rs that the specific form of the HIPO depends upon the context within which an organization operates. The HIPO then may be a manifestation of the dynamic process of obtaining a fit between an organization's structure and the demands of its business environment (3).
Kirkman, et al (3) note that even in identifying an acronym for the construct, there is disagreement with some analysts preferring to use HIPO as opposed to HPWS. These researchers uncovered certain core assumptions and components of the model, to wit:
àwe know that the components of the HIPO must entail aspects of organizational structure, human resource policies, managerial behaviors, and organization culture. More specifically, these organizational areas are affected by five major components of the HIPO: (1) self-managing work teams; (2) employee involvement; (3) integrated production (manufacturing and service) technologies; (4) organizational learning; and (5) total quality management
Semantic considerations aside, Reid and Hobbell (1) assert that what organizations are now seeking is nothing less than a performance culture û a culture that is based on discipline that promotes decisiveness and standards of excellence and which ensures direct accountability. In performance cultures, proactive performance management blocks obstructive behaviors while supporting, reinforcing, and rewarding constructive behaviors. Such organizations enjoy openness and trust, simplicity and focus, proactive and empowering leadership, and a vital ability to play to peoples' strengths. These organizations are able overall to respond to opportunities emerging in the environment and to manage change when it becomes necessary (Coughlan and Prokopoff 189).
It is within this general background that the present study is positioned. The purpose of this report is to move from a description of the theory of high performance organizational design to an assessment of the practical ...