See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/327022197

A multidimensional approach to the content of human capital: Dimensions,

emergence process and organizational capabilities

Article in Management Research · August 2018

DOI: 10.1108/MRJIAM-05-2016-0666

CITATIONS READS

5 381

3 authors, including:

Alvaro Lopez Cabrales Ramon Valle

Universidad Pablo de Olavide Universidad Pablo de Olavide
36 PUBLICATIONS 1,337 CITATIONS 96 PUBLICATIONS 3,761 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Human resource strategies and practices in crisis times View project

Innovation in the wine industry View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Alvaro Lopez Cabrales on 17 November 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Management Research: Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of
Management
A multidimensional approach to the content of human capital: Dimensions,
emergence process and organizational capabilities
Yosdenis Urrutia-Badillo, Alvaro Lopez-Cabrales, Ramon Valle Cabrera,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Yosdenis Urrutia-Badillo, Alvaro Lopez-Cabrales, Ramon Valle Cabrera, (2018) "A multidimensional
approach to the content of human capital: Dimensions, emergence process and organizational
capabilities", Management Research: Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of Management, https://
doi.org/10.1108/MRJIAM-05-2016-0666
Downloaded by 80.31.18.179 At 09:01 15 August 2018 (PT)

Permanent link to this document:

https://doi.org/10.1108/MRJIAM-05-2016-0666
Downloaded on: 15 August 2018, At: 09:01 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 64 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by
Token:Eprints:CWNZEI5B4CUPW4IJIZGR:
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1536-5433.htm

Content of
A multidimensional approach to human capital
the content of human capital
Dimensions, emergence process and
organizational capabilities
UNA aproximación Received 9 May 2016
Revised 21 September 2016
19 January 2017
multidimensional al contenido 29 April 2017
19 May 2017
Accepted 19 May 2017

del capital humano

Dimensiones, proceso de surgimiento y
Downloaded by 80.31.18.179 At 09:01 15 August 2018 (PT)

capacidades organizativas
UMA aproximação
multidimensional ao conteúdo
do capital humano
Dimensões, processo de surgimento e
capacidades organizacionais
Yosdenis Urrutia-Badillo, Alvaro Lopez-Cabrales and
Ramon Valle Cabrera
Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Sevilla, Spain

Abstract
Purpose – Using a multilevel approach, this theoretical paper aims to build a framework to explore the
cognitive and non-cognitive dimensions of human capital, which may in turn explain how they become a
source of competitive advantage.
Design/methodology/approach – This paper presents several propositions to be empirically tested in
further research using multilevel analysis. Starting at the individual level, four configurations of human capital are
determined by considering cognitive and non-cognitive human capital. Based on these settings, interactions of
human capital at intermediate or departmental level are discussed, taking into account the complexity of the task
environment and psychosocial processes. These interactions constitute microfoundations, which explain why
human capital may influence different types of organizational capabilities.
Findings – The theoretical analysis carried out allows proposing four configurations of human capital,
combining individual cognitive and non-cognitive dimensions. These configurations form a human capital
portfolio classifying different types of employees. In addition, this paper shows how individual human capital Management Research: Journal of
the Iberoamerican Academy of
aggregates into departmental level and generates human capital emergence processes by contextualizing Management
through the complex task environments and psychosocial processes. The development of these emergence © Emerald Publishing Limited
1536-5433
processes enables proposing the association of certain organizational capabilities with cognitive elements of DOI 10.1108/MRJIAM-05-2016-0666
 MRJIAM human capital (absorptive capacity, innovativeness and technical capacities), whereas a second group of
organizational capabilities is linked to non-cognitive human capital aspects (organizational commitment,
leadership and customer intimacy).
Originality/value – This paper combines individual dimensions in the study of the content of human
capital from a multilevel and microfoundational approach, explaining the effects of emerging human capital
on different organizational capabilities when human capital is contextualized at departmental level. This
theoretical paper is a new step towards understanding and measuring the concept of human capital, enriching
the resource-based view framework.

Keywords Organizational capabilities, Human Capital, Microfoundations, Emergence processes

Paper type Conceptual paper

Resumen
osito – Utilizando un enfoque multidimensional, este paper te
orico tiene como objetivo el diseño de un
Prop

marco conceptual que explore las dimensiones cognitivas y no cognitivas del capital humano, de cara a
explicar c
omo puede convertirse en fuente de ventaja competitiva.
Downloaded by 80.31.18.179 At 09:01 15 August 2018 (PT)

Diseño – En este artículo se presentan varias proposiciones te
oricas que pueden ser testadas empíricamente
en investigaciones futuras a través de análisis multinivel. Comenzando a un nivel individual, se determinan
cuatro configuraciones de capital humano, al considerar las dimensiones cognitivas y no cognitivas. En base a
esto, a nivel intermedio o departamental se discuten las interacciones de capital humano, teniendo en
consideraci
on la complejidad del entorno de tareas y los procesos psicosociales. Dichas interacciones se
convierten en microfundamentos que explican c
omo el capital humano puede influir en diferentes capacidades
organizativas a nivel de empresa.
Hallazgos – El análisis te
orico que se realiza nos permite proponer cuatro configuraciones de capital
humano al combinar las dimensiones individuales cognitivas y no cognitivas. Estas configuraciones forman
un portafolio de capital humano que permiten clasificar cuatro tipos de trabajadores. Además, este artículo
muestra c
omo se agrega el capital humano individual a nivel departamental, generando procesos de
surgimiento del capital humano, los cuales se contextualizan por la complejidad del entorno de tareas y los
procesos psicosociales. Dicho proceso de surgimiento nos permite proponer la asociaci
on de capacidades
organizativas como la de absorci
on, innovaci
on y tecnol
ogica, con los elementos cognitivos del capital
humano, mientras que un segundo grupo de capacidades organizativas (compromiso, liderazgo, intimidad con
el cliente) se asocia a aspectos no cognitivos del capital humano.
Originalidad/valor – Este paper combina las dimensiones individuales del capital humano en el estudio
de su contenido, desde una perspectiva multinivel y basada en microfundamentos, explicando los efectos del
surgimiento del capital humano en diferentes capacidades organizativas, una vez que dicho capital humano se
contextualiza a nivel departamental. Este paper te
orico sería un paso más en el conocimiento y medici
on del
capital humano, enriqueciendo el marco de la Teoría Basada en los Recursos.
Palabras clave – Capital humano, Capacidades organizativas, Proceso de surgimiento, Microfundamentos
Tipo de artículo – Comentario

Resumo
osito – Usando uma abordagem multidimensional, este paper te
orico tem como objetivo a construção
Prop

dum marco conceptual que explore as dimensões cognitivas e não cognitivas do capital humano, de modo a
explicar como se pode tornar em fonte de vantagem competitiva.
Concepção – Neste artigo apresentam-se várias proposições te
oricas que podem ser testadas
empiricamente em futuras pesquisas através da análise multinível. Partindo dum nível individual,
determinam-se quatro configurações de capital humano, considerando as dimensões cognitivas e não
cognitivas. Baseado nisto, a nível intermédio ou departamental debatem-se as interações do capital humano,
tendo em consideração a complexidade do ambiente de tarefas e os processos psicossociais. Ditas interações
constituem-se em microfundamentos que explicam como o capital humano pode influir em diferentes
capacidades organizacionais a nível de empresa.
Achados – A análise te
orica realizada nos permite propor quatro configurações de capital humano ao
combinar as dimensões individuais cognitivas e não cognitivas. Essas configurações formam um portf
olio de
capital humano que permitem classificar quatro tipos de trabalhadores. Aliás, este artigo mostra como se
 agrega o capital humano a nível departamental, gerando processos de surgimento do capital humano, os quais Content of
contextualizam-se pela complexidade dos ambientes de tarefas e dos processos psicossociais. O
desenvolvimento destes processos de surgimento nos permite propor a associação de determinadas human capital
capacidades organizacionais como a de absorção, a de inovação e a tecnol
ogica, com os elementos cognitivos
do capital humano, enquanto que um segundo grupo de capacidades organizacionais (compromisso,
liderança, proximidade com o cliente) está ligado a aspectos não cognitivos do capital humano.
Originalidade/valor – Este paper combina as dimensões individuais no estudo do conteúdo do capital
humano desde uma perspectiva multinível e micro-fundacional, explicando os efeitos do surgimento do
capital humano em diferentes capacidades organizacionais quando o capital humano se contextualiza a nível
departamental. Este paper te
orico seria mais um passo no conhecimento e medição do conceito do capital
humano, enriquecendo o marco da Teoria Baseada nos Recursos.
Palavras chave – Capital humano, Capacidades organizacionais, Processo de surgimento, Microfundamentos
Tipo de artículo – Comentario

1. Introduction
In principle, every organization, conceived as a comprehensive set of resources (Wernerfelt,
1984), must necessarily identify those that differentiate it from the competition, enabling the
Downloaded by 80.31.18.179 At 09:01 15 August 2018 (PT)

generation of sustainable competitive advantage in the market. The resource-based view

(RBV) holds that human resources, and human capital in particular, may possess the
characteristics or requirements that define a resource as strategic – valuable, unique and
difficult to imitate (Barney, 1991) – as well as contribute to sustained competitiveness
(L
opez-Cabrales et al., 2006) as a strategic asset (Barney and Wright, 1998). Nevertheless, the
specific process through which human capital contributes to the development of
organizational capabilities is still unresolved and the main objective of this paper will be to
design a theoretical framework around such relationships.
The construct of human capital has its origins in studies of intelligence (Spearman, 1927),
which include variables such as the skills and knowledge that influence both the
performance of people and the results of organizations (Becker, 1964). However, this variable
was only recently considered strategic due to RBV, given the importance attached to
intangible issues such as knowledge in the competitiveness of organizations (Barney, 1991;
Barney and Wright, 1998).
Previous RBV research has considered human capital to be either one-dimensional (Coff
and Kryscynski, 2011) or explained through two dimensions: value and uniqueness (Lepak
and Snell, 1999, 2002). However, as Wright and McMahan (2011) pointed out, it is necessary
to enrich the content of human capital by considering both cognitive and emotional issues to
understand individual behaviour.
In keeping with this, Ployhart and Moliterno (2011) suggested that the content of human
capital should include both the cognitive components of general cognitive ability
(i.e. knowledge, skills and experience) and those components related to non-cognition that
are more linked to personality, interests and values. However, although these cognitive and
non-cognitive components have already been suggested as potential sources of competitive
advantage in the literature (Wright and McMahan, 2011; Molloy and Barney, 2015), we have
found no other studies, either theoretical or empirical, linking these dimensions or
considering the motivational aspects that contribute to the understanding of the effects of
human capital on the capabilities of the organization. Subsequently, the first contribution of
this research is the analysis of the non-cognitive dimension. This in turn provides a new
integrative architecture of human capital through the combination of cognitive and non-
cognitive human capital dimensions, thus enriching the previous models and being able to
explain its influence on the capabilities and competitive advantage of any job in any
organization.
 MRJIAM However, human capital at individual level needs to be aggregated in some way to
configure a resource to be related to organizational capabilities. When considering the
emergence process of human capital (Ployhart and Moliterno, 2011) supporting the creation
and maintenance of competitive advantage (Coff and Kryscynski, 2011), a gap arises in the
research around the description of analytical frameworks to explain the role played by
intermediate organizational levels (considered as teams and/or departments), enabling the
connection of individual and organizational levels. Current studies highlight conceptual
frameworks which allow convergence between the human capital approach at individual
level and the human capital view at collective level as a resource (Nyberg et al., 2014;
Ployhart et al., 2014).
Thus, the second contribution of this paper is the proposed architecture relating
emergence processes of human capital, using a multilevel approach (Nyberg et al., 2014;
Crocker and Eckardt, 2014) to explain the construct of collective human capital, considering
the individual-level and unit-level interactions (Felin et al., 2012). Here, we take into account
two contextual variables that enrich our proposal:
Downloaded by 80.31.18.179 At 09:01 15 August 2018 (PT)

(1) the complexity of task environment in which employees perform; and

(2) psychosocial processes or interactions within teams or units (Ployhart and
Moliterno, 2011).

Having filled the void at a unit or team level, the relationship between new configurations of
human capital and its influence on the different organizational capabilities can be set. This
paper explains how different configurations of individual human capital interact within
teams or departments to affect different organizational capabilities, taking into account
different emergence processes of human capital. Our choice of capabilities includes
absorptive capacity (Zahra and George, 2002), innovativeness (Lado and Wilson, 1994),
technological capacity (Zehir et al., 2006; Teece, 2007), organizational commitment capability
(Meyer and Smith, 2000; Spagnoli and Caetano, 2012), organizational leadership capability
(Lado and Wilson, 1994; Kivipõld and Vadi, 2010) and customer intimacy (Ulrich and
Smallwood, 2004; Kai-Uwe and Yu-Zhou, 2012).
Our proposal regarding the relationships between dimensions of human capital, job
environment and organizational capabilities also reinforces the need to consider a
contingent approach to the study of human capital. Our third contribution is the design of a
contingent framework of analysis for a better understanding relationships between
individual human capital and organizational capabilities (Ployhart et al., 2014; Wright et al.,
2014).
This theoretical or review paper seeks to develop propositions linking individual-level
human capital, emergence processes and organizational level capabilities. Given the
arguments above, the three research questions that this paper aims to answer are:
RQ1. Considering the possible cognitive and non-cognitive configurations of individual
human capital, what is the architecture of the human capital of an organization?
RQ2. What are the emergence processes that add individual human capital to form
collective human capital?
RQ3. How do the different configurations of human capital influence developing
organizational capabilities in the context of emergence of human capital?
The next section of the paper aims to clarify the components of these new dimensions of
human capital. Microfoundations that explain the emergence of human capital at
 intermediate levels are presented in the Section 3. In section 4, the configurations of human Content of
capital are linked to organizational capabilities, highlighting their strategic influence. human capital
Finally, the main conclusions are explained.

2. Towards a content configuration of human capital at individual level

Although individual characteristics such as intelligence (Spearman, 1927), skills, knowledge
and others allowed the conceptualization of human capital (Becker, 1964) in earlier research,
studying through the perspective of RBV (Barney, 1991) has enriched and improved human
capital analysis. In essence, SHRM has considered human capital as a valuable, unique and
difficult to imitate strategic resource capable of generating sustainable competitive
advantage for organizations (Barney and Wright, 1998; Ployhart et al., 2014). However, these
are not the only features to be considered (Lepak and Snell, 1999). In this theoretical paper,
we propose a link between both fields considering the potential contribution of individual
human capital (aggregated into a collective resource) to organizational capabilities as
sources of sustainable competitive advantage.
Downloaded by 80.31.18.179 At 09:01 15 August 2018 (PT)

As part of human capital, cognitive dimensions, knowledge, skills and experience have
an impact on the creation of competitive advantage (Lepak and Snell, 1999; 2002), but
previous research (Wright et al., 2001; Wright and McMahan, 2011) has insisted on the fact
that non-cognitive dimensions should also be considered, as these reflect the emotions and
intentions of individuals. These authors suggested that firms can obtain a sustainable
competitive advantage by directing and guiding employees’ non-cognitive issues towards
the strategic objectives of the firm.
In this regard, Ployhart and Moliterno (2011) defined human capital as a resource unit
level created from the emergence of knowledge, skills, abilities and other individual
characteristics, (KSAOs) which require a multilevel analysis to theoretically and empirically
measure and analyse each construct according to the organizational level in question
(Kozlowski and Klein, 2000; Hitt et al., 2007; Crocker and Eckardt, 2014). Although Ployhart
et al. (2014) assumed that human capital resources can simultaneously consist of individual
or unit-level capacities, they acknowledge the major multidimensional contribution in terms
of content, as both cognitive and non-cognitive elements were considered (Ployhart and
Moliterno, 2011). However, the configurations that include the relationship between these
two dimensions and their different implications in terms of motivation and individual
performance are not specified. This paper aims to fill the gap by considering the
relationships between these components and their motivational effects (Cable and Judge,
1996; Knafo and Sagiv, 2004).
The first of the cognitive components is general cognitive ability, or the ability to learn,
the main dimension of which is intelligence (factor g according to Ackerman and Heggestad,
1997). This characteristic of human capital enables differentiation, as the higher the
cognitive capacity, the fewer the people who possess it (Wright and McMahan, 2011). There
is a very rich literature of studies looking at the validity of cognitive ability in predicting job
performance, many of them within the context of pre-employment testing (Gottfredson,
1997; Schmidt and Hunter, 1998, 2004). Within a work environment, the second component,
knowledge, is defined as general or technical information which influences routines, skills or
organizational activity. This concept is based on the distinction between explicit and tacit
knowledge (Grant, 1996). The former is included in coded products such as written
documents, standards and protocols, whereas the latter is reflected in non-coded routines,
where it can be a source of competitive advantage (Wright et al., 2001). The third cognitive
component of human capital is skills. These include abilities to perform a specific job which
can be acquired depending on the complexity of the tasks and types of processes involving
 MRJIAM individuals. Skill acquisition has a significant influence on the results of job performance
(Ackerman et al., 1995). Finally, a fourth dimension, experience, has been treated in the
literature as a construct of multidimensional and multilevel character affecting job
performance (Quinones et al., 1995), and defined by personal events at work, determined by
duration and complexity, either individual or collective.
Non-cognitive dimensions such as personality, interests and values add content to
human capital, as they have been associated to motivational issues affecting work
performance (Ackerman and Heggestad, 1997; Barrick et al., 2003; Wille and De Fruyt, 2014).
Therefore, the joint study of individual motivation, as a consequence of both cognitive and
non-cognitive dimensions, will affect the development of sustainable competitive advantage
provided these are consistent with firms’ strategic objectives (Wright et al., 2001; Wright
and McMahan, 2011; Baum et al., 2001).
Personality refers to a set of traits, generally stable during adulthood (McCrae and Costa,
2003), which directly maintain consistent behaviour (Ployhart and Moliterno, 2011). The
effectiveness of certain personality features in certain jobs and the motivational aspects that
Downloaded by 80.31.18.179 At 09:01 15 August 2018 (PT)

influence this adaptation have both been considered (Ackerman et al., 1995; Barrick et al.,
2003; Wille and De Fruyt, 2014). Therefore, some personality traits, such as anxiety or
impulsive character, have been demonstrated to exert a negative impact on employees’
behaviour and performance (Revelle, 1987). Furthermore, other variables related to
employees’ personality, such as their tenacity, proactivity and passion, have indirect effects
on behaviour and performance, with employees’ skills and motivation acting as mediating
variables (Baum et al., 2001). These research works also highlight the need for contextual
analysis, considering other variables, such as job characteristics and working environments,
as Humphreys and Revelle (1984) suggested.
Interests can be defined as representing the will or autonomy of human capital (Wright
et al., 2001) in deciding about many facets of life, including preferences for certain types of
work. When vocational interests do not coincide with the working environment, individuals
eventually opt to give up their jobs (Barrick et al., 2003; Wille and De Fruyt, 2014). Given the
impact of personal interests on job performance, it is essential to consider these among non-
cognitive components of human capital. In this line, Sullivan and Hansen (2004) suggested
some relationships between vocational interest, personality traits and job satisfaction and
performance.
The final non-cognitive component of human capital consists of values, which are
usually quite stable throughout adulthood, formed from an early age and cannot be changed
easily. Personal values are strongly related to personality (Oliver and Mooradian, 2003) and
motivation (Parks and Guay, 2009) and they affect the acceptance of job positions, as people
tend to be more comfortable and more efficient in environments that support their values
(Schwartz, 1992). Therefore, when personal values are consistent with vocational interests
and with work environments, individuals can be motivated to improve their job
performance (Cable and Judge, 1996; Barrick et al., 2003; Knafo and Sagiv, 2004).
The links between some of the cognitive and non-cognitive aspects have been explored
previously (Ackerman et al., 1995), but not jointly, that is to say, these dimensions have not
been considered together as human capital. Therefore, combining cognitive and non-
cognitive aspects of human capital bearing in mind that cognitive dimensions can be
assessed in terms of high and low levels of knowledge, skills and abilities, and evaluating
non-cognitive dimensions as high or low depending on the level of adequacy of employees’
personalities, interests and values for the specific job and task environment, we find four
configurations of human capital (Figure 1). But what is the meaning of each of these
configurations?
 Content of
human capital

Figure 1.
Configurations of
Downloaded by 80.31.18.179 At 09:01 15 August 2018 (PT)

human capital
(individual level)

In terms of the cognitive dimension, high levels refer to individuals with high general
cognitive ability, reflected in high levels of intelligence and ability to learn (Ackerman and
Heggestad, 1997; Ployhart, et al., 2014), knowledge, skills and experiences. In the case of the
non-cognitive dimension, it seems reasonable to assess this according to the higher or lower
level of adequacy of employees’ personalities and interests as values in relation to the
specific job performed and the task environment. Whenever there is a match between
cognitive and non-cognitive dimensions, job and task environment, higher individual
motivation and performance emerge (Cable and Judge, 1996; Knafo and Sagiv, 2004; Wille
and De Fruyt, 2014). Employees’ work satisfaction depends largely on the extent to which
their knowledge, skills and personalities match their work environment (Ackerman and
Heggestad, 1997; De Fruyt and Mervielde, 1997; Barrick et al., 2003) so values are shared
within the unit or department (Holland, 1997; Knafo and Sagiv, 2004).
Getting to know the significance of the variation in each of the dimensions of human capital
(high – low), we can analyse possible relationships between these and their consequences.

2.1 Cell 1. High cognitive and highly adequate non-cognitive human capital: strategic human
capital
In theory, in a situation such as the one described in Cell 1 within Figure 1, we are dealing
with individuals in the organization who possess not only high levels of knowledge, skills
and abilities, but also personalities, interests and values fitting the job requirements and
intrinsic characteristics. Taking into account these matching job characteristics and
employees, we can expect high individual motivation. Given these circumstances, as human
capital these generate sustainable competitive advantage (Barney and Wright, 1998).
This human capital should be able to assume knowledge acquisition and skill
development for getting the best performance in key strategic activities. Thus, employees
will have major decision-making powers in the duties assigned. Furthermore, it is
understood that people take jobs commensurate with their personality traits, vocational
interests and values, which will improve their motivation and affect their individual
performance. In this situation, the maintenance of these conditions is essential, and the
mechanisms of isolation of human capital should be considered to retain key employees and
 MRJIAM keep them permanently motivated (Coff and Kryscynski, 2011). Employees with such
characteristics best match the requirements for becoming strategic workers, that is,
employees who add value to the firm. They are unique, as they are hardly found in the
labour market and are difficult to imitate (Barney and Wright, 1998), although their strategic
potential will also depend on employees’ match with job characteristics, as we shall be
explained further in more detail.

2.2 Cell 2. Low cognitive but highly adequate non-cognitive human capital: efficient human
capital
The second scenario (Cell 2, Figure 1) features an apparent imbalance, given the low cognitive
levels and suitable non-cognitive levels, but in fact this is not so. In this case, low levels of
cognitive dimension mean that we are looking at employees who could not work on highly
complex jobs or high-responsibility jobs, although they are perfectly able to work on tasks that
match their personalities, values or interests (non-cognitive dimension). These results can
explain how a high degree of motivation and employees’ performance can be high providing
Downloaded by 80.31.18.179 At 09:01 15 August 2018 (PT)

that the job content matches their lower level of knowledge, skills, and abilities.
However, this type of human capital cannot be said to play a key role in the
competitiveness of any organization, given that cognitive components do not stand out for
rarity or inimitability (Barney, 1991). High motivation leads to efficiency and productivity,
and, as long as these determine the competitive strategy of a given company, human capital
can make positive contributions to the company. These employees would positively affect
their teams or units depending on whether their low cognitive elements (knowledge and
skills) are adjusted to the type of job they perform.
Following a cognitive approach or dimension, this type of workers could be easy to
replace, because they lack of valuable/unique knowledge (Lepak and Snell, 1999). However,
as they are very motivated in their jobs, firms should not be interested in their replacement.
Therefore, it could be recommended to use HR practices aimed at increasing the cognitive
dimensions to improve performance (Cabello-Medina et al., 2011). The human capital
described in this situation can be considered to be efficient.

2.3 Cell 3. Low cognitive and lowly adequate non-cognitive human capital: inefficient human
capital
For situations in which the cognitive dimension presents low levels, and the non-cognitive
dimension does not fit people’s roles (Cell 3 in Figure 1), the scenario is one of low human
capital development. The causes of low cognitive level are similar to those mentioned in the
previous section: people with low levels of knowledge, skills and experience as a result of
their low cognitive ability. Coupled with this is the lack of personal motivation, as an
expression of the mismatch between personality, interests and values, and the assigned
responsibilities (Spagnoli and Caetano, 2012). This situation reflects an incorrect work
assignment, which if corrected would correspond to Cell 2, that is, improving employees’
motivation for being more efficient in their routine tasks. It is reasonable to view these
workers as non-strategic employees who may negatively affect firm competitiveness due to
their inefficiency (Barney and Wright, 1998).

2.4 Cell 4. High cognitive but lowly adequate non-cognitive human capital: potentially
strategic human capital
Finally, the development of human capital is unbalanced whenever it presents high levels of
cognition and inadequate levels of non-cognitive dimensions (Cell 4 in Figure 1). This is the
 typical situation of an employee with high general cognitive ability, which facilitates the Content of
acquisition of knowledge, skills and specific experience (Ployhart et al., 2014). In the case of human capital
employees in the wrong job, their motivation would be lower and expected contributions
might not be reached. In this context, employees may perform complex jobs that correspond
with their high knowledge, skills and abilities, but still are not matched to their personalities,
interests and values. These employees are underutilized resources, which could increase
their strategic contribution if placed in the right job.
In this situation, the demotivation generated by the mismatch of non-cognitive
components hinders the acquisition of positive contributions to the organization. Improving
this situation would require a reallocation of responsibilities and functions in line with the
personalities, interests and values of people (Cable and Judge, 1996; Knafo and Sagiv, 2004).
These are employees who could be labelled as potentially strategic, as their cognitive
dimension matches the requirements for becoming a strategic resource, and they could
increase organizational competitiveness if they performed more strategic roles.
Downloaded by 80.31.18.179 At 09:01 15 August 2018 (PT)

3. Configurations of human capital at intermediate/departmental level:

emergence processes and their microfundamentals
While the previous section dealt with individual configurations of content of human capital
which allow us to predict their influence on competitiveness, this analysis should also
consider a multilevel approach that highlights individual interactions within groups or
departments (intermediate organizational level). This would take into account task
environment, explaining the influence, strategic or otherwise, of these interactions in the
organization (Ployhart et al., 2014; Crocker and Eckardt, 2014; Mahoney and Kor, 2015). This
multilevel approach gives rise to a theoretical integration (micro-macro) for analysing
concepts by using different levels and measures according to each level (Kozlowski and
Klein, 2000; Hitt et al., 2007).
Recent literature (Nyberg et al., 2014) identified theoretical frameworks which use a
multilevel and microfoundational approach to explain the emergence of human capital as a
strategic resource. In addition, the microfoundational approach to human capital is
established as a collective construct which, in turn, is based on individual characteristics
(Ployhart and Moliterno, 2011). Research on the process of emergence of human capital is
based on two main contextual factors related to the nature of work:
(1) the complexity of task environment; and
(2) the psychosocial processes to be shared within the group or team (Kozlowski and
Ilgen, 2006).

According to Wood (1986), task complexity means the number and difficulty of components
involved in the task (component complexity), the need to develop complex coordination
mechanisms with other groups (coordination complexity) and the numerous changes in the
task (dynamic complexity). Environments with high-complexity tasks are characterized by
a higher number of synchronous activities, a high degree of dynamism and changing
activities, with high-intensity workflows (Kozlowski and Ilgen, 2006). In environments with
low-complexity tasks, activities are fundamentally asynchronous, with stable and
predictable relationships between individuals and lower-intensity workflows.
Depending on the level of difficulty of each activity, different levels of interaction
will be needed to complement and coordinate the knowledge and skills required by the
process. Interactions between employees within a team or unit have been named
psychosocial processes (Ployhart and Moliterno, 2011). Zahra and George (2002)
pointed out that these psychosocial processes are defined as strong when there are high
 MRJIAM levels of coordination, communication and interdependence. In contrast, psychosocial
processes are defined as weak when characterized by poor coordination,
communication and interdependence.
Our objective is to find out how individual employees (as defined in Figure 1) fit with
contextual factors in their work (task complexity and psychosocial processes) in the creation
of aggregated human capital. According to Ployhart and Moliterno (2011), in the presence of
adequate psychosocial processes, as the complexity of the task environment increases,
human capital tends to emerge. We propose that in cases where there is a match between
human capital, task environment and psychosocial processes, the human capital which
emerges at departmental level is more valuable than the human capital considered only at
individual level.
As seen in Figure 2, there are four emergence processes which, due to interactions
between individuals, are conditioned by the complexity of the task environment and
psychosocial processes, leading to human capital capable of generating sustainable
competitive advantages or high performance (Ployhart et al., 2014). In this figure, the shaded
Downloaded by 80.31.18.179 At 09:01 15 August 2018 (PT)

information shows situations in which human capital emerges depending on the best
combination of cognitive and non-cognitive dimensions of human capital and the
complexity of task environments and psychosocial processes within the group or
department.

3.1 Cell 1. Emergence process of strategic human capital in situations of high cognitive and
highly adequate non-cognitive human capital
This cell shows the emergence of human capital in cases where employees possess
high levels of knowledge, skills and abilities in addition to performing tasks suited to
their personalities, interests and values (Crocker and Eckardt, 2014; Mahoney and

Figure 2.
Emergence processes
of human capital
(intermediate level)
 Kor, 2015). The emergence of this human capital is appropriate under these Content of
circumstances provided that employees perform jobs in environments of high- human capital
complexity tasks, where high coordination, communication and interdependence
between team members are required, that is, in the presence of strong psychosocial
processes. High values in cognitive and non-cognitive dimensions and their fit with
the components, coordination and dynamic complexity that define task complexity
enable the design and implementation of strategies for achieving high performance
(Earley et al., 1990).
High development of human capital especially favours the knowledge-intensive and
technology-based activities. As shown in this cell, emerged human capital will be
strategic if there is a good match between individual characteristics and job content,
generating value within teams or units and contributing to firm competitiveness
(Ployhart et al., 2014). Taking this into consideration, we formulate the following
proposition:
P1. Interactions between individuals with high cognitive and highly adequate non-cognitive
Downloaded by 80.31.18.179 At 09:01 15 August 2018 (PT)

human capital in job contexts characterized by high task complexity and strong
psychosocial processes will lead to strategic human capital at departmental/unit level.

3.2 Cell 2. Emergence process of efficient human capital in situations of low cognitive but
highly adequate non-cognitive human capital
In this cell, the emergence of human capital is conditioned by non-cognitive aspects, which
will generate motivation if suited to the job (Cable and Judge, 1996). A desirable match
between low cognition and low task complexity can be positively moderated by employee
personality (Tett et al., 1991; Baum et al., 2001; Fullarton, et al., 2014). Therefore, interactions
between individuals lacking cognitive human capital become more effective in low-
complexity tasks which also require multiple links within the team, if employees possess
personalities, interests and values that favour interactions (Ployhart et al., 2014).
Individuals tend to be identified with team values and job prospect satisfaction if they
are to be willing to make sacrifices for collective achievement (Wille and De Fruyt, 2014).
Human capital arising in these conditions can lead to a partial competitive advantage
(Barney and Wright, 1998) which it is not considered strategic, given the low cognitive
dimensions and relative homogeneity which makes it easily replaceable by competitors
(Lepak and Snell, 1999). Nevertheless, employees who lack high levels of knowledge and
skills can be efficient within the organization if their motivation results from the match
between employees’ non-cognitive dimensions, low task complexity and strong
psychosocial processes (Coff and Kryscynski, 2011). Thus, the following proposition arises:
P2. Interactions among individuals with a low cognitive but highly adequate non-
cognitive human capital in job contexts characterized by low-complexity tasks and
strong psychosocial processes will lead to high efficient human capital at
departmental/unit level.

3.3 Cell 3. Emergence process of inefficient human capital in situations of low cognitive and
lowly adequate non-cognitive human capital
This cell shows a negative situation with low human capital development, given the absence of
knowledge, specific skills, experience or job-adjusted motivations. The interactions between
individuals in groups or departments may be more effective if activities are carried out in low-
 MRJIAM complexity task environments, which do not require more than minimal coordination,
communication and interdependence, giving rise to very weak psychosocial processes
(Kozlowski and Ilgen, 2006). However, this effectiveness will be reduced due to the lack of
motivation of employees performing jobs, which are not in line with their personalities,
interests and values (Cable and Judge, 1996). As we have said in preceding sections, the specific
nature of cognitive and non-cognitive dimensions should match the job characteristics and the
working environment. Emerged human capital in these conditions will be inefficient and
negatively affect teams or groups, making it necessary to substitute or replace. This allows us
to state the following proposition on the following pattern of emergence:
P3. Interactions between individuals with low cognitive and lowly adequate non-cognitive
human capital, in job contexts of low-complexity tasks and weak psychosocial
processes, will lead to inefficient human capital at departmental/unit level.

3.4 Cell 4. Emergence process of potentially strategic human capital in situations of high
Downloaded by 80.31.18.179 At 09:01 15 August 2018 (PT)

cognitive but lowly adequate non-cognitive human capital

Finally, in this cell, we have employees with high knowledge but not matching in terms of
non-cognitive issues. The microfundamental approach (Felin et al., 2012) considers that low
motivation reflects the unfavourable relationship or the mismatch between personalities,
interests and values in relation to the characteristics of specific tasks or activities. This
mismatch has an impact on learning processes requiring a high use of new knowledge.
Given the individual characteristics specified in this cell, high cognition but low fit with
personality, interests and values, the specific contribution of these employees to the team or
group will be low, as these underutilized resources are poorly assigned. According to
Odiorne (1984), these employees will succeed if they occupy more strategic positions suited
to their interests, personalities and values. These could be better exploited in high-
complexity task environments, which do not require interactions with other colleagues
(weak psychosocial processes).
This emerged human capital can be used in intensive knowledge processes in which
teamwork is not necessary. In this situation, as long as the organization improves conditions
to foster individual motivations, it could be considered that there is a potential to contribute
to achieving and sustaining competitive advantage over time (Coff and Kryscynski, 2011).
The following proposition is based on the above arguments:
P4. Interactions between individuals with high cognitive but lowly adequate non-
cognitive human capital in job contexts characterized by highly complex task
environments and weak psychosocial processes will lead to a potentially strategic
human capital at departmental/unit level.

4. Human capital configurations and organizational capabilities

The influence of human capital on organizational capabilities can be better understood
following the examination of the emergence processes of human capital at departmental
level. It is the human capital arising from interactions between individuals, which explains
their contributions to the development of organizational capabilities (Ployhart et al., 2014;
Wright et al., 2014). Such capabilities may be defined as the ability of a company to create
and develop differentiating features and advantageous internal processes and structures
(Lado and Wilson, 1994).
 In this study, we choose to identify two groups of capabilities. The first group includes Content of
capabilities relating to cognitive human capital. These cognitive characteristics favour human capital
knowledge acquisition, learning and innovation, enabling firms to focus on improving
technology and processes (Ulrich and Smallwood, 2004). The capabilities in question are
absorptive capacity, innovativeness and technological capability (Teece, 2007).
Absorptive capacity is defined as the recognition of the value of new external
information, to assimilate it and apply it to several strategic ends (Zahra and George, 2002).
Learning organizations show high innovativeness (a second capability to be considered).
Innovativeness is defined as a firm’s ability to introduce new products or lines (ranges) into
the market. That is, it is the degree to which a company strays from existing practices in the
creation of new products that are successfully marketed (Capon et al., 1992; L
opez-Cabrales
et al., 2009). But to be innovative, firms demand a high cognitive human capital to scan new
opportunities and seize them (Lado and Wilson, 1994; Teece, 2007). A third capacity
associated with cognition, and linked to the previous two, is technological capacity, which is
the collective ability to create products and/or services more efficiently (Zehir et al., 2006).
Downloaded by 80.31.18.179 At 09:01 15 August 2018 (PT)

A second group of capabilities is based on non-cognitive dimensions of human capital:

personality, values and interests. We have considered the capabilities associated with
organizational commitment (Meyer and Smith, 2000), shared leadership (Carson et al., 2007) and
customer intimacy (Osarenkhoe, 2008; Kai-Uwe and Yu-Zhou, 2012). The organizational
capacity of commitment can be understood as the organization’s ability to strengthen feelings
of trust and involvement among employees (Meyer and Smith, 2000; Spagnoli and Caetano,
2012). Second, organizational leadership capability means the identification of potential leaders
who can be trained as such (Ulrich and Smallwood, 2004; Kivipõld and Vadi, 2010). A third
non-cognitive capability, customer intimacy, can be defined as the ability to develop
communication strategies with customers, establishing relationships of trust to meet present
needs and anticipate future needs (Osarenkhoe, 2008; Kai-Uwe and Yu-Zhou, 2012).
The identification of the organizational capabilities considered in this study gives rise to
the question: what is the relationship between human capital configurations, emergence
processes and organizational capabilities? The answer to this is reflected in the analysis of
the four situations described below and illustrated in Figure 3. Each of these situations can
coexist with different degrees of intensity within any organization.

4.1 Cell 1. Organizational capabilities associated with emergence processes of high cognitive
and highly adequate non-cognitive human capital
In the first scenario of Figure 3, human capital emerges from interactions of motivated people
with high KSAs who also work in jobs with strong ties to develop highly complex tasks. This
strategic human capital will contribute to enhancing and meeting any competitive advantage of
an organization (Ployhart, et al., 2014). This aggregate human capital will impinge on the
capabilities of absorption, innovation and technology (Mahoney and Kor, 2015). In a context of
dynamic technological environments with competitors who are committed to innovation,
interaction within teams allows the identification and exploitation of new market opportunities
through the timely reconfiguration of internal resources (Teece, 2007).
As seen, strong psychosocial processes that favour high coordination and commitment
among team members support interactions. Managerial positions must constantly assess
employee satisfaction to maintain good levels of commitment between strategic human
capital (Meyer and Smith, 2000), as the benefits will be higher if the employees’ attitude is
positive. Teamwork and trust in other employees and the institution provide the basis for
suitably influencing the capacity for organizational commitment (Zehir et al., 2006).
 MRJIAM

Figure 3.
Configurations of
Downloaded by 80.31.18.179 At 09:01 15 August 2018 (PT)

human capital,
emergence processes
and their influence on
the types of
organizational
capabilities

When the organization fosters feelings of commitment and trust, it is easier to identify
individuals potentially able to take on responsible leadership responsibilities and thus
articulating organizational leadership capacity (Carson et al., 2007). This cell shows that the
qualifications and training of these future managers will enable them to share their informal
leadership with current leaders, guaranteeing similar levels of influence over other
employees (Ulrich and Smallwood, 2004).
This human capital also affects customer intimacy, as the positive attitudes of employees
have an effect on trust and customer loyalty (Lado and Wilson, 1994). These employees need
to show high motivation, maintain communication and support systems to recognize the
current needs of each client, and predict their future interests. This in turn creates strong
feelings of loyalty (Osarenkhoe, 2008; Kai-Uwe and Yu-Zhou, 2012).
In short, after considering the above emergence processes, this type of human capital can be
expected to have a significant impact on its specific value as a strategic resource for the
capabilities of absorption, innovation, technology, organizational commitment, organizational
leadership and customer intimacy. This gives rise to the following proposition:
P5. The process of emergence of high cognitive and highly adequate non-cognitive human
capital in environments of high complex tasks and strong psychosocial processes
positively influences the capabilities of (1) absorption, (2) innovation, (3) technology, (4)
organizational commitment, (5) organizational leadership and (6) customer intimacy.

4.2 Cell 2. Organizational capabilities associated with emergence processes of low cognitive
and highly adequate non-cognitive human capital
Following a multilevel approach, the second cell (Figure 3) shows that the emerged efficient
human capital shows adequate levels of non-cognitive components, which means that
people’s jobs match their interests and personal values (Wille and De Fruyt, 2014; Mahoney
 and Kor, 2015). This situation also demonstrates that the cognitive dimension of these Content of
people does not reach high values in terms of knowledge, skills or previous experience. human capital
Ideally these people would work on low-complexity tasks, that is to say, jobs with
predictable activities and limited synchronization. However, strong psychosocial processes
represent willingness to work in teams and high social interaction activities. Thus, it is
possible to obtain human capital in this situation to provide good levels of efficiency, due to
the motivation and commitment of teamwork with low levels of knowledge.
Although these employees face low-complexity tasks, teamwork is a strength to be
considered for achieving efficiency. In fact, even though there may be motivation to
innovate, there are not enough cognitive foundations to guarantee success. The absence of
high levels of cognitive ability makes it difficult to generate innovative solutions and thus it
is easier for competitors to imitate. However, being able to contribute to a high value
associated with high motivation, partial competitive advantage may be given to the
organization (Barney and Wright, 1998), thus providing efficiency in the development of
organizational capabilities.
Downloaded by 80.31.18.179 At 09:01 15 August 2018 (PT)

In the context of companies requiring individuals with greater knowledge, skills or

experience, the organization must employ new staff to meet cognitive needs or take action
by training existing staff (Coff and Kryscynski, 2011). Consequently, this human capital
with a low cognitive dimension will feel commitment to the organization, giving rise to a
positive influence on other individuals, and therefore both enhancing the internal cohesion
of the different departments and strengthening the capacity of organizational commitment.
These employees will be vital towards establishing an intimate relationship with customers,
and will have the support of the team to manage customers appropriately (Osarenkhoe,
2008). These close ties with both customers and suppliers can improve the profitability of
the company and reduce costs by attracting new ones (Kai-Uwe and Yu-Zhou, 2012). Thus,
the relationships described give rise to the formulation of the following proposition:
P6. The process of emergence of low cognitive and highly adequate non-cognitive
human capital in environments of low complex tasks and strong psychosocial
processes positively influences the capabilities of (4) organizational commitment
and (6) customer intimacy.

4.3 Cell 3. Organizational capabilities associated with emergence processes of low cognitive
and lowly adequate non-cognitive human capital
The emergence of human capital characterized by low-value cognitive components and
unsuitable non-cognitive components, with people working in jobs defined by weak
psychosocial processes and low-complexity tasks, will not generate strategic or efficient
resources. These circumstances could be expected to give rise to a negative influence on
organizational capabilities (Ployhart et al., 2014; Wright et al., 2014).
This situation could constitute a problem for the company. At a glance, it could be said that
people in these settings are employed in low-complexity activities with little coordination.
These activities in themselves are routine and require limited decision-making, and so should
not constitute part of the main strategic activities for the organization (Lepak and Snell, 1999).
Integrating these individuals to work in teams is difficult and a potential cause of conflict and
negative consequences for the organization. This low motivation could be transmitted to other
employees and cause infighting and resistance to change. Feelings of anxiety, resentment,
stress, apathy, low energy levels, lack of interest in what has been done and lack of
commitment to the objectives would have a negative impact not only on productivity, the
 MRJIAM capabilities for organizational commitment, organizational leadership and loyalty to customers,
but also on absorption capacities, innovation and technology (Lado and Wilson, 1994).
Based on the above analysis, there are no arguments to suggest that the interactions of this
type of human capital may affect the capabilities of the organization in any major way. In fact,
the interactions of human capital that does not benefit from the opportunities of the
environment, reduce threats or try to be efficient may have a negative impact on the
capabilities available to the organization (Lado and Wilson, 1994; Teece, 2007; Ployhart et al.,
2014). This gives rise to the following proposition:
P7. The process of emergence of low cognitive and lowly adequate non-cognitive human
capital in environments of low-complexity tasks and weak psychosocial processes
negatively influences the capabilities of (1) absorption, (2) innovation, (3) technology, (4)
organizational commitment, (5) organizational leadership and (6) customer intimacy.

4.4 Cell 4. Organizational capabilities associated with emergence processes of high cognitive
Downloaded by 80.31.18.179 At 09:01 15 August 2018 (PT)

and lowly adequate non-cognitive human capital

From a multilevel perspective, in this last situation, emerged human capital can be observed
to possess knowledge, skills and experience useful to the organization. This allows
interaction in environments of complex tasks with changing activities and close relations.
However, any lack of motivation of employees becomes evident when interacting in teams.
In this sense, jobs that require little coordination or interdependence and are suited to
employees’ personalities, interests and values would be preferred (Barrick et al., 2003; Knafo
and Sagiv, 2004). This has different implications for the type of capabilities developed.
The interactions reflected in the figure above result in a workforce with a great capacity
for individual learning. This means an increase in the chances of absorbing new information
(Zahra and George, 2002), although the degree of absorption will be limited by employees
unsuited to non-cognitive issues in work (Chen and Chang, 2012). The high level of cognition
is understood to foster technological capability by incorporating knowledge to optimize
processes which may become more efficient (Zehir et al., 2006; Noblet et al., 2011).
In this context (Cell 4, Figure 3), potentially strategic human capital emerges in activities
that do not rely on teamwork but make an intensive use of knowledge, or in individual tasks
which require a high level of knowledge, skills and abilities, that is, which try to match job
context with non-cognitive dimensions. The influence on absorption and technological
capacities will therefore appear to a lesser extent than those found in Cell 1. The difference
lies in the fact that cooperation, communication and high socialization knowledge must be
fostered to achieve the same effect. Thus, this type of emerged human capital will be able to
generate temporary competitive advantage, and although it can affect cognition-related
capabilities, its sustainability cannot be guaranteed (Barney and Wright, 1998). Therefore,
the following proposition should be considered:
P8. The process of emergence of high cognitive and lowly adequate non-cognitive
human capital in environments of high complex tasks and weak psychosocial
processes positively influences the capabilities of (1) absorption and (3) technology,
but to a lesser extent than expected.

5. Conclusions
This theoretical paper aimed at providing propositions to explain the role of human capital
in developing organizational capabilities. The specific intent was to provide a theoretical
 review considering cognitive and non-cognitive human capital elements jointly, as Content of
influences on the competitiveness of the organization. human capital
Initially, this paper proposes an architecture containing four configurations of human
capital, combining individual cognitive and non-cognitive dimensions. These configurations
depict a human capital portfolio that classifies different types of employees within different
organizational units, taking the work context into account. We feel this contributes to the
literature by providing a deeper analysis of human capital characteristics and their effects
on the organization.
Content analysis for each configuration shows that only the human capital which ensures
high levels of cognitive elements (knowledge, skills, experiences. . .) and adequate non-
cognitive aspects (personality, values and interests) is potentially ideal for supporting the
complete set of organizational capabilities that are coherent for sustainable competitive
advantage (Figure 3, Cell 1). This takes place in the context of highly complex jobs which
demand strong interactions with colleagues. In this case, the employee possesses appropriate
competences for the acquisition of new knowledge and the development of abilities in strategic
Downloaded by 80.31.18.179 At 09:01 15 August 2018 (PT)

domains. High values in cognition and a good match between job content and individual
personality, interests and values will positively improve workers’ motivation and performance.
Moreover, we think that our model enriches the field by proposing alternative
configurations of human capital worth studying. In cases with low cognitive levels but
adequate non-cognitive elements (Figure 1, Cell 2), employees can contribute to competitive
advantages associated with efficiency and productivity, as these workers are highly motivated.
If they are working in appropriate jobs, their contributions to the firm can also be positive. The
opposite configuration (high cognition instead of lowly adequate non-cognition, Figure 1, Cell 4)
means that employees are poorly motivated and their human capital is potentially
underutilized. This affects the competitiveness of the firm, as internal competences are not
used. Finally, we hold that employees lacking cognitive elements and motivation (Figure 1, Cell
3) cannot contribute to any competitive advantage, and should be relocated or replaced.
Therefore, our first contribution in this paper is a proposal for a typology of human capital (at
individual level) based on cognitive and non-cognitive elements.
Second, the transition from the content of human capital at individual level to
intermediate (departmental) level can be explained considering contextual variables
connected with the jobs being performed and proposing different emergence processes of
human capital. In this regard, interactions within groups or teams were analysed and seen
as influenced by emergence processes (complexity of task environments and psychosocial
processes). Interactions of employees with high cognitive and adequate non-cognitive
human capital, developing highly complex tasks that require strong psychosocial processes
and teamwork, will produce a strategic human capital, with a high performance in
knowledge-based activities, top management decisions or innovative tasks (Figure 2, Cell 1).
Our framework also proposes different emergence processes for other configurations. So,
interactions of employees with low cognition and adequate non-cognition will be used to the
best advantage in carrying out low-complexity tasks requiring strong teamwork processes
(Figure 2, Cell 2). In these cases, emerged human capital will not be strategic but will be
efficient in developing tasks not based on knowledge, and supporting partial competitive
advantages. Conversely, actions of demotivated employees who are highly skilled (Figure 2,
Cell 4) will be appropriate in developing high-complexity and individual (not team-based)
tasks. Under such circumstances, a certain level of efficiency will be obtained in individual
knowledge-based activities. We think that demotivation is caused by employment in the
wrong jobs, so an appropriate strategy for these qualified people would be to increase the
complexity of tasks. Eventually, the action of employees combining low cognition and
 MRJIAM demotivation (Figure 2, Cell 3) will develop an expendable human capital in emergence
processes conditioned by low task complexity and weak psychosocial processes. Our second
contribution is therefore based on explaining the emergence processes of human capital due
to the interactions at intermediate level of individuals possessing human capital and
contextual characteristics.
Third, it was possible to establish a theoretical relation between the content of human capital
and organizational capabilities considering emergence processes at intermediate level. The study
of these emergence processes produced a portfolio including four different types of human capital
emergence processes affecting organizational capabilities. This portfolio can be managed within
each company unit and it contains strategic human capital, efficient human capital depending on
psychosocial processes and task complexity and expendable human capital.
Our last contribution is the proposal of organizational capabilities associated with cognitive
elements of human capital (absorptive capacity, innovativeness and technical capacities)
combined with a second group of organizational capabilities linked to non-cognitive human
capital aspects (organizational commitment, leadership and customer intimacy). Our proposal
Downloaded by 80.31.18.179 At 09:01 15 August 2018 (PT)

is based on the contextualization of human capital emergence processes, and job

characteristics, as capabilities are favoured by different configurations of emerged human
capital, also explained in terms of complexity of task environment and psychosocial processes,
as shown in Figure 3. As a potential worthy line of research, it would be interesting to include
corporate strategy as another contextual factor that could explain a better fit between
emergence processes of human capital and organizational capabilities.
Overall, our paper considers new dimensions for studying the content of human capital
from a multilevel and microfoundational approach, explaining the aggregation of individual
behaviours that affect different organizational capabilities. The theories put forward in this
paper are a further step towards understanding and measuring the concept of human capital
within the RBV framework. Although further empirical development is needed, we hope
that the theoretical arguments reflected here may contribute to future advances in the study
of human capital as a source of organizational competitiveness.

References
Ackerman, P.L. and Heggestad, E.D. (1997), “Intelligence, personality, and interests: evidence for
overlapping traits”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 121 No. 2, pp. 219-245.
Ackerman, P.L., Kanfer, R. and Goff, M. (1995), “Cognitive and noncognitive determinants and
consequences of complex skill acquisition”, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, Vol. 1
No. 4, pp. 270-304.
Barney, J. (1991), “Firm resource and sustained competitive advantage”, Journal of Management,
Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 99-120.
Barney, J. and Wright, P. (1998), “On becoming a strategic partner: the role of human resources in
gaining competitive advantage”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 31-46.
Barrick, M.R., Mount, M.K. and Gupta, R. (2003), “Meta-analysis of the relationship between the five-
factor model of personality and Holland’s occupational types”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 56
No. 1, pp. 45-74.
Baum, J., Locke, E. and Smith, K. (2001), “A multidemsional model of venture growth”, Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 292-303.
Becker, G. (1964), Human Capital, 3rd ed., Columbia University Press, New York, (Section II).
Cabello-Medina, C., L
opez-Cabrales, Á. and Valle-Cabrera, R. (2011), “Leveraging the innovative
performance of human capital through HRM and social capital in Spanish firms”, The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 807-828.
 Cable, D.M. and Judge, T.A. (1996), “Person – organization fit, job choice decisions, and organizational Content of
entry”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 67 No. 3, pp. 294-311.
human capital
Capon, N., Farley, J.U., Lehmann, D.R. and Hulbert, J.M. (1992), “Profiles of product innovators among
large US manufacturers”, Management Science, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 157-169.
Carson, J.B., Tesluk, P.E. and Marrone, J.A. (2007), “Shared leadership in teams: an investigation of antecedent
conditions and performance”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 50 No. 5, pp. 1217-1234.
Chen, S.T. and Chang, B.-G. (2012), “The effects of absorptive capacity and decision speed on
organizational innovation: a study of organizational structure as an antecedent variable”,
Contemporary Management Research, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 27-50.
Coff, R. and Kryscynski, D. (2011), “Drilling for micro-foundations of human capital–based competitive
advantages”, Journal of Management, Vol. 37 No. 5, pp. 1429-1443.
Crocker, A. and Eckardt, R. (2014), “A multilevel investigation of individual- and unit-level human
capital complementarities”, Journal of Management, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 509-530.
De Fruyt, F. and Mervielde, I. (1997), “The five-factor model of personality and Holland¨s RIASEC
interest types”, Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 87-103.
Downloaded by 80.31.18.179 At 09:01 15 August 2018 (PT)

Earley, P., Lee, C. and Hanson, L. (1990), “Joint onderating effects of job experience and task component
complexity: relations among goal setting, task strategy and performance”, Journal of
Organizational Behavior, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 3-15.
Felin, T., Foss, N.J., Heimeriks, K.H. and Madsen, T.L. (2012), “Microfoundations of routines and
capabilities: individuals, processes, and structure”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 49
No. 8, pp. 1351-1374.
Fullarton, C.H., Fuller-Tyszkewicz, M. and Von Treuer, K. (2014), “The mediating role of work climate
perceptions in the relations between personality and performance”, European Journal of Work
and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 525-536.
Gottfredson, L.S. (1997), “Why g matters: the complexity of everyday life”, Intelligence, Vol. 24 No. 1,
pp. 79-132.
Grant, R.M. (1996), “Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm”, Strategic Management Journal,
Vol. 17 No. S2, pp. 109-123.
Hitt, M.A., Beamish, P.W., Jackson, S.E. and Mathieu, J.E. (2007), “Building theoretical and empirical
bridges across levels: multilevel research in management”, Academy of Management Journal,
Vol. 50 No. 6, pp. 1385-1399.
Holland, J.L. (1997), Making Vocational Choices, 3rd ed., Psychological Assessment Resources, Odessa,
FL.
Humphreys, M.S. and Revelle, W. (1984), “Personality, motivation, and performance: a theory of the
relationship between individual differences and information processing”, Psychological Review,
Vol. 91 No. 2, pp. 153-184.
Kai-Uwe, J. and Yu-Zhou, J. (2012), “Customer intimacy”, Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing,
Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 370-383.
Kivipõld, K. and Vadi, M. (2010), “A measurement tool for the evaluation of organizational leadership
capability”, Baltic Journal of Management, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 118-136.
Knafo, A. and Sagiv, L. (2004), “Values and work environment: mapping 32 occupations”, European
Journal of Psychology of Education, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 255-273.
Kozlowski, S.W. and Ilgen, D.R. (2006), “Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams”,
Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 77-124.
Kozlowski, S.W.J. and Klein, K.J. (2000), “A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations:
contextual, temporal, and emergent processes”, in Klein, K.J. and Kozlowski, S.W.J. (Eds),
Multilevel Theory, Research and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and New
Directions, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 3-90.
 MRJIAM Lado, A.A. and Wilson, M.C. (1994), “Human resource systems and sustained competitive advantage: a
competency-based perspective”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 699-728.
Lepak, D.P. and Snell, S.A. (1999), “The human resource architecture: toward a theory of human capital
allocation and development”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 31-48.
Lepak, D.P. and Snell, S.A. (2002), “Examining the human resource architecture: the relationship among
human capital, employment and human resource configurations”, Journal of Management,
Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 517-543.
L
opez-Cabrales, A., Pérez Luño, A. and Valle Cabrera, R. (2009), “Knowledge as a mediator between HRM
practices and innovative activity”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 48 No. 4, pp. 485-503.
L
opez-Cabrales, Á., Valle Cabrera, R. and Herrero, I. (2006), “The contribution of core employees to
organizational capabilities and efficiency”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 81-109.
McCrae, R.R. and Costa, P.T. (2003), Personality in Adulthood: A Five-Factor Theory Perspective,
Guilford Press, New York.
Mahoney, J.T. and Kor, Y.Y. (2015), “Advancing the human capital perspective on value creation by
joining capabilities and governance approaches”, Academy of Management Perspectives, Vol. 29
Downloaded by 80.31.18.179 At 09:01 15 August 2018 (PT)

No. 3, pp. 296-308.

Meyer, J.P. and Smith, C. (2000), “HRM practices and organizational commitment: test of a mediation
model”, Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue Canadienne Des Sciences De
L’administration, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 319-331.
Molloy, J.C. and Barney, J.B. (2015), “Who captures the value created with human capital? A market-
based view”, Academy of Management Perspectives, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 309-325.
Noblet, J., Simon, E. and Parent, R. (2011), “Absorptive capacity: a proposed operationalization
knowledge”, Management Research & Practice, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 367-377.
Nyberg, A., Moliterno, T.P., Hale, D. and Lepak, D.P. (2014), “Resource-based perspectives on unit-level
human capital: a review and integration”, Journal of Management, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 316-346.
Odiorne, G. (1984), Strategic Management of Human Resources, Jossey-Bas Publishers, San Francisco.
Oliver, J. and Mooradian, T. (2003), “Personality traits and personal values: a conceptual and empirical
investigation”, Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 109-125.
Osarenkhoe, A. (2008), “What characterises the culture of a market-oriented organisation applying a
customer-intimacy philosophy?”, Journal of Database Marketing & Customer Strategy
Management, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 169-190.
Parks, L. and Guay, R. (2009), “Personality, values and motivation”, Personality and Individual
Diferences, Vol. 47 No. 7, pp. 675-684.
Ployhart, R.E. and Moliterno, T.P. (2011), “Emergence of the human capital resource: a multilevel
model”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 127-150.
Ployhart, R.E., Nyberg, A.J., Reilly, G. and Maltarich, M.A. (2014), “Human capital is dead; long live
human capital resources! ”, Journal of Management, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 371-398.
Quinones, M.A., Ford, J.K. and Teachout, M.S. (1995), “The relationship between work experience and
job performance: a conceptual Meta-analytic review”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 48 No. 4,
pp. 887-910.
Revelle, W. (1987), “Personality and motivation: sources of inefficiency in cognitive performance”,
Journal of Research in Personality, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 436-452.
Schmidt, F.L. and Hunter, J. (1998), “The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel
psychology: practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings”,
Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 124 No. 2, pp. 262-274.
Schmidt, F.L. and Hunter, J. (2004), “General mental ability in the world of work: occupational
attainment and job performance”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 86 No. 1,
pp. 162-173.
 Schwartz, S. (1992), “Universals in the content and structure of values: theoretical advances and Content of
empirical tests in 20 countries”, in Zanna, EM.P. (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social
Psychology, Academic Press, New York, Vol. 25, pp. 1-65. human capital
Spagnoli, P. and Caetano, A. (2012), “Personality and organisational commitment”, Career Development
International, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 255-275.
Spearman, C. (1927), The Abilities of Man: Their Nature and Measurement, 1st Ed., MacMillan,
New York, Part II.
Sullivan, B.A. and Hansen, J.I.C. (2004), “Mapping associations between interests and personality:
toward a conceptual understanding of individual differences in vocational behavior”, Journal of
Counseling Psychology, Vol. 51 No. 3, pp. 287-298.
Teece, D.J. (2007), “Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable)
enterprise performance”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 28 No. 13, pp. 1319-1350.
Tett, R., Jackson, D.N. and Rothstein, M. (1991), “Personality measures as predictors of job performance:
a meta analytical review”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 44 No. 4, pp. 703-742.
Ulrich, D. and Smallwood, N. (2004), “Capitalizing on capabilities”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 82
Downloaded by 80.31.18.179 At 09:01 15 August 2018 (PT)

No. 6, pp. 119-127.

Wernerfelt, B. (1984), “A resource based view of the firm”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 5 No. 2,
pp. 171-180.
Wille, B. and De Fruyt, F. (2014), “Vocations as a source of identity: reciprocal relations between big
five personality traits and RIASEC characteristics over 15 years”, Journal of Applied Psychology,
Vol. 99 No. 2, pp. 262-281.
Wood, R. (1986), “Task complexity: definition of the construct”, Organizationl Behavior and Human
Decision, Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 60-82.
Wright, P.M., Coff, R. and Moliterno, T.P. (2014), “Strategic human capital: crossing the great divide”,
Journal of Management, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 353-370.
Wright, P.M., Dunford, B. and Snell, S.A. (2001), “Human resources and the resource based view of the
firm”, Journal of Management, Vol. 27 No. 6, pp. 701-721.
Wright, P.M. and McMahan, G.C. (2011), “Exploring human capital: putting human back into strategic
human resource management”, Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 93-104.
Zahra, S.A. and George, G. (2002), “Absorptive capacity: a review, reconceptualization and extensi
on”,
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 185-203.
Zehir, C., Acar, A.Z. and Tanriverdi, H. (2006), “Identifying organizational capabilities as predictors of
growth and business performance”, The Business Review, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 109-116.

Corresponding author
Alvaro Lopez-Cabrales can be contacted at: alopcab@upo.es

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

View publication stats