Clint Chadwick

Making Intangibles “Tangible” in Tests of Resource-Based Theory A Multidisciplinary Construct Validation Approach

The authors identify theoretical disconnects among resource-based theory (RBT), conceptualizations of intangible resources (intangibles), and measures of intangibles. Specifically, the authors’ survey of 186 recent empirical tests of RBT suggests that measures of intangibles are often assigned with little theoretical conceptualization of the intangible construct or connection with RBT. This lack of theoretical justification undermines confidence in measures and empirical findings, leaves central RBT questions unaddressed, and constricts the usefulness of RBT. Furthermore, their survey suggests that the dominant approach to measuring intangibles is mechanical and unidisciplinary (i.e., rooted in either economics or psychology). The authors argue that the challenge of measuring intangibles is primarily theoretical. Thus, mechanical and unidisciplinary approaches are problematic for they sustain theoretical disconnects among RBT and intangible conceptualizations and measures. Moreover, a multidisciplinary construct validation approach is required to remedy the respective deficiencies of economic and psychological approaches and integrate their complementary strengths. The authors present such an approach, which they call the multidisciplinary assessment process (MAP). The MAP guides scholars in creating theories of intangibles that are specific to their RBT study. These theories are the focal point of the MAP and clarify what, specifically, the intangible is and how firms use the intangible to create and appropriate economic value. In turn, these theories inform the measurement and validation steps of the MAP, so that intangibles are assessed with greater credibility.

The Effects of Part-Time Workers on Establishment Financial Performance

Using a sample of 1,468 private sector establishments, this article addresses the relationship among part-time workers, commitment-based human resource (HR) systems, and establishment financial performance. Building on theoretic perspectives about equity perceptions and reciprocal exchanges, we find that the proportion of part-time workers in an establishment workforce is nonlinearly related to establishment financial performance in an inverted U-shaped relationship. In addition, the interaction between part-time workers and commitment-based HR systems is negatively related to establishment performance. The analysis suggests that those deciding about how to structure establishments’ workforces should consider how interactions between different types of workers within workforces can influence establishment performance.

Team-Level High Involvement Work Practices: Investigating the Role of Knowledge Sharing and Perspective Taking

To assess potential boundary conditions in the relationship between HRM systems and team service quality, we examined both collective and individual-level capabilities as underlying mechanisms between team-level high involvement work practices (HIWPs) and team service quality. Using multi-level modelling with a sample of 397 employees in 25 work teams from five service organisations, we found that team HIWPs enhanced knowledge sharing, leading to improved team service climate. Moreover, the presence of individual perspective taking moderated the mediating effect of knowledge sharing such that perspective taking enhanced service climate beyond the value of team HIWPs. The results contribute to the HRM literature by examining the multi-level social and environmental influences on individual learning conceptualised in social cognitive theory, to identify the value of individual capabilities as moderators to knowledge sharing in the link between team HRM systems and service climate.

Human Resource Management’s Effects on Firm‐Level Relative Efficiency

Using stochastic frontier production functions methodology with data from 1579 private‐sector establishments, we demonstrate that HR practices are significantly associated with differences in relative firm‐level efficiency. Supplemental analysis implies that this efficiency analysis is substantively different than the common approach to evaluating HRM’s relationships with firm‐level labor productivity. The results suggest that HR practices’ contributions to relative firm‐level efficiency are an important but heretofore overlooked factor in the relationship between HRM and firm performance.