behavioral

sciences
Article
A Study of the Impact of Strategic Human Resource
Management on Organizational Resilience
Jingjing Yu 1 , Lingling Yuan 1 , Guosheng Han 1, * , Hui Li 2, * and Pengfei Li 3, *

1 Business School, Shandong University, Weihai 264209, China

2 School of Economics and Management, Harbin Institute of Technology, Weihai 264200, China
3 School of Public Health and Management, Binzhou Medical University, Yantai 264003, China
* Correspondence: [email protected] (G.H.); [email protected] (H.L.); [email protected] (P.L.)

Abstract: Organizational resilience is a key capability for modern firms to survive and thrive in
the VUCA environment. The purpose of this study is to investigate the mechanism of strategic
human resource management on organizational resilience and the mediating and moderating roles
of self-efficacy and self-management, respectively, in the relationship between the two. A total of
379 valid questionnaires were obtained from employees of Chinese companies in August 2022, and the
data were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 and Amos. The results showed that strategic HRM can effectively
contribute to organizational resilience; self-efficacy plays a mediating role in the relationship between
strategic HRM and organizational resilience; self-management can effectively contribute to the impact
of self-efficacy on organizational resilience; and self-management can hinder the ability of strategic
HRM to contribute to organizational resilience. This paper breaks with the previous literature that
studied organizational resilience from a single perspective by studying organizational resilience from
the perspective of strategic human resource management (SHRM) and verifies that SHRM can be a
possible path for Chinese firms to improve organizational resilience.

Keywords: strategic human resource management; organizational resilience; self-efficacy; self-management

Citation: Yu, J.; Yuan, L.; Han, G.; Li,

H.; Li, P. A Study of the Impact of 1. Introduction
Strategic Human Resource
In recent years, unexpected events such as natural disasters, financial crises, industrial
Management on Organizational
accidents, trade embargoes, and even terrorist attacks have occurred frequently, and
Resilience. Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 508.
sudden “black swans” and “gray rhinoceroses” have led to a business environment that
https://doi.org/10.3390/bs12120508
has become more full of volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity (VUCA) [1,2]. The
Received: 3 November 2022 still-unresolved novel coronavirus epidemic has caused more than 40% of Chinese
Accepted: 9 December 2022 companies to lose money or suffer severe losses, and employees to lose their jobs or
Published: 13 December 2022 take pay cuts [3], which has a major negative impact on China’s social and economic
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
development. It also revealed that many Chinese companies are “rigid” but “not resilient”.
with regard to jurisdictional claims in Organizational resilience is the core capability of today’s enterprises to cope with crises
published maps and institutional affil- in a volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) market environment. It helps
iations. companies to remain sensitive and adaptable to the external environment and to recover
and bounce back quickly from the challenging impact of adverse events. Additionally,
in the process of reflection and improvement, it goes against the trend to become the
key to gain core competitiveness and even steady progress [4–6]. Thus, how to enhance
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors. organizational resilience in a dynamically changing business environment has become a
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. hot topic for entrepreneurs and scholars to address [7].
This article is an open access article A review of the literature related to organizational resilience at home and abroad
distributed under the terms and reveals that the current research on organizational resilience in China is still in its infancy.
conditions of the Creative Commons
The research is mainly concerned with the elaboration of the concept and principles of
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
organizational resilience, and the scarce literature on the antecedents of organizational
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
resilience are studied from one aspect, such as management methods, human capital, social
4.0/).

Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 508. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs12120508 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/behavsci

Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 508 2 of 18

capital, business environment, organizational system, etc. [8]. Organizational resilience is a

reflection of an enterprise’s comprehensive ability to cope with an uncertain environment, and
the study of a single factor cannot comprehensively explain the formation of the mechanism
of resilience in an enterprise and cannot well integrate the impact of the interaction of
various factors on organizational resilience, which lacks operability in enterprise practice
and cannot effectively help enterprises to improve organizational resilience [9]. At present,
there is an urgent need to study the formation mechanism of organizational resilience from
a holistic perspective considering the comprehensive effect of each antecedent factor and
provide a theoretical basis for Chinese enterprises to improve organizational resilience.
Strategic human resource management is a system, process, or measure consisting of a series
of temporal activities taken in order to fit with the organization’s strategy and long-term
development goals and thus maintain competitive advantage. Lengnick-Hall [10] believes
that organizational resilience works through the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other
attributes of people within an organization, and that strategic human resource management
can be achieved by changing management styles, processes, practices, and HR policies, etc.
to develop these qualities in employees to enhance organizational resilience.
In exploring the role of modeling the relationship between strategic human resource
management and organizational resilience, this paper found the “key” of self-efficacy,
drawing on the literature on emotional competence. All HR policies and plans in an
organization require employees to take specific actions to achieve the desired goals. Thus,
self-efficacy, an essential emotional competency on the part of employees, is critical to the
effectiveness of plan implementation. Early warning capability, flexibility during a crisis,
and learning and growth capability following a crisis are three core competencies included
in organizational resilience [11]. Self-efficacy refers to a strong belief in one’s own ability
to comply with a corporate strategy, which enables employees to relieve psychological
pressure in time, stabilize the psychological reactions of personnel to adversity, actively
obtain environmental resources and external support to optimize human resource allocation,
and integrate human resource management practices with corporate strategy organically
by focusing on internal personnel selection and appointment, performance evaluation
and assessment, and external active recruitment; this approach allows organizations to
shape a corporate culture of overcoming difficulties, create dynamic and flexible adaptation
mechanisms, construct internal knowledge structures, and actively seek foreign
environmental resources, thereby enhancing corporate resilience capabilities by providing
solutions to crises and addressing corporate structural problems [12]. Thus, self-efficacy
is an essential perspective for the study of organizational resilience that can explain
why strategic HRM are able to influence organizational resilience capabilities; therefore,
this study intends to discuss the relationship between strategic HRM and organizational
resilience as mediated by self-efficacy.
In addition, we cannot ignore the key issue that strategic HRM must be implemented
and accomplished through corporate employees no matter what policies are formulated,
and corporate organizational resilience capabilities must also function through corporate
employees as mediators. Thus, studying the mechanism of strategic HRM’s effect on
organizational resilience is inevitably influenced by employees’ work style. As a result
of the rapid development of the economy and excellent material abundance of China,
employees’ sense of autonomy and their self-working ability are becoming increasingly
prominent. According to the traditional HRM model, it is difficult for leaders to supervise
and constrain employees. It is more practical to study the effects of strategic HRM with
respect to enhancing organizational adaptability and flexibility to the environment from
the perspective of employees’ sense of autonomous work. Therefore, this paper uses
self-management as a moderating variable to determine whether self-management plays a
moderating role in the relationship between strategic HRM and organizational resilience.
According to a report by Fortune magazine, the average life expectancy of small
enterprises in China is 2.5 years, and the average life expectancy of large enterprises is
7–8 years, which is far behind those of European and American countries. From the side, it
Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 508 3 of 18

shows that Chinese enterprises lack the ability of resilience to cope with the crisis. Especially
under the impact of the novel coronavirus epidemic, many enterprises have experienced
serious losses or even bankruptcy, resulting in employee pay cuts and unemployment,
adding a heavy burden to China’s social stability and economic development. In summary,
this paper takes conservation of resources theory and self-cognitive theory as the theoretical
basis and empirically investigates the intrinsic mechanism of strategic human resource
management on organizational resilience. It provides references for Chinese companies to
enhance organizational resilience.
The main contributions of this study include two main aspects. On the one hand, this
study can enrich the literature related to the study of strategic human resource management
and organizational resilience; on the other hand, the research results of this paper can guide
the managers of Chinese enterprises to formulate strategic human resource planning,
coordinate all resources of human, financial and material resources, optimize enterprise
processes, improve enterprise management policies, increase enterprise innovation, etc., so
as to enhance organizational resilience.

2. Literature Review and Research Hypothesis

2.1. Strategic Human Resource Management and Organizational Resilience
Strategic HRM was developed to facilitate the strategic management of organizations,
and Wright and McMahan [13] give a more representative definition of this concept. They
consider strategic HRM to represent an organization’s plans for human resource deployment
and behavioral norms with the aim of achieving the organization’s goals. This definition
emphasizes both the vertical and horizontal fit of strategic HRM: vertically, strategic HRM refers
to the match between and mutual adaptation of HRM practices and the organization’s strategic
management process, whereas horizontally, strategic HRM emphasizes the coherence among
various HRM practices based on the planned action model. The vertical and horizontal fit of
strategic HRM ensures that HRM is fully integrated into strategic planning to guarantee
that HR policies and practices are generally accepted and widely used by managers and
employees, such that companies can obtain inimitable or alternative competitive advantages
by leveraging their HR strengths [9,14]. According to conservation of resources theory,
strategic HRM, as a strategic organizational resource, represents an organic combination
the talent resource elements in an organization as well as the allocation of resources among
members of the organization; thus, strategic HRM emphasizes the flexible adjustment of
staffing policies and practices, training and development programs, performance standards,
selection criteria, and rewards and punishments in response to changes in external contexts,
thus providing strategic tools to promote resource integration, crisis prevention and control,
and learning and innovation in organizations [15].
The concept of resilience originated in the fields of physics, ecology, and environmental
science, and Meyer [16] first introduced this concept into the field of management, thereby
opening up a new chapter in the study of organizational resilience, which was quickly and
widely studied in the fields of crisis management, disaster management, and high-reliability
organizations. Previous research on organizational resilience has been focused on two main
research perspectives: the rebound perspective and the rebound + overtake perspective [10].
The rebound perspective views organizational resilience simply as the ability of the
organization to recover from an accident, stress, or crisis to return its original state, i.e.,
the ability of an organization to take countermeasures to return to its precrisis level of
performance. The rebound + overtake perspective views organizational resilience not
merely as the organization’s ability to respond to challenges and changes to return to its
original state but also as the organization’s ability to develop new capabilities or create
new opportunities for the organization to continue to thrive and grow [17]. This paper
considers organizational resilience to be a dynamic and flexible organizational capacity that
allows organizations to survive, adapt, recover, and even return to prosperity in an adverse
environment. Lengnick [18] claimed that organizational resilience capacity is rooted in
the psychology and behavior of individual employees. Employees’ knowledge, skills,
Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 508 4 of 18

and strengths regarding their values, mindsets, levels of stress tolerance, and innovation
abilities are essential sources of organizational resilience [18,19]. These employee
qualities and capabilities are closely related to the individual’s ability to adapt to dynamic
environments and to develop creative solutions to resolve crises. Employee resilience is an
important source of and foundation for organizational resilience; thus, organizations can
enhance their organizational resilience capabilities by developing employee resilience.
In this paper, we argue that strategic HRM can influence individual resilience and
thus enhance organizational resilience via the development of HRM policies and practices
that match both the external environment and organizational goals [20]. Specifically, the
effects of HRM policies and practices on organizational resilience can be elaborated in
terms of three aspects of human resources: human capital, social capital, and psychological
capital [15].
First, human capital primarily includes the physical quality and physical health of
employees on the one hand and the knowledge, skills, and experience possessed by
employees on the other hand. In a crisis, members of an organization can make timely
judgments and actions based on the knowledge, skills, and experience they possess to
change the organization’s passive situation as much as possible, thus influencing its
resilience [19]. The exchange of knowledge and experience among organizational members and
their interactions can promote the formation of the collective cognition of the organization. This
collective cognitive ability encourages organizational members to cooperate tacitly, trust each
other, and unite in the face of adversity, thus developing the unique organizational ability
of the enterprise to cope with crises and affecting the organizational resilience ability [21].
Second, social capital is a potential resource possessed by the organization within the
social network system, which is essentially an environmental factor that is mainly divided into
internal environmental factors (e.g., colleague relationships, learning atmosphere, team spirit)
and external environmental factors (e.g., partnership with suppliers or distributors, flexible
external information system) [22]. Social capital can increase the levels of coordination and
cooperation that employees exhibit in their work, which in turn increase the motivation
and efficiency of the organization with respect to coping with a crisis. Moreover, social
capital can be used to obtain resources and information from the external environment that
are critical for crisis resolution and the reallocation of resources both inside and outside the
organization, thus enhancing organizational resilience and mitigating the negative impacts
of the crisis for the organization.
Finally, employees with high psychological capital can withstand the tremendous
pressure entailed by a crisis and face challenges and changes with a positive and confident
attitude, create a good organizational climate, and apply their knowledge and skills based
on the local conditions to create opportunities for the organization to survive and grow in
the face of adversity, which has a significant impact on the organization’s ability to enhance
its resilience and obtain competitive advantage [23]. In addition, previous studies have
demonstrated that strategic HRM that is well matched with the organizational environment,
strategic planning, and corporate culture is closely related to organizational resilience. For
example, Shafer et al. [23] found that when organizational HR practices are aligned with
organizational values, organizations can promote organizational agility through staffing
policies, personnel training, career development programs, and performance standards,
thereby enhancing organizational resilience. Okuwa [24] found positive relationships
among training, human resource development, and organizational resilience. Mienipre [25]
found that talent management was significantly correlated with organizational risk monitoring
and crisis response capacity. In summary, the following hypothesis is proposed.

Hypothesis 1 (H1). Strategic human resource management has a positive effect on organizational
resilience.
Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 508 5 of 18

2.2. The Mediating Role of Self-Efficacy

The concept of self-efficacy was introduced by Bandura [26], an American psychologist
who believed that self-efficacy represents an individual’s subjective evaluation and perception
of his or her abilities, which in turn influences the individual’s behavioral choices, beliefs
regarding success, and level of effort, and can to some extent determine the individual’s
ability to fulfill the requirements of a particular job; that is, self-efficacy is dynamic and
can change due to different levels of access to external resources, the acquisition of new
knowledge and skills, or an increase in experience. According to previous studies, the
factors affecting self-efficacy mainly include the following. (1) Individuals’ ability levels
are evaluated prior to performing certain activities; individuals evaluate their own ability
based on their past successes or failures, such that individuals who exhibit a strong sense
of self-efficacy do not deny their ability due to occasional failures but rather search for the
causes of environmental factors, strategies, and experiences and adjust their future actions
accordingly. (2) Individuals who observe the behavior of others and encounter people with
similar abilities who have achieved success can greatly enhance their own self-efficacy
and increase their firm belief in achieving success. (3) Individuals receive evaluations,
encouragement, and self-motivation from others. Evaluations or encouragement based
on the facts of the situation can increase the individual’s belief in his or her ability to
accomplish the goal. (4) The individual’s own emotional and physiological state also affects
self-efficacy, such as the ability to remain calm under tremendous pressure, avoid exhibiting
arrogance, analyze the pros and cons of the actual situation, and make the most appropriate
decision, which can increase the individual’s ability to accomplish the goal as well as his or
her sense of self-efficacy [26].
Self-efficacy is an important component of human capabilities that can influence
individuals’ perceptions, ways of thinking, motivation, and actions [27]; in addition,
it varies with people’s knowledge and external environment [28]. Thus, organizations
can improve employees’ self-efficacy by implementing human resource practices such as
communication, training, sharing successful experiences, and providing opportunities for
success. For example, organizations can increase employees’ relevant work experience
by providing training and organizational learning [29]. When employees are trained in
job-related practices, they are able to acquire relevant job knowledge and information
that can enhance their self-efficacy to perform their jobs competently. Second, employees’
self-efficacy can be stimulated by sharing the successful experiences of colleagues with
similar abilities to enhance their beliefs in their ability to overcome specific job difficulties
and their efforts to do so, thus moderating the empowerment of employees and providing
them with opportunities to grow and succeed to ensure that employees feel supported by
the organization and trusted by their leaders; this approach increases employees’ sense
of organizational belonging and self-efficacy, thus allowing the organization to take full
advantage of employees’ knowledge and skills and to face challenges and cope with stress
actively. Strategic human resource management refers to the alignment of organizational
strategic planning with human resources, which is used to guide human resource practice
activities and is frequently considered to be an essential factor influencing the cognitive,
motivational, and affective processes of self-efficacy [30]. Organizations can ensure sound
planning and develop action plans for future operations by engaging in HR activities such
as training, sharing successful experiences, role models or motivation, and developing
employees’ confidence in dealing with dynamic environmental challenges and complex
work. In summary, the following hypothesis is proposed.

Hypothesis 2 (H2). Strategic HRM has a positive effect on self-efficacy.

According to conservation of resources theory, self-efficacy, as an essential psychological

resource, is closely related to employees’ self-beliefs and can motivate them to accept challenges
and persevere in the task of accomplishing their work goals [31]. Thus, when facing complex
tasks, on the one hand, self-efficacy can strengthen employees’ determination and confidence
Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 508 6 of 18

to complete tasks and allow them to unite their colleagues actively, integrate relevant resources
and information, and courageously face difficulties and challenges [32]; on the other hand,
self-efficacy can motivate employees to self-regulate in a timely manner, relieve tension and
anxiety, and reallocate resources and set goals based on the specific situational conditions
at hand to ensure that difficulties can be broken down into simple goals and achievable
work objectives [33–35]. In addition, employees who exhibit a high sense of self-efficacy are
skilled at using new methods and ideas to solve unconventional problems, thus enabling the
organization to find alternative ways of surviving situations of adversity and contributing
to the organization’s resilience [35]. In conclusion, self-efficacy enables employees to believe
in their ability to work in situations of adversity, recover quickly from anxiety, and invest
the necessary effort and creativity to accomplish challenging tasks. Therefore, the following
hypotheses are proposed.

Hypothesis 3 (H3). Self-efficacy has a positive effect on organizational resilience.

Hypothesis 4 (H4). Self-efficacy plays a mediating role in the relationship between strategic human
resource management and organizational resilience.

2.3. The Moderating Role of Self-Management

According to self-cognitive theory, individuals have certain values, beliefs, knowledge
systems, and behavioral norms. Individuals form their unique control systems based on
these internal resources and accordingly set goals, engage in self-assessment, and exhibit
self-motivation as a means of guiding their work activities, i.e., self-management [36].
The awareness of the practice community that organizational control and supervision
must be achieved by influencing the self-management system to achieve this goal, i.e., by
harmonizing organizational control and individual motivational orientation, is increasing [37].
Self-management refers to the process by which employees set goals, take positive actions,
and engage in a series of behaviors, including self-monitoring and evaluation as well as
self-reward and punishment, to promote their own intrinsic self-worth based on their personal
needs. Self-management results from the interaction of individual cognition, behavior, and
the external environment. Bandura [38], in developing social cognitive theory, proposed
that individuals exhibit self-rationality, that is, that the individual’s response to the external
world is not mechanical and passive but rather represents a form of goal-oriented behavior
following self-regulation of and self-reflection on their activities; in addition, the achievement
of such a goal can allow the individual to obtain self-worth and meaning (such as monetary
or spiritual rewards, social needs, or self-actualization). Bandura’s model of individual
self-management [39] includes three components: self-observation, self-assessment, and
self-response. The process of self-observation involves actively identifying the quality,
quantity, and frequency of the performance accomplishment of other individuals and
comparing those individuals with oneself to make an objective assessment of one’s own
work ability; the process of self-assessment entails comparing one’s actual performance
with the company’s performance standards, thereby assessing one’s own performance and
developing strategies for improvement; and the process of self-reaction implies rewarding
and punishing oneself according to the results of the assessment as well as reflecting on
and improving oneself continuously.
According to conservation of resources theory, organizational resilience is an essential
intangible resource that allows the organization to survive and develop in adverse situations,
thus enabling organizations to make decisive decisions in dynamic situations, flexibly deploy
their internal and external resources, and take appropriate actions to ensure that the organization
is always able to adapt to the business environment and obtain competitive advantage [11].
In times of crisis, only if the organization is united, determined, and confident can it seize
the fleeting moment, make decisive decisions, and act efficiently to take full advantage of its
own resilience. A high level of self-management ability on the part of employees, with good
Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 508 7 of 18

self-cognitive ability and the ability to obtain and process environmental information to ensure
that they can quickly judge the situation in times of crisis and work in an orderly manner based
on the situation, is target management. Thus, a high level of self-management can increase
employees’ sense of psychological security and self-efficacy in times of crisis, thereby enhancing
the resilience of the organization. Specifically, on the one hand, the process of self-management
is driven by employees’ intrinsic values, and the achievement of the organization’s goals is a
testament to employees’ self-worth [40]. Employees view the challenges presented by adversity
as opportunities to prove their own ability and value. They view work as their responsibility
and believe in accomplishing challenging goals by taking full advantage of their professional
skills and creativity and working with other members of the organization to deal with
environmental challenges and smoothly survive crises, thereby enhancing organizational
resilience. On the other hand, employees with high levels of self-management are skilled
at assessing their own abilities and performance levels or those of others as well as setting
reasonable work goals and developing reasonable action strategies based on the resources
and information that they obtain because employees who are skilled at self-management tend
to take the initiative to collect and process environmental information, remain sensitive to the
external environment and organizational operations, and ensure that they are always needed
by the organization as a means of maintaining their competitive positions in the organization.
In times of crisis, when the organizational landscape changes, employees quickly orient
themselves to their goals with self-management ability, integrate their accessible resources,
develop reasonable action plans and smoothly execute them, reduce their confusion and
anxiety, increase their self-efficacy, and take full advantage of organizational resilience [41]. In
conclusion, self-management can enhance the contribution of self-efficacy to organizational
resilience. In summary, the following hypothesis is proposed.

Hypothesis 5 (H5). Self-management plays a positive role in regulating the impact of self-efficacy
on organizational resilience.

Previous studies have shown that the application of self-management in organizations can
reduce the costs of business supervision and management and improve business performance
and employee well-being, among other effects [42]. However, self-management is not effective
in all situations [43]. Employee self-management is based on mutual trust between leaders and
employees, such that leaders trust employees to be capable of accomplishing the established
goals, and employees trust that they will receive set rewards for accomplishing such goals [44].
However, critical moments that require companies to demonstrate their resilience to cope with
difficult times can lead to changes in companies’ human resource management plans and thus
in their goals and development direction as well as the reshuffling of personnel rights and
interests within such companies. In this situation, employee self-management hinders the ability
of strategic human resource management to promote the company’s organizational resilience
capabilities. Specifically, first, according to conservation of resources theory, the achievement of
self-management goals requires the input of individual and organizational resources [45]. Crises
cause the achievement of goals to be rife with uncertainty. Employees have negative attitudes
toward the implementation of the company’s strategic human resource plan and corporate
goals due to their desire to prevent their resources from being lost. In addition, organizational
resources become scarcer and more difficult to acquire in a crisis. Employees tend to compete for
internal resources to maintain their existing resources and rights, which strains the relationships
among people within the organization and is not conducive to communication, cooperation,
and knowledge sharing among members of the organization. In contrast, organizational
resilience requires a high degree of team cohesion, mutual trust, assistance, and cooperation
and thus is not conducive to organizational resilience. Second, the adjustment of strategic
HR policies in times of crisis can lead to the reformulation of individual goal management.
Employees’ internal self-actualization and self-growth are essential drivers of self-management
goals. Once corporate goals deviate from individual goals, employees’ actions may impede or
even prevent the implementation of strategic HRM plans, thus rendering the organization
 ganization. In contrast, organizational resilience requires a high degree of team cohesion,
mutual trust, assistance, and cooperation and thus is not conducive to organizational re‐
silience. Second, the adjustment of strategic HR policies in times of crisis can lead to the
reformulation of individual goal management. Employees’ internal self‐actualization and
self‐growth are essential drivers of self‐management goals. Once corporate goals deviate
Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 508 8 of 18
from individual goals, employees’ actions may impede or even prevent the implementa‐
tion of strategic HRM plans, thus rendering the organization unable to deploy people and
resources rapidly and perhaps even causing the organization to miss the best time to act,
unable
which tois deploy people and
not conducive resources
to the rapidly
development ofand perhaps even
organizational causing [46].
resilience the organization
Finally, stra‐
totegic
missHRM
the best time to act, which is not conducive to the development
is a management approach that aligns HRM with corporate strategy. of organizational
Corpo‐
resilience [46].often
rate strategy Finally, strategic
takes the formHRM is a management
of management approach
involving that goals,
multiple aligns such
HRMaswithcor‐
corporate strategy. Corporate
porate performance, strategy often
social responsibility, andtakes
brandthe formThe
image. of management
complexity ofinvolving
work and
multiple
teamwork goals,
causesuch as corporate
corporate goals toperformance, social responsibility,
become indistinguishable andwhich
or unclear, brandmakes
image.it
The complexity of work and teamwork cause corporate goals to become
difficult for employees to set and implement their personal self‐management goals,indistinguishable
or unclear,
thereby which them
causing makestoitbecome
difficultconfused
for employees to set and implement
and uncomfortable their personal
and to experience self‐
self-management goals, thereby causing them to become confused and uncomfortable and
doubt or negative emotions, which is not conducive to the development of organizational
to experience self-doubt or negative emotions, which is not conducive to the development
resilience. In summary, the following hypothesis is proposed.
of organizational resilience. In summary, the following hypothesis is proposed.
Hypothesis 6 (H6). Self‐management negatively affects the impact of strategic human resource
Hypothesis 6 (H6). Self-management negatively affects the impact of strategic human resource
management on organizational resilience.
management on organizational resilience.
In summary, based on conservation of resources theory and self‐cognitive theory,
In summary, based on conservation of resources theory and self-cognitive theory, this
this paper constructs a moderated mediation model, as shown in Figure 1, and examines
paper constructs a moderated mediation model, as shown in Figure 1, and examines the rela-
the relationships among strategic human resource management, self‐efficacy and self‐
tionships among strategic human resource management, self-efficacy and self-management,
management, and organizational resilience.
and organizational resilience.

Figure 1. Hypothetical model of the mediating effect of self‐efficacy and the moderating effect of
Figure 1. Hypothetical model of the mediating effect of self-efficacy and the moderating effect of
self‐management.
self-management.

3.3.Methodology
Methodology
3.1.
3.1.Study
StudySample
Sample
This
This studywas
study wasconducted
conductedtotoinvestigate
investigatethetheorganizational
organizationalresilience
resilienceofofenterprises
enterprises
within China. In order to guarantee the accuracy, reliability of data,
within China. In order to guarantee the accuracy, reliability of data, and and wide distribution
wide of
distribution
the
of research sample,
the research this study
sample, this follows the principle
study follows of randomness
the principle to select thetoemployees
of randomness select the
ofemployees
enterprises
of with different
enterprises withindustries, ages, education
different industries, levels, positions,
ages, education and income
levels, positions, and
statuses
income in severalincities
statuses within
several citiesChina.
withinDue to the
China. Duespecial
to thenational conditions
special national of China,
conditions of
there are major disparities in the development levels of various regions,
China, there are major disparities in the development levels of various regions, so the so the sample
source
sampleofsource
this paper includes
of this paperdeveloped large cities,large
includes developed suchcities,
as Beijing,
such Shanghai,
as Beijing,Shenzhen,
Shanghai,
Guangzhou, etc., medium development level cities, such as Jinan,
Shenzhen, Guangzhou, etc., medium development level cities, such as Jinan, Qingdao, Dongguan,
Qingdao,
Huizhou,
Dongguan, Haikou,
Huizhou, Lanzhou,
Haikou,etc., and developing
Lanzhou, small cities,
etc., and developing such
small as Jiuquan,
cities, Weihai,
such as Jiuquan,
Hami, etc. For the convenience of sample collection, a combination of online and on-site
distribution was chosen for this study. In order to guarantee the authenticity and accuracy
of the acquired data, a partial reverse setting of the question items was used. It was filled
out voluntarily and anonymously to reduce the concerns of those who filled it out. A
lottery link was also included with the questionnaire to incentivize the completion of the
questionnaire. A total of 441 questionnaires were collected for one month starting from
August 2022, excluding invalid questionnaires that were completed too quickly, filled
out incorrectly, had omitted answers, or were duplicates. 379 valid questionnaires were
obtained, for a return rate of 86%. The gender distribution of the sample was 53% males
and 47% females; the age distribution included 16.9% of participants aged 25 and below,
37.2% aged 26–35, 28.5% aged 36–45, 14.8% aged 46–55, and 2.6% aged 55 and above; the
education distribution included 20.6% of participants with a high school/junior college
Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 508 9 of 18

education, 43.3% with bachelor’s degrees, 10.3% with master’s degrees, and 2.1% with
doctoral degrees.

3.2. Variable Measurement

All variables included in this study questionnaire were measured using the seven-point
scale developed by Richter. All the scales used in this paper are well-established scales with
good reliability and validity that have been validated many times in the Chinese cultural
context. Additionally, a small sample of 73 people was taken for pre-study. Afterwards,
two professors and three PhD and MSc students in the field of business management and
human resource management examined and adjusted the new questionnaire according to
the research questions, validity, and reliability of the questionnaire results, Chinese cultural
background, and readability.
Organizational resilience: this variable was measured using a 15-item organizational
resilience scale developed by Xiu’e Zhang et al. [47] in the context of China. This scale
contains items such as “ability to adapt and creatively solve problems when a crisis occurs”
and “ability to access needed resources quickly to address challenges in times of crisis”.
Strategic human resource management: this variable is assessed using a 19-item
scale based on Delery’s Strategic Human Resource Management Scale [48], adapted to the
Chinese cultural context, which contains items such as “Individuals in this job have clear
career paths within the organization“ and “Individuals in this job have very little future
within this organization (reverse-coded)“.
Self-management: this variable is assessed using a 10-item scale based on Renn ‘s
self-management scale [49], adapted to the Chinese cultural context, including “I set specific
goals for myself at work”, “I establish challenging goals for myself at work”, and “I clearly
define goals for myself at work”.
Self-efficacy: this variable was measured using an eight-item scale developed by Chen
et al. [50]. This scale contains items such as “I will be able to achieve most of the goals that
I have set for myself” and “When facing difficult tasks, I am certain that I will accomplish
them”.
Control variables: this paper investigates the effects of organizational human resource
management policies, self-efficacy, and self-management on organizational resilience from
the perspective of human resource management. To make the questionnaire data as accurate
as possible, the gender, age, and education of employees are used as control variables in
this paper to reduce the influence of errors on the analysis of the relationships among
variables.

4. Results
4.1. Common Method Biases Test
This study draws on Podsakoff et al. [51] to procedurally reduce homogeneous method
bias by selecting different spatial survey respondents, anonymous surveys, and partial
question item reversal settings at the time of data acquisition. Harman one-way analysis of
variance was used to measure the presence of severe common method bias. The results
of the SPSS 22.0 test revealed a total of six factors with eigenvalues greater than one for
the unrotated exploratory factor analysis. Additionally, the maximum factor variance
explained was 28.22%, which was much less than 40%; thus, there was no serious common
method bias in this study.

4.2. Reliability and Validity Tests

First, this study used SPSS 22.0 and AMOS statistical software to analyze the data from
379 samples. Internal consistency tests were conducted based on the criteria of whether
the coefficient of internal consistency was greater than 0.7 and whether the coefficient of
internal consistency would increase after the deletion of a question item. The test results
are described in Table 1. The Cronbach’s α values of all variables are above 0.90, and
the deletion of any question item does not increase the Cronbach’s α value significantly,
Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 508 10 of 18

indicating that the variables have good internal consistency. The CR values are all greater
than 0.90, and the AVE values are all greater than 0.55. This indicates that the variables
have good composite reliability.

Table 1. Reliability test results for each variable.

Dimension N Cronbach’s α CR AVE

SHRM 19 0.96 0.96 0.56
SM 10 0.95 0.95 0.66
SE 8 0.96 0.96 0.77
OR 15 0.97 0.87 0.83
Note: SHRM represents Strategic Human Resource Management; SM represents Self-Management; SE represents
Self-Efficacy; OR represents Organizational Resilience.

Second, this study developed confirmatory factor analysis models for strategic human
resource management, self-management, self-efficacy, and organizational resilience and
conducted confirmatory factor analysis on the research models using AMOS. The results
showed that all model indicators met the statistical benchmark values (χ2 /df = 2.658,
RMSEA = 0.066, CFI = 0.905, IFI = 0.905), thus indicating that the model goodness of fit
well. In addition, the fit indices of the randomly selected two-factor model and those
of one-factor and three-factor models were compared, as shown in Table 2. The results
showed that the fit indices of the original model were significantly better than those of the
one-factor, two-factor, and three-factor models, thus indicating that the original model had
good discriminant validity.

Table 2. Results of validation factor analysis.

Model
Model X2 df X2 /df CFI IFI RMSEA DC2 Ddf
Compare
Original
3250.633 1223 2.658 0.905 0.905 0.066
Model
3-factor a 3587.905 1227 2.924 0.889 0.890 0.071 2 vs. 1 337.272 *** 4
3-factors b 4224.300 1227 3.443 0.859 0.860 0.080 3 vs. 1 636.395 *** 4
3-factor c 4346.399 1227 3.615 0.849 0.850 0.083 4 vs. 1 122.099 *** 4
2-factor 4441.853 1228 3.617 0.849 0.850 0.083 5 vs. 1 95.454 *** 3
1-factor 5519.733 1230 4.488 0.798 0.799 0.096 6 vs. 1 1077.880 *** 3
Note: *** denotes p < 0.001.

4.3. Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Analysis

The mean and standard deviation of each variable as well as the correlations among
all the variables were analyzed using SPSS 22.0, and the results of this analysis are shown
in Table 3. There was a positive and strong correlation between strategic HRM on the
one hand and organizational resilience (r = 0.722, p < 0.01) and self-efficacy on the other
(r = 0.676, p < 0.01); the relationship between self-efficacy and organizational resilience
(r = 0.711, p < 0.01) also exhibited a positive and robust correlation, thereby providing
preliminary evidence to support the research hypotheses.

Table 3. Means, variances, and correlation coefficients of the variables.

Standard
Means OR SM SE SHRM
Deviation
5.5402 1.22914 1
5.6304 0.90327 0.747 ** 1
5.8146 1.07130 0.711 ** 0.833 ** 1
5.1990 1.11426 0.722 ** 0.640 ** 0.676 ** 1
Note: ** denotes p < 0.01; SHRM represents Strategic Human Resource Management; SM represents Self-
Management; SE represents Self-Efficacy; OR represents Organizational Resilience.
Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 508 11 of 18

4.4. Test of Mediation Model with Moderation

In this paper, we refer to Wen [52] with the moderated mediation model test method to
test the mediation model first, and, on the basis of significant mediation effect, we conduct
the moderated mediation model significance test to verify whether each model proposed
in this paper is significant.
First, this study tested the mediating effect on the relationship between self-efficacy
on strategic HRM and organizational resilience using Model 4 (mediating model) in the
SPSS macro developed by Hayes [53]. The results of this test are shown in Table 4. Strategic
HRM has a significant positive effect on organizational resilience (B = 0.711, t = 19.952,
p < 0.001); strategic HRM has a significant positive effect on self-efficacy (B = 0.568,
t = 17.180, p < 0.001); and self-efficacy has a significant positive effect on organizational
resilience (B = 0.459, t = 9.098, p < 0.001). In addition, the upper and lower limits of the
bootstrap 95% confidence intervals pertaining to the direct effect of strategic HRM on
organizational resilience and the mediating effect of self-efficacy do not contain 0, as shown
in Table 5, thus indicating that strategic HRM affects organizational resilience not only
directly but also indirectly via the mediating effect of self-efficacy, with the direct and
indirect effects accounting for 63% and 37% of the total utility, respectively.

Table 4. Mediated model test of self-efficacy.

OR OR SE
B t B t B t
Gender 0.081 1.030 0.063 0.727 −0.040 −0.484
Age −0.034 −0.866 −0.001 −0.029 0.070 1.778
Education −0.031 −0.736 −0.068 −1.546 −0.084 −2.062 *
SHRM 0.450 10.424 *** 0.711 19.952 *** 0.568 17.180 ***
SE 0.459 9.098 ***
R-sq 0.622 0.5375 0.4751
F 122.499 108.669 84.628
Note: * denotes p < 0.05; *** denotes p < 0.001; SHRM represents Strategic Human Resource Management; SM
represents Self-Management; SE represents Self Efficacy; OR represents Organizational Resilience.

Table 5. Decomposition of total utility, direct effects, and mediating effects.

Effectiveness
Effect BootSE BootLLCI BootULCI
Ratio
Indirect effect 0.261 0.042 0.181 0.348 37%
Direct effect 0.450 0.060 0.327 0.562 63%
Total effect 0.711 0.040 0.630 0.787 100%

Second, the moderated mediation model was tested using Model 15 in the SPSS
macro prepared by Hayes (2012) [53]. The results of the test are shown in Tables 6 and 7.
After including self-management in the model, the product term of strategic HRM and
self-management has a negative effect on organizational resilience (B = −0.144, t = 6.617,
p = 0.01). Furthermore, the moderating effect of self-management contains 0 between the
upper and lower limits of the bootstrap 95% confidence intervals at the eff1 (M − 1SD)
level. In comparison, this effect does not contain 0 between the upper and lower limits
of the bootstrap 95% confidence intervals at the eff1 (M + 1SD) level, thus indicating the
significant moderating effect of self-management. The product term of self-efficacy and
self-management positively affected organizational resilience (B = 0.137, t = 6.617, p = 0.001).
Further simple slope analysis indicated that the effect of strategic HRM on organizational
resilience tends to decrease gradually as the level of self-management increases and that
the effect of self-efficacy on organizational resilience tends to increase in this context, as
shown in Figure 2a,b.
Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 508 12 of 18

Table 6. Mediated model tests with moderation.

OR SE
B t B t
Gender 0.066 0.910 −0.039 −0.484
Age −0.018 −0.505 0.070 1.779
Education −0.034 −0.890 −0.084 −2.062 *
SHRM 0.394 9.432 *** 0.567 17.180 ***
SE 0.143 2.020 *
SM 0.488 6.617 ***
SHRM * SM
Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW −0.144 −3.130 ** 12 of 18
SE * SM 0.137 3.452 ***
R-sq 0.684 0.475
F 99.997 84.627
Second, the moderated mediation model was tested using Model 15 in the SPSS
Note: * denotes
macro p < 0.05;
prepared ** denotes
by Hayes p <[53].
(2012) 0.01;The
*** denotes p <the
results of 0.001;
testSHRM represents
are shown Strategic
in Tables 6 andHuman
7. Re-
source Management; SM represents Self-Management; SE represents Self-Efficacy; OR represents Organizational
After including self‐management in the model, the product term of strategic HRM and
Resilience.
self‐management has a negative effect on organizational resilience (B = −0.144, t = 6.617, p
= 0.01). Furthermore, the moderating effect of self‐management contains 0 between the
Table
upper7. Direct and mediated
and lower limits ofeffects at different
the bootstrap 95%levels of self-management.
confidence intervals at the eff1 (M − 1SD)
level. In comparison, this effect does not contain 0 between the upper and lower limits of
Indicators Effect BootSE BootLLCI BootULCI
the bootstrap 95% confidence intervals at the eff1 (M + 1SD) level, thus indicating the sig‐
nificant moderating (M − of self‐management. The product term of self‐efficacy and self‐
eff1 effect
moderating 0.002 0.058 −0.116 0.112
management positively 1SD) affected organizational resilience (B = 0.137, t = 6.617, p = 0.001).
mediating
Further simple slope eff2analysis
(M) 0.082that the effect
indicated 0.053
of strategic HRM−0.019 0.190
on organizational
effect
resilience tends toeff3 (M + gradually as the level of self‐management increases and that
decrease 0.161 0.068 0.037 0.302
1SD) on organizational resilience tends to increase in this context, as
the effect of self‐efficacy
shown in Figure 2a,b.

(a) (b)
Figure 2. (a) The moderating role of self‐management in the relationship between strategic human
Figure 2. (a) The moderating role of self-management in the relationship between strategic human
resource management and organizational resilience; (b) the moderating role of self‐management in
resource management
the relationship andself‐efficacy
between organizational resilience; (b)resilience.
and organizational the moderating role of self-management in
the relationship between self-efficacy and organizational resilience.
Table 6. Mediated model tests with moderation.
5. Discussion
OR SE
Based on the conservation of resources theory and self-cognitive theory, this study
B t B t
takes employees in Chinese culture as the research object and explores the mechanism and
Gender 0.066 0.910 −0.039 −0.484
boundary conditions of strategic human resource management on organizational resilience.
Age −0.018 −0.505 0.070 1.779
The three aspects of human capital, social capital, and psychological capital are explained
Education −0.034 −0.890 −0.084 −2.062 *
to ensureSHRM
that the human resources of9.432
0.394
a company
***
fit with the corporate17.180
0.567
strategy
***
to ensure
that the strategic
SE goals of the
0.143 company match
2.020 * with the external environment, and that
the internalSMresources are rationally6.617
0.488 allocated
*** to promote the organizational resilience.
Self-efficacy, as
SHRM * SM an emotional
−0.144ability, is an employee’s
−3.130 ** attitude and belief about the company’s
SE * SM 0.137 3.452 ***
R‐sq 0.684 0.475
F 99.997 84.627
Note: * denotes p < 0.05; ** denotes p < 0.01; *** denotes p < 0.001; SHRM represents Strategic Human
Resource Management; SM represents Self‐Management; SE represents Self‐Efficacy; OR represents
Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 508 13 of 18

ability to cope with crises. Organizational resilience is a corporate soft capability embedded in
employees’ knowledge, skills, and traits. Thus, employees’ beliefs about achieving strategic
human resource management goals will influence employees’ performance in times of crisis
and thus the ability to perform with organizational resilience. Therefore, the potential
impact of self-efficacy on the performance of organizational resilience capabilities cannot
be ignored. The impact of self-management on organizational resilience is uncertain.
Self-management can enhance the positive impact of strategic HRM on organizational
resilience but hinders the positive impact of self-efficacy on organizational resilience.
(1) Hypothesis 1, that strategic HRM in the Chinese context facilitates organizational
resilience, was confirmed. Facing a VUCA environment, business operations are
fraught with many uncertainties, a point which is especially salient to this study since
it was conducted in the middle of the novel coronavirus pandemic, which has had
a massive impact on the global economy and people’s lives. To address this major
crisis that can reshape the global economic landscape, it is imperative for companies
to adjust their corporate strategies and long-term development plans, encourage
their employees to respond to the associated challenges actively, and transform the
crisis into an opportunity for growth. The empirical study of strategic human resource
management and organizational resilience in the face of crisis shows that strategic
human resource management can actively transform corporate development strategies,
reorganize and reallocate corporate human resources, lead companies to adapt to changes
quickly, act flexibly and innovate actively, and have a positive effect on the improvement
of organizational resilience. Accordingly, strategic human resource management is an
effective way in which enterprises can ensure their survival and obtain competitive
advantages in the face of a crisis.
(2) This study tested hypothesis 2, that strategic human resource management has a
positive effect on self-efficacy, hypothesis 3, that self-efficacy has a positive effect
on organizational resilience, and hypothesis 4, that self-efficacy mediates the effect
of strategic human resource management on organizational resilience. Based on the
argument that strategic human resource management positively affects organizational
resilience, this study further argues that strategic human resource management can
enhance organizational resilience by increasing employees’ self-efficacy. Self-efficacy
refers to an employee’s strong belief in his or her own ability to do his or her job and
accomplish the associated tasks. Self-efficacy enables employees to act rationally in times
of crisis, to believe that the company has the strength to deal with the crisis, to respond
positively to the company’s HR policies and practices, to unite with colleagues, and to
dare to solve corporate problems in innovative ways. Self-efficacy enables the company’s
strategic human resource management policies and practices to be implemented quickly
throughout the company, thereby enhancing the company’s operations and flexibility in
times of crisis and enabling the organization to recover quickly from a crisis and respond
to a variety of environmental challenges, thus enhancing the organizational resilience
that allows the organization to deal with complex environments.
(3) Hypothesis 5 was tested, that is, the positive moderating role of self-management
in the effect of self-efficacy on organizational resilience. Self-management has a
nonnegligible impact on the effect of self-efficacy on organizational resilience. The
achievement of corporate strategic goals is ultimately based the actions taken by
employees at work, and the self-management ability of employees is related to the
efficiency and effectiveness of policy implementation. Employee self-management
motivates employees to combine corporate goals with their own internal needs, set
their own goals, actively access and use external information and resources, assess the
gaps between goals and actual performance as well as the difficulties associated with
crossing those gaps, and choose creative action paths to achieve their goals. Thus,
self-management ability can enhance the organization’s sensitivity to the external
environment, thus allowing the organization to prepare for crises in advance to ensure
that employees can act with plans and goals in times of crisis, thereby enhancing their
Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 508 14 of 18

self-efficacy and making full use of their creativity and professional skills; given such
preparation, the organization can smoothly survive the crisis and continue normal
operations or even increase the prosperity of the enterprise.
(4) Hypothesis 6 was also tested, that is, the negative moderating role of self-management
in the effect of strategic HRM on organizational resilience. Self-management
negatively influences the impact of strategic human resources on organizational
resilience. Previous research on self-management has focused on the positive
effects of self-management on business management, such as its effects on business
performance, employee satisfaction, employee happiness, and creativity. However,
this study finds that employee self-management capabilities at the strategic level may
be detrimental to organizational resilience. The original driving force behind the role
of self-management is rooted in the deep-seated needs of employees. In times of
crisis, if adjustments to corporate strategies and resource reorganizations deviate from
the goal of self-management, employee self-management may impede or jeopardize
the implementation and achievement of corporate strategic goals. Self-management
causes the organization to become slow to act, rigid in its operations, and inflexible and
insensitive in times of crisis, and it is detrimental to the development of organizational
resilience.
Based on these findings, this paper argues that strategic human resource management
is conducive to the enhancement of organizational resilience and is a possible way in which
organizations can cope with potential crises and turbulent business environments. Strategic
HRM allows companies to create innovations in their organizational staffing structures
and systems actively, thereby enhancing the ability to self-repair and self-rebound at the
organizational level; it allows companies to respond to the diverse and constantly changing
needs of the market and customers and enhance the adaptability and flexibility of the
organization, which is crucial for the organization’s competitiveness in the market.

6. Conclusions
Strategic human resource management facilitates organizational resilience capacity
enhancement and is a possible path for organizations to respond to potential crises and
turbulent business environments. Strategic HRM facilitates companies to actively innovate
their organizational staff structure and system, enhance the ability to repair and rebound at
the organizational level, respond to the diversified and changing needs of the market and
customers, and enhance the adaptability and flexibility of the organization to the market.
This is the reason why many companies are consciously implementing strategic human
resource management. Thus, strategic HRM is a possible path for Chinese companies to
enhance organizational resilience.

6.1. Theoretical Contributions

(1) This paper expands the conservation of resources theory and discusses important
antecedent variables that facilitate the organization’s ability to exhibit organizational
resilience. Organizational resilience is an essential resource and capability that allows
companies to adapt to changes actively following a crisis, seek opportunities for survival
and innovation, and overcome difficulties and achieve counter prosperity. In a dynamic
and changing business environment and given human-centered management trends, it is
crucial to clarify the manner in which strategic human resource management can enhance
organizational resilience. Managing and utilizing the company’s employees well in
a manner that takes advantage of the company’s talent and allows the company to
cope with an unpredictable business environment has become a hot topic for both
corporate managers and academic researchers. This paper focuses on the ways in
which a human resource management model that fits with corporate strategy can
enhance employees’ self-efficacy and thus organizational resilience, thereby providing
a new perspective on the relationship between strategic human resource management
and organizational resilience, theoretically considering possible ways of enhancing
Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 508 15 of 18

organizational resilience, and helping expand research on the mechanisms underlying

the impact of strategic human resources.
(2) This paper validates the important influence effect of self-efficacy, and it explores
the relationship between strategic human resource management, self-efficacy, and
organizational resilience from the perspective of conservation of resources theory and
self-cognitive theory, using strategic human resource management as an antecedent
variable of self-efficacy, which helps to understand the intrinsic correlation between
strategic human resource management, self-efficacy, and organizational resilience in
depth. The mechanisms of how strategic HRM affects organizational resilience have
been unclear in past previous research. This paper explores the “black box” of the
relationship between the mechanisms of strategic HRM’s impacts on organizational
resilience through the self-efficacy variable and highlights the vital role and value of
self-efficacy in organizational resilience.
(3) This paper analyzes the theoretical mechanisms and boundary conditions according
to which organizational resilience can function in crises. Regardless of the uniqueness
and effectiveness of the strategies and responses that are adopted by enterprises,
these strategies and responses must be implemented and facilitated by employees.
Therefore, in times of crisis, enterprises should pay more attention to employees’
psychology, attitudes, and abilities, stimulate their creativity and motivation, and
take the best path of action. Therefore, this paper includes self-management as a
moderating variable to deepen our understanding of organizational resilience at the
enterprise human resource management level. Through theoretical extrapolation
and empirical research, the paper reveals that employees’ self-management is not
conducive to the promotional effect of strategic HRM on organizational resilience,
a conclusion which differs from the findings of many previous studies regarding
the positive effects of self-management on enterprises; the paper thus argues that
the promotional effect of self-management on enterprise management must have an
appropriate background and conditions.

6.2. Practical Implications

Previous research has failed to answer the question of why some companies can transform
themselves and survive when faced with a significant crisis, whereas others fall apart. This
paper has significant practical value for understanding the ways in which strategic human
resource management can help companies survive and grow in a dynamic environment by
enhancing organizational resilience when faced with a crisis and uncertainty.
First, enterprises should actively guarantee that their corporate strategies match their
human resource management to ensure that human resources can serve as critical capital
to help enterprises survive the crisis and achieve their strategic goals smoothly. The
novel coronavirus epidemic is a significant test of enterprise human resource management
and continuous operation and development. Companies should optimize their corporate
strategies and human resource structures continuously as part of their daily operations and
should focus on the power of talent. When facing a crisis, companies should be skilled at
exploring the potential opportunities associated with the challenges, thereby improving
the cohesiveness of employees, taking full advantage of the creativity of employees, and
skillfully using the company’s potential resources so that the company can endure the crisis
smoothly; accordingly, the company should actively reflect on the problems and loopholes
in the company’s operation after the crisis, further adjust the company’s strategic layout,
and be fully prepared to deal with possible crises in the future.
Second, the enterprise should focus on improving employees’ self-efficacy and enhancing
their work execution and enthusiasm. Employees are the primary capital of an enterprise and
represent the only driving force for the creation of value. In an enterprise, human resource
management should focus on adopting people-oriented management policies, cultivating
employees’ self-efficacy, and allowing employees to realize that the enterprise values them.
This paper explores the role of self-efficacy in enhancing organizational resilience from a
Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 508 16 of 18

practical perspective and shows that the enhancement and utilization of the enterprise’s
organizational resilience capability ultimately depends on the power of its employees.
Finally, the enterprise should focus on employees’ self-management capabilities and
simultaneously enhance its own internal management capabilities. Previous research has
illustrated a variety of benefits of employee self-management on corporate performance.
However, based on both theoretical extrapolation and practical research, this paper demonstrates
that self-management is not beneficial to organizational development under all conditions. Only
when employees’ self-goals and organizational goals are aligned do employees exert their utmost
efforts to accomplish overall corporate goals. In management practice, managers should focus
on employees’ career development plans and intrinsic needs to ensure that the organization’s
strategy matches their jobs and to guarantee that their jobs meet their intrinsic needs.

6.3. Limitations and Prospects

This study employs a combination of theoretical derivation and empirical research. It
achieves some success regarding both the theoretical and practical aspects of
organizational resilience research, but it also faces certain limitations. First, this paper uses
only the questionnaire method to obtain sample data, i.e., it relies on a single data source.
Future research can employ experimental, interview, and other methods combined with a
questionnaire to improve data accuracy. Second, the data used in this study were obtained
from employees’ self-reports, and no attention was given to temporal changes when the
respondents completed the questionnaires. Although this paper examined the possibility
of common method bias using Harman’s one-way analysis of variance method, the results
of which were within an acceptable range, the effect of common method bias could not be
avoided entirely. Future studies can reduce common method bias by obtaining objective data
from companies or enhancing the design of the study. Finally, this study explored only the
mediating variable of self-efficacy. Future research can explore other mediating variables
associated with the relationship between strategic HRM and organizational resilience from
other perspectives with the aim of gradually improving the research on the mechanism
underlying the effects of strategic HRM and organizational resilience.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.Y. and L.Y.; methodology, L.Y.; software, L.Y.; investiga-
tion, L.Y.; resources, P.L.; data curation, H.L.; writing—review and editing, G.H.; visualization, H.L.;
supervision, G.H.; project administration, G.H.; funding acquisition, P.L. All authors have read and
agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by Natural Science Foundation of China grant number 42201224
and the Innovative Team Development Project of Inner Mongolia Higher Education Institutions,
grant number: NMGIRT2206.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Ethics Committee of Shandong University (Project identifi-
cation code: 3885535).
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Lu, J.C.; Sang, P.R. Crisis process management: How to improve organizational resilience? Foreign Econ. Manag. 2021, 43, 3–24.
2. Hosseini, E.; Tajpour, M.; Demiryurek, K.; Kawamorita, H. Resilience and Knowledge-Based Firms’ Performance: The Mediating
Role of Entrepreneurial Thinking. J. Entrep. Bus. Resil. 2021, 2, 7–29.
3. Li, L.; Zhong, W.; Peng, S.; Hao, D.; Wang, Y. Corporate resilience and entrepreneurship under the crisis of the new pneumonia
epidemic: A thematic survey report on the growth and development of Chinese entrepreneurs in 2021. Nankai Manag. Rev. 2022,
25, 50–64.
4. Shan, Y.; Xu, H.; Zhou, L.; Zhou, Q. Empowerment by numbers: How organizational resilience is formed in crisis situations—An
exploratory case study based on Qingxuan Lin’s transformation of crisis into opportunity. Manag. World 2021, 3, 84–104.
5. Stokes, P.; Smith, S.; Wall, T.; Moore, N.; Rowland, C.; Ward, T.; Cronshaw, S. Resilience and the (micro-)dynamics of organizational
ambidexterity: Implications for strategic HRM. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2019, 30, 1287–1322. [CrossRef]
6. Tajpour, M.; Hosseini, E.; Mohammadi, M.; Bahman-Zangi, B. The Effect of Knowledge Management on the Sustainability of
Technology-Driven Businesses in Emerging Markets: The Mediating Role of Social Media. Sustainability 2022, 14, 8602. [CrossRef]
Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 508 17 of 18

7. Tonkin, K.; Malinen, S.; Näswall, K.; Kuntz, J.C. Building employee resilience through wellbeing in organizations. Hum. Resour.
Dev. Q. 2018, 29, 107–124. [CrossRef]
8. Repenning, J.W.R.A. Disaster Dynamics: Understanding the Role of Quantity in Organizational Collapse. Adm. Sci. Q.
2002, 1, 1–30.
9. Zhu, Y.; Wang, X.; Sun, N.; Li, Y. A study on organizational resilience based on strategic human resource management perspective.
Manag. Rev. 2014, 26, 78–90.
10. Lengnick-Hall, C.A.; Beck, T.E.; Lengnick-Hall, M.L. Developing a capacity for organizational resilience through strategic human
resource management. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2011, 21, 243–255. [CrossRef]
11. Yao, K. A review of self-efficacy research—A new trend in organizational behavior. J. Manag. 2008, 5, 463–468.
12. Wright, P.M.; Mcmahan, G.C. Theoretical Perspectives for Strategic Human Resource Management. J. Manag. 1992, 18, 295–320.
[CrossRef]
13. Agha, S.; Alrubaiee, L.; Jamhour, M. Effect of Core Competence on Competitive Advantage and Organizational Performance. Int.
J. Bus. Manag. 2011, 7, 192–204. [CrossRef]
14. Hoiling, C.S. Resilience and Stability of Ecological Systems. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 1973, 1, 1–23. [CrossRef]
15. Dai, L.; Eden, L.; Beamish, P.W. Caught in the crossfire: Dimensions of vulnerability and foreign multinationals’ exit from
war-afflicted countries. Strateg. Manag. J. 2017, 38, 1478–1498. [CrossRef]
16. Meyer, A.D. Adapting to Environmental Jolts. Adm. Sci. Q. 1982, 4, 515–537. [CrossRef]
17. Bouaziz, F.; Smaoui Hachicha, Z. Strategic human resource management practices and organizational resilience. J. Manag. Dev.
2018, 37, 537–551. [CrossRef]
18. Lengnick-Hall, M.L.; Lengnick-Hall, C.A.; Rigsbee, C.M. Strategic human resource management and supply chain orientation.
Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2013, 23, 366–377. [CrossRef]
19. Lengnick-Hall, C.A.; Beck, T.E. Adaptive Fit Versus Robust Transformation: How Organizations Respond to Environmental
Change. J. Manag. 2005, 31, 738–757. [CrossRef]
20. Morgeson, F.P.; Source, D.A.H. The Structure and Function of Collective Constructs: Implications for Multilevel Research and
Theory Development. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1999, 2, 249–265. [CrossRef]
21. Leana, C.R.; Van Buren, H.J. Organizational Social Capital and Employment Practices. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1999, 3, 538–555.
[CrossRef]
22. Ryan, R.M.; Deci, E.L. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being.
Am. Psychol. 2000, 55, 68–78. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
23. Shafer, R.A.; Dyer, L.; Kilty, J.; Amos, J.; Ericksen, J. Crafting a Human Resource Strategy to Foster Organizational Agility: A Case
Study. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2001, 3, 197–211. [CrossRef]
24. Okuwa, J.A.; Nwuche, C.A.; Anyanwu, A.C. Human Capital Development and Organizational Resilience in Selected Manufacturing
Firms in Rivers State. Int. J. Nov. Res. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 2016, 2, 43–50.
25. Mienipre, A.A.N.C.; Anyanwu, S.A.C. Talent management and organizational resilience in manufacturing firms in port harcourt.
Int. J. Bus. Manag. 2016, 3, 135–145.
26. Bandura, A. Self-efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change. Psychol. Rev. 1977, 2, 191–215. [CrossRef]
27. Hunter, R.H.; Jordan, R.C. “I have a little, little, little footprint on the world” and “I’m not political”: Feelings of low self-efficacy
and the effect of identity on environmental behaviour in educators. Environ. Educ. Res. 2020, 5, 666–683. [CrossRef]
28. Ma, Z.; Long, L.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, J.; Lam, C.K. Why do high-performance human resource practices matter for team creativity?
The mediating role of collective efficacy and knowledge sharing. Asia Pac. J. Manag. 2017, 34, 565–586. [CrossRef]
29. Bandura, A. Self-Efficacy Mechanism in Human Agency. Am. Psychol. 1982, 2, 122–147. [CrossRef]
30. Eissa, G.; Wyland, R.; Gupta, R. Supervisor to coworker social undermining: The moderating roles of bottom-line mentality and
self-efficacy. J. Manag. Organ. 2020, 26, 756–773. [CrossRef]
31. Kornilaki, M.; Thomas, R.; Font, X. The sustainability behaviour of small firms in tourism: The role of self-efficacy and contextual
constraints. J. Sustain. Tour. 2019, 27, 97–117. [CrossRef]
32. Jaiswal, N.K.; Dhar, R.L. Transformational leadership, innovation climate, creative self-efficacy and employee creativity: A
multilevel study. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2015, 51, 30–41. [CrossRef]
33. Carter, W.R.; Nesbit, P.L.; Badham, R.J.; Parker, S.K.; Sung, L.K. The effects of employee engagement and self-efficacy on job
performance: A longitudinal field study. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2018, 29, 2483–2502. [CrossRef]
34. Puente-Diaz, R. Creative Self-Efficacy: An Exploration of Its Antecedents, Consequences, and Applied Implications. J. Psychol.
2016, 150, 175–195. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
35. Yang, F.; Ling, W.; Jiang, H. Current status of self-management theory research based on organizational behavior perspective. Sci.
Technol. Manag. Res. 2009, 29, 560–563.
36. Sun, X.; Xue, G. A review and outlook of self-management research. Adv. Psychol. Sci. 2008, 1, 106–113.
37. Bandura, A. Exercise of Human Agency through Collective Efficacy. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2000, 3, 75–78. [CrossRef]
38. Bandura, A. Social Cognitive Theory: An Agentic Perspective. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2001, 52, 1–26. [CrossRef]
39. Unsworth, K.L.; Mason, C.M. Self-concordance strategies as a necessary condition for self-management. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol.
2016, 89, 711–733. [CrossRef]
Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 508 18 of 18

40. Alisic, A.; Wiese, B.S. Keeping an insecure career under control: The longitudinal Interplay of career insecurity, self-management,
and self-efficacy. J. Vocat. Behav. 2020, 120, 103431. [CrossRef]
41. Jain, A.K.; Sinha, A.K. Self-management and job performance: In-role behavior and organizational citizenship behavior. Psychol.
Stud. 2013, 1, 19–29.
42. Nederveen Pieterse, A.; Hollenbeck, J.R.; Van Knippenberg, D.; Spitzmüller, M.; Dimotakis, N.; Karam, E.P.; Sleesman, D.J.
Hierarchical leadership versus self-management in teams: Goal orientation diversity as moderator of their relative effectiveness.
Leadersh. Q. 2019, 30, 101343. [CrossRef]
43. Xiao, Y. Self-management teams and their application in enterprises. Chin. Manag. Sci. 2001, 9, 63–67.
44. Jung, Y.; Takeuchi, N. A lifespan perspective for understanding career self-management and satisfaction: The role of developmental
human resource practices and organizational support. Hum. Relat. (N. Y.) 2018, 71, 73–102. [CrossRef]
45. Zhang, Z.; Zhao, S.; Lian, H.; Xie, X. Self-management and self-leadership in the age of digital intelligence: The present and the
future. Foreign Econ. Manag. 2021, 43, 3–14.
46. Chen, C.; Huang, J. Strategic human resource practices and innovation performance—The mediating role of knowledge
management capacity. J. Bus. Res. 2009, 62, 104–114. [CrossRef]
47. Zhang, X.; Teng, X. Organizational resilience connotation, dimensionality and measurement. Sci. Technol. Prog. Countermeas. 2021,
38, 9–17.
48. Delery, J.E.; Doty, D.H. Modes of Theorizing in Strategic Human Resource Management: Tests of Universalistic, Contingency, and
Configurational Performance Predictions. Aeademy Manag. J. 1996, 4, 802–835. [CrossRef]
49. Renn, R.W.; Allen, D.G.; Huning, T.M. Empirical examination of the individual-level personality-based theory of self-management
failure. J. Organ. Behav. 2011, 32, 25–43. [CrossRef]
50. Chen, G.; Gully, S.M.; Eden, D. Validation of a New General Self-Efficacy Scale. Organ. Res. Methods 2001, 4, 62–83. [CrossRef]
51. Podsakoff, P.M.; Mackenzie, S.B.; Lee, J.; Podsakoff, N.P. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the
literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 88, 879–903. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
52. Wen, C.-L.; Ye, B.-J. Mediated model testing methods with regulation: Competition or substitution? J. Psychol. 2014, 46, 714–726.
53. Hayes, A.F. PROCESS: A Versatile Computational Tool for Observed Variable Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process; Guilford
Press: New York, NY, USA, 2012; pp. 1–39. Available online: http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf (accessed on 2
November 2022).