit Index (NFI)	≥ 0.80	0.907
Root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)	≤ 0.08	0.060
Comparative Fit Index (CFI)	≥ 0.90	0.948
Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI)	≥ 0.90	0.939
Standardized root mean square residual (SRMR)	≤ 0.05	0.041

Hypotheses tests

The structural method was tested using a bootstrapping procedure with 1000 bootstrap samples evaluated [58, 59]. The hypotheses tests show the relationship between the constructs for the research model shown in Table 5, and the path analysis presented the summary of results—the relationships, estimates of the original coefficients (β), Std. Error (standard error), z-value, and level of significance. Also, the R2 for CC is 33.3%, which has proven to be significant for HP in line with [55]. Similarly, the predictive power of SQ (32.4%), ERP (10.5%), and CP (17.1%) proved to be significant for CC in the banking sector.

Table 5

Hypotheses test results.

Hypothesis	Estimate	Std. Error	z-value	p-value	Decision
H1:HP→ CC	0.590	0.071	8.360	0.000	Supported
H2a:CC→ SQ	0.386	0.066	5.875	0.000	Supported
H2b:CC→ ERP	0.288	0.068	4.214	0.000	Supported
H2c:CC→ CP	0.354	0.068	5.196	0.000	Supported
H3a:HP→CC→ SQ	0.088	0.054	1.626	0.104	Not supported
H3b:HP→CC→ CP	0.114	0.058	1.972	0.049	Supported
H3c:HP→CC→ ERP	0.150	0.060	2.500	0.012	Supported

Supported at **p < 0.05; z > 1.96.

From the results, hypotheses H1, H2a, H2b, and H2c were empirically supported. Thus, the relationships among these hypotheses of the current research model were significant in predicting employee outcomes in banking sectors. Among these predictive factors, HP has a significant impact of (H1: β = 0.590, p < 0.001) on employee career competencies. This suggests that HP influence employee career competencies in the banking sector. In addition, employee career competencies significantly impact (H2a: β = 0.386, ρ < 0.001) on employee service quality in organization practices. This suggests that employee career competencies are an important factor that influences employee service quality in the banking sector. In addition, employees’ career competencies have a positive effect (H2b: β = 0.288, ρ < 0.001) on creative performance in the banking sector. Thus, H3 was statistically significant. The findings indicate that employee career competencies have a significant effect (H2c: β = 0.354, ρ < 0.001) on extra-role performance in the banking sector. This suggests that employees’ career competencies influence extra-role performance in the banking sector.

Also, the indirect effect of H3a shows the career competencies significantly influence a relationship between HP and service quality in the banking sector, and the result shows unverifiable support (H3a: β = 0.088, ρ < .0001), which indicates that employee’ career competencies do not mediate the relationship between HP and service quality in the banking sector. In contrast, H3b shows that career competencies significantly influence the relationship between HP and creative performance. The results show empirical support (β = 0.114, ρ < .0001), which indicates that career competencies partially mediate the relationship between HP and creative performance in the banking sector. Also, H3c is hypothesized that career competencies significantly influence the relationship between HP and extra-role performance in banking sectors, the results show empirical support (β = 0.150, ρ > .0001) that career competencies partially mediates the relationship between HP and extra-role performance in the banking sector. Thus, a summary of the hypotheses test results is shown in Table 5.

Discussion and implications

This study examines why HPWPs affect employees’ career competencies. Further, we investigate whether employee career competencies influence employee service quality, creative performance, and employee extra-role performance in the banking sector.

First, there are some interesting findings regarding the effect of HPWPs on employee career competencies. In line with existing studies, the findings of this study provide empirical support for the direct relationship between HPWPs and employees’ career competencies [24, 25]. The role of HPWPs tends to promote the importance of career-related competencies in areas such as knowledge, skills, and abilities through training, empowerment, and career opportunities. Accordingly, most organizations investing in HPWPs help staff’s knowledge-intensive set of skills and competencies to help develop the relationships between HPWPs and employee career competencies and improve organizational core capabilities.

Second, this study’s results demonstrated a significant relationship between career-related competencies and service quality. These results show that perceived employee career competencies have a positive impact on organizational service quality. This implies that employee professionals’ roles and functions are determined by professional job activities being performed within the organization. It is a function of qualifying employees in performing certain functions and roles. Therefore, the link to employee competence in critical activities depends on the level of knowledge, skills, and attitude as it positively influences organizational service quality [34].

Third, this study’s results revealed a significant effect between employee career competencies and creative performance, which is in line with prior studies [25, 37]. This shows that employees are willing to accomplish career goals and feel accomplished through selective staffing, training, and rewards to motivate their employees’ creative performance and other social activities that might influence their creative performance. Therefore, career competencies help employees feel more secure and protected [60].

The findings of this study is in line with previous studies on career-related competencies and extra-role performance, further establishes that the relationship between career-related competencies and extra-role performance is significant to organizational practices [25, 48], in as much as the management is providing novel ideas to improve organizational outcomes when investing on HPWPs. Employees tend to enjoy extra-role performance as long as they fit their future career-related competencies. Thus, most employees tend to use their ability to develop an organization. Accordingly, when employees are motivated by organizational motivation, they find means of achieving their career goals with actions and new opportunities, they show loyalty through their extra-role performance capability.

Finally, this study confirmed the mediating effect of career competencies between HPWPs and creative performance, and the findings indicate career competencies are partially mediated. These results further indicate that strong career competencies strengthen the effect of HPWPs on organizational, creative performance. That is, an organization with HPWPs provides employees with creative performance to grow and develop the organization. However, the indirect relationship between HPWPs and service quality is not mediated by career competencies, suggesting an effect of employee career competence on the relationship between HPWPs and service quality. The result implies that employees who focus on career competency do not strengthen organizational policies but only offer employees a long-term secure career for personal factors.

In conclusion, this study confirmed the mediating effect of career competencies on HPWPs and extra-role performance. The findings indicate that career competencies partially mediate the relationship between HPWPs and extra-role performance in the banking sector. These outcomes further indicate that strong career competencies strengthen the effect of HPWPs on employee extra-role performance. These results show that proper HPWPs help employees perform extra functions and roles at any level or position beyond organizational requirements. Thus, career competence with a high level of personal resources always accomplishes their exceptional goals in organizational development [61].

Theoretical implications

From theoretical implications, this study contributes to organizational practices in the following ways. First, we highlight various studies on the effect of HPWSs on employee career competence and the subsequent employee outcomes—service quality, creative performance, and extra-role performance. Thus, this study provides a theoretical approach to understanding the mediating effect of career competency on the relationship between HPWPs and employee outcomes. This is important because no previous research has proposed a model to support this argument. This empirical study shows how HPWPs utilize their effects on employee career competence. In strategic human resource management studies, service quality, creative performance, and extra-role performance are imperative employee outcomes of career competencies. Thus, the analyses of these factors show a substantial contribution toward HR development in the banking sector.

In general, HPWPs effectively enhance employee career competence because they serve as organizational means for employees outcomes. Also, many researchers pay more attention to HPWSs as antecedents of different mediators to measure their effects on employee and organizational outcomes [25, 32]. Therefore, this study extends the study on the outcome of HPWPs by analyzing the boundary effect of employee career competence on the indirect relationship with employee outcome. Based on the results of employee outcomes, the indirect effect of service quality needs the attention of researchers on measures to improve organization/employee service quality.

Practical implications

The practical implication of this study shows that investing in human capital is an asset to any organizational competitiveness and improving human resources, meaning that organizations need to maintain and retain their resources. Satisfied employees are more likely to stay with suitable staffing, general training and development, incentive rewards, good work-life balance, adequate empowerment, job security, and excellent career opportunities. It determines employees’ well-being and organizational performance [8, 9]. Therefore, the findings imply that organizations can achieve employee outcomes by implementing proper HPW practices that help develop and manage the interrelationships among employees in any organization.

In addition, bank managers and supervisors need to focus on HPWPs to develop employees’ career competencies because, without human capital development, the organization might be affected internally and externally. This is important because employees’ career competency promotes a positive environment in every organization and improves employee outcomes. In retrospect, managers should provide incentives, royalties, and performance activities so that there will be an effective means of communication, knowledge sharing, and goal targets within the organization.

Moreover, the findings of this study suggest that managers should develop more elusive career competence programs that will benefit from the organizational application of high-performance work practices in workplaces. In this respect, bank managers and supervisors need to improve employees’ career competencies to promote strategic human resource management and help reduce incompetence within organizations.

Limitations and suggestions for future research

This study has many limitations; and we suggest better future research. First, this study used a single-time cross-sectional approach with many advantages and significant contributions to providing vital information for the study. However, a longitudinal approach could be used for future studies to track trends and changes over time with the same respondents. Furthermore, the inclusion of other control variables such as, age and gender differences could be an additional measure for future research on HPW practices.

Second, the present study focuses specifically on banks in Tanzania with respect to HR policies and practices in their organizations. Thus, there is a need to extend the study population; multiple locations and other non-financial institutions to provide a better concept for future research. This study measured the effect of high-performance work practices on employee career competencies on service quality, creative performance, and extra-role performance. However, the study should consider in-depth aspects of HPWPs such as training, empowerment, work-life balance, rewards, selective staffing, job security, and career opportunities to provide insights into the current study. Therefore, Therefore, there is a need to expand the study to a more comprehensive aspect of HPWPs in order to provide a better concept for future research.

Finally, the current study examines how high-performance work practices influence employee career competencies and their influences on service quality, creative performance, and extra-role performance as a resultant. Future research should take into account the management and policies of other non-financial institutions which may assist in decision-making and organizational growth.

(DOCX)

Click here for additional data file.

20 Aug 2021

PONE-D-21-22454

CAN HIGH PERFORMANCE WORK PRACTICES HAVE EFFECT ON EMPLOYEE CAREER COMPETENCIES? THERE IS A NEED TO IMPROVE EMPLOYEE OUTCOMES.

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Damis Feruzi Kamna

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by 1.09.2021. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see:  http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at  https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols .

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Yuriy Bilan

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

1. When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please include additional information regarding the survey or questionnaire used in the study and ensure that you have provided sufficient details that others could replicate the analyses. For instance, if you developed a questionnaire as part of this study and it is not under a copyright more restrictive than CC-BY, please include a copy, in both the original language and English, as Supporting Information.

3. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure:

"The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript."

At this time, please address the following queries:

a) Please clarify the sources of funding (financial or material support) for your study. List the grants or organizations that supported your study, including funding received from your institution.

b) State what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role in your study, please state: “The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”

c) If any authors received a salary from any of your funders, please state which authors and which funders.

d) If you did not receive any funding for this study, please state: “The authors received no specific funding for this work.”

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

3. Thank you for stating the following in your Competing Interests section:

"The author(s) received no specific funding for this work."

Please complete your Competing Interests on the online submission form to state any Competing Interests. If you have no competing interests, please state "The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.", as detailed online in our guide for authors at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submit-now

This information should be included in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

4. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability.

"Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized.

Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access.

We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter.

5. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ

6. Please amend your authorship list in your manuscript file to include author Shiva ILKHANIZADEH and Damis Feruzi Kamna.

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

Major revision is needed

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: 1. It is not clear whether the findings of the study can be disseminated to all Tanzanian bank employees, as the representativeness of the sample (340 respondents) using the Cochran formula (Cochran, 1977) is not justified.

such as https://doi.org/10.3846/btp.2020.12750

2. The Measurement Scales section discusses 5 items of High Performance Work Practices, 4 items of Career’s competencies, 4 items of Service quality, 4 items of Creative performance, 4 items of Extra-role performance. They are also listed in table 2: CP-CP5, CC1-CC4, SQ1-SQ4, CP1-CP4 (coincide with the first group of CP-CP5), ERP1-ERP4. Also in table 3. However, in the text of the article they are not explained.

3. It is also not clear what is the essence of the adaptation of the literature [31], [27], [38], [42], [43], as stated in the section Measurement Scales. For a description of High Performance Work Practices you can for example use https://doi.org/10.3846/btp.2020.12750

4. It is not clear which component is referred to in Figure 2., in what units it is measured

5. It is necessary to specify Measurement in table 1

6. Table 3 is called "Correlation coefficient of the constructs". But there are still Mean, SD. Therefore it is necessary to specify the name or the maintenance of table 3.

7. Is it correct that in table 3 the correlation coefficient of, for example, HPWPs with HPWPs = 0.768, and not 1,000? This also applies to other diagonal correlation coefficients

8. Figure 1. Conceptual model - in the title of the figure you need to specify which model it is

9. Non-content errors. The study examined the effect of high performance work practices on employee outcomes in banking system - repetition of words in the Abstract section. Are De sala salaam, Arub, Nwanza cities in Tanzania? are they spelled correctly?

Reviewer #2: The study was conducted on the basis of the banking sector. This aspect should be reflected in the title of the article.

It is also worth mentioning modern concepts that contain elements of HR.

References need updating because there are outdated sources.

Other comments are in the text.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Submitted filename: PONE-D-21-22454.docx

Click here for additional data file.

15 Sep 2021

Response to reviewers

Manuscript ID PONE-D-21-22454

We've checked your submission and before we can proceed, we need you to address the following issues:

1.  Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure:

"The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript."

At this time, please address the following queries:

a) Please clarify the sources of funding (financial or material support) for your study. List the grants or organizations that supported your study, including funding received from your institution.

b) State what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role in your study, please state: “The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”

c) If any authors received a salary from any of your funders, please state which authors and which funders.

d) If you did not receive any funding for this study, please state: “The authors received no specific funding for this work.”

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

2. Thank you for stating the following in your Competing Interests section:

"The author(s) received no specific funding for this work."

Please complete your Competing Interests on the online submission form to state any Competing Interests. If you have no competing interests, please state "The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.", as detailed online in our guide for authors at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submit-now

This information should be included in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

3. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ

4. Please amend your authorship list in your manuscript file to include author Shiva ILKHANIZADEH and Damis Feruzi Kamna.

5.Please provide additional details regarding participant consent. In the Methods section, please ensure that you have specified (1) whether consent was informed and (2) what type you obtained (for instance, written or verbal). If your study included minors, state whether you obtained consent from parents or guardians. If the need for consent was waived by the ethics committee, please include this information.

6. We suggest you thoroughly copyedit your manuscript for language usage, spelling, and grammar. If you do not know anyone who can help you do this, you may wish to consider employing a professional scientific editing service.

Upon resubmission, please provide the following:

The name of the colleague or the details of the professional service that edited your manuscript

A copy of your manuscript showing your changes by either highlighting them or using track changes (uploaded as a *supporting information* file)

A clean copy of the edited manuscript (uploaded as the new *manuscript* file)

7. Please ensure that you refer to Table 1 in your text as, if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the Table.

8. Please amend your current ethics statement to include the full name of the ethics committee/institutional review board(s) that approved your specific study.

Your comments are appreciated. We have added and met all the editorial requirements for 1-8.

Response to reviewers

Authors comment Corrections made

Reviewer #1: 1. It is not clear whether the findings of the study can be disseminated to all Tanzanian bank employees, as the representativeness of the sample (340 respondents) using the Cochran formula (Cochran, 1977) is not justified. We thank you for the constructive reviews. we justified the data through secondary data and Yamane sample size calculator. Data from this survey were collected through online questionnaire conducted with banking employees across Tanzania - Dar es Salaam, Arusha, Mwanza, Moshi and Dodoma. Dar es Salaam has 290 branches, followed by Arusha, 68 branches, Mwanza, 67, Moshi, 46, and Dodoma, 41. Available data from Bank of Tanzania annual report shows that in 2020, banking supervisors and managers in this region have a total of 1,198 employees. Therefore, the Yamane (1967) sample size calculator was used to establish the minimum sample size for the survey and the result shows that 301 participants are required for the survey.

The Measurement Scales section discusses 5 items of High Performance Work Practices, 4 items of Career’s competencies, 4 items of Service quality, 4 items of Creative performance, 4 items of Extra-role performance. They are also listed in table 2: CP-CP5, CC1-CC4, SQ1-SQ4, CP1-CP4 (coincide with the first group of CP-CP5), ERP1-ERP4. Also in table 3. However, in the text of the article they are not explained. We thank you for the feedbacks. We corrected High Performance Work Practices and all other issues with the segment thanks High Performance Work Practices (HP);

Career’ competencies (CC)

Service quality (SQ)

Creative performance (CP)

Extra-role performance (ERP)

It is also not clear what is the essence of the adaptation of the literature [31], [27], [38], [42], [43], as stated in the section Measurement Scales. For a description of High Performance Work Practices you can for example use https://doi.org/10.3846/btp.2020.12750 Thanks for your observation. We have to adopt it from different literature.

Thnks It is because we adapted from different literature instead one literature

It is not clear which component is referred to in Figure 2., in what units it is measured Thanks for your observation. We have corrected Figure 2. Scree plots showing principal components and benchmark Eigenvalue

It is necessary to specify Measurement in table 1 Thanks for the observation Thanks we removed the measurement as you have rightly stated

Table 3 is called "Correlation coefficient of the constructs". But there are still Mean, SD. Therefore it is necessary to specify the name or the maintenance of table 3. We thank you for the constructive review. we have made the corrections. Table 3 Descriptive statistics and correlation coefficient of the constructs

Figure 1. Conceptual model - in the title of the figure you need to specify which model it is We thank you for your constructive review. we made the adjustments. The research model of this study is depicted in Figure 1. based on the effect of high performance work practices on employee career competencies and the mediating effect of employee career competencies on the relationship between high performance work practices and employee outcomes in the banking sector

Reviewer 2

Non-content errors. The study examined the effect of high performance work practices on employee outcomes in banking system - repetition of words in the Abstract section. Are De sala salaam, Arub, Nwanza cities in Tanzania? are they spelled correctly? We thank you for your constructive review. we made the adjustments. In today's world, it is important for organisations to invest and improve employee outcomes to enhance organizational competitiveness and growth. However, most organizations place management objectives above the career competencies of employees. Therefore, this study investigates 1. the effect of high performance work practices on employee career competencies in the banking industry. 2. the mediating effect of employee career competencies on the relationship between high performance work practices and employee outcomes in the banking sector

Dar es Salaam, Arusha, Mwanza, Moshi and Dodoma

Other Corrections Thanks for the observation CAN HIGH PERFORMANCE WORK PRACTICES INFLUENCE EMPLOYEE CAREER COMPETENCIES ? THERE IS A NEED FOR BETTER EMPLOYEE OUTCOMES IN THE BANKING INDUSTRY.

It is also worth mentioning modern concepts that contain elements of HR. For example, Social responsibility assessment in the field of employment (case study of manufacturing). doi.org/10.33271/nvngu/2020-3/131 We thank you for your constructive review. we made the adjustments. It is necessary for an organization to select and design the appropriate HR practices that are not only allied with each other, but also affiliated with the organization's plan so as to accomplish the suitable organizational outcomes [1,10] such as several components of HPWSs and the assessment of social responsibility in employment relations [24-26].

This approach also has other positive consequences for organizations. For example, Hiring and retaining skilled employees in SMEs: problems in human resource practices and links with organizational success. We appreciate your comments. we have corrected it. With HPWPs in place, employees relish working for the organization while following their objectives and building their career competencies. This occurs when organizations carefully recruit the appropriate personnel to boost their productivity. According to [31], employee empowerment promotes competence, growth and helps employees reach their goals as long as employees continue to receive training adapted to their qualifications. This increases their capacity and provides them with the opportunity to use their empowerment in their work successfully. Also, encourage them to effectively manage their job requirements while working in an environment where remuneration, career development and job security are highly considered [32]. As previously studied by [25] and also stated that HPWPs has a significant relationship with career adaptability. Therefore, this hypothesis is hereby adopted:

References need updating because there are outdated sources (1991, 1995, 1996, 1998…) Thanks for the observation We updated the references

5 Jan 2022

31 Jan 2022

Dear EIC/reviewers

We will like to appreciate your efforts in reviewing this manuscript.

Thank you for your comments and contributions, it helps the improve the readability of the manuscript.

Thanks.

�  The acronym HPWPs appears in the abstract, but the reader does not know what it is since it has not yet been described. Therefore, delete and write the full meaning.

Thanks for the comment

We have deleted it and added the full meaning of the acronyms

Thanks

�  Line 43: “[8] also contended…” should be changed by “Lepack et al. [8] also contended…”

Thanks for the comment

We have changed it to [8] also contended

�  Analogously, in line 48: “Szabó-Bálint [19] described a career…”

Thanks for the comment

We have changed it to [19] described a career

�  Line 62: “than examines High…” should be changed by “than examines high…”

Thanks for the comment

We corrected it - than examines high

�  HPWPs has been not described previously. It could be done on line 58.

Thanks for the comment

We made proper correction - high-performance work practices (HPWPs)

Thanks

�  Line 101: “According to [31]…” should be changed by “According to Kong et al. [31]…”

Thanks for the comment

We have changed it to According to [31]

�  Lines 107-108: “As previously studied by [26] and…” should be changed by “As previously studied by Oliinyk [26] and…”

Thanks for the comment

We have changed it to According to [26]

�  Line 126: “Creative performance the creation of…” The sentence is not complete.

Thanks for the comment

We have changed it to - Creative performance is the creation that influences “products, ideas, or procedures that satisfy two conditions, namely, they are novel or original, and they are potentially relevant for, or useful to an organization”

Line 144 should be in bold.

Thanks for the comment

Yes we bold it - competencies as mediators

�  Lines 166-167: What are Dar es Salaam, Arusha, Mwanza, Moshi and Dodoma. They are banks? It should be specified.

Thanks for the comment

Yes we specified the main cities where the data collection took place- main cities of Dar es Salaam, Arusha, Mwanza, Moshi, and Dodoma

�  Line 170: What sample calculation criteria were used?

Thanks for the comment

Yes, we used (yamane, 1967) calculator n/1+n(e2). Yamane T. Statistics, an introductory Analysis 2nd Edition: Harper and Row. New York. 1967.

�  Line 183: “With highest age between 25-34 years…”. I suggest to change the sentence because it lead to think that the older employees had between 25-34 years. In reality, the largest group of employees were between 25-34 years old.

A total of 41.91% were between 25 and 34 years of age, and 59.8% were supervisors with bachelor’s degrees (44.91%).

Thanks for the comment

�  Line 184: Change “Bachelor Degree” by “bachelor degree”.

Thanks for the comment

We have changed it

�  Lines 190-194: Authors say that HPWP were measured using 5 items. However, training, empowerment, work-life balance, rewards, selective staffing, job security and career opportunities are 7 items.

Thanks for the comment

We have corrected it

�  Line 199: “… adapted from [28]” should be changed by “… adapted from Akkermans et al. [28]”. Idem in lines 204, 210 and 218

Thanks for the comment

We have corrected it

�  Line 212: Change “we” by “We”.

Thanks for the comment - This study tested for the analysis of descriptive statistics

�  Line 227: Change “… as suggested by [49]” by “… as suggested by Weer and Greenhaus [49]”

Thanks for the comment- We have corrected it

�  All paragraphs in the "Measurement scales" section are constructed in the same way. It is not necessary to indicate 5 times “five-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5)". Once is enough since it is the same in all items. Rewrite this section combining concepts and not repeating the wording scheme.

Thanks for the comment- We have corrected it

�  Revise line 236: “… as required by [50,51]”

�  Rewrite sentence in line 243.

�  Revise sentence in line 245-246.

�  Revise the present-past in lines 248-249.

Thanks for the comment- We have corrected it

This study carried out different tests to confirm the study proposed model. This study tested for the analysis of descriptive statistics. The model fit and other factor measures were checked through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), through measurement model. We tested the whole model in CFA consist of five constructs, and the study checked for the model fit indices as suggested by [50,51]. Also, we tested the research model fit with structural equation modeling using the JASP 10.0.0.13 statistical software tool that measures relationships of direct and indirect effects in relation to previous studies [52,53].

�  PLS-SEM do not requires data be normal distribution. Therefore, the analysis of normality has no sense in this study (lines 251-261).

Thanks for the comment- We have corrected it - Covariance Based Structural Equation Modelling (CB-SEM).

�  Revise sentence in line 262: “we measured the measurement model…”. Why not, for example, “we assess the measurement model…”. In line 263 authors repeat “measures”. Please, improve the wording.

�  Revise line 270: “… as recommended by [54]”

�  Line 275. “As presented in Table 2” is an incomplete sentence.

�  Lines 279-280 are not clear.

�  Line 307: Revise “as stated by [55]”

Thanks for the comment- We have corrected this section

Second, we assess the measurement model based on internal consistency and convergent validity. The measurement model evaluates the factor loadings (γ), composite reliability (CR), average variance extracted (AVE), and Cronbach’s alpha (α). As suggested [54], the recommended value for the reliability of each construct must be > 0.70. Therefore, the values of Cronbach’s alpha (α) of the study ranged from 0.882 to 0.899, and values of each construct exceed 0.7 threshold value [54,55], suggesting good internal consistency. Also, the factor loadings (γ), composite reliability (CR), and average variance extracted (AVE) were evaluated. The value of standard factor loading < 0.4 were deleted as recommended by [54]. Table 2 indicates that all values of factor loading are above 0.40. Also, the acceptable CR values for each construct should be > 0.70, while the AVE values should also be > 0.50, as recommended by [54]. The Cronbach's alpha and CR values exceed the 0.7 thresholds, and AVE exceeds the 0.5 threshold value. Thus, the value of standard factor loading, AVE, CR, and Cronbach's alpha satisfy the suggested thresholds. Table 2 presents a summary of the exploratory analyses (AVE, CR, Cronbach's alpha, skewness and kurtosis ).

�  Lines 309-310: It is not correct. Authors should revise this statement.

SQ, ERP and CP are not predictors of CC.

Also, the R2 for CC is 33.3%, which has proven to be significant for HP in line with [55]. Similarly, the predictive power of SQ (32.4%), ERP (10.5%), and CP (17.1%) proved to be significant for CC in the banking sector.

�  Line 314 onwards HPWP has been changed by HPW. Why?

�  Lines 311-325 has been constructed in a similar way. Please, change the wording.

Thanks for the comment- We have corrected it

Thnaks

10 Feb 2022

14 Feb 2022

Dear EIC/reviewers

We will like to appreciate your efforts in reviewing this manuscript.

Thank you for your comments and contributions, it helps improve the readability of the manuscript.

Thanks.

�  Line 43: “[8] also contended…” should be changed by “Lepack et al. [8] also contended…”

Thanks for the comment

We have changed it to Lepack et al. [8] also stated

�  Analogously, in line 48: “Szabó-Bálint [19] described a career…”

Thanks for the comment

We have changed it to Szabó-Bálint [19] described a career

�  Line 101: “According to [31]…” should be changed by “According to Kong et al. [31]…”

Thanks for the comment

We have changed it to According to Kong et al. [31],

�  Lines 107-108: “As previously studied by [26] and…” should be changed by “As previously studied by Oliinyk [26] and…”

Thanks for the comment

We has been changed to Oliinyk [26] stated

�  Line 170: What sample calculation criteria were used?

Thanks for the comment

Yes, we used Yamane [38] sample size calculator was used to establish the minimum sample size for the survey, and the result shows that 301 participants are required for the survey.

�  Line 199: “… adapted from [28]” should be changed by “… adapted from Akkermans et al. [28]”. Idem in lines 204, 210 and 218

Thanks for the comment

We have corrected it

�  Line 212: Change “we” by “We”.

Thanks for the comment - This study tested for the analysis of descriptive statistics

�  Line 227: Change “… as suggested by [49]” by “… as suggested by Weer and Greenhaus [49]”

Thanks for the comment- We have corrected it

This ensured that this study adopted an approach to reduce common bias, as suggested by Weer and Greenhaus [49].

�  All paragraphs in the "Measurement scales" section are constructed in the same way. It is not necessary to indicate 5 times “five-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5)". Once is enough since it is the same in all items. Rewrite this section combining concepts and not repeating the wording scheme.

Thanks for the comment- We have corrected it

High-performance work practices were measured using seven items adapted from previous literature [32]. The items focused on the key factors of high-performance work practices that have been extensively used in many kinds of literature, including training, empowerment, work-life balance, rewards, selective staffing, job security, and career opportunities [24,25]. Employees were asked about the extent to which their organizations used high-performance work practices. The reliability test showed that the Cronbach’s alpha value was 0.899, indicating acceptable reliability of the construct. Career competencies were measured using four items adapted from Akkermans et al. [28]. Employees were asked to assess their career competencies in the organization. Cronbach’s alpha was .879, indicates acceptable reliability of the construct. Service quality was measured using four items, adapted from Bettencourt et al. [39]. Service quality has been studied extensively [40-42]. The items include the quality of the service received within the organization. The overall reliability value was .879, indicating good reliability of the construct.

Creative performance was adapted from the scale developed by Ali and Razi [42]. In line with previous studies, Four items were used to assess the working environment, in line with previous studies [27,43]. These items capture employees’ perceptions of routine tasks in several ways. A reliability test using Cronbach’s coefficient was conducted. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.882, indicating acceptable reliability of the construct. Extra-role performance was measured and adapted from Ozturk and Karatepe [44]. The extra-role performance has been extensively studied [45-48]. Employees were asked to make constructive suggestions to improve the organization's operations. The Cronbach’s coefficient was 0.869, indicating acceptable reliability of the construct. The questionnaire was measured on a five-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). We instructed bank employees to provide information on their high-performance work practices, career’ competencies, creative performance, service quality, and extra-role performance. This ensured that this study adopted an approach to reduce common bias, as suggested by Weer and Greenhaus [49]. We ensured that respondents' responses were anonymous and confidential.

�  Revise line 236: “… as required by [50,51]”

�  Rewrite sentence in line 243.

�  Revise sentence in line 245-246.

�  Revise the present-past in lines 248-249.

Thanks for the comments- We have corrected it

�  This study carried out different tests to confirm the study proposed model. First, the model fit and other measurement factors were tested using CFA (Confirmatory Factor Analysis) as suggested by Podsakoff et al. [50] and Bentler [51]. Furthermore, we tested the research model relationships with Covariance-Based Structural Equation Modelling (CB-SEM) using the JASP 10.0.0.13 statistical software tool that measures relationships of direct and indirect effects of variables [52,53].

�  PLS-SEM do not requires data be normal distribution. Therefore, the analysis of normality has no sense in this study (lines 251-261).

Thanks for the comment- We have corrected it - we used Covariance Based Structural Equation Modelling (CB-SEM).

�  RRevise line 270: “… as recommended by [54]”

while [54] recommended that the AVE values should also be > 0.50.

�  Line 275. “As presented in Table 2” is an incomplete sentence.

Table 2 presents a summary of the exploratory analyses (AVE, CR, Cronbach's alpha, skewness and kurtosis).

�  Line 307: Revise “as stated by [55]”

Thanks for the comment- We have corrected this section

We conducted a correlation analysis to evaluate the relationships between the constructs [55]. Accordingly, the results show a positive and significant relationship between the constructs

Submitted filename: ACADEMIC EDITOR.docx

Click here for additional data file.

17 Feb 2022

CAN HIGH PERFORMANCE WORK PRACTICES INFLUENCE EMPLOYEE CAREER COMPETENCIES ? THERE IS A NEED FOR BETTER EMPLOYEE OUTCOMES IN THE BANKING INDUSTRY.

PONE-D-21-22454R3

Dear Dr. Damis Feruzi Kamna ,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

María del Carmen Valls Martínez, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

21 Feb 2022

PONE-D-21-22454R3

CAN HIGH-PERFORMANCE WORK PRACTICES INFLUENCE EMPLOYEE CAREER COMPETENCIES? THERE IS A NEED FOR BETTER EMPLOYEE OUTCOMES IN THE BANKING INDUSTRY.

Dear Dr. Kamna:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. María del Carmen Valls Martínez

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE