The impact that different dimensions of human resource (HR) practices have on employee performance has attracted a lot of attention in the human resource management (HRM) literature over the past 25 years (Van De Voorde and Beijer, 2015). In the past two decades, researchers also began to focus more directly on employee-centered outcomes such as employee well-being and to look more closely at the effect that HR practices have on employee well-being (e.g. Jiang et al., 2012). The role of employee well-being as a mechanism through which HR practices affect employee performance has also been studied (Fisher, 2010; Van De Voorde and Beijer, 2015). The empirical evidence regarding the trilateral relationships between HRM, employee wellbeing and employee performance demonstrates that HRM has a positive effect on the different dimensions of employee performance due to the creation of positive employee happiness effects (Devonish, 2013; Jiang et al., 2012; Van De Voorde et al., 2012). However, some studies indicate that HR practices may trigger higher levels of stress, burnout, exhaustion and work intensification, which are elements that negatively affect employee physical well-being (Alfes et al., 2012; Grant et al., 2007; Jackson et al., 2014; Pawar, 2016; Van De Voorde et al., 2012). HR practices may thus benefit employee performance and one type of employee well-being, while damaging another dimension of employee well-being. These findings voice the possibility of complex patterns of trade-offs between HRM, different dimensions of employee well-being and employee performance. However, despite growing indications of the existence of trade-offs, many questions remain (Boxall et al., 2016; Paauwe, 2009; Peccei et al., 2013).
