The routine may be stable but the advantage is not: competitive implications of key employee mobility

Abstract

We extend our theoretical understanding of the effect of key employee mobility on organizational performance. We find that when an organization with an advantageous set of routines loses a key employee to a competitor, the advantaged organization's competitive position is reduced vis‐à‐vis the hiring competitor. What is more interesting is that we also show that the diffusion of an advantageous set of routines through the mobility of key employees may affect competitive advantage in at least two additional ways. Our findings result from an analysis of 412 competitive events between the San Francisco 49ers and all other teams in the National Football League during the 24‐year period when the San Francisco 49ers perfected the routines of a strategic innovation that has become known as the West Coast Offense. First, we find that there is a loss of advantage for the organization when competitors increasingly compete against additional organizations that hired key employees from it. Second, we find that there is a loss of advantage for the organization when competitors expect future competition against additional organizations that hired key employees from it. Our results challenge the traditional argument that socially complex routines create sustainable competitive advantages because they are not easily imitated and do not rely on any single individual. Instead, we show that routines are stable to the loss of key employees, but the advantages derived from them are not. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

When much more of a difference makes a difference: Social comparison and tournaments in the CEO's top team

“…For example, pay structures may need to acknowledge the resources of particular members of the TMT to deal with situational environmental uncertainties for the firm because such uncertainty reduction resources have been shown to affect hierarchical structures in teams (Aime et al, in press). Similarly, it is important to study the implications of pay, power, and similarity for executive departures (Bloom & Michel, 2002) because there is a growing interest in the relationship between key players mobility and firm performance (Aime et al, 2010). Therefore, future extensions may benefit from considering the impact of both tournaments and social comparisons on the adjusting nature of TMT teams.…”

Pre‐Exit Bundling, Turnover of Professionals, and Firm Performance

“…Indeed, these unexpected voluntary exits diminish the firm's human and social capital (Dess and Shaw, 2001;Shaw et al, 2005). When the losses are sufficiently large, such turnover can even prevent the firm from implementing desired strategies, continuing productivity routines, or sustaining current competitive advantages (Aime et al, 2010;Hausknecht and Holwerda, 2013;Ployhart et al, 2014;Siebert and Zubanov, 2009).…”

Do Higher Wages Reduce Knowledge Worker's Job Mobility? Evidence for Swedish Inventors

“…Since key employees are essential for the performance of firms (Aime et al, 2010) paying high wages can be an important retention mechanism .…”