Right now, I am going to write about my opinions about HR, concerned more in HPWS and which aspects that could affected it. I just learnt more about HR in my university [right now studying level is in a master degree :) ] and found it interesting. Talking about HPWS and according to an International journal titled Crossing The Level of Employee's Performance: HPWS, Affective Commitment, Human Capital and Employee Job Performance in Professional Service Organizations, wrote by two students from Sun Yat Sen university and Macau University, it says that Affective Commitment and Human Capital are the mediator between HPWS and Employee Job Performance.
It was a presentation session in the class, a presentation about HPWS, and I asked about the ratio between Affective Commitment and Human Capital... then the lecturer said that if it's individually, it depends on the individual.
Then, now after getting those answers I would like to explore more here:
1. Affective Commitment
It's an attitude and behavior of the employee to the company/institution, how they commit to the company and how loyal they are. For this thing, it exists from the employee mindset about their loving and loyalty to reach the goal of the company.
2. Human Capital
A big quantity of human resource doesn't mean that they are all have a good ability. That's why in human capital it's more concern in the development of the employee's ability, so the company/institution could reach the goal.
About the priority which comes first or which one has a bigger ratio or percentage,
if it comes to an individual, IN MY OPINION there are conflicts, can't decide which one is important...
Affective commitment should be the first thing due to the commitment is the first thing come to an individual mindset but in the other side the development of the human resources also couldn't be rejected. How the manpower could get a job without getting in any recruitment which include in Human Capital aspect. If it comes to the company matters, of course human capital comes first then they looked for an affective commitment. Because if there is no human capital there is no body could do a commitment to the company.
Lastly, I would like to state my opinion that it's true that both of Affective Commitment and Human Capital are important. In a simple way, if there is no human capital (recruitment, selection, development) how the company could get a commitment and then after getting those people to be the manpower the company will tell them all the rules and regulations also the vision and the mission of the company, if the candidate of the employee said they would do all and reach the target, and during the works they do really well, it means that both human capital (such as training, course) and affective commitment (the employee stay and work for a long time, love the company) run well to the individual and the company managed both matters well also. At the end, the employees work happily while in the other side the company or institution reach the goal.
