Mark A. Maltarich

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.

Academics or Entrepreneurs? Entrepreneurial Identity and Invention Disclosure Behavior of University Scientists

We conceptualize the nascent process of becoming an entrepreneur as a role identity transformation and investigate the factors that influence an individuals decision to assume an entrepreneurial identity. We collected more than 70 hours of interview data in addition to a survey of 796 scientists at a premier research university. Our results reveal that perceived social and economic enablers, institutional support and perceived impediments play a significant role in the willingness of scientists to adopt an entrepreneurial role identity and engage in technology commercialization activity, measured by the level of invention disclosure. Interestingly, entrepreneurial intent to start a business did not have a significant main effect on the level of disclosure activity. Our findings provide a deeper understanding of the social psychological dynamics underlying nascent entrepreneurial activity as it relates to the factors enabling or impeding the adoption of role identities. This study also informs the rich dialog in the science policy and academic entrepreneurship literatures.

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.

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.

Collective Pay for Performance: A Cross-Disciplinary Review and Meta-Analysis:

Rewarding collective outcomes has become an increasingly important strategic motivational tool for driving collective success, reflecting the insight that paying employees for individual contributions does not always optimize performance in collective endeavors. Research into different types of collective pay for performance (PFP), or pay that is contingent on collective outcomes, has been studied in diverse academic fields (e.g., economics, strategy, psychology), but the compartmentalization between these academic disciplines hinders conceptual coordination. To advance this research and its related insights, this article provides a review of the theory and evidence pertaining to the relationships between different collective PFP types and collective outcomes. We also provide a meta-analysis that shows that collective PFP has desirable outcomes (e.g., meta-analysis shows an overall ρ = 0.11; p < .001), substantiating the value of studying collective PFP separately from individual PFP. The review also reveals a lack of empirical and theoretical development and highlights the need for a comprehensive theory of collective PFP. Our cross-disciplinary review of 106 empirical articles builds a foundation for advancing common pursuits, integrating knowledge, and creating theory. The consolidated perspectives point to promising directions for future research.

Improving the measurement of group-level constructs by optimizing between-group differentiation.

The ability to detect differences between groups partially impacts how useful a group-level variable will be for subsequent analyses. Direct consensus and referent-shift consensus group-level constructs are often measured by aggregating group member responses to multi-item scales. We show that current measurement validation practice for these group-level constructs may not be optimized with respect to differentiating groups. More specifically, a 10-year review of multilevel articles in top journals reveals that multilevel measurement validation primarily relies on procedures designed for individual-level constructs. These procedures likely miss important information about how well each specific scale item differentiates between groups. We propose that group-level measurement validation be augmented with information about each scale item’s ability to differentiate groups. Using previously published datasets, we demonstrate how ICC(1) estimates for each item of a scale provide unique information and can produce group-level scales with higher ICC(1) values that enhance predictive validity. We recommend that researchers supplement conventional measurement validation information with information about item-level ICC(1) values when developing or modifying scales to assess group-level constructs.