|Table of Contents|

[1] Ma Liang, Zhang Shumin, Zhong Weijun, et al. Coupling dimensions of human resource archetypesand organizational learning modes [J]. Journal of Southeast University (English Edition), 2021, (1): 104-113. [doi:10.3969/j.issn.1003-7985.2021.01.014]
Copy

Coupling dimensions of human resource archetypesand organizational learning modes()
Share:

Journal of Southeast University (English Edition)[ISSN:1003-7985/CN:32-1325/N]

Volumn:
Issue:
2021年第1期
Page:
104-113
Research Field:
Economy and Management
Publishing date:
2021-03-20

Info

Title:
Coupling dimensions of human resource archetypesand organizational learning modes
Author(s):
Ma Liang1 2 Zhang Shumin1 Zhong Weijun2
1School of Economics and Management, Lanzhou University of Technology, Lanzhou 730050, China
2School of Economics and Management, Southeast University, Nanjing 211189, China
Keywords:
human resource archetype organizational learning mode coupling dimensions ambidexterity manufacturing firm
PACS:
F270.7
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.1003-7985.2021.01.014
Abstract:
In order to provide channels of human resource management in promoting organizational learning, structural equation models were used for identifying the differences in the coupling dimensions between human resource archetypes and organizational learning modes based on sample data of 219 manufacturing firms with more than 100 employees. It is found that the coupling of the cooperative human resource archetype and exploitative learning is reflected in the mechanistic structure dimension; the coupling of the cooperative human resource archetype and exploratory learning is reflected in the two dimensions of the mechanistic structure and specialist cognition; the coupling of the entrepreneurial human resource archetype and exploitative learning is reflected in the two dimensions of generalist cognition and cognitive trust; the coupling of the entrepreneurial human resource archetype and exploratory learning is reflected in the dimension of generalist cognition. When manufacturing firms pursue exploitative learning, it is suggested that they pay attention to the structure dimension management of the collaborative human resource archetype and the cognition and affect dimensions management of the entrepreneurial human resource archetype. When manufacturing firms pursue exploratory learning, it is suggested pay attention to the structure and cognition dimensions management of the collaborative human resource archetype and the cognition dimension management of the entrepreneurial human resource archetype.

References:

[1] Huang Q H, He J. The core capability, function and strategy of Chinese manufacturing industry—comment on “Chinese manufacturing 2025”[J]. China Industrial Economics, 2015(6): 5-17.DOI:10.19581/j.cnki.ciejournal.2015.06.002. (in Chinese)
[2] Varshney D. Employees’ job involvement and satisfaction in a learning organization: A study in India’s manufacturing sector[J]. Global Business and Organizational Excellence, 2020, 39(2): 51-61.DOI:10.1002/joe.21983.
[3] March J G. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning[J]. Organization Science, 1991, 2(1): 71-87.DOI:10.1287/orsc.2.1.71.
[4] Kang J, Kim S J. Performance implications of incremental transition and discontinuous jump between exploration and exploitation[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2020, 41(6): 1083-1111.DOI:10.1002/smj.3119.
[5] Luger J, Raisch S, Schimmer M. Dynamic balancing of exploration and exploitation: The contingent benefits of ambidexterity[J]. Organization Science, 2018, 29(3): 449-470.DOI:10.1287/orsc.2017.1189.
[6] Kang S C, Morris S S, Snell S A. Relational archetypes, organizational learning, and value creation: Extending the human resource architecture[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2007, 32(1): 236-256.DOI:10.5465/amr.2007.23464060.
[7] Kang S C, Snell S A. Intellectual capital architectures and ambidextrous learning: A framework for human resource management[J]. Journal of Management Studies, 2009, 46(1): 65-92.DOI:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00776.x.
[8] Kang S C, Snell S A, Swart J. Options-based HRM, intellectual capital, and exploratory and exploitative learning in law firms’ practice groups[J]. Human Resource Management, 2012, 51(4): 461-485.DOI:10.1002/hrm.21484.
[9] Lepak D P, Snell S A. The human resource architecture: Toward a theory of human capital allocation and development[J]. Academy of Management Review, 1999, 24(1): 31-48.DOI:10.5465/amr.1999.1580439.
[10] Lepak D P, Snell S A. Examining the human resource architecture: The relationships among human capital, employment, and human resource configurations[J]. Journal of Management, 2002, 28(4): 517-543.DOI:10.1016/S0149-2063(02)00142-3.
[11] O’Reilly C A III, Tushman M L. Organizational ambidexterity: Past, present, and future[J]. Academy of Management Perspectives, 2013, 27(4): 324-338.DOI:10.5465/amp.2013.0025.
[12] Benitez J, Llorens J, Braojos J. How information technology influences opportunity exploration and exploitation firm’s capabilities[J]. Information & Management, 2018, 55(4): 508-523.DOI:10.1016/j.im.2018.03.001.
[13] Buller P F, McEvoy G M. Strategy, human resource management and performance: Sharpening line of sight[J]. Human Resource Management Review, 2012, 22(1): 43-56. DOI:10.1016/j.hrmr.2011.11.002.
[14] Davis J P, Aggarwal V A. Knowledge mobilization in the face of imitation: Microfoundations of knowledge aggregation and firm-level innovation[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2020, 41(11): 1983-2014. DOI:10.1002/smj.3187.
[15] Weber L, Bauman C W. The cognitive and behavioral impact of promotion and prevention contracts on trust in repeated exchanges[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2019, 62(2): 361-382.DOI:10.5465/amj.2016.1230.
[16] Chang S, Gong Y P, Way S A, et al. Flexibility-oriented HRM systems, absorptive capacity, and market responsiveness and firm innovativeness[J]. Journal of Management, 2013, 39(7): 1924-1951.DOI:10.1177/0149206312466145.
[17] Lopez-Cabrales A, Pérez-Lu�F1;o A, Cabrera R V. Knowledge as a mediator between HRM practices and innovative activity[J]. Human Resource Management, 2009, 48(4): 485-503.DOI.org/10.1002/hrm.20295.
[18] McAllister D J. Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 1995, 38(1): 24-59.DOI:10.2307/256727.
[19] Cai L, Yin M M.A study on the impact of the learning ability of innovative enterprises and their ways of resources integration on their performance[J]. Management World, 2009(10):1-10, 16.DOI:10.19744/j.cnki.11-1235/f.2009.10.002. (in Chinese)
[20] Podsakoff P M, MacKenzie S B, Lee J Y, et al. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies[J]. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 2003, 88(5): 879-903.DOI:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.
[21] Tang D D, Wen Z L. Statistical approaches for testing common method bias: Problems and suggestions[J]. Journal of Psychological Science, 2020, 43(1): 215-223.DOI:10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20200130. (in Chinese)
[22] Fang J, Wen Z L, Zhang M Q, et al. The analyses of multiple mediation effects based on structural equation modeling[J].Journal of Psychological Science, 2014, 37(3): 735-741. DOI:10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.2014.03.001. (in Chinese)
[23] Delery J E, Roumpi D. Strategic human resource management, human capital and competitive advantage: Is the field going in circles?[J]. Human Resource Management Journal, 2017, 27(1): 1-21.DOI:10.1111/1748-8583.12137.
[24] Zhang M, Li Qing, Yin S, et al. Changes in the level of conflict trigger conflict adaptation[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2021, 53(2): 128-138.Doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00128.(in Chinese)

Memo

Memo:
Biography: Ma Liang(1981—), male, doctor, associate professor, mal@lut.cn.
Foundation items: The National Natural Science Foundation of China(No.71764015).
Citation: Ma Liang, Zhang Shumin, Zhong Weijun. Coupling dimensions of human resource archetypes and organizational learning modes[J].Journal of Southeast University(English Edition), 2021, 37(1):104-113.DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1003-7985.2021.01.014.
Last Update: 2021-03-20