1、中文 3827 字 本科毕业论文（设计） 外文翻译 外文出处 Personnel Review, 2008（ 3） :300-316 外文作者 Kuen-Hung Tsai， Christine Chou， Ming-Yi Chen 原文 Does matching pay policy with innovation strategy really improve firm performance? Introduction In a fast-moving and globalized world, a firm must maintain its competitive advantag
2、e to constantly improve its performance and compete with its competitors. The competitive advantage concept includes the capabilities, resources, relationships, and decisions that permit a firm to capitalize on opportunities and avoid threats within its industry (Hofer and Schendel, 1978). Porter (1
3、985) argued that human resourcemanagement (HRM) helps a firm obtain a competitive advantage by lowering costs, increasing product sourcing and service differentiation, or both. However, achieving a competitive advantage through human resources requires a strategic management perspective (Jackson and
4、 Schuler, 1995). This is the basic rationale of strategic human resource management (SHRM). Recent studies have examined SHRM as a means of enhancing organizational competitive advantage, which improves overall firm performance (Arthur, 1994； Huselid, 1995； MacDuffie, 1995) Previous authors have des
5、cribed SHRM as the process of linking HR practices to business strategy (Ulrich and Lake, 1991). Human resource managers have long regarded compensation as a crucial lever to move employees toward the desired goals of an organization (McLagan and Nel, 1995). Examining the effects of pay policy on an
6、 enterprise has become a very important issue in the HRM field as managers increasingly emphasize SHRM. Prior research has contributed, at the individual level, to the nexus between pay policy and several important constructs by examining issues such as satisfaction (Dyer and Theriault, 1976； Rice e
7、t al., 1990), retention (Holzer, 1990；Barber and Bretz, 2000), and performance (Neal, 1993； Levine, 1993； Trevor et al., 1997).At the firm level, several studies argue that matching pay policy with business strategy may increase organizational performance (Miles and Snow, 1984； Carroll,1987). In add
8、ition, a few recent studies discuss the impact of business strategy on compensation (Singh and Agarwal, 1999； Yanadori and Marler, 2006). Although previous studies address the strategic perspective of pay policy, only a few empirical investigations were conducted (e.g. Balkin and Gomez-Mejia, 1990；M
9、ontemayor, 1996). These studies provide a solid foundation for subsequent research , but challenges must still be addressed in terms of their methodology and interpretation of results. For example, previous analyses were grounded in small sample sizes and scarcely controlled for extraneous factor ef
10、fects such as firm size and industry characteristics. Therefore, the effect which pay policy combined with business strategy has on firm performance remains to be fully examined. Even though pay policy is regarded as a crucial HR lever to influence employee behavior and enhance firm performance (McL
11、agan and Nel, 1995； Song et al., 2005), some HR scholars argue that pay may be valuable in recruiting and retaining employees but is typically unrelated to productivity (Rosenbloom and Hallman, 1981； Hills, 1987). Other authors note that individual incentive pay may undermine teamwork and encourage
12、a short-term focus, which often decreases organizational performance (Pfeffer, 2001). A pay increase may also lead to rising firm costs (Becker and Gerhart, 1996). Disputes regarding the role of pay which the strategic compensation viewpoint emphasizes necessitate a further examination of this persp
13、ective. This study draws on a large data-set to support a developed conceptual framework, and examines the notion of whether matching a pay policy with a business strategy conclusively supports better firm performance. This paper concentrates on Taiwans three technology-based service sectors the int
14、egrated circuit (IC) design service industry, the system integrated service industry, and the software service industry.Several factors influenced the selection of these three industries. First, acquiring a skilled workforce is an important part of a service firms efforts to enhance its competitive
15、advantage. Since technology-based service firms profit from services delivered within an advanced technology context, they should emphasize an appropriate pay policy to recruit and motivate highly qualified people. Second, in terms of issues related to strategic pay policy perspectives, existing stu
16、dies do not focus onservice sectors. Third, Taiwan was once one of the significant emerging markets in the world, but is now facing great challenges due to the emergence of China and intense competition in international markets. The technology-based service sector plays the important role of innovat
17、ion initiator and knowledge mediator, leading to productivity growth for the entire industry. Building a competitive advantage through HRM practices in this sector is of vital interest to Taiwans economic development, and is thus an important issue for Taiwans HR professionals and researchers. This
18、analysis includes several important controls to provide more convincing evidence for the research hypotheses.Finally, the empirical aspect of this research exploits a technology-based service firm dataset constructed by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS), a cabinet-
19、level office in Taiwan. This large sample dataset provides a more complete and appropriate picture of the variables analyzed in this study. Consequently, the results of this investigation are an interesting examination of this field. In view of the importance of innovation in technology-based servic
20、e firms, this study focuses on one specific but important aspect of business strategy: innovation strategy. This area is worthy of study because no researchers have investigated the effect which pay policy combined with innovation strategy has on firm performance.This study uses secondary data rathe
21、r than the primary data derived from questionnaires in previous studies. This approach limits the effect caused by the qualitative or attitudinal propensities of respondents. Hence, this study examines the strategic compensation perspective more objectively. Previous studies do not regard industry-type as a variable in their frameworks even though different industries may have different labor conditions related to market situations and competition. This
