Greg Reilly

Human Capital Is Dead; Long Live Human Capital Resources!

This paper introduces a radically different conceptualization of human capital resources that runs counter to the individual-level approaches that have dominated human capital theory for the last 50 years. We leverage insights from economics, strategy, human resources, and psychology to develop an integrated and holistic framework that defines the structure, function, levels, and combinations of human capital resources. This multidisciplinary framework redefines human capital resources as individual or unit-level capacities based on individual knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs) that are accessible for unit-relevant purposes. The framework and definition offer three broad contributions. First, multidisciplinary communication is facilitated by providing precise definitions and distinctions between individual differences, KSAOs, human capital, human capital resources, and strategic human capital resources. Second, given that human capital resources originate in individuals’ KSAOs, multiple distinct types of human capital resources exist at individual and collective levels, and these types are much more diverse than the historical generic-specific distinction. Third, the multiple types of human capital resources may be combined within and across levels, via processes of emergence and complementarity. Consequently, the locus of competitive advantage has less to do with whether human capital resources are generic or specific but instead occurs because nearly all human capital resource combinations are complex, are firm-specific, and lack strategic (or efficient) factor markets. Overall, the proposed multidisciplinary framework opens new avenues for future research that challenge the prevailing literature’s treatment of human capital resources.

A conceptual and empirical analysis of the cognitive ability-voluntary turnover relationship.

Despite much research into cognitive ability as a selection tool and a separate large literature on the causes of voluntary turnover, little theoretical or empirical work connects the two. We propose that voluntary turnover is also a potentially key outcome of cognitive ability. Incorporating ideas from the person-environment fit literature and those regarding push and pull influences on turnover, we posit a theoretical connection between cognitive ability and voluntary turnover that addresses both why and how voluntary turnover is related to cognitive ability. Integrating data from 3 different sources, our empirical analyses support the theoretical perspective that the relationship between cognitive ability and voluntary turnover depends on the cognitive demands of the job. When the cognitive demands of a job are high, our findings support the hypothesized curvilinear relationship between cognitive ability and voluntary turnover, such that employees of higher and lower cognitive ability are more likely than medium cognitive ability employees to leave voluntarily. With regard to jobs with low cognitive demands, our data are more consistent with a negative linear relationship between cognitive ability and voluntary turnover, such that higher cognitive ability employees are less likely to leave voluntarily. We also examine the role of job satisfaction, finding that job satisfaction is more strongly linked to voluntary turnover in jobs with high cognitive demands.

Time Horizon of Investments in the Resource Allocation Process: Review and Framework for Next Steps

Corporate investment inherently relies on time horizon, as profits result from acquiring assets or developing capabilities that yield future benefits that exceed upfront costs. Despite the importance of time horizon to understanding resource allocation, knowledge about the subject has accumulated slowly. Our review therefore encompasses insights from several research streams that partially address the subject even though time horizon is not the central construct in any of them. We aim to clarify key constructs related to time horizon, organize prior research about the antecedents of time horizon, explain the implications of several theoretical traditions for time horizon, and detail the range of measures that have been used to capture time horizon empirically. By focusing narrowly on this topic but searching broadly for references, we provide integrative summaries of existing research and identify opportunities for new and unique research.

Conflict in Teams: Modeling Early and Late Conflict States and the Interactive Effects of Conflict Processes:

We introduce a model of teams’ early and late conflict states, conflict processes, and performance. In a study of 529 individuals in 145 teams, we provide a theoretical framework and empirically test a series of hypotheses pertaining to the influence of conflict states, including task and relationship conflict, on performance, as well as the moderating effect of two conflict processes (cooperative and competitive management approaches). We address inconsistencies in the literature related to the effect of team conflict, specifically task conflict, within teams. Our results suggest that task conflict in the end of a team’s life cycle, like relationship conflict, can have a significant negative effect on performance, but only when teams’ conflict management approaches are competitive (rather than cooperative). We also provide evidence that conflict management approaches are affected by the type of conflict teams exhibit in their early life cycle stages. Thus, we present a study of how early levels of conflict types affect conflict management approaches, and how these approaches affect later levels of the conflict type/performance relationship. Our model suggests that conflict types and conflict management approaches should be modeled together to better understand team conflict.

A Behavioral Understanding of Investment Horizon and Firm Performance

Observers have argued that firms overly emphasize short-term results at the expense of long-run value. Using a behavioral perspective, we analyze three hypotheses related to this general argument. First, we examine the association of investment time horizons with firm performance, contributing new theory that argues for a quadratic rather than linear association. Second, because the tendency toward immediate results could reflect stock market pressures, we consider how the interaction of investor patience and firm horizon relates to firm performance. Third, we examine the arguments implication that most firms have investment horizons at a level where marginal increases in horizon associate positively with firm performance. Measuring horizon as the expected useful lives of capital expenditures, we find empirical support for the hypothesized quadratic relation in a large-scale, multiyear sample of U.S. publicly held manufacturing firms and confirm that a majority of firms have horizons in the region where our models predict increases in horizon positively influence performance. We also find that the most positive returns occur when long horizon investments are aligned with investor patience.

Team-level goal orientation: an emergent state and its relationships with team inputs, process, and outcomes

Building on recent efforts to extend the concept of goal orientation to teams, we identify team-level goal orientation as an emergent state, distinct from static trait goal orientations of team members. We reinforce this distinction by developing and testing hypotheses about team inputs, processes, and outcomes as determinants of the development of team goal orientation over time. We test our hypotheses with longitudinal data from 230 participants on 64 teams engaged in a management simulation. We find that team members’ trait goal orientations affect the team’s state goal orientation, but only in the early stages of team functioning. Team process and interim outcomes drive changes in team state goal orientation.

Human capital resources: a call to retire settled debates and to start a few new debates

Abstract The concept of human capital resources (HCRs) is increasingly the predominant mechanism for explaining how organizations compete strategically through attracting, retaining, and developing talent. Despite the increased attention placed on the HCR construct, progress in HCR research has not advanced as rapidly as related scholarly fields. We posit that some of the lag in HCR research can be attributed to the continued focus on established debates. Rather than focusing on understanding how HCRs are developed and can be leveraged to achieve unit performance differentiation, HCR research often seems preoccupied with long-standing battles. In this manuscript, we provide a commentary on the current state of HCR literature, explain why we recommend reducing discussions along three specific HCR debates, and propose alternative HCR topics for researchers to pursue.