Article review of “HRM systems & employee well-being”, focusing on the topic of research approaches: for MBA students

Article review of “HRM systems & employee well-being”, focusing on the topic of research approaches: for MBA students

 

How to present this article in Harvard reference format?

Messersmith, J.G., 2026. HRM systems & employee well-being: Toward a eudaimonic perspective. Human Resource Management Review, 36, p.101149. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2026.101149.

 

 

What are the key research issues the article wants to address?

The article by Messersmith (2026) aims to address several key research issues:

1.    Gap Between Research and Practice on Well-Being: Despite growing interest in how HRM systems affect employee outcomes, many employees still face mental health challenges, poor engagement, and a crisis of purpose. The article highlights a gap between existing research models and the practical challenges employees face regarding well-being.

2.    Limitations of Social Exchange Models: Most existing models linking HR systems to well-being rely heavily on social exchange mechanisms, which may be insufficient for addressing deeper, eudaimonic forms of well-being. These models focus on extrinsic motivation and organizational-centric well-being measures like job satisfaction and affective commitment, which are limited in scope.

3.    Need to Focus on Eudaimonic Well-Being: The article identifies a need to shift from hedonic or affect-driven well-being (e.g., satisfaction, positive affect) toward eudaimonic well-being, which emphasizes living well, meaningfulness, and purposeful work. Eudaimonic well-being aligns more with employees' psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness as per self-determination theory (SDT), yet it is underexplored in HRM research.

4.    Development of a New Conceptual Model: The article seeks to offer a novel conceptual model grounded in SDT to explain how HR systems can be designed to promote autonomous motivation and eudaimonic workplace well-being (EWWB). This includes identifying specific HR practices that foster employees’ psychological needs, thus enabling more long-term and meaningful well-being at work.

5.    Practical Implications for Managers: The article addresses how organizations and HR leaders can support employee well-being through designing meaningful work and aligning HR practices with employees’ deeper sense of purpose, moving beyond traditional engagement or satisfaction metrics.

6.    Integration of Psychological Theory into HRM Research: It attempts to integrate eudaimonic philosophy and SDT, which have largely been discussed in psychology and philosophy, into the HRM field, thereby enriching the theoretical frameworks used to study HR systems and well-being.

In sum, the article responds to the rising mental health issues and crisis of purpose among employees by critiquing traditional HRM well-being models and proposing a new SDT-based framework for fostering eudaimonic well-being through HR systems.

 

What research methods have been used in this study?

The article by Jake G. Messersmith (2026) is a conceptual/theoretical paper rather than an empirical study. It does not employ primary data collection or quantitative/qualitative research methods typical of empirical research. Instead, the paper uses:

·        Literature Review and Theoretical Synthesis: The author reviews and synthesizes existing literature in strategic HRM, positive psychology, self-determination theory (SDT), and eudaimonic well-being to identify gaps in current research and build a new theoretical framework linking HR systems with eudaimonic workplace well-being (EWWB).

·        Conceptual Model Development: Based on this theoretical integration, the paper develops a conceptual model that articulates propositions about how specific HR practices can fulfill employees’ psychological needs (autonomy, competence, relatedness) and foster autonomous motivation and eudaimonic well-being.

·        Propositions and Theoretical Arguments: The study formulates testable propositions regarding moderators and mediators in the model, such as the role of frontline manager support and identified motivation influencing EWWB.

Therefore, the research method is best characterized as a conceptual/theoretical development through critical review, synthesis, and proposition formulation rather than empirical investigation. There are no mentions of primary data collection, statistical analyses, experiments, or surveys in the paper.

 

What research approaches (i.e. qualitative method, quantitative method and mixed research method) have been used in this study?

The study by Jake G. Messersmith (2026) employs a conceptual research approach rather than empirical research methods. Specifically, it does not use qualitative, quantitative, or mixed research methods. Instead, the paper:

• Develops a theoretical/conceptual model grounded in self-determination theory (SDT) and eudaimonic well-being by synthesizing existing literature from HRM, psychology, and related fields.
• Proposes conceptual propositions about the relationships between HR systems, psychological needs fulfillment, motivation, and employee well-being.

No primary data collection, qualitative analyses (e.g., interviews, case studies), quantitative analyses (e.g., surveys, experiments, statistical modeling), or a combination of these (mixed methods) are conducted in this paper.

Thus, the research approach is conceptual/theoretical rather than empirical qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods.

 

What (reasoning) research approaches have been used in this study (i.e. inductive, deduct and abductive approaches)?

The study by Messersmith (2026) primarily uses a deductive reasoning approach. This is evident because:

• The paper begins with established theories—particularly self-determination theory (SDT) and the concept of eudaimonic well-being—and uses these theoretical frameworks to develop a new conceptual model linking HR systems to eudaimonic workplace well-being (EWWB).
• It critiques existing research models (mainly social exchange theory-based HR models) and deduces that these are insufficient to explain deeper forms of well-being, then logically constructs a new theoretical framework and propositions based on SDT principles (autonomy, competence, relatedness).
• The paper moves from general theory (psychological theories of motivation and well-being) to specific propositions about HR practices, employee motivation, and well-being outcomes.

There is no indication of inductive reasoning (building theory from empirical data) or abductive reasoning (starting from surprising facts to generate new theoretical explanations) because the study does not involve data collection or analysis, but rather theoretical development based on existing literature.

Therefore, the reasoning approach is best described as deductive.

 

Describe 3 main claims of the article in terms of Toulmin's model of argument.

Using Toulmin’s model of argument, which includes components such as Claim, Grounds (evidence), and Warrant (reasoning connecting the grounds to the claim), three main claims of Messersmith’s (2026) article are as follows:

---

Claim 1: Traditional HR systems models grounded in social exchange theory are insufficient to adequately address deeper, eudaimonic employee well-being.

• Grounds: Most current research links HR systems to employee well-being through social exchange mechanisms emphasizing reciprocal commitment, focusing on employee attitudes like job satisfaction and affective commitment rather than deeper psychological states. The literature often uses proxies that reflect hedonic well-being rather than eudaimonia.
• Warrant: If the theoretical basis of HR system research centers on externally motivated behavior and social exchange, this logic does not promote autonomous motivation, which according to self-determination theory (SDT) is necessary for deeper forms of well-being (eudaimonia) [T3,T2].

---

Claim 2: A eudaimonic perspective based on self-determination theory provides a more robust conceptual model for understanding how HR systems can enhance employee well-being.

• Grounds: Self-determination theory explains that fulfilling basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness leads to eudaimonic well-being. Identified and integrated forms of motivation connect employees meaningfully to their work. Existing findings in psychology associate eudaimonia with critical positive outcomes like happiness, mental health, and life satisfaction.
• Warrant: If well-being depends on autonomous motivation and fulfillment of core psychological needs, then HR systems designed to support these needs should promote deeper, eudaimonic well-being rather than mere satisfaction or commitment [T2,T3].

---

Claim 3: Specific HR practices, rooted in the eudaimonic framework, can be implemented to create organizational contexts that foster eudaimonic workplace well-being.

• Grounds: The paper proposes concrete HR practices such as selection for value congruence, job crafting, meaningful socialization, developmental performance management, autonomy-supportive leadership, and pay linked to mission—all aimed at fulfilling psychological needs [T4,T5].
• Warrant: If HR systems implement practices that satisfy autonomy, competence, and relatedness needs, they will facilitate autonomous motivation and thereby foster eudaimonic workplace well-being.

---

These three claims form the backbone of the article’s argument: that moving beyond traditional social exchange-based HR models toward a self-determination theory-informed, eudaimonic framework will better support employee well-being, and that this can be operationalized through specific HR practices.