How to create an engaging call centre environment despite tight commercial constraints

(April 2011)

Authored by Dr Martha Knox-Haly ( Workplace Research Centre, University of Sydney)

Abstract

The objective of this case study was to explore the relationship between high performance work systems (HPWS) and a call center’s culture of engagement. The aim was to see whether these two features could create ‘an exceptional call centre’ which transcended commercial constraints. The case study takes Salmat Salesforce, (a specialist in managing outsourced call centres and winner of the Hewitt Employer of the Year, South East Asia from 2005 to 2007) as its focus. This service sector case study analysis also compliments the predominance of manufacturing and survey based research on high performance work systems.

Introduction
Call centers have been described by some researchers as lacking career opportunities and engagement, resulting in poor retention and burnout of employees (Huang, Chan, Lam and Nan, 2010). Batt, Nohara and Kwon (2010) perceive call centers as representative of employment shaped by mobile digitally based technologies and industrial deregulation. The combination offers opportunities in flexible work organization, but can also be associated with downward pressure on wages and conditions. Ball’s (20 10) research highlighted the complexities of maintaining a viable internal labor market, when many parameters of the outsourced call centre employment relationship are determined by external customer specifications. Ball notes that contractual parameters impact wage equity, employee development; and can produce a culture of employee burnout to sustain customer quality in highly prescriptive work. Call centers clearly have many associated challenges for the employment process. However the picture canno t be reduced to “simple negatives”; and the aim of this paper is to explore whether a call centre environment can transcend these commercial constraints, by creating an engaging work environment.

There are several features contributing to the complexity and diversity of call centre employment relationships, including political economic structure. Batt, Nohara and Kwon’s (2010) comparative study of call centers across five co-ordinated economies (Austria, Denmark, France, Germany and Spain) and three liberal market economies (UK, Canada and US) concluded relationships between high involvement work, performance based pay and wages were generally accentuated in liberal economies. Salmat Salesforce is an Australian organization, and according to this research, would have a broad opportunity to develop a strong relationship between flexible remuneration and reward practices with employee engagement. Organisational longevity has a role to play. Moss, Salzman and Tilly’s (2008) longitudinal survey of American retail and financial services call centers; demonstrated that organizations began with flat hierarchies, but management layers evolved in response to client service quality d emands; this created career opportunities in management and specialist functions. There was high turnover amongst call centre novices, but a stable core of career employees existed. Quality of management-employee relationships can be influential. A recent study of a Chinese call centre noted positive leader-employee exchange reduced employee burnout and turnover (Huang et al, 2010). Market segment characteristics have an effect. Call centre surveys point to a possibility of HPWS within high profit ma rgin markets segments; although the majority of call centre environments are highly controlled, prescriptive environments (Batt, 2000). Another paradox is that full utilization of telecommunications technology (and by extension, derivation of technological competitive advantage) can only be achieved with engagement and congruent work organization – such as high performance work systems (Whitefield and Poole, 1997).  These points highlight that ‘exceptional’ call centers are poss ible, and that flexible work organization (such as HPWS) and engagement have role to play.  
 
HPWS and Employee Engagement
Although HPWS practices have been fluidly defined, there appears to be broad agreement around the core components. These components include detailed recruitment and selection processes, merit based promotions, cross functional career paths and teams, team based rewards and skills based pay, intensive training in interpersonal and technical competencies, participatory mechanisms, information sharing, developmental appraisal and equitable remuneration (Boxall and Mackay, 2007, Beltran Martin, Roca-Pu ig, Escrig-Tena and Bou-Llusar, 2008, Takeuchi, Lepack, Wang and Takeuchi, 2007). The most detailed and rigorous measure of HPWS was developed by Guthrie (2001); listing  group gain sharing, profit sharing, employee stock ownership, attitude surveys and teams as core HPWS components. The first hypothesis is that the practices within the case study organization will constitute a HPWS.

HPWS systems are believed to contribute to organizational performance through engagement (Takeuchi, Lepack, Wang and Takeuchi 2007, Evans and Davis, 2005).  Employee engagement has been variously defined as involvement, emotional connection, vigor, absorption and enthusiasm for work (Harter, Schmidt and Hayes, 2002, Bakker and Xanthopoulou, 2009). Engagement is positively associated with resourcing (Crawford, LePine and Rich, 2010). Resources can include information sharing/ c ommunication networks, work organization and appropriate work technologies.

The relationship between HPWS and engagement could operate on a number of levels. Employee engagement is said to arise as a consequence of positive emotional connections and clear performance expectations (Harter, Schmidt and Hayes, 2002). Beltran-Martin et al (2008) hypothesized that HPWS contributed to organizational performance through reward and recognition systems.  These elements reinforce employee participation, and social exchange becomes the central operational variable connecting HP WS and organizational performance. Leadership is another critical aspect, as organizational and management support facilitated deployment of employee human capital (Liao et al, 2009).  Coaching styles of leadership (again characteristic of HPWS) contribute to employee engagement (Karsten, Baggot, Brown and Cahill, 2010).
HPWS incorporates selective staffing systems which screen for interpersonal relational skills which facilitate information sharing, both of which are core elements for engagement. HPWS elements of team based remuneration and work organization promote greater mutual interest and reinforce social exchange. Strong group norms promote behavioral compliance with performance standards, with fewer requirements for recourse to administrative and supervisory monitoring (Evans and Davis, 2005). HPWS componen ts of team based work organization, remuneration and goal setting could provide the structural basis for employee engagement in ‘exceptional call centers’. Therefore the second hypothesis is that an ‘exceptional call centre’, such as the case study organization, would rely on HPWS and engagement having multiple inter-connections.

Methodology
Many of the early studies of HPWS were based on manufacturing sector organizations (Ledford and Mohrman, 1993, Applebaum, Bailey, Berg and Kalleberg, 2000, Lowe, Delbridge and Oliver, 1997, Kintana, Alonso and Olaverri 2006, Datta and Rajagpolan, 1998).  HPWS has usually been studied through surveys (as opposed to case studies) at a firm level (Liao, Toya, Lepak and Hong, 2007 Batt, 2000, Huselid, 1995, Beltran Martin, Roca-Puig, Escrig-Tena and Bou-Llusar, 2008, Arthur, 1994, Guthrie, 2001, De Menezes and Wood, 2006); with a focus on the contribution of HPWS to organizational performance. Whilst there have been qualitative case studies of call centers around leadership (Huang et al, 2010);  there is a shortage of detailed organizational operationally focused case studies on HPWS in service environments (O’Driscoll, 1998, Ball, 2010).  This is unfortunate, as case studies can provide richly detailed descriptions of organizational systems (Kydd and Oppenheim, 1990).  Th ere is limited concrete illustration of what actually might be meant by HPWS. In acknowledging this deficit, Boxall and Macky (2007) have called for greater study of the complexities of the ‘organizational black box’.
 
In survey based research, the issue of HPWS diffusion has been traditionally been expressed as percentage of the workforce covered by such practices (Huselid, 1995). In the case study organization, all employees are covered by similar remuneration and employment practices. It is therefore felt that this blanket coverage resolves potential methodological questions around HPWS diffusion; and opens the way for interviews to be used as the key data collection strategy.  Twenty four interviews were conducted over the course of twelve months from July 2008 to June 2009 with management and call centre agents at Salmat Salesforce’s Melbourne offices. Interviews were conducted with the former CEO, current CEOs, Heads of Team Development, Recruitment, Learning and Development, Business Intelligence, Workforce Scheduling, Operational Management for call centers and direct sales, Information Technology and Finance, as well as customer service officers for outbound and inbound call centres. Int erviewees were nominated for their anticipated occupational knowledge around structural, procedural, systemic and cultural variables effecting HPWS and engagement. Interviewee selection and questions were independently specified by the author, and done without direction from Salmat Salesforce. Interviews addressed work processes, knowledge of organizational history, culture, climate, competitive advantage, performance management and reward systems, as well as use of technology and communication channe ls. Interview data was then used to generate a descriptive context and organizational history for hypothesis testing.

Salmat Salesforce: History
Salmat Salesforce could be regarded as an ‘exceptional call centre’, as it won the Hewitt  Employer of the Year for South East Asia Award for three consecutive years (2005 – 2007). The award was based on Salesforce reporting the highest levels of employee engagement and levels of turnover amongst participating companies (Connect4, 2009). Approximately half the workforce completed the Hewitt survey with an engagement ranking in the ninetieth percentile.  As a provider of outsourced call centers, Salmat Salesforce exemplifies Ball’s (2010) call centre where employment conditions are driven by external customer specifications. A brief organizational history will provide some context for the pursuit of engagement and HPWS.

Salmat Salesforce was established in 1994, (and was then known as Salesforce), as a joint venture between Kevin Panozza (Salesforce CEO) and DDB World Wide Communications. DDB World Wide Communications had held a 60% ownership stake in Salesforce, which originally provided travel phone services for Ansett and a well known loyalty program. As the former CEO Kevin Panozza noted, “Salesforce - being a Greenfield site - permitted a great deal of latitude in the type of organizational culture that could be created. A project fee based business model enabled Salesforce to hire dynamic and communicative staff who were attracted by the glamour of working for an airline” (Interview with former CEO K. Panozza in 2009). Early strategy sessions were built around the principle of creating a work environment that would fully engage staff members. This was expressed through the organizational values of “fun, focus and fulfillment”. The objective was to have fun at work, but remain focu sed on the phone with customers. Fulfillment was said to automatically arise when employees were both focused and having fun.  Engagement is therefore an historical cultural value for Salmat Salesforce.

Salesforce became the largest provider of Australian call centers over the next eleven years, with a reputation for quickly establishing centres. Salmat purchased and merged with Salesforce in 2005. Salesforce was renamed Salmat Salesforce, and was now one of five Salmat divisions, and was a now a publicly listed company. All employees had an option of purchasing shares and participating in a gain sharing program. The gain sharing program is an example of a HPWS component providing a structural bas is for engagement.

Despite the global financial crisis, Salmat Salesforce achieved a 12.9% increase in revenue for the year 2007/2008 (Connect4, 2009). Revenue increases came from call centre businesses, direct sales and emerging technology businesses. Consolidation was being achieved through the organization’s fourth round of ‘optimization’ of business models, systems, processes and pricing parameters.  The outsourced call centre market had become highly competitive with narrow profit margins, because of the shift from project based payment to transactional based costing. Price models now included penalties for failure to meet sales targets.

Optimisation Directors were the top level of operational management, with responsibility for groups of call centers. Their roles encompassed selling, corporate account management, operational management, staff development and motivation, as well as working closely with all the support units to ensure optimum call centre performance.
As Salmat Salesforce has experienced strong growth in the last four years, daily succession and career planning were essential; and facilitated the provision of cross-functional career opportunities. Each management interviewee spoke about his or her responsibility to identify the next generation of leaders and successors.

Each call centre is headed by a project manager and a workforce planning manager, and these roles come with an opportunity for rotation between operational and support teams.
 Some of the larger call centres also have an area manager (or campaign manager). Salmat Salesforce’s call centers are usually large, colorful rooms, with individually decorated work stations accommodating several hundred casually dressed operators (typically in their early to late twenties). Operators may either make phone calls to potential and existing customers for the purposes of selling (outward bound call centers); or receive phone calls from potential and existing customers (inwar d bound call centers) around customer support.  

Team leaders manage 12 – 15 agents, as well as the immediate aspects of accounts management, customer relations, coaching and cost control. Team leaders have responsibility for developing agents, whilst workforce planners organize workforce schedules. Many of the team leaders were in the same age group as the agents. This could have its challenges as young leaders were being asked to deal with complex areas such as mental health in the workplace.  Call centre agents are paid through a c ombination of base rate pay, commissions and bonuses. A limited upward career path for agents, with a small number of team leader roles had been identified as a significant hurdle for retention. Project manager and sales manager roles were also subject to turnover every few years.  Generation Y (employees aged between 18 to 25 years) represented 60% of Salmat Salesforce’s agent workforce. The recruitment manager explained that only twenty percent of each recruitment cohort would still be w orking for Salmat Salesforce after twelve months; therefore retaining enough agents to consolidate corporate knowledge was a major challenge.
Call centers are supported by seven corporate services departments. Corporate services includes Team Development (or human resources), Learning and Development (consisting of STARS – Salmat Salesforce’s registered training organization and Salmat College which provides internal courses), Recruitment, BIG (Business Intelligence Group) Team, Workforce Planning, Information Technology and Finance.

Findings on Strategy, Systems and Competitive Advantage
HPWS have been conceptualized as ‘mutually reinforcing or synergistic human resources practices’, which build organizational performance through increased procedural alignment (Dyer and Reeves, 1995, p. 658, Huselid, 1995, Lepack, Wang and Takeuchi, 2007, Beltran Martin, Roca-Puig, Escrig-Tena and Bou-Llusar, 2008, Semler, 1997, Evans and Davis, 2005). This implies a context of alignment between strategic platform and operational practices, a feature which will be explored in the followi ng section.

Salmat Salesforce’s strategic platform is the first pillar of the organization’s competitive advantage. The strategic platform is designed to achieve the stated organizational objectives or the ‘Three Es’: expansion, excellence and extension, and is facilitated by the climate values or ‘Three Fs’: fun, focus and fulfillment. These two value sets are realized through implementation values or the ‘Three Cs’: change, challenge and control.  Each wor kplace meeting is conducted with a ‘mental check’ of whether these nine values are being adhered to. A strategic review was conducted every three years. Ten or twelve themes were considered each year, and reviewed on a six monthly basis. The strategic plan was regarded by interviewees at all levels as a dynamic, live document determining relevant priorities in each work area. One Optimization Director described Salmat Salesforce as ‘an improvement architect’ - continually buil ding on its strategic platform and checking daily operational practice against this document. The strategic plan promoted decentralized, flexible communication and control systems. Each functional area has developed its own budgets along the lines suggested in the strategic platform, with the final organizational allocation being determined by the two CEOs. Shifting business models in a flat organizational structure required Salmat Salesforce management to be adaptable and innovative in how they pursu ed these three value sets. Salmat Salesforce maintained a minimum number of senior managers. One senior manager noted:  ‘being lean at the top meant that management had to be very versatile in the number of hats that they wore’.
 
Decentralization assists rapid reconfiguration of call centers by optimization directors. This level of responsiveness is required by the changing business models associated with each new call centre contract. An Optimization Director noted that ‘each call centre is unique and can easily become insular; the challenge is to develop organization wide perspectives in call centre management and promote innovation’.  Senior management retained a strongly operational role with front line call centre and sales agents. For example, one optimization director who managed eight call centers still conducted individual team leader performance reviews to ensure the right candidates were in these roles.  Decentralized control was apparent in the encouragement of agents exercising their initiative.  An agent commented ‘you are encouraged to pursue initiatives and then tell management what you have done’. The only limitation on agent initiative was the product integrity c ould not be compromised. Awareness of the strategic platform and recognition of its alignment through daily operational delivery was mentioned by all interviews.    

Findings on Human Resources, Learning and Development, Recruitment and Business Analysis
As previously mentioned HPWS includes technology rich work systems, cross-functional career paths, intensive recruitment, training and participation. These practices were apparent in the six support units which deliver human resources services, training, recruitment, workforce scheduling, IT support and business analysis.

Team Development (Human Resources) is responsible for Salmat Salesforce’s climate and culture by monitoring workforce well being and engagement. This unit has formal responsibility for the climate values or ‘Three Fs’ of  fun, focus and fulfillment, outlined in the strategic platform. Team Development’s work is informed by quarterly intensive surveys into generational differences. These surveys highlighted technology utilization as a key point of generational different iation, as well as prioritization of career pathing, talent management and leadership development. As a result all managers complete three months training in leadership development, management competency and employee coaching strategies. Leadership and agent roles have been designed with opportunities for cross functional career paths.
 
The Recruitment team is directly responsible for matching supply and demand for call centre agents. The Recruitment team were collaborating with Team Development and Learning and Development to create meaningful career paths for call centre agents.
The Recruitment team is paid a bonus for candidates who are retained at three and six months. They would make a concerted effort to maintain contact with recruits, as according to the Recruitment Manager, ‘for the first ninety days – they are our people’.  
The Recruitment team and Team Development see their function as ‘provision of an employment experience’ – through an effective match of work context and employee lifestyle.  One of the more creative initiatives was to win contracts with companies that were inspirational to Generation Y. Recruitment has also shifted from an unstructured group interview to an intensive process involving group activities, online skills tests (measuring numeracy, literacy and typing), scenario int erviews, job previews and reference checks.

Salmat Salesforce’s Learning and Development (L&D) section consists of STARS (Salmat Salesforce’s Registered Training Organization) and Salmat College (which delivers training across other Salmat divisions). STARS trains external customer organizations and call centers, where content is developed with project (call centre) management. Training relevance was established through incorporating each call center’s performance metrics and culture. Each month, the L&D team wou ld have a ‘Breakfast with the STARS meeting’ where trainers collected detailed information on call centre projects. L &D also ensured that all work areas had access to the online training calendar. The training calendar included modules for leadership and coaching, sales, communication, performance management, management training, progressive remuneration, compliance auditing, review cycles, recognition and reward systems.

The L&D section delivers formally accredited Certificates III and IV in accordance with ATTP (Apprenticeship and Traineeship Program) and AQF (Australian Qualifications Framework) requirements. Ensuring that training is compliant with national competency standards provides training participants with portable qualifications, and is also used as a recruitment draw card. Like Recruitment, the L&D section has a sales budget with KPIs. L&D has a specific objective of selling corporate train ing programs to other organizations.  The advantage of performance based incentives for recruitment and L&D is the conversion of these units from overhead costs to variable costs. This enables section performance to be explicitly linked with overall organizational performance.
Agents frequently disengaged from Salmat Salesforce to pursue ‘real jobs’ after graduation. Countering the view that agents only worked at Salmat Salesforce during university studies was the key challenge for these three teams.

Workforce Planning schedules agents for call centre work. Adequate staffing levels were an important ingredient in minimizing agent turnover, as risk of agent burnout increased when occupancy (time on the phone) exceeded 85% of working hours. Inadequate occupancy means a failure to meet demand and loss of sales opportunities. A consultative approach for workforce scheduling was commercially critical. Workforce planning managers consulted agents about their availability, which was entered into workf orce planning and scheduling software. Workforce planners collaborated with the Business Intelligence (BIG) team to build accurate scheduling models of occupancy and demand. Scheduling must also incorporate training, absenteeism and other events taking agents off phones. There is also a reliance on the Recruitment team to produce a sufficient labor pool. Flexibility in accommodating agent needs and the opportunity for agent shift bidding was recognized by workforce management and agent interviewees a s the key for engagement. 

The BIG (Business Intelligence Group) team represented the strongest example of a cross functional team and career paths, as its membership changed each day. The BIG team incorporated the brightest individuals (as defined by a specific project) within Salmat Salesforce at any given time. This team functions as ‘an internal think tank’ identifying methodologies, pricing frameworks, workforce management, business analysis (developing pricing/business models for new call centers) and data analytics for each new call centre. There were thirty different pricing parameters which can be explored before a project proposal is signed off.  Data analytics included development of ‘propensity models’ – which identified customer segments and parallel sales opportunities. The BIG team analyzed the human interface with call centre technology, benchmarking call centers, identifying KPIs and remuneration structures which promoted the most effective agent behavior.  

Boxall and Macky (2007) implied that HPWS are most commonly used by organizations with high technology skill requirements serving highly competitive, customized market segments. The evidence about Salmat Salesforce’s IT group highlights the centrality of technology in securing competitive advantage.  Stability of senior IT staff ensured long term knowledge of call centre applications such as Totalview and Genesys. This knowledge facilitated exploration of skills based routing options in overseas based, multi-lingual call centers and interactive voice recognition systems. Grounded IT applications knowledge enabled Salmat Salesforce to broadly tap agents’ skills sets.  Salmat Salesforce’s IT section had also been involved with annual development forums for Genesys software from its inception. Long term business relationships meant that Genesys developed its products to suit Salmat Salesforce. A complete suite of Genesys’s products meant call cen ters could be constructed with significantly reduced costs due to minimal software integration and synchronization problems. Distillation of project implementation methodologies also facilitates experimentation with variations of call centre structures such as metropolitan, regional, home based and off-shore call centers. Consolidated IT knowledge under-pinned Salmat Salesforce’s reputation for being able to establish call centers more quickly than any competitors.
 
Findings on the role of engagement and HPWS through flexible remuneration and social networks
Whitefield and Poole (1997) have noted that HPWS require a committed workforce.
Salmat Salesforce’s internal surveys highlight the importance of HPWS elements such as flexible pay and reward systems in building agent commitment. Remuneration included base pay and bonuses, and was above market rate, with average earnings between $60,000 to $70,000 Australian dollars (AU) annually, with some agents earning $120,000 AU annually.  

Team based incentives were deployed in humorous and imaginative ways. For example, one project manager divided teams into cowboys and indians, and sales were described as ‘cows’. When a team scored twelve sales they were entitled to rustle ‘cows’ from other teams. There was also an option for agents to work in self managing teams with higher rates of commission. Membership of the self managing team structure required an exceptional standard of performance. Reward programs we re also employed in inbound call centers, with loyalty program points, movie tickets and public recognition.   As agent remuneration was largely based on commission, there appeared to be little requirement for formalized disciplinary action. Commission based remuneration for both Salmat Salesforce and its agents aligned both parties’ interests; whilst a positive social network boosted work performance built around team structures, flexible pay and rewards.

Researchers Takeuchi, Lepack, Wang and Takeuchi (2007) argue that HPWS build human capital, by contributing through engagement to skills development and relationship networks. Salmat Salesforce relied on a buddying system to build friendships and performance networks.  The stability of the Salmat Salesforce management team was another significant contribution to intellectual property. Most senior management appeared to have been with the organization since its inception. The friendship networ k within the management group sustained a unique intellectual property base around deployment of call centre IT and agent engagement. All interviewees (irrespective of occupation) referred to an enjoyable sense of camaraderie and closeness in their workplace relations.  

Caring for and coaching vulnerable performers was recognized as an important signal of management engagement. As sales incentives were team based, significant effort was invested in encouraging team members to support the lowest performer. There was also a cultural practice where management tried to find chronic non-performers alternative positions, and use dismissal as a last resort.  Although there was a formal grievance process, management was trained to quickly resolve conflicts. Campaign managers were also available to assist agents with their performance. 

It has been argued that HPWS promote an ‘information democracy’, where information is widely exchanged and freely available (Boxall and Purcell, 2007). Salmat Salesforce utilized a dense network of communication channels for data sharing. One to one interactions and mentoring were the main channels for information transmission between management and agents.  Project managers would conduct ‘chairs in meetings’ each morning in call centers. These meetings involved exchan ges of ideas and concerns from the staff, as well as feedback about the call center’s performance. ‘Chairs in meetings’ were supplemented with newsletters and focus groups. One to one interactions and mentoring were the main channels for information transmission between project managers, team leaders and agents. Campaign managers spent several hours each day collating performance statistics data, a day each week was spent monitoring calls, and five hours per week was spent discussing results with the corporate customer and agents.  Management tried to be as creative as possible around information dissemination. Some call centers would present centre performance information on large video screens in the call centre.

Staff surveys highlighted the importance of technology utilization when communicating with generation Y workers. The Recruitment team advertised through Facebook, maximizing the reach to Generation Y candidates. Recruitment also maintained a database of former candidates and retained contact with former Salmat Salesforce agents. Recruitment and L&D Divisions used text messaging to communicate about induction processes, interviews and appointments. The BIG Team also created Wikis, Blogs and Fac ebook pages for knowledge distribution.    

Conclusion
The aim of this paper was to establish whether a call centre organization could transcend commercial contractual constraints and create an engaging environment. Two specific hypotheses were generated. The first was whether the practices within the case study organization could constitute an HPWS; thereby complimenting a body of HPWS research which is predominantly survey based and set in the manufacturing sector. The second concerned the inter-relationship between HPWS and engagement, and its contr ibution to an ‘exceptional call centre’.

It was interesting to note that the shift from project based payment to transactional based payment drove Salmat Salesforce into an even more tightly controlled commercial environment. Profit margins were thinner and there were more competitors in the field. Given Batt’s (2000) conclusion that HPWS existed in high profit segments, there is an implication that there would significant market pressures for Salmat Salesforce to move away from more expensive ‘HPWS’ work organization. Interview data suggested that this was not the case.

The core components of  Salmat Salesforce’s HPWS included intensive recruitment, training and consultation, merit based promotion, cross functional career paths, team based rewards, performance based pay and information sharing.  Interview evidence indicated that all these practices were used in all operational and corporate support units.  Recruitment was an increasingly complex process, including aptitude testing, job previews, group exercises, scenario questions, reference checking and interviews. Training ranged from detailed project specific training for agents to fully scoped leadership programs, accredited certificates in customer service, sales and performance development. As has been the case for other companies utilizing HPWS, equal emphasis was placed on relationship and technical competencies in recruitment and training (Boxall and Mackay, 2007). A flat organizational structure meant limited upward opportunities, but strong company growth meant cross functional career path opportunities were common.

Information sharing characterized a number of workplace functions, including devolved budgeting and ease of accessibility to information sources (product information, performance reports, strategic documents, workforce schedules and training calendars). Salmat Salesforce seemed to be continually engaged in information exchange through online surveys, daily meetings, briefings, bulletins, texts, newsletters, facebook and wikkis.   Use of team based incentives, flexible pay and recognition systems were widely deployed across all Salmat Salesforce units. This was the case even in units which would traditionally be regarded as overhead costs.  Bundling of human resources practices was ensured through each section’s practice of researching and tailoring their functions to align with operational and strategic requirements. The Recruitment Team, L&D, Team Development, BIG, Workforce Planning, IT and  operational management worked synergistically to ensure optimum occupan cy levels. Salmat Salesforce also conformed with Guthrie’s (2001) broader definition of HPWS, where all employees had an opportunity of participating in a gain sharing scheme. This suggests that the first hypothesis was upheld - that Salmat Salesforce’s systems and processes did represent an HPWS . In so far as an HPWS continued to exist, Salmat Salesforce did succeed in transcending contractual and commercial constraints.

The second hypothesis asserted that HPWS and engagement would be inter-connected. Certainly there was evidence of this being the case, and this evidence provides a clue on how an HPWS could be sustained within low profit margin constraints. It begins with the pervasiveness of the idea of a ‘culture of engagement’ throughout interviews. Each interviewee presented evidence that a ‘culture of engagement’ was strategically, symbolically and operationally evident. For example, Sa lmat Salesforce’s strategic platform represented an explicit statement of the cultural values of engagement; and this platform guided daily operational practices. There were no identified incongruities between interviewees’ expressed cultural values and identified work practices; suggesting that Salmat Salesforce’s culture of engagement was a ‘strong system’ characterized by consistency and consensus (Kemp and Dwyer, 2007, Bowen and Ostroff (2004).  Salmat Salesforce ’s culture of engagement also possessed the characteristics of distinctiveness in its rituals, events and symbols.  Symbolic expression of engagement and innovation was vividly evident in theatrical corporate celebrations, team competitions, dress codes, individualized work stations and reward systems.
 
It was clear that engagement played a protective role for HPWS, enabling Salmat Salesforce to transcend commercial constraints, which might otherwise ‘cost out’ expensive HPWS practices. Engagement (particularly amongst long term senior management and IT staff), generated a body of intellectual property which enhanced Salmat Salesforce’s competitive advantage. Occupancy also represented the critical ingredient in Salmat Salesforce, therefore employee engagement was a critical comme rcial imperative for the deployment of all organizational systems.

Components of the HPWS, such as incentive based payment and career paths represented as structural mechanisms of engagement. There was a deliberate program of leadership development to create management competencies in coaching and developing engagement. The engagement capacity of L&D programs was consolidated through consultation and external accreditation. Other systems which made a specific contribution to engagement were the process of analysis through the BIG Group, performance based pay, team bonuses and intensive tailored recruitment processes. This supports Evans’s and Davis’s (2005) prediction that HPWS contributes to organizational performance through increased human capital. 

Salmat Salesforce’s organizational conceptualization of engagement was data driven and theoretically sophisticated. For example, the successful commercial outcomes from consultative workforce scheduling were only possible through the BIG team’s complex business and scenario modeling. As with other components of the HPWS, careers, scheduling and planning were in support of engagement, not the other way around.  The BIG Team explored both the technical and social aspects of engageme nt. Call centre and corporate communications software was shaped by Salmat Salesforce’s research on the technology utilization and the workforce skills profile. Technology was effectively utilized to create multiple communication channels (recruitment material, staff communications, workforce schedules and engagement surveys). Usually the social system is fitted to the available technology (Kintana, Alonso and Olaverri, 2006). In Salmat Salesforce, the converse applied where technology was used to strongly support social systems.  

What was interesting was that whilst engagement and HPWS helped Salmat Salesforce become a transcendent call centre, engagement did not necessarily translate in employee commitment. All interviewees were clear that agents (most of whom were university students) did not generally perceive their work as a career option. Employment opportunities were cleverly marketed as a tool for supporting a flexible lifestyle and self expression, and this built retention for twelve months. However this did not de liver a high percentage of agent retention after twelve months. Salmat Salesforce only retained twenty percent of its call centre agents after twelve months of employment. This places Salmat Salesforce within the category of high-turnover call centre (i.e. it has a turnover in excess of 45%, McCulloch, 2004). Therefore it cannot be said that Salmat Salesforce completely managed to transcend commercial and contractual constraints.

There are multiple implications for practitioners. First concerns the importance of maintaining long term relationships amongst IT, operational management and senior management; whilst setting those relationships within a job context of continual enquiry and innovation. The longevity of core management relationships brought substance and depth to the organization’s reflective processes and the intellectual property which underpinned Salmat Salesforce’s HPWS. This was particularly appar ent in the development of software protocols and project management for each new call centre. The second revolves around the use of multiple communication channels and using relationships to ensure consist message delivery. The third implication involves the importance of ‘creating space’ for self expression where ever possible as a means of promoting engagement. This was not simply about work stations and dress codes; it was also about encouraging employees to raise concerns and views fre ely. A practice of self-expression encouraged employees to make use of available communication channels and to report results and performance challenges quickly.   The fourth implication concerns the importance of career pathing. Agents need be made aware of career opportunities, organizational competency data bases which record agent’s interests and skills, as well as offering short secondments in different roles. 

There are several possible directions for HPWS research. In this case study engagement was prioritized over all other aspects of organizational functioning to achieve optimal organizational performance. Where engagement did serve the HPWS, it seems to be more the result of happy accident, rather than intentional design.  This suggests another line of inquiry in HPWS research. Instead of the question being whether engagement enables HPWS, it seems there is merit in asking ‘whether HPWS is subordinate and serves engagement?’ Another intriguing question concerns the process by which engagement does or does not translate into commitment within an outsourced environment. Is this process more impacted by career opportunities or affective variables such as emotional exhaustion?  Also there would be benefits to a longitudinal survey which tracked agents’ awareness of different career pathing initiatives such as secondments, mentoring, competency databases and cross-function al career paths. Such a study’s aim could be an exploration of how this awareness influences the transformation of engagement into commitment.

The limitations of this study lie in the lack of longitudinal and quantitative data. At the time of this research, Salmat Salesforce was going through an unprecedented set of changes arising from a merger. The question is whether it could retain a culture of engagement as the organization grew in size, and senior management would inevitably have to become more distant because of increased governance duties. The interview responses might be quite different at end of the merger process. Whilst the n umber of interviews was appropriate for documenting systems and processes, a broader sample of interviews or data collection might be required to accurately understand the ‘experience’ of a culture of engagement and HPWS. This echoes Henneman and Millanowski’s (2011) comments in their case study research, (which also captured data at a specific organisational level) around the question of whether practices are actually carried out. It would be interesting to compliment qualitative fi ndings with a quantitive survey of perceived job characteristics, occupational demand and control across a broad sample of workers. Such data might provide broader clues as to why engagement did not translate into commitment. A final limitation is of course the generalisability of this case study. Salmat Salesforce is an Australian company, located within a deregulated liberal economy. The relationships between system variables such as flexible pay, shift bidding, cross functional career paths and eng agement might not be replicable within a coordinated economy.

References
Applebaum, E., T. Bailey, P. B. and Kalleberg, A. (2000), Manufacturing advantage: why high performance systems pay off,  ILR Press, New York, NY.
Arthur, J. (1994), “Effects of human resources systems on manufacturing performance and turnover”,  Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 37, No. 3, pp. 670 – 687.
Bakker, A.B. and Xanthopoulou, D. (2009), “The Crossover of Daily Engagement: Test of an Actor – Partner Independence Model”,  Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 94, No. 6, pp. 1562 – 1571.
Ball, K. (2010), “Data Protection in the Outsourced Call Centre: An Exploratory Study”, Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 20, No.3, pp. 294 - ?
Batt, R. (2000), “Strategic segmentation in front-line services: matching customers, employees and human resource systems”, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol.11, No.3, pp. 540-561.
Batt, R., Nohara, H. and Kwon, H. (2010), “Employer Strategies and Wages in New Service Activities: A Comparison of Co-ordinated and Liberal Market Economies”, British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 48, No. 2, pp. 400 – 435.
Beltran-Martin, I., V. Roca-Puig, A.E. and  Bou-Llusar, J.C. (2008), “Human resource flexibility as a mediating variable between high performance work systems and performance”, Journal of Management, Vol. 34, No.5, pp. 1009-1044.
Bohl, D., F., Luthans, F., Slocum, J.W. and Hodgetts, R.W. (1996), “Ideas that will shape the future of management practice”, Organizational Dynamics, Vol.25,  No.2,  pp.7-14.
Bowen, D.E. and Ostroff, C. (2004), “Understanding HRM-firm performance linkages: the role of the ‘strength’ of the HRM system”,  Academy of Management Review, Vol. 29 No.2, pp. 203-221.
Boxall, P. and Purcell, J. (2003), Strategy and Human Resource Management, Palgrave MacMillan, New York, NY.
Boxall, P. and Macky, K. (2007), “High performance work systems and organizational performance: Bridging theory and practice”,  Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 45, No.3, pp. 261-270.
Connect4. (2009), ‘Annual Reports 2007: Salmat’, www.connect4.com.au.ezproxy1.library.usyd.edu.au/products/ar, (accessed 18 June 2009).
Crawford, E.R., LePine, J. A. and Rich, B.L. (2010), “Linking Job Demands and Resources to Employee Engagement and Burnout: A Theoretical Extension and Meta-Analytic Test”,  Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 95, No.5, pp. 834 – 848.
Datta, D.K. and Rajagpolan, N. (1998), “Industry structure and CEO characteristics: an empirical study of succession events”,  Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 19, No.9, pp. 833-852.
Datta, D.K., Guthrie, J.P. and Wright, P.M. (2005), “Human Resource Management and Labour Productivity: Does Industry Matter?” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 48, No. 1, pp. 135-145.
De Menezes, L.M. and Wood, S. (2006), “The reality of flexible work systems in Britain”,  International Journal of Human Resources Management, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 106-138.
Dyer, L. and Reeves, T. (1995), “Human resource strategies and firm performance: what do we know and where do we need to go?”, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 656-670.
Epstein, M.J. (2004), “The drivers of success in post-merger integration” Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 33, No. 2, 174-189.
Evans, W.R. and Davis, W.D. (2005), “High Performance Work Systems and Organisational Performance: The Mediating Role of Internal Social Structure”,  Journal of Management, Vol. 31, No.5, pp. 758 – 775.
Finegold, D., Benson, G.S. and Mohrman, S.A. (2002), “Harvesting what they grow: can firms get a return on investments in general skills”, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 31, No.2, pp. 151-164.
Guthrie, J.P. (2001), “High involvement work practices, turnover and productivity: Evidence from New Zealand”,  Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44, No. 1, pp. 180 -190.
Hall, G.B., Dollard, M.F. and Coward, J. (2010), “Psychosocial Safety Climate: Development of the PSC-12”,  International Journal of Stress Management, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp.  353 – 383.
Harris, L. C. and Ogbonna, E. (1998), “Employee responses to culture change efforts”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 8, No.2, pp. 78-92.
Harter, J.K., Schmidt, F.L. and Hayes, T.L. (2002), “Business-Unit-Level Relationship Between Employee Satisfaction, Employee Engagement, and Business Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis”,  Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87, No.2, pp. 268 – 279.
Henneman III, H.G. and Milanowski, A.T. (2011), “Assessing Human Resources Practices Alignment: A Case Study”,  Human Resources Management, Vol. 50, No. 1,  pp. 45 – 64.
Hewitt Associates. (2009). http://was2.hewitt.com/bestemployers/anz/pages/emp_engagement.htm, (accessed 18 June 2009).
Huang, X., Chan, S.C.H., Nan, W. and Lam, X. (2010), “The joint effect of leader-member exchange and emotional intelligence on burnout and work performance in call centers in China”,  The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 21, No.7, pp. 1124 – 1144.
Hubbard, N. and Purcell, J. (2001), “Managing employee expectations during acquisitions”,  Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 11, No.2, pp. 17-33.
Huselid, M. (1995), “The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity, and corporate financial performance”,  Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 38, No.3, pp. 635-672.
Karsten, M., Baggot, D., Brown, A. and Cahill, M. (2010), “Professional Coaching as an Effective Strategy to Retaining Frontline Managers”, The Journal of Nursing Administration, Vol. 40, No.3, pp. 140 – 144.
Kemp, S. and Dwyer, L. (2001), “An examination of organizational culture – The Regent Hotel”, Sydney, Hospitality Management, Vol. 20 (2001), 77-93.
Kintana, M.L., Alonso, A.U. and Olaverri, C.G. (2006), “High Performance Work Systems and Firm’s Operational Performance: The moderating role of technology”, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 17, No.1, pp. 70-85.
Kydd, C.T. and Oppenheim. L. (1990), “Using Human Resource Management to Enhance Competitiveness: Lessons from Four Excellent Companies”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 29, No.2, pp. 145 -166.
Ledford, G.E. and Mohrman, S.A. (1993), “Self design for high involvement: a large scale organizational change”, Human Relations, Vol. 46, No.2, pp. 146 – 174.
Liao, H., Toya, K., Lepak, D. P. and Hong, Y. (2009), “Do They See Eye to Eye? Management and Employee Perspectives of High-Performance Work Systems and Influence Processes on Service Quality”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 94, No. 2, pp. 371 – 391.
McCulloch, M.C. (2004), “The low turnover call centre”, Call Centre Magazine, Vol. 17, No.4, pp. 8.
McLellan, N.J. (2004), “NHS Direct: virtually engaged”, Archives of Disease in Childhood, Vol. 89, No.1, pp. 57 – 59.
Moss, P.,  Salzman, H. and Tilly, C. (2008), “Under Construction: The Continuing Evolution of Job Structures in Call Centres”,  Industrial Relations, Vol. 47, pp. 173 – 208.
Mueller, F. (1996), “Human Resources as Strategic Assetts: An evolutionary resource based view”,  Journal of Management Studies, Vol.33, No. 6, pp. 757-785.
O’Driscoll, T.M. (1998), “The analysis development and implementation of a knowledge based high performance work system: A case study of corporate innovation”, Dissertation, North Carolina State University, North Carolina.
Semler, S.W. (1997), “Systematic agreement: a theory of organizational alignment”, Human Resource Development Quartlerly, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 23-40.
Takeuchi, R., Lepak, D.P., Wang, H. and Takeuchi, K. (2007), “An empirical examination of the mechanisms mediating between high performance work systems and the performance of Japanese organizations”,  Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol.92, No. 4, pp. 1069-1083.
Thompson, M. (1998), “Jet setters”,  People Management, Vol. 4,  No.8, pp. 38-41.
Whitefield, K. and  Poole. M. (1997), “Organising employment for high performance: Theories, evidence and policy”, Organisational Studies, Vol. 18, No. 5, pp. 745 – 764.