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

The authors examined relationships among collective efficacy, group potency, and group performance. Meta-analytic results (based on 6,128 groups, 31,019 individuals, 118 correlations adjusted for dependence, and 96 studies) reveal that collective efficacy was significantly related to group performance (.35). In the proposed nested 2-level model, collective efficacy assessment (aggregation and group discussion) was tested as the 1st-level moderator. It showed significantly different average correlations with group performance (.32 vs. .45), but the group discussion assessment was homogeneous, whereas the aggregation assessment was heterogeneous. Consequently, there was no 2nd-level moderation for the group discussion, and heterogeneity in the aggregation group was accounted for by the 2nd-level moderator, task interdependence (high, moderate, and low levels were significant; the higher the level, the stronger the relationship). The 2nd and 3rd meta-analyses indicated that group potency was related to group performance (.29) and to collective efficacy (.65). When tested in a structural equation modeling analysis based on meta-analytic findings, collective efficacy fully mediated the relationship between group potency and group performance. The authors suggest future research and convert their findings to a probability of success index to help facilitate practice.

Scholarly interest in leveraging resource-based theory to explore the unit-level human capital resource (HCR) is undergoing a paradigmatic shift in the strategy and strategic human resource management (HRM) literatures. As they undertake this next generation of research, scholars will be informed by a rigorous examination of prior unit-level HCR research. To this end, we present a systematic and multidisciplinary review of scholarship that invokes resource-based theorizing in examining the unit’s HCR. We reviewed 156 articles published in the strategy and strategic HRM literatures that conceptualize HC as a unit-level resource. This review suggests that a multidimensional typology of the unit-level HCR has emerged. In particular, research has examined the HCR’s type, context, and antecedents. We build on our review of this multidimensional typology to propose a multilevel conceptual integration of current and future unit-level HCR research in the strategy and strategic HRM domains. Current scholarly work in these two areas suggests that these two literatures are converging, and the multidimensional HCR typology suggested by our review informs this convergence. We conclude with a discussion of future research domains that will advance the multilevel theoretical integration we propose.

No abstract

No abstract