Knowledge that Transforms

Discrimination in the labor market has historically been associated with gender, race, ethnicity, and age. This article introduces another basis of discrimination—international experience—which may exist in developing countries because of a colonial mindset. The research is an exploratory study, based on an analysis of in‐depth semistructured interviews with 8 HR managers, 19 employees with international experience, and 24 employees without international experience ( N = 51) working in the oil and gas and telecom sectors of Pakistan. Results indicate some initial evidence of a bias, and hence discrimination during recruitment for entry‐level positions. Findings also indicate that international experience may contribute to enhanced employment opportunities, career progress, and higher compensation at senior‐level leadership positions, leaving those without such experience at a disadvantage. While in some cases international experience may be a genuine occupational requirement ( GOR ), further research is needed to identify whether this is in fact a GOR for senior level positions in all types of organizations or indirect discrimination under the guise of GOR . Recommendations for HR managers and organizational leaders are also set out, which can be applied in practice to foster equality of opportunity in the workplace.

This article develops theory about an agency problem affecting the strategic human capital (SHC) of the firm. It proposes three categories of SHC‐related choices managers must make that imply a trade‐off between near‐ and long‐term performance. Dispersed shareholding, firm coverage by securities analysts, and their practice of publishing quarterly earnings forecasts are argued to entail a bias in management incentives, shifting the balance in this trade‐off toward near‐term performance. To restore the balance, securities analysts would need to distinguish transitory from recurring effects of SHC‐related choices in their valuation models (e.g., treating certain labor cost savings during cyclical downturns as transitory). Restoring the balance would also require them to anticipate long‐term effects in their long‐term earnings forecasts (e.g., long‐term positive effects of retaining employees with valuable skills during cyclical downturns). The article discusses specific transitory cost effects and long‐term effects they could potentially take into account. The skills and incentives needed by analysts to account for such effects are argued to vary across firm segments.

This article reveals an unexplored paradox for HR managers: the centrality of an employee in the social network benefits performance but hampers performance appraisal because it affects supervisors' rating errors. Central employees can be erroneously rated high on performance even when they are not high performers because supervisors tend to overappraise their performance. A distinction is made between rating precision, which depends on supervisors' uncertainty regarding employees' performance, and rating accuracy, which depends on supervisors' bias in favor of employees. Employee centrality is posited to be beneficial to precision but deleterious to accuracy because it regulates the diffusion of positive information, status, and power, all of which distort supervisors' capacity and motivation to accurately appraise performance. It is then argued that rating errors caused by network centrality affect aggregate perceptions of justice in organizations. When employees are highly connected to each other in a dense network, organizations have a strong and positive justice climate. Yet when some employees are more central than others in a centralized network, organizations have a negative and weak justice climate. The article contributes to the literature because it identifies an unexplored dark side of network centrality and offers recommendations for HR managers to cope with its deleterious consequences and for scholars to study them.

Noncompete agreements (also known as covenants not to compete [CNCs]) are frequently used by many businesses in an attempt to maintain their competitive advantage by safeguarding their human capital and the associated business secrets. Although the choice of whether to include CNCs in employment contracts is made by firms, the real extent of their restrictiveness is determined by the state laws. In this article, we explore the effect of state‐level CNC enforceability on firm productivity. We assert that an increase in state level CNC enforceability is detrimental to firm productivity, and this relationship becomes stronger as comparable job opportunities become more concentrated in a firm's home state. On the other hand, this negative relationship is weakened as employee compensation tends to become more long‐term oriented. Results based on hierarchical linear modeling analysis of 21,134 firm‐year observations for 3,027 unique firms supported all three hypotheses.

This study investigates the relationship between sickness absence and shift work. It is hypothesized that the effect of shift work is linked to sickness absence by two mediators: perceived health and work‐family conflict (WFC). Shift work was hypothesized to have an adverse effect on health, as well as making work‐family balance harder to obtain, both in turn resulting in higher sickness absence. The study distinguishes between self‐declared (short‐term) and doctor declared (long‐term) sickness absence. A survey was conducted covering all employees in a Norwegian hospital working more than 30 % of a full position (N=5272) in January 2012, yielding 1864 valid responses (% response = 36). Survey data was coupled with register data on days of sickness absence in 2014. A model with perceived health and WFC as mediating variables between shift work and sickness absence was tested. The findings indicate no direct effect of shift work on sickness absence, but indirect effects both through WFC and perceived health.

Organizations often pay greater salaries to higher‐ranking executives compared to lower‐ranking executives. While this method can be useful for retaining those at the organization's apex, it may also incline executives at the bottom of the pay pyramid to see themselves at a disadvantage and thus exit the firm. Naturally, organizations often want to retain some of their lower‐paid, but highly valuable executives; the question, then, is how organizations can reduce the turnover of lower‐ranking executives. By integrating social with temporal comparison theory, we argue that, when executives earn relatively less than their peers, more pay growth (i.e., individual pay increases over time) leads to less turnover. The results of our analysis, which covered almost 20 years of objective data on a large sample of U.S. top executives, provide support for our theory.

While prior research demonstrates the strategic human resource (HR) advantages associated with offering work–family benefits (WFBs), firms continue to be reluctant in providing their employees with these benefits. Drawing on the corporate governance and stakeholder orientation literatures, this study examines the role of board independence and capital for WFBs being offered in publicly‐traded firms. Our results demonstrate that various director independence and capital attributes are related to the firm offering WFBs. Specifically, board directors who are outsiders, women, and holders of additional directorships, with their broad stakeholder orientation, increase the likelihood of WFBs being offered by the firm [Correction added on December 14, 2017, after first online publication: the preceding sentence has been updated to clarify the findings of the study.]. These findings are of importance to HR practitioners considering the influence that corporate boards can have on the firm's use of HR practices, such as WFBs, that affect all employees, not just the executives.

Star employees are highly sought after by competitors and thus more likely to move from one company to another. However, not all the factors related to stardom are as mobile as the stars themselves. We argue that while simply possessing star status leads to increased movement, differences in the attributions of human capital and value appropriation will also influence a star's movement to competing firms. To test this, we analyzed the careers of 695 security analysts over a 10‐year period. We found that while stars are more likely to move to competing firms than nonstars, the difference in movement between stars and nonstars decreases as the status of their current firm and their tenure increases.

This study examines the generalizability of the network‐performance relationship across individual and group levels, focusing on knowledge‐intensive contexts. Drawing on a meta‐analytical approach, we synthesize the results of 102 empirical studies to test whether network characteristics such as centrality, brokerage, and tie strength similarly influence the job performance of individuals and groups. Results show that while there are no differences in the direction of the network‐performance relationship across levels, there are substantial differences in magnitude. Individual performance profits more strongly from a high number of direct connections, whereas groups reap higher benefits from brokerage positions. Additional analyses reveal that the network measurement method, tie content, and performance criteria function as moderators of the network performance relationship, but their influence is consistent neither across network characteristics nor across levels. By meta‐analytically comparing and contrasting the network‐performance relationship for individuals and groups, we contribute to multilevel research on networks and organizations. Particularly, we move toward the development of a multilevel homology theory of networks. Implications for theory, practice, and future research are discussed.

This study applies evolutionary economics reasoning to the green HRM context and examines whether and how environmental management routinization relates to organizational performance. In doing so, we introduce the concept of ecological routines, defined as deeply embedded, firm‐specific rules and procedures associated with organizing and practicing corporate environmental management that do not change very much from one iteration, period, or functional unit to another. We examine the extent to which ecological routines that encompass organizing (high‐performance organizing [HPO]) and practice routines of environmental sustainability relate to green decisions, green behaviors, and organizational performance. In a sample of 229 managers from 33 organizations in the environment‐sensitive industries of the United States, we find support for multilevel mediation of green decisions and green behaviors as well as interaction of HPO and environmental management practice routines. Implications for research and practice are discussed.