Impact of Human Resource Management Practices on Employee Engagement and Retention
Author(s): Deepika Sharma, Manoj Kumar Tiwari, Anitha Rajan
Affiliation: Department of Management Studies, Saraswati Institute of Business Administration, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India Department of Human Resource Management, Pratap College of Management and Commerce, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, India
Page No: 13-19-
Volume issue & Publishing Year: Volume 3, Issue 5, May 2026
Journal: International Journal of Modern Engineering and Management | IJMEM
ISSN NO: 3048-8230
DOI:
Abstract:
Human Resource Management (HRM) practices constitute a strategic lever through which organisations shape the psychological contract with their workforce, influencing discretionary effort, organisational commitment, and ultimately, the decision of employees to remain or exit. In the context of India's rapidly expanding private sector — characterised by high attrition rates averaging 18–26% across sectors and the concurrent challenge of retaining knowledge workers in a competitive talent market — the systematic empirical examination of which HRM practices most significantly predict employee engagement and retention outcomes is of both theoretical and practical importance. This study investigates the relationship between four core HRM practice dimensions — Training and Development (T&D), Performance Appraisal (PA), Compensation and Benefits (CB), and Work-Life Balance (WLB) — and the outcomes of employee engagement and retention intention, using a structured survey instrument administered to 384 employees across six industry sectors (manufacturing, IT/ITES, banking and finance, healthcare, retail, and education) in Tier-I and Tier-II Indian cities. Partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) was employed to test the measurement model and structural hypotheses. Results confirm that all four HRM practice dimensions significantly predict employee engagement (R² = 0.68), with Work-Life Balance emerging as the strongest predictor (β = 0.34, p < 0.01) followed by Training and Development (β = 0.31, p < 0.01). Employee engagement fully mediates the relationship between WLB and retention intention, and partially mediates the relationships between T&D, PA, CB and retention intention. Sector-wise analysis reveals that IT/ITES employees report the highest engagement scores (mean = 76/100) while retail sector employees report the lowest (mean = 65/100). The findings provide actionable guidance for HR practitioners in designing targeted HRM initiatives, particularly in medium-sized Indian firms where HRM formalisation is incomplete.
Keywords:
HRM practices, employee engagement, employee retention, training and development, work-life balance, performance appraisal, PLS-SEM, Indian organisations, attrition, organisational commitment
Reference:
[1] Ahmad, S., & Schroeder, R. G. (2003). The impact of human resource management practices on operational performance: Recognising country and industry differences. Journal of Operations Management, 21(1), 19–43.
[2] Anitha, J. (2014). Determinants of employee engagement and their impact on employee performance. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 63(3), 308–323.
[3] Appelbaum, E., Bailey, T., Berg, P., & Kalleberg, A. (2000). Manufacturing Advantage: Why High Performance Work Systems Pay Off. Cornell University Press, Ithaca.
[4] Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands-resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309–328.
[5] Biswas, S., & Bhatnagar, J. (2013). Mediator analysis of employee engagement: Role of perceived organisational support, PO fit, organisational commitment and job satisfaction. Vikalpa, 38(1), 27–40.
[6] Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life. Wiley, New York.
[7] Boxall, P., & Purcell, J. (2011). Strategy and Human Resource Management (3rd ed.). Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
[8] Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling Techniques (3rd ed.). John Wiley & Sons, New York.
[9] Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organisational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 386–400.
[10] Decramer, A., Smolders, C., & Vanderstraeten, A. (2012). Employee performance management culture and system features in higher education. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(2), 352–371.
[11] Delery, J. E., & Doty, D. H. (1996). Modes of theorising in strategic human resource management. Academy of Management Journal, 39(4), 802–835.
[12] Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24.
[13] Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hayes, T. L. (2002). Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 268–279.
[14] Hayman, J. (2005). Psychometric assessment of an instrument designed to measure work life balance. Research and Practice in Human Resource Management, 13(1), 85–91.
[15] Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692–724.
[16] Mobley, W. H., Griffeth, R. W., Hand, H. H., & Meglino, B. M. (1979). Review and conceptual analysis of the employee turnover process. Psychological Bulletin, 86(3), 493–522.
[17] Pattanayak, B. (2020). Human Resource Management (5th ed.). PHI Learning, New Delhi.
[18] Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891.
[19] Rana, S., Ardichvili, A., & Tkachenko, O. (2014). A theoretical model of the antecedents and outcomes of employee engagement. Journal of Workplace Learning, 26(3/4), 249–266.
[20] Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(7), 600–619.
[21] Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(4), 701–716.