| Literature DB >> 35359813 |
Jie Mao1, Saeed Siyal2,3, Munawer Javed Ahmed4, Riaz Ahmad4, Chunlin Xin2, Samina Qasim4.
Abstract
Service recovery performance (SRP) is very important for the takaful insurance industry for maintaining and attracting new clients, which in turn serves as a competitive advantage for the survival and continued future of the businesses. If the insurance sector could not maintain SRP, then the competitive advantage of the organizations could be decayed. Therefore, under the theoretical foundation of equity theory and resource-based theory, this research has investigated the link between human resources management practices (HRMP) (such as human capital, training, job description, teamwork, empowerment, and rewards) and SRP directly and indirectly through the employee commitment. By using a convenient sampling technique data was collected from the employees working in the Takaful industry in Pakistan to empirically test the proposed hypotheses and validate the findings. Using cross research design and quantitative research approach. The Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) had presented the positive relationship between HRM practices and SRP. On the other hand, employee commitment had also mediated this relationship. As employee commitment is significantly mediated among most of the HRMP, this aspect is therefore considered to be a big contribution of the study in the context of Pakistan. Based on these findings, the current study has several important implications the practitioners and readers.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; Pakistan; employee commitment; human resources management practices; service recovery performance; takaful industry
Year: 2022 PMID: 35359813 PMCID: PMC8964282 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.752912
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
FIGURE 1Research framework.
Measurement model results.
| Variable | Item | Loading | Cronbach’s alpha | Composite reliability | AVE |
|
| SRP1 | 0.838 | 0.850 | 0.892 | 0.675 |
| SRP2 | 0.875 | ||||
| SRP3 | 0.817 | ||||
| SRP4 | 0.751 | ||||
|
| TR1 | 0.802 | 0.777 | 0.855 | 0.597 |
| TR2 | 0.84 | ||||
| TR3 | 0.737 | ||||
| TR4 | 0.703 | ||||
| TR5 | 0.873 | ||||
| TR6 | 0.780 | ||||
|
| HC1 | 0.731 | 0.858 | 0.898 | 0.639 |
| HC2 | 0.781 | ||||
| HC3 | 0.845 | ||||
| HC4 | 0.826 | ||||
| HC5 | 0.809 | ||||
|
| TW1 | 0.888 | 0.834 | 0.897 | 0.744 |
| TW2 | 0.871 | ||||
| TW3 | 0.827 | ||||
|
| EMP1 | 0.823 | 0.888 | 0.922 | 0.748 |
| EMP2 | 0.878 | ||||
| EMP3 | 0.884 | ||||
| EMP4 | 0.873 | 0.847 | 0.893 | 0.677 | |
|
| JD1 | 0.747 | |||
| JD2 | 0.834 | ||||
| JD3 | 0.879 | ||||
| JD4 | 0.826 | ||||
|
| RE1 | 0.704 | 0.890 | 0.903 | 0.674 |
| RE2 | 0.654 | ||||
| RE3 | 0.759 | ||||
| RE4 | 0.600 | ||||
| RE5 | 0.784 | ||||
|
| EC1 | 0.897 | 0.904 | 0.928 | O.675 |
| EC2 | 0.762 | ||||
| EC3 | 0.567 | ||||
| EC4 | 0.785 | ||||
| EC5 | 0.675 | ||||
| EC6 | 0.871 | ||||
| EC7 | 0.659 | ||||
| EC8 | 0.870 | ||||
| EC9 | 0.631 | ||||
| EC10 | 0.503 | ||||
| EC11 | 0.604 | ||||
| EC14 | 0.804 | ||||
| EC16 | 0.862 | ||||
| EC17 | 0.850 | ||||
| EC18 | 0.764 |
SRP, service recovery performance; TR, training; HC, human capital; RE, rewards; JD, Job description, EMP, empowerment; TW, teamwork; EC, employee commitment.
Correlation.
| SRP | TR | HC | TW | EMP | JD | RE | EC | |
|
| 0.822 | |||||||
|
| 0.176 | 0.772 | ||||||
|
| 0.176 | 0.468 | 0.799 | |||||
|
| 0.552 | 0.14 | 0.322 | 0.863 | ||||
|
| 0.175 | 0.488 | 0.624 | 0.313 | 0.865 | |||
|
| 0.004 | 0.127 | 0.274 | 0.036 | 0.336 | 0.823 | ||
|
| 0.512 | 0.214 | 0.232 | 0.163 | 0.423 | 0.453 | 0.752 | 0.814 |
|
| 0.271 | 0.388 | 0.424 | 0.213 | 0.215 | 0.341 | 0.275 | 0.188 |
SRP, service recovery performance; TR, training; HC, human capital; RE, rewards; JD, Job description; EMP, empowerment; TW, teamwork; EC, employee commitment.
HTMT.
| SRP | TR | HC | TW | EMP | JD | RE | EC | |
|
| ||||||||
|
| 0.126 | |||||||
|
| 0.474 | 0.265 | ||||||
|
| 0.453 | 0.213 | 0.322 | |||||
|
| 0.376 | 0.382 | 0.644 | 0.214 | ||||
|
| 0.105 | 0.323 | 0.284 | 0.133 | 0.135 | |||
|
| 0.313 | 0.215 | 0.222 | 0.562 | 0.525 | 0.153 | ||
|
| 0.173 | 0.183 | 0.324 | 0.316 | 0.316 | 0.441 | 0.385 |
SRP, service recovery performance; TR, training; HC, human capital; RE, rewards; JD, Job description; EMP, empowerment; TW, teamwork; EC, employee commitment.
Direct and indirect effect results.
| Hypotheses | Path | Beta | STDEV | T statistics | |
|
|
| 0.146 | 0.04 | 3.697 | 0.000 |
|
|
| 0.180 | 0.050 | 3.603 | 0.000 |
|
|
| 0.098 | 0.039 | 2.534 | 0.012 |
|
|
| 0.220 | 0.054 | 4.057 | 0.000 |
|
|
| 0.329 | 0.050 | 6.583 | 0.000 |
|
|
| 0.162 | 0.037 | 4.355 | 0.000 |
|
|
| 0.16 | 0.055 | 2.909 | 0.004 |
|
|
| 0.151 | 0.036 | 4.146 | 0.000 |
|
|
| 0.293 | 0.054 | 5.406 | 0.000 |
|
|
| 0.372 | 0.02 | 18.612 | 0.000 |
|
|
| 0.285 | 0.027 | 10.729 | 0.000 |
|
|
| 0.602 | 0.016 | 38.229 | 0.000 |
|
|
| 0.234 | 0.490 | 3.285 | 0.000 |
|
|
| 0.117 | 0.015 | 7.603 | 0.000 |
|
|
| 0.705 | 0.024 | 28.945 | 0.000 |
|
|
| 0.108 | 0.013 | 8.021 | 0.000 |
|
|
| 0.400 | 0.041 | 9.816 | 0.000 |
|
|
| 0.044 | 0.088 | 0.506 | 0.613 |
|
|
| 0.248 | 0.059 | 4.181 | 0.000 |
SRP, service recovery performance; TR, training; HC, human capital; RE, rewards; JD, Job description; EMP, empowerment; TW, teamwork; EC, employee commitment.
FIGURE 2Structural Model.