. 2024 Sep 11;79(1):177–190. doi: 10.3233/WOR-230314

Table 3.

Mean score comparison on characteristics

	Classes
	1	2	3	4	5	6
	Recruitment and development HRM bundle	Development HRM bundle	Maintenance HRM practices	Recruitment HRM bundle	Sustainable employment HRM bundle	Passive HRM	Sample
Organizational characteristics (0 = no, 1 = yes)
> 100 employees	0.49 ^2,3,6	0.28 ^1,4	0.32^,1,4	0.53 ^2,3,6	0.42 ⁶	0.08 ^1,4,5	0.43
Part of a larger organization	0.50 ²	0.36 ^1,4	0.50	0.60 ^2,6	0.51	0.28 ⁴	0.48
Vulnerable groups in mission	0.59 ^2,3,6	0.24 ^1,3,4,5	0.44^1,2	0.61 ^2,6	0.50 ²	0.28 ^1,4	0.50
Profit sector	0.62 ²	0.73 ^1,4	0.71	0.55 ^2,6	0.65	0.88 ⁴	0.65
Non-profit sector	0.06 ^2,6	0.08 ^1,4	0.06	0.06 ^2,6	0.08	0.08 ^1,4	0.06
(Semi-)public	0.32	0.19	0.23	0.39	0.27	0.04	0.29
Growing revenue in past 2 years	0.44	0.44	0.41	0.46	0.50	0.48	0.44
Growing profits in past 2 years	0.53	0.52	0.51	0.57	0.67	0.52	0.54
Financial support (0 = no, 1 = yes)
Subsidy adaptations workplace	0.16 ²	0.06 ^1,4	0.13	0.20 ²	0.12	0.00	0.13
Wage dispensation	0.39 ^2,6	0.17 ^1,3,4	0.40 ^2,6	0.33 ^2,6	0.27	0.00 ^1,3,4	0.32
Premium discount	0.34 ^2,6	0.14 ^1,3,4	0.41^2,5,6	0.40 ^2,5,6	0.21 ^3,4	0.00 ^1,3,4	0.30
Wage cost subsidy	0.30 ^2,3,6	0.15 ^1,3,4	0.44 ^1,2,5,6	0.32 ^2,6	0.17 ³	0.00 ^1,3,4	0.27
Specialized recruitment (0 = no, 1 = yes)
Job creation	0.23 ^2,6	0.00 ^1,3,4,5	0.19 ²	0.32 ^2,6	0.18 ^2,6	0.00 ^1,4,5	0.18
Renewing old jobs	0.21 ^2,4,6	0.00 ^1,3,4,5	0.19 ^2,4	0.36 ^1,2,3,5,6	0.15 ^2,4	0.00 ^1,4	0.17
Work experience jobs	0.85 ^2,5,6	0.00 ^1,3,4,5	0.82 ^2,5,6	0.87 ^2,5,6	0.56 ^1,2,3,4,6	0.00 ^1,3,4,5	0.64
Hiring external workers	0.25 ^2,6	0.00 ^1,3,4,5	0.27 ^2,6	0.32 ^2,5,6	0.17 ^2,4	0.00 ^1,3,4	0.19
Reshoring work	0.01	0.00	0.01	0.03	0.00	0.00	0.01
Collaborations with local parties	0.08	0.00	0.03	0.13	0.06	0.04	0.06

Note. Although clusters may show a small probability to apply certain practices in Table 2, results may show a low mean of application of these practices in Table 3, due to our use of so-called modal clustering [41], meaning that only participants that did not apply certain practices could be assigned to a certain cluster, which explains some unexpectedly low values in Table 3; Significant cross-group differences (p < 0.05) are indicated in superscript, using the class number that the class significantly differed from.