Journal of Transnational Management, 15:229245, 2010 Copyright # Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 1547-5778 print=1547-5786 online

DOI: 10.1080/15475778.2010.504497

The Reactions of Employees Toward the Implementation of Human Resources Information Systems (HRIS) as a Planned Change Program: A Case Study in Malaysia
MAT ZIN RAZALI
King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia

DEMETRIS VRONTIS
University of Nicosia, Nicosia, Cyprus

The main purpose of this research is to examine the main factors that contributed to the acceptance of employees toward the new HRIS implemented in the Malaysian Airlines System (MAS). The emphasis is on data collection based on employee perception. The study did not attempt to establish cause and effect analysis, but focused exclusively on determining the relationship between 10 selected variables and employees acceptance of a planned change program. The findings may help managers to direct efforts toward the variables that influence employees acceptance, which will increase probability of employee participation, which, in turn, will lead to the success of the implementation process of the change program. A questionnaire was developed and administered with 250 employees. The findings clearly indicated that top management involvement and organizational commitment appeared as the two largest coefficients for the impact on the acceptance level of employees toward the planned change effort. Based on the findings some managerial implications and future research agenda were recommended. Hence, research in future should include the causality framework in order to establish more convincing findings.

Received January 2010; revised May 2010; accepted June 2010. Address correspondence to Mat Zin Razali, Department of Management & Marketing, King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals, Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia. E-mail: matali@ kfupm.edu.sa 229

230

M. Z Razali and D. Vrontis

KEYWORDS human resources information system, human resources management, management involvement, organizational commitment, planned change

Information technology has, of course, changed the face of human resources management (HRM) throughout the world. Perhaps the most central use of technology in HRM is an organizations Human Resources Information System (HRIS) (Bohlander & Snell, 2007). An HRIS provides current and accurate data for purposes of control and decision making. In this sense, it moves beyond simply storing and retrieving information but also includes broader applications such as producing reports, forecasting HRM needs, strategic planning, career and promotion planning, and evaluating human resources policies and practices. In short, HRIS can be a potent weapon for lowering administrative costs, increasing productivity, speeding response time, improving decision making, and enhancing services. Hussein, Wallace, and Cornelius (2007) claimed that HRIS is vital for providing a data and communications platform that helps HRM link and leverage the organizations human capital to achieve competitive advantage. Employees react to change in a variety of ways. Some vehemently resist the change and continue to do so months and even years after its implementation. Oftentimes, this resistance is expressed through reduction of output, disengagement, quarrelling, hostility and even turnover (Bridges, 1991). In contrast, others seem to exert extra effort to achieve the objectives of the change and even promote the value of the change to those both inside and outside of the organization (Herscovitch & Meyer, 2002). To understand such differences, it may be useful to consider stage models that describe the process by which individuals experience change in the workplace (Bridges, 2003). One assumption of the phase models is that an individual must work through the negative stages characterized by feelings of denial, anger, anxiety, loss, and resistance in order to reach the positive stages involving recovery, exploration, acceptance, and ultimately commitment. Therefore, a critical question for practitioners and researchers alike is: What are the factors in change situation which produce this movement from resistance to the acceptance of such particular change initiative?

BACKGROUND OF HUMAN RESOURCES INFORMATION SYSTEM (HRIS) IN MALAYSIA AIRLINES (MAS)

Malaysia Airlines (MAS) is the national airline of Malaysia, operating scheduled services to more than 100 destinations worldwide. It also operates domestic network and charter services. Its main base is Kuala Lumpur

Reactions of Employees Toward HRIS

231

International Airport, with hubs at Kota Kinabalu International Airport, Penang International Airport, and Kuching International Airport. It is one of only five airlines in the world to have been awarded a five-star rating by Skytrax, the others being Asiana Airlines, Cathay Pacific, Qatar Airways, and Singapore Airlines. Since its inception the company had experienced more consistent growth both in route and fleet expansion and in the number of employees (http://www.malaysiaairlines.com). Ninety percent of the companys employees are located on the front lines in various positions including customer service agents, flight attendants, and pilots, delivering a superior level of customer service, on-time performance, and safety enhancements to their customers. As is typical in the airline industry, hiring new employees is conducted via training classes where as many as 50 new hires come aboard at one time. Knowledge required for front line positions is specialized and industry requirements necessitate successful completion of the training class prior to an actual job offer. In the past, managing the process of attracting new applicants and facilitating the training was handled through a paper-based process that began with placing an advertisement for job openings in various newspapers. As the company continued to grow and each new advertisement generated more than 400 resumes, continuing to use a paper-based system just did not fly. Too much time was spent evaluating nonqualified candidates and not enough time was allocated for assessing the applicants skills and talents, limiting their ability to effectively evaluate potential employees. Due to the volume of resumes received by HR Department, those who were at the top of the stack got looked at first, and the process did not allow the recruitment managers to necessarily consider an applicant for all the openings for which they might best suited. The company needed an automated solution that would not only improve the overall training and hiring process but also improve the quality of applicants seen by the hiring managers. As part of its Business Turnaround Plan that was launched in 2006, MAS made a departure from a paper-based process to an automated system known as Human Resources Information System (HRIS). Since then the top management has seen a lot of improvement both in quantity and quality. HRIS has beginning to show its impact by helping MAS to achieve its business goals because of the trickle down effect resulting from improved human resources management processes. Hiring the best of the best had so far improved their customer service offering and thereby delivered a much more enjoyable in-flight and boarding experience for their customers. The plan in the near future is to design the HRIS, which not only focus on recruitment activities, but also covers other HRM functions such as payroll management, benefits administration, compliance reporting, performance appraisal, employee training and development, employee relations, and employee date maintenance.

232

M. Z Razali and D. Vrontis

LITERATURE REVIEW: RESISTANCE AND COMMITMENT TOWARD A PLANNED CHANGE PROGRAM

Resistance to organizational change has been a topic of scientific research since the 1940 s (Coch & French, 1948). Since then, a number of articles have been published regarding the predictors and behavioral consequences associated with resistance to change (Oreg, 2003; Piderit, 2000; Wanberg & Banas, 2000; Vrontis, 2001; Vrontis & Vignali, 2006). Based on Miller, Johnson, & Graus (1994) conceptualizations, the current study defines resistance as an unwillingness to support the change, and negative affect toward the change. There is no single reason as to why an individual may resist a change. Resistance is often attributed to departmental and individual investment in the status quo (Bandura, 1982), lack of motivation for altering behaviors (George & Brief, 1992), and simply that the benefits to the organization are not necessarily consonant with the interest of the individuals (Oreg, 2003). For the most part, many believe that resistance lies, to some degree, within the individual (Piderit, 2000; Wanberg & Banas, 2000). Wu, Neubert, & Yi. (2007) reported that people who are more likely to be cynical about change were those who felt they lacked meaningful opportunities to participate in decision making, felt uniformed in general about what was going on in the workplace, and had supervisors and union representatives who were poor communicators. Bommer, Rich, & Rubin (2005) examined American workers at three privately owned manufacturing firms, and discovered that leaders high in organizational change resistance were less likely to engage in transformational leader behaviors (e.g., articulating a vision of the future, displaying supportive leader behavior, modeling appropriate behavior, etc.). In addition, these researchers suggest that change implementers who engage in transformational leader behaviors can effectively reduce their subordinates resistance toward organizational change. Thus, their research suggests that one way to develop employees who are more receptive to organizational change is to use transformational leadership behaviors (e.g., improve ability to articulate a clear and compelling vision for the change) as a tool to generate greater commitment to and acceptance of planned changes. However, recent research findings indicate that transformational leadership can have a negative influence on employee cynicism about organizational change (Self, 2007). Oreg (2003) designed a scale to measure an individuals dispositional inclination to resist change. Evidence suggests that the disposition has a four-facet structure made up of routine seeking (i.e., preference for low levels of stimulation and novelty), emotional reactions to imposed change (i.e., experiencing feelings of stress and tension when plans are changed), and cognitive rigidity (i.e., the ease and frequency with which individuals

Reactions of Employees Toward HRIS

233

change their minds). The current research is also built on the idea that certain individual differences are likely to predict resistance to organizational change. Commitment to organizational change is more than simply the antecedent of resistance to change, which might be termed as openness to change. Instead, commitment to change is defined as a force (mindset) that binds an individual to a course of action deemed necessarily for the successful implementation of a change initiative (Herscovitch & Meyer, 2002). In fact, an employees commitment to change is considered by many to be one of the most important factors involved in successful change initiative (Armenakis, Harris, & Feild 1999). Herscovitch and Meyer (2002) conceptualize this mindset to reflect a desire to provide support for the change based on its inherent benefits (affective commitment), a recognition that there are perceived costs associated with no supporting the change (continuance commitment), and= or a sense of obligation to support the change (normative commitment). These mindsets alone and in combination contribute to varying degrees of behavioral support for a change initiative (Herscovitch & Meyer, 2002). For example, they provide evidence that each type of commitment is related to compliance with the requirements of a change. However, affective commitment is also associated with behaviors that involve going along with the spirit of the change as well as those that require considerable personal sacrifice and=or promote the value of the change to others. Meyer and Herscovitch (2001) propose that affective commitment develops from any personal or situational variable that contributes to the likelihood that the individual will become intrinsically motivated by or absorbed in a course of action, recognize its value-relevance, or derive his or her identity from working toward the objective. As its name suggests, the authors believe that all the factors considered to be involved in the development of affective commitment are likely to be accompanied by a strong positive emotion. This is one aspect that differentiates affective commitment from the other forms. Elias (2009) in his study examines three potential antecedents of 258 police officers attitudes toward organizational change (ATOC), and whether ATOC mediates the relationships between these antecedents and affective organizational commitment (AOC). At the time of data collection, the officers police department was restructuring its organizational design. Structural equation modeling indicates the growth need strength= AOC relationship is fully mediated, whereas the locus of control=AOC and internal work motivation=AOC relationships are partially mediated by ATOC. This conceptualization of how affective commitment develops provides a basis for why certain strategies such as training, participation, and empowerment are widely recommended for the implementation of change (Herscovitch & Meyer, 2002). It is likely that these strategies increase involvement, value relevance, and=or identification and therefore foster affective commitment. It is also likely that individual disposition particularly amenable

234

M. Z Razali and D. Vrontis

to situations involving change have the potential to contribute to these same factors. Thus, a discussion regarding individual differences that are likely to alleviate resistance and foster affective commitment to change follows. Employees acceptance is fundamental for the success of any change programs. Once employees tend to participate more in the change process, they tend to accept more. Managers and decision makers can benefit from the knowledge about acceptance and its antecedents. By knowing what influence acceptance, managers can assess these factors before starting the implementation process of a planned change. If results are favorable they can proceed with confidence, if not, they should make an intervention in those factors trying to adjust them an adequate level (Meyer & Herscovitch; 2001). Antecedents to willingness to participate in a planned organizational change are those factors that influence employees evaluation of whether the change should be supported, viewed with indifference or opposed. Some of these factors have already been identified in previous studies. Underlying culture and operating climate became evident for their positive influence to determine the readiness required for acceptance of the TQM change program (Meyer & Herscovitch (2001). Acceptance of organizational change is also influenced by participation of workers in the decision-making process on both strategic and tactical issues as researched and concluded by Furnham and Miller (1997). Meyer and Smith (2000) concluded that top management commitment and active participation by employees through Management By Objectives (MBO) programs increased job satisfaction at a statistically significant level, and, in turn, job satisfaction is positively associated with employees participation and the success of the MBO initiative. Based on a sample of public school educators, Broner (2003) concluded that employees react negatively to organizational change when they have been ignored in the decision-making process or feel that change efforts will not be beneficial. In a related vein, Connell and Waring (2002) and Watt and Piotrowski (2008) suggest that when employees fail to perceive a good rationale for change, their psychological contracts become reformulated in such a way that they become cynical about further organizational change efforts. A few other studies have been carried out to investigate antecedents of acceptance of organizational change efforts. Positive attitude toward change has been found to be predicted by employees receiving quality information and having a high need for achievement (Meyer & Herscovitch, 2001). Other researchers such as Armenakis, Harris, & Feild (1999) further concluded that acceptance of an organizational change is increased by organizational commitment, harmonious industrial relations climate, job motivation, job satisfaction, job security, and positive affectivity, and decreased by union membership, role conflict, environmental opportunity (jobs available outside organization), and tenure. On the other hand, Self (2007) and Jones and Sinar (2006) emphasized that it is the change leaders responsibility to guide the

Reactions of Employees Toward HRIS

235

organizational member to embrace the change rather than resist it. Thus, the process must target creating readiness for the change, not attempt to overcome resistance to it. By effectively managing readiness, the change leader attempts to shape attitudes toward the change. Successfully doing so may lead to adoption rather than resistance behaviors by organizational members.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The main purpose of this study is to investigate the possible predictors of acceptance of a planned change effort, namely Human Resources Information System (HRIS) in Malaysia Airlines (MAS). The possible predictors included in the study were organizational commitment, organizational climate (reward, warmth, and support), participation in the work environment, job satisfaction, supervisory support; freedom to participate in the implementation of the change program, top management consistency and top management involvement.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

This study would address some of the problems encountered when introducing any change efforts. Once the concept of how employees accept or reject change efforts and managers understood it, their efforts can be directed to increase employees level of acceptance, with the expectation that participation in the planned change effort will be intensified. The contribution of this study to the field is evident because the relationship between employees attitudes and their reactions (acceptance, indifference or rejection) regarding a planned change program has not been the target of many studies in the context of Malaysian working environment (Razali, 2006).

RESEARCH HYPOTHESES
The line of research inquiry was guided by 10 hypotheses, as follows:
. . . .

Hypothesis 1: There will be a positive relationship between organizational commitment and acceptance of a planned change program. Hypothesis 2: There will be a positive relationship between climatereward and acceptance of a planned change program. Hypothesis 3: There will be a positive relationship between climatewarmth and acceptance of a planned change program. Hypothesis 4: There will be a positive relationship between climatesupport and acceptance of a planned change program.

236
. . . . . .

M. Z Razali and D. Vrontis

Hypothesis 5: There will be a positive relationship between general job satisfaction and acceptance of a planned change program. Hypothesis 6: There will be a positive relationship between freedom to participate and acceptance of a planned change program Hypothesis 7: There will be a positive relationship between participative environment and acceptance of a planned change program. Hypothesis 8: There will be a positive relationship between supervisory support and acceptance of a planned change program. Hypothesis 9: There will be a positive relationship between top management involvement and acceptance of a planned change program. Hypothesis 10: There will be a positive relationship between top management consistency and acceptance of a planned change program.

METHODOLOGY
This research is based on action research model. The key aspects of this model are basically the cyclical sequence of activities such as diagnosis, data gathering, feedback to the client group, discussion of the results, action planning, and action. The purpose of such a cycle of activities is to change behavior in organizations, hence action research is closely aligned with organizational development efforts.

Data Collection
Data was collected through the questionnaire consisting of 117 items. It is important to note that the questionnaire used in this research was prepared to evaluate several dimensions previously validated by other researchers with some modifications to suit the local imperatives of the company under investigation. The type of information collected in this research requires that anonymity and confidentiality be assured. The researchers worked directly with the employees in MAS who have been selected as respondents for this research. Once the respondents were accommodated in the room at the companys site, an organizational representative explained the research process. Respondents were reminded that questionnaires were anonymous and that the survey results would not be used for any reward or to discipline specific employees. While the respondents worked on the questionnaire, only the researchers remained in the room to answer any questions and address any concerns. The representative from MAS left the room as soon as respondents started filling out the questionnaires. Upon finishing the questionnaire, the respondent would drop it in a box, feeling free to put it on the top, bottom or in the middle of the pile of questionnaires, to avoid been identified. It took the respondents from 20 to 50 minutes to answer the 117 items. All the

Reactions of Employees Toward HRIS

237

items designed to assess study variables were to be answered by respondents using a 5-point Likert scale.

Respondents
The stratified random sampling method was used to select the respondents for the study. At the first stage, the researcher divided the employees in MAS according to four categories: (1) top management; (2) middle level managers; (3) lower level employees: and outsourced employees. From the companys staff directory, it was determined about 10% of employees were in the top management category; 20% in middle management; 60% in the lower level rankings; and 10% as outsourced employees. Only three categories were included for this study because the outsourced employees were not having contractual employment with MAS but rather with their respective employers who were contractors for MAS. Based on the above stratification, 250 employees were randomly selected from the companys staff directory to participate in the survey. From the sample, 32.4% were females, and 67.6% males. The median age was 28 years and the composition in terms of staff hierarchy was as follows: 10.8% were among the top management, 20.6% were holding middle-level managerial positions,, and 58.6% were the lower-level staff. Ninety-six percent of the respondents were hired on a full-time basis while the remaining were part-timers.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS Descriptive Statistics and Intercorrelation Variables for Study Variables
As indicated in Table 1 among the predictors (numbered from 2 to 11), almost all intercorrelation coefficients are statistically significant at the .01 level. Exceptions can be observed for six coefficients; all of them between climate reward and one other variable, climate support and one variable, and supervisory support and four other variables that are statistically significant at .05 level.

Multiple Regression Analysis

A hierarchical multiple regression analysis was carried out for the dependent variable (acceptance of a planned change). The independent variables were forced to enter the model at three steps, as follows:
.

Step 1: Organizational commitment, reward, warmth, support, and general job satisfaction. These variables were grouped because they represent organizational climate dimensions.

TABLE 1 Descriptive Statistics and Intercorrelation Variables for Study Variables Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Variables

238 .53 .52 .08 .39 .33 .28 .56 .33 .26 .47 .28 .24 .33

Acceptance of Planned Change Organizational Commitment Climate-Reward Climate-Warmth Climate Support General Job Satisfaction Freedom to Participate Participative Environment Top Management Consistency Top Management Involvement Supervisory Support .23 .28 .48 .27 .32 .99 .34 .58 .41 .46 .35 .36 .34 .29 .06 .23 .35 .42 .24 .29 .27 .24 .22 .23 .19 .51 .46 .38 .28 .23 .52 .41

3.38 4.26 3.01 3.59 3.55 4.09 3.11 3.36 3.64 4.28 4.01

.29 .42 .71 .65 .72 .77 .74 .62 .42 .58 .64

.22 .29 .29 .54

.39 .41 .48

.24 .13

.43

Note. p < .05;

p < .01.

Reactions of Employees Toward HRIS

.

239

Step 2: Freedom to participate in the planned change program and participative environment. These variables represent pressure to take part in the change program and opportunities employees have to take part in the decision-making process of the organization. Step 3: Top management involvement, top management consistency, and supervisory support. These two variables are related to employees perceptions of leadership styles of top and middle level management and their commitment to the planned change program.

Results of the multiple regression analysis are presented in Table 2. As Table 2 shows, the first block of predictors explained 35% (adjusted 2 R ) of the variance in acceptance for a planned change program. Among the predictors, the ones with most impact in the regression equation are organizational commitment (B 0.269, p < .0 l). When the second block of predictors was entered in the equation, it significantly explained (change in F 27. 196, p < .001) a unique variance in acceptance for a planned change program that was not accounted for by the other variables (3.4% in the adjusted R2). It is worth noting that the contribution in the equation was mainly due to participative environment
TABLE 2 Multiple Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting the Acceptance of Employees Toward a Planned Change Program Variables Organizational Commitment Climate-Reward Climate-Warmth Climate Support General Job Satisfaction STEP 1 TOTAL Freedom to Participate Participative Environment STEP 2 TOTAL Supervisory Support Top Management Involvement Top Management Consistency STEP 3 TOTAL
Note. p < .05;

B .269 .042 .233 .103 .038

SE B .066 .021 .036 .029 .022

R2

Adj. R2

R2 change

F change

.355 .038 .214 .028 .044 .467 0.62 .396 .012 .019 .039 .016

.350

.355

66.136

.384

.464

27.196

.494
p < .01;

.482

.086

52.163

p < .001.

240

M. Z Razali and D. Vrontis

(B 0.214, p < .01) and not due to freedom to participate in the planned change program (B 0.038). It could be speculated that participative environment in general (opportunities for employees to express opinions and make suggestions) is more important than freedom to participate in creating a situation where employees would react positively toward accepting any planned change program. The third and last block of predictors also significantly explained variance in climate for quality (change in F 52.163, p < .00I), adding 9.8% in the adjusted R2. Top management involvement contributed most in the equation (B 0.396, p < .00 l) while supervisory support and top management consistency did not make a significant contribution (B 0.062) and (B 0. 19) respectively. This finding confirmed what has been largely published lately that top management leadership, involvement and support in the implementation process of any change effort or program are of fundamental importance for the success of the change initiative (Razali, 2006; Wu et al., 2007; Elias, 2009). Thus, it could be speculated that both management leadership and participation in an organizational change initiative have a positive influence on employees commitment to the organization. A possible explanation for this could be that top managers not only represent the organization but they are the organization. The organization speaks through the top managers, i.e., employees see company actions in managements behavior. Miller et al. (1993) noted that employees tend to view actions by agents of the organization as actions of the organization itself. As this study has shown that there is a positive influence of organizational commitment on employees acceptance of the change initiative, any action that impacts acceptance will eventually have a positive impact on acceptance of the initiative. Results in Table 2 show that 48.2% (adjusted R2) of the variance in acceptance for a planned change program is attributable to the independent variables entered in three subsequent steps in the regression equation, with most of the contribution being made by organizational commitment, climate-warmth, climate-support, participation, and top management involvement. Top management involvement appeared as the largest coefficient for the impact on the acceptance level of employees toward the planned change effort. It was an expectation of this study that involvement of top managers in the implementation process would be the most important influence on employees in the Malaysia Airlines for the acceptance of the new initiative to implement HRIS. Organizational commitment produced the second largest coefficient in the analysis. Climate-reward and general job satisfaction did not impact significantly on the employees acceptance of the new HRIS. Based on the above analysis, it is apparent that organizational commitment and top management involvement are the most important predictors of employees acceptance of any planned change effort in an organization. It seems to be

Reactions of Employees Toward HRIS

241

a direct conclusion that two conditions should be present in order to enhance the probability of employees to react positively by accepting and embracing the change program initiated in the organization. Top management should ensure that employees are committed to the organization and they also must definitely get involved and participate in the implementation process of the change initiative, showing their commitment and support. The finding of this study not only corroborates conclusions of previous research (Beer, Eisenstat, & Spector, 1990; Berry & Parasuraman, 1992; Rodgers, Hunter, & Rogers, 1993) but it also points out the importance of people in leading positions in the organizations taking responsibility over the implementation process of a planned change initiatives. Organizational commitment has been conjectured in the first place to positively impact employees reactions of a planned change effort. This particular finding suggests that employees who are committed to the organization would be more inclined to accept and be part of any organizational change program. Similar results were found by Iverson (1996), who concluded that organizational commitment has a significant impact on employees readiness to embrace a planned organizational change implementation.

CONCLUSIONS, MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS, LIMITATIONS, AND FUTURE RESEARCH

One of the major findings of this study can be a strong recommendation for the top management in MAS. A key issue related to top management involvement with the acceptance for a planned change program is visibility. It is timely for the top management in MAS to be seen actively engaged themselves in committees or task forces that are designed for the purpose of managing on daily basis the change program. Not only top managers in MAS must support and be committed to the change project, but it is also very important that employees see themselves really participating in the implementation process from the very beginning. Employees particularly at the middle and lower layers of the MAS bureaucracy must be empowered to join the task forces or teams that are directly engaged in implementing the change program. The MAS as an organization must not view the change program in isolation with other behavioral aspects of employees in organization. Efforts must be taken seriously to ensure that the commitment levels of employees toward organization are sustained because those who are committed tend to accept the change program more positively. Employees acceptance is fundamental for the success of the change effort. Once employees tend to participate more in the change process they tend to be more committed. Managers and decision makers can benefit from the knowledge about the acceptance and its antecedents. By knowing what

242

M. Z Razali and D. Vrontis

influences acceptance, managers can assess these factors before starting the implementation process of the planned change. If results are favorable, they can proceed with confidence; if not they should make an intervention in those factors by trying to adjust them to an adequate level. The results of this study can be summarized in Table 3, as follows: It seems that several shortcomings have happened in this study that should be seriously considered in future research endeavors. One of the shortcomings has to do with several aspects related to employees jobs. When dealing with planned change programs, one of the most important issues to be considered is the impact the initiative has on employees jobs. Workers expect that any program eventually turns out particular changes that directly affect their daily tasks, especially in terms of work environment, quality improvement, importance of the task, less repetitive movement, job involvement, etc. In this study, only general job satisfaction has been assessed. Several other aspects related to the job could have been assessed,
TABLE 3 Summary of the Results of the Hypothesis Testing Hypotheses Hypothesis 1: There will be a positive relationship between organizational commitment and acceptance of a planned change program. Hypothesis 2: There will be a positive relationship between climate-reward and acceptance of a planned change program. Hypothesis 3: There will be a positive relationship between climate-warmth and acceptance of a planned change program. Hypothesis 4: There will be a positive relationship between climate-support and acceptance of a planned change program. Hypothesis 5: There will be a positive relationship between general job satisfaction and acceptance of a planned change program. Hypothesis 6: There will be a positive relationship between freedom to participate and acceptance of a planned change program. Hypothesis 7: There will be a positive relationship between participative environment and acceptance of a planned change program. Hypothesis 8: There will be a positive relationship between supervisory support and acceptance of a planned change program. Hypothesis 9: There will be a positive relationship between top management involvement and acceptance of a planned change program. Hypothesis 10: There will be a positive relationship between top management consistency and acceptance of a planned change program. Acceptance of planned change program Supported p  0.001 Not supported Supported p  0.05 Supported p  0.01 Not supported Not supported Supported p  0.01 Not supported Supported p  0.001 Not supported

Reactions of Employees Toward HRIS

243

such as role ambiguity, role conflict, skill variety, task identity, task significance, and autonomy. Then, all the variables related to the job could have been investigated future research in terms of their relationship with acceptance of the planned change program. Another shortcoming is related to the success and failure of planned change initiatives. In this study there has not been any evaluation of the level of success of the HRIS program in MAS. Even though it is possible to affirm that some aspects of success have been achieved, but the extent to which HRIS succeeded and was helping MAS to improve its performance was not systematically analyzed in this study. An assessment of the effectiveness of the planned change initiative in terms of its contribution for the improvement of performance of the organization would be desirable, which would allow to investigate relationships between the study variables and the degree of success of the quality initiatives. This dimension should be given serious consideration for future research in this area. Perhaps a major shortcoming of this study has to do with the idea of causality. Due to the fact that the first part of the research was exploratory in nature and the second part of the research utilized Pearsons correlation and multiple regression analysis, results show relationships between independent and dependent variables and suggest a possible impact of some of the predictors on the criteria. However, statistical methods used in this research do not allow to make statements about causality. Hence, research in future should include this analytical framework such as structural equation modeling or path-analysis in order to establish more convincing and meaningful findings. As it was addressed previously, the purpose of any planned change program is to improve performance of the organization. A HRIS as implemented in this case study organization, MAS, allows employees to perform better individually and collectively. In order for the program such as HRIS to be successful in enhancing individual performance, it is imperative that workers get involved with the program and put its precepts in practice. For this to happen, it is important that workers accept the planned change initiative and make the necessary effort to implement it to the full extent.

REFERENCES
Armenakis, A. A., Harris, S., & Field, M. (1999). Paradigms in organizational change: Change agent and change target perspectives. In R. T. Golembiewski (Ed.), Handbook of Organizational Behavior (2nd ed., pp. 631658). New York, NY: Marcel Dekker. Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122147.

244

M. Z Razali and D. Vrontis

Beer, M., Eisenstat, R. A., & Spector, B. (1990). Why change programs dont produce change. Harvard Business Review, 68, 158166. Berry, L. L. & Parasuraman, A. (1992). Prescriptions for a service quality revolution in America. Organizational Dynamics, 20, 515. Bohlander, G. & Snell, S. (2007). Managing Human Resources, (14th ed.). Boston, MA: Thomson South Western. Bommer, W. H., Rich, G. A., & Rubin, R. S. (2005). Changing attitudes about change: Longitudinal effects of transformational leader behavior on employee cynicism about organizational change. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 733353. Bridges, W. (1991). Managing Transitions: Making the Best of Change. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc. Bridges, W. (2003). Managing Transitions: Making the Best of Change, (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing. Broner, C. (2003). Cynicism about Organizational Change: Disposition or Leaderships Creation? The Reactions of K-12 Educators Undergoing Change. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation) Walden University, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Coch, L. & French, R. P., Jr. (1948). Overcoming resistance to change. Human Relations, 1, 512532. Connell, J. & Waring, P. (2002). The BOHICA syndrome: A symptom of cynicism toward change initiatives? The Journal of Strategic Change, 11, 347356. Elias, M. S. (2009). Employee commitment in times of change: Assessing the importance of attitudes toward organizational change. Journal of Management, 35, 37. Furnham, A. & Miller, T. (1997). Personality, absenteeism and productivity. Personality and Individual Differences, 23, 705707. George, J. M. & Brief, A. P. (1992). Feeling gooddoing good: A conceptual analysis of the mood at work Organizational spontaneity relationship. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 310329. Herscovitch, L. & Meyer, J. P. (2002). Commitment to organizational change: Extension of a three-component model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 474487. Hussein, Z, Wallace, J, & Cornelius, E. N (2007). The use and impact of human resource management information systems on human resource management professionals. Information & Management. Amsterdam, 44, 74. Iverson, R. D. (1996). Employee acceptance of organizational change: The role of organizational commitment. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 7, 122149. Jones, J. A. & Sinar, E. F. (2006, May). Predictability and Consequences of Employee Engagement. Paper Presented at the 21st Meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Dallas, TX. Meyer, J. P. & Herscovitch, L. (2001). Commitment in the workplace: Toward a general model. Human Resource Management Review, 11, 229326. Meyer, J. P. & Herscovitch, L. (2002). Commitment in the workplace: Toward a general model. Human Resource Management Review, 11, 299326. Meyer, J. P. & Smith, C. A. (2000). HRM practices and organizational commitment: Test of a mediation model. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 17, 319331.

Reactions of Employees Toward HRIS

245

Miller, V. D., Johnson, J. R., & Grau, J. (1993). Antecedents to willingness to participate in a planned organizational change. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 22, 5280. Oreg, S. (2003). Resistance to change: Developing an individual differences measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 680693. Piderit, S. K. (2000). Rethinking resistance and recognizing ambivalence: A multidemensional view of attitudes toward an organizational change. Academy of Management Reviews, 25, 783794. Razali, M. Z. (2006). Can total quality management (TQM) be implemented in a rationalistic environment? Sasin Journal of Management, 2, 8597. Rodgers, R., Hunter, J. E., & Rogers, D. L. (1993). Influence of top management commitment on management program success. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 151155. Self, R. D. (2007). Organizational change-overcoming resistance by creating readiness. Development and Learning in Organizations, 21, 11. Vrontis, D. (2001). A human resource research investigation in Cyprus duty free industry. Management Case Quarterly, 4, 1727. Vrontis, D. & Vignali, D. (2006). A human resource research investigation in Cyprus duty free ndustry. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 3, 427446. Wanberg, C. R. & Banas, J. T. (2000). Predictors and outcomes of openness to changes in a reorganizing workplace. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 132142. Watt, J. D. & Piotrowski, C. (2008). Organizational change cynicism: A review of the literature and intervention strategies. Organization Development Journal, 26, 2332. Wu, C, Neubert, M. J., & Yi, X. (2007). Transformational leadership, cohesion perceptions, and employee cynicism about organizational change: The mediating role of justice perceptions. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 43, 327351.