Micro-Foundations of Firm-Specific Human Capital: When Do Employees Perceive Their Skills to be Firm-Specific?

Joseph Raffiee · Russell Wayne Coff

137 citations0/0 files storedAcademy of Management Journal

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Human Resource and Talent Management Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior Innovation and Knowledge Management

Abstract

Drawing on human capital theory, strategy scholars have emphasized firm-specific human capital as a source of sustained competitive advantage. In this study, we begin to unpack the micro-foundations of firm-specific human capital by theoretically and empirically exploring when employees perceive their skills to be firm-specific. We first develop theoretical arguments and hypotheses based on the extant strategy literature, which implicitly assumes information efficiency and unbiased perceptions of firm-specificity. We then relax these assumptions and develop alternative hypotheses rooted in the cognitive psychology literature, which highlights biases in human judgment. We test our hypotheses using two data sources from Korea and the United States. Surprisingly, our results support the hypotheses based on cognitive bias—a stark contrast to expectations embedded within the strategy literature. Specifically, we find organizational commitment and, to some extent, tenure are negatively related to employee perceptions of the firm-specificity. We also find that employer-provided on-the-job training is unrelated to perceived firm-specificity. These results suggest that firm-specific human capital, as perceived by employees, may drive behavior in ways unanticipated by existing theory—for example, with respect to investments in skills or turnover decisions. This, in turn, may challenge the assumed relationship between firm-specific human capital and sustained competitive advantage. More broadly, our findings may suggest a need to reconsider other theories, such as transaction cost economics, that draw heavily on firm-specificity and implicitly assume widely shared and unbiased perceptions.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 137 citations exist upstream.

References

1991Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage 2004Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage 1974Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases 1957A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance 1973Job Market Signaling 1996Toward a knowledge‐based theory of the firm 2011Sources of Method Bias in Social Science Research and Recommendations on How to Control It 1976Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications.

Cited by

2018The winner takes it all, the loser has to fall: Provoking the agency perspective in employability research 2016The impact of intellectual capital on innovation generation and adoption 2021Resources for What? Understanding Performance in the Resource-Based View and Strategic Human Capital Resource Literatures 2020The structural capital, the innovation and the performance of the industrial SMES 2019A knowledge-based theory of the firm 2018How Matching Creates Value: Cogs and Wheels for Human Capital Resources Research

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.