The Effects of Prior Knowledge, Networks, and Cognitive Style on Individuals' Absorptive Capacity

Unveiling the Microfoundations of Absorptive Capacity: A Study of Coleman’s Bathtub Model

“…In addition, absorptive capacity has a multilevel character (Lowik, Kraaijenbrink, & Groen, 2012; Matusik & Heeley, 2005), as it might be influenced by antecedents at different levels of analysis (Volberda et al, 2010). Previous conceptual work has started to highlight the different internal and external conditions under which absorptive capacity might evolve (e.g., Lane et al, 2006).…”

The Elicitation of Frontline, Customer-Contact, Hotel Employee Innovative Behavior: Illuminating the Central Roles of Readiness for Change and Absorptive Capacity

“…Del Val & Fuentes, 2003; Hon & Lui, 2016) and absorptive capacity (cf. Chang, Gong, Way, & Jia, 2013; Cohen & Levinthal, 1990; Löwik, 2013; Löwik, Kraaijenbrink, & Groen, 2012). In this study, we build and extend on the extant hospitality and human resource management (HRM) research literatures and elucidate a positive psychological state (readiness for change) and a positive cognitive state (absorptive capacity) as proximal determinants of individual hospitality employee innovative behavior.…”

“…In addition, consistent with extant HRM studies that have advocated the agent-centered perspective (e.g., Jiang, Hu, Liu, & Lepak, 2017; Liao, Toya, Lepak, & Hong, 2009; Nishii, Lepak, & Schneider, 2008; Nishii & Wright, 2008; Tummers, Kruyen, Vijverberg, & Voesenek, 2013, 2015), we posit that a frontline, customer-contact employee’s perception of high-investment human resource practices (perceived HIHRP) is a key proximal determinant of her or his readiness for change: that is, a positive individual-level psychological state that involves an individual’s beliefs, feelings, and intentions concerning novel ideas and changes (Kwahk & Kim, 2008) and her or his absorptive capacity, that is, a positive individual-level cognitive state that involves an individual’s ability to acquire, assimilate, and use knowledge (cf. Erhardt, Martin-Rios, & Way, 2009; Löwik, 2013; Löwik et al, 2012). Furthermore, consistent with a central dogma in the HRM research literature that psychological outcomes are precursors of human resource outcomes (see detailed descriptions in Note 1) we posit that an employee’s readiness for change and absorptive capacity (two positive individual-level psychological outcomes) are in turn key proximal determinants of her or his innovative behavior, that is, a positive individual-level human resource outcome that involves the individual generating novel ideas, promoting novel ideas to others, and implementing novel ideas (Janssen, 2000).…”

“…Armenakis, Harris, & Mossholder, 1993; Del Val & Fuentes, 2003) and her or his exhibited innovative behavior. Similarly, although Cohen and Levinthal (1990) and Löwik and colleagues (Löwik, 2013; Löwik et al, 2012) contended that the innovation performance of a firm is dependent on the absorptive capacities of its individual employees, to date, there are no published studies that have examined the link between employee absorptive capacity and innovative behavior at the individual level. In this study, congruent with the contentions of Cohen and Levinthal (1990), Löwik and colleagues, and Van Winkelen and McKenzie (2011), we postulate that an employee’s absorptive capacity will be a proximal determinant of her or his ability to adapt to change and of her or his exhibited innovative behavior.…”

“…Then again, although scholars (e.g., Cohen & Levinthal, 1990; Löwik et al, 2012) have underscored that firm innovativeness is dependent on the absorptive capacities of its individual employees, Chang et al (2013) conjectured and presented empirical evidence, which indicated that firm-level flexibility-oriented human resource system use and firm absorptive capacity were positively related, and that firm absorptive capacity in turn mediated the positive relationship between firm-level flexibility-oriented human resource system use and firm innovativeness. In this study, we build on the work of Nishii and Wright (2008), Chang et al (2013), and others (e.g., Liao et al, 2009), and posit that individual employee self-reported perceived HIHRP will be a key proximal precursor and that individual employee supervisor-rated innovative behavior will be a key proximal consequence of individual employee self-reported absorptive capacity.…”