Although there is growing evidence that high performance work practices (HPWPs) affect organizational performance, varying sample characteristics, research designs, practices examined, and organizational performance measures used has led extant findings to vary dramatically, making the size of the overall effect difficult to estimate. We use meta‐analysis to estimate the effect size and test whether effects are larger for (a) HPWP systems versus individual practices, (b) operational versus financial performance measures, and (c) manufacturing versus service organizations. Statistical aggregation of 92 studies reveals an overall correlation that we estimate at .20. Also, the relationship is stronger when researchers examine systems of HPWPs and among manufacturers, but it appears invariant across performance measures. We use our findings as a basis to offer 4 suggestions intended to shape research practices such that future meta‐analyses might answer today's emerging questions.

No abstract

Since the 1991 publication of the first Journal of Management special issue devoted to resourcebased inquiry, resource-based theory (RBT) has evolved from a nascent, upstart perspective to one of the most prominent and powerful theories for understanding organizations. Indeed, 20 years after that landmark issue, RBT appears to have reached maturity as a theory. One implication of this maturity is that RBT lies at a critical juncture, one that will be followed either by revitalization of the theory or by its decline. In this introductory article, the authors provide a brief overview of the contributions provided by the commentaries and articles contained in this third Journal of Management special issue on RBT. These contributions center on five themes: interlinkages with other perspectives, processes of resource acquisition and development, the micro-foundations of RBT, RBT and sustainability, and method and measurement issues. Their view is that the commentaries and articles collectively offer a foundation for extending RBT in meaningful new directions and steering clear of decline. They also offer their thoughts about some key opportunities within each of the themes for further revitalizing research involving the RBT.

At present, the resource-based view of the firm is perhaps the most influential framework for understanding strategic management. In this editor’s introduction, we briefly describe the contributions to knowledge provided by the commentaries and articles contained in this issue. In addition, we outline some additional areas of research wherein the resource-based view can be gainfully deployed.

Theory at both the micro and macro level predicts that investments in superior human capital generate better firm-level performance. However, human capital takes time and money to develop or acquire, which potentially offsets its positive benefits. Indeed, extant tests appear equivocal regarding its impact. To clarify what is known, we meta-analyzed effects drawn from 66 studies of the human capital-firm performance relationship and investigated 3 moderators suggested by resource-based theory. We found that human capital relates strongly to performance, especially when the human capital in question is not readily tradable in labor markets and when researchers use operational performance measures that are not subject to profit appropriation. Our results suggest that managers should invest in programs that increase and retain firm-specific human capital.

A recent series of articles in the Strategic Management Journal has discussed the potential value of an organization developing a market orientation in its quest to achieve success. We posit that market orientation can enhance success, but that its potential value should not be considered in isolation. Specifically, we draw on the resource-based view of the firm to suggest that four capabilities-market orientation, entrepreneurship, innovativeness, and organizational learning-each contribute to the creation of positional advantages for some firms. The data used are drawn from 181 large multinational corporations (MNC). The results indicate that positional advantages arising from the confluence of market orientation, entrepreneurship, innovativeness, and organizational learning have a positive effect on MNC performance (five-year average change in ROI, income, and stock price). Overall, the results support the contention that market orientation can enhance success, albeit within the context of other important phenomena.

This article addresses Rö nkkö and Evermann's criticisms of the partial least squares (PLS) approach to structural equation modeling. We contend that the alleged shortcomings of PLS are not due to problems with the technique, but instead to three problems with Rönkkö and Evermann's study: (a) the adherence to the common factor model, (b) a very limited simulation designs, and (c) overstretched generalizations of their findings. Whereas Rö nkkö and Evermann claim to be dispelling myths about PLS, they have in reality created new myths that we, in turn, debunk. By examining their claims, our article contributes to reestablishing a constructive discussion of the PLS method and its properties. We show that PLS does offer advantages for exploratory research and that it is a viable estimator for composite factor models. This can pose an interesting alternative if the common factor model does not hold. Therefore, we can conclude that PLS should continue to be used as an important statistical tool for management and organizational research, as well as other social science disciplines.

No abstract