A Direct Measure of the Relationship between Human Capital and Productivity

Horowitz, Stanley A.; Sherman, Allan W.

doi:10.2307/145347

Cited by 30 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Horowitz and Sherman (1980) measure the productivity of navy personnel by the number of hours specific pieces of naval equipment (boilers, engines, guns and missiles) are 'downtime' (out of service). They find experience at sea and on the vessel, qualifications gained in Navy school (schooling) and (on the job) training to be important influences.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managerial efficiency and human capital: an application to English association football

Dawson

Dobson

2002

Manage Decis Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The problem of hidden action in organizations makes direct measurement of managerial performance problematic. But in English association football hidden action is unlikely to be as serious a problem because the owner observes the manager's performance each time the team plays. In this situation production frontier analysis may be used to measure managerial performance and analyze the variation in performance across managers in terms of manager human capital. Having some kind of prior affiliation with the club and achieving international recognition as a player are especially important. Overall, initial experience matters more than specific and general managerial experience. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managerial efficiency and human capital: an application to English association football

Dawson

Dobson

2002

Manage Decis Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Holzer (1988) found that hours of formal, informal, and coworker training all were positively related to rated performance growth but not to its level. Horowitz and Sherman (1980) found that the relation-…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Skill and Attitudes on Employee Performance and Earnings

Nollen¹,

Gaertner²

1991

Industrial Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study uses original survey and archival data from factory and office employees in one firm to relate differences among individual employees' performance to differences in their skill and attitudes about work, and to test the association between employees' earnings and their performance, skill, and attitudes. We suggest that the way in which skill and attitudes affect performance will depend on the type of work that is done. The main results show that among factory employees, those who have on‐the‐job training and longer experience receive better performance ratings than those without training and with less experience. Factory employees' earnings depend on their performance, following the human capital model of wage determination. Among office workers, training and experience do not significantly affect performance ratings; instead, higher‐rated employees have more positive attitudes about work. Office employees' earnings depend on their classroom training, experience, and attitudes, but not on their rated performance.

show abstract

“…For non-for-profit organizations, Ao provides a surrogate metric for the profit (benefit) gained through possession of a productive asset (that is, the percentage of time the asset is available to support the non-profit mission has been used as a surrogate for the contribution of that asset to the mission). Within the U.S. Armed Services, the use of Ao is pervasive, even to the point of measuring labor productivity via its impact on Ao (Horowitz & Sherman, 1980). Hundreds of papers have been written using either Ao or LCC as criteria: a comprehensive review of either literature is beyond the scope of the current research.…”

Section: Criteriamentioning

confidence: 99%