THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

2021, VOL. 32, NO. 2, 331–358

https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2019.1711442

Expanding the resource based view model of

strategic human resource management
Christopher J. Collins
ILR School, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
Strategic human resource management scholars have drawn Strategic human resource
on the resource-based view of the firm to argue that a high management; resource-
commitment human resource (HCHR) strategy leads to firm based view; employee-
based resources; dynamic
competitive advantage by creating greater firm-level managerial capabilities
employee-based resources that are rare and valuable. While
there is early empirical support for this mediated model,
prior studies have largely ignored two key aspects of the
RBV perspective. First, extant research has not effectively
explained why differences in employee-based resources per-
sist across firms that have adopted the same firm-level HR
strategy. Second, this body of research has largely ignored
contemporary thinking on the RBV which suggests that
employee-based resources only lead to competitive advan-
tage when they are a fit to other organization capabilities
that enable the firm to effectively orchestrate them for pro-
ductive use. I draw on the literature on dynamic managerial
capabilities to argue that CEO managerial cognition, social
capital, and human capital help to explain when pursuing
an HCHR strategy potentially leads to greater firm-level
employee-based resources and when firms are able to
effectively manage and deploy these employee-based
resources for competitive advantage.

Following work on the resource-based view (RBV), strategic human

resource management scholars have argued that HR strategies have the
potential to lead to firm competitive advantage by creating unique and
valuable employee-based resources (Collins & Smith, 2006; Lepak &
Snell, 1999). In line with this theorizing, there is strong empirical evi-
dence that HR strategies that focus HR policies on high-levels of invest-
ment in employees are significantly and positively related to higher levels
of firm performance through their effect on employee-based resources
(Jackson, Schuler, & Jiang, 2014; Jiang, Lepak, Hu, & Baer, 2012).
Theoretically, HR policies that underly an HR strategy work together to

CONTACT Christopher J. Collins cjc53@cornell.edu ILR School, Cornell University, 192 Ives Hall, Ithaca,
NY 14853-0001, USA.
ß 2020 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
332 C. J. COLLINS

create a unique climate that shapes and directs employees to develop

particular skills and abilities or direct their effort toward specific behav-
iors (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004); therefore, different high investment HR
strategies should lead to the emergence of different employee-based
resources (Kehoe & Collins, 2017; Lepak & Snell, 1999). Among the
alternative systems that employ a high investment philosophy, I focus on
a high commitment HR (HCHR) strategy because it has been identified
as effective for managing the core employees who are most responsible
for sustained competitive advantage (Collins & Smith, 2006; Lepak &
Snell, 1999).
HCHR, as a philosophical approach to managing the employer-
employee relationship, focuses on HR policies that invest in employee
skill and capability development, build attachment to the organization,
and enable employee involvement (Arthur, 1994; Lepak & Snell, 1999).
When these high investment policies are consistently implemented across
employees, the HCHR strategy results in greater collective employee
attachment and motivation to build human and social capital resources
that can provide competitive advantages for the benefit of the organiza-
tion (Kehoe & Collins, 2017). Indeed, recent research provides support
for the notion that an HCHR strategy leads to competitive advantage by
creating potentially rare and valuable human capital (e.g. Arthur, 1994;
Kehoe & Collins, 2017; Takeuchi, Lepak, Wang, & Takeuchi, 2007) and
social capital (e.g. Collins & Smith, 2006; Kehoe & Collins, 2017; Shaw,
Duffy, Johnson, & Lockhart, 2005). There are, however, several key issues
that researchers must address in order to better understand the potential
contingencies of the two halves of this mediation model (i.e. the relation-
ship between HCHR and employee-based resources and the relationship
between employee-based resources and firm performance).
First, recent research has been critical of the failure of scholars to
explain why differences in employee-based resources persist across firms
(Coff & Kryscynski, 2011; Foss, 2011; Lepak, Smith, & Taylor, 2007).
High investment philosophies, like the HCHR strategy, are easily adopted
by firms and the value of these strategies is widely written about, sug-
gesting that resource differences across firms that are driven by these
strategies should not persist for long (Wright, Dunford, & Snell, 2001);
therefore it is critical to identify contingency factors that may limit the
extent to which adoption of an HCHR strategy at the firm-level results
in the creation of greater firm human and social capital resources. While
the adoption of an HCHR strategy at the firm level is easily imitated, it
is more complicated to replicate the effective implementation of the poli-
cies underlying an HR strategy. Recent research suggests that there is a
great deal of variability in the extent to which HCHR policies are
 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 333

implemented across different departments within a firm because there is

a great deal of variability in the extent to which frontline leaders are cap-
able of and motivated to implement the policies associated with a firm’s
HCHR strategy (Fu, Flood, Rousseau, & Morris, 2018; Nishii, Lepak, &
Schneider, 2008). Thus, researchers need to identify key organizational
factors that increase the likelihood that frontline leaders across the firm
will consistently implement similar policies underlying a firm’s HR strat-
egy such that employees across the firm experience a similar employer-
employee relationship leading to the development of greater firm-level
human and social capital.
Second, scholars have argued that we can better understand resource-
based advantages by identifying the underlying organizational capabilities
that enable firms to mobilize, reconfigure, and deploy resources to create
competitive advantage (Teece, 2012; Lepak et al., 2007). Indeed, a key
tenet of the RBV perspective is the concept of organizational fit, which
suggests that firms are only likely to achieve sustained competitive
advantage when they have the capability to put potentially valuable
resources to productive use (Hitt, Ireland, Sirmon, & Trahms, 2011;
Sirmon, Hitt, & Ireland, 2007). The growing body of RBV-based strategic
HR research has typically failed to address the theoretically and practic-
ally important question of when the employee-based resources that
emerge from an HR strategy lead to higher firm performance (Collins &
Kehoe, 2017). Therefore, to understand how an firm-level HR strategy
leads to competitive advantage, researchers need to identify key organiza-
tional factors that affect when firms can effectively orchestrate the
employee-based resources that emerge from an HR strategy.
Based on the extant literature on dynamic managerial capabilities, I
argue that the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of a firm is one organiza-
tional resource that can help to explain (1) the conditions that may
impact frontline leaders’ ability and motivation to consistently implement
HCHR policies and (2) when the employee-based resources that emerge
from an HCHR system are more likely to lead to competitive advantage.
CEO dynamic managerial capabilities have been seen as key for under-
standing how firms are able to effectively acquire, develop, extend,
recombine, and deploy organizational resources for higher firm perform-
ance (Adner & Helfat, 2003; Helfat & Peteraf, 2015). CEO dynamic man-
agerial capabilities are supported by three broad underlying factors—
managerial cognition, social capital, and human capital—that enable
CEOs to effectively support on-going organization adaptation and the
creation of short-term competitive advantage (Augier & Teece, 2009;
Helfat & Martin, 2015). Specifically, managerial cognition, social capital,
and human capital enable CEOs to spot external market opportunities
334 C. J. COLLINS

that align with organizational resources, reconfigure and deploy these

resources to pursue new market opportunities, and motivate leaders and
employees to align resources to support strategic change efforts (Huy &
Zott, 2019; Teece, 2012).
I first look to add to the extant literature on strategic HR by drawing
on the dynamic managerial capabilities literature to explore how CEO
managerial cognition, social capital, and human capital create a context
that leads to more consistent implementation of a firm’s HCHR strategy
across managers. Specifically, I argue that these underpinnings of CEO
dynamic managerial capabilities create a shared understanding of the
firm’s HCHR strategy and motivation to implement underlying HCHR
policies across frontline leaders and that the consistent execution and
deployment of HCHR policies strengthen employee perceptions of a high
commitment employer-employee relationship which leads to greater col-
lective employee human and social capital. Second, I look to contribute
to the literature on strategic HR by drawing on the dynamic managerial
capabilities literature to explore why some firms can more effectively put
employee-based capabilities to work for competitive advantage. I chal-
lenge the current underlying assumption in the RBV approach to stra-
tegic HR research that creating potentially valuable employee-based
resources should always lead to competitive advantage and higher firm
performance; instead, CEO dynamic managerial capabilities are required
to unlock the potential of employee-based resource. In combination, I
argue that CEO dynamic managerial capabilities enhance our under-
standing of how and when an HCHR system can lead to competitive
advantage and higher firm performance through employee-based resour-
ces (Figure 1).

Figure 1. RBV-based model of strategic HR and CEO dynamic managerial capabilities.

 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 335

Theoretical background
Resource-based model of HCHR and competitive advantage
Strategic HR researchers have focused on examining systems of HR poli-
cies that represent alternative philosophical approaches to managing
employees (Jackson et al., 2014; Lepak, Marrone, & Takeuchi, 2004). The
HR policies within an overarching strategy overlap and reinforce each
other in manner intended to convey and reinforce a consistent signal to
employees about the employer-employee relationship and provide clear
guidance as to how the firm will look to develop and support employees
and what the firm expects from employees in return (Bowen & Ostroff,
2004; Lepak & Snell, 1999). To date, much of the research on strategic
HR has focused on HR policies (e.g. rigorous selection, high investment
in employee training, employee involvement in decision making) to cap-
ture an overall philosophical approach to the employer-employee rela-
tionship, because it would be extremely difficult to assess an HR strategy
at the practice level given the huge variety of potential practices that
could be used to enact a specific policy (Lepak et al., 2004). Importantly,
different HR strategies are composed of unique sets of mutually reinforc-
ing HR policies which work together to communicate different messages
regarding the employer-employee relationship, leading to the creation of
unique employee-based resources across different HR strategies (Collins
& Smith, 2006; Lepak & Snell, 1999).
HCHR is one strategic approach to managing employees that has been
found to lead to competitive advantage through how it shapes the
employer-employee relationship and resulting employee-based resources
(Chang, Jia, Takeuchi, & Cai, 2014; Collins & Smith, 2006). The HCHR
strategy emphasizes a long-term approach to the employer-employee
relationship, high investment in employees, and employee involvement
(Arthur, 1994; Lepak & Snell, 1999). Typical HR policies within an
HCHR system include attracting and selecting employees based on fit to
organizational culture and norms, high levels of investment in employee
training and development, a focus on internal labor markets to provide
employees career progression and growth, higher levels of pay tied to
organizational performance, and higher levels of employee autonomy
and involvement in decision making (Arthur, 1994; Chang et al., 2014).
In return for the high investment by the company, employees are more
likely to stay with the firm and invest in developing firm-specific resour-
ces (Kehoe & Collins, 2017; Lepak & Snell, 1999).
Following the RBV, scholars have argued that an HCHR strategy leads
to competitive advantage by creating an internal climate that encourages
employees to build and contribute human capital and social capital that
336 C. J. COLLINS

can support higher levels of innovation, customer service, and operational

efficiency which can underpin competitive advantage under different busi-
ness strategies (Gittell, Seidner, & Wimbush, 2010; Kehoe & Collins, 2017;
Takeuchi et al., 2007). In terms of employee human capital, prior research
has demonstrated that the relationship between an HCHR strategy and
firm performance is mediated by collective employee firm-specific experi-
ence (Batt, 2002; Kehoe & Collins, 2017), general human capital (Snell &
Dean, 1992; Kehoe & Collins, 2017), and managers’ perceptions of
employee human capital (Takeuchi et al., 2007). In terms of social capital,
prior studies have shown that an HCHR strategy is related to higher firm
performance by building internal network relationships for knowledge
sharing (Kehoe & Collins, 2017), and creating climates for collaboration
and trust between employees (Collins & Smith, 2006).
While there is growing evidence that human and social capital are valu-
able employee-based resources that help to explain how an HCHR system
drives higher firm performance, there are two key issues that prevent this
research from addressing all of the conditions underlying the RBV. First,
the research does not sufficiently address the condition of inimitability of
an HR strategy and the persistence in employee-based resource differences
across firms over time (Coff & Kryscynski, 2011; Lepak et al., 2007).
Importantly, the adoption of an overarching company HR strategy for
managing employees is easily imitated and adopted, but the consistent exe-
cution of these policies such that all employees experience them similarly
is complex and not easy to replicate (Nishii & Wright, 2008; Li, Wang,
Van Jaarsveld, Lee, & Ma, 2018). HR strategy inimitability is tied to the
fact that frontline leaders are responsible for implementing HR policies
(Fu et al., 2018; Li et al., 2018). Differences in frontline leaders’ under-
standing of and motivation to implement these policies creates inconsis-
tencies in how employees across a company experience a high
commitment employer-employee relationship, leading to inconsistent
development and retention of employee-based resources (Fu et al., 2018;
Nishii et al., 2008). In order for an HCHR strategy to lead to higher firm-
level employee-based resources, firms must be able to drive more consist-
ent implementation of HCHR policies by leaders across the firm (Fu et al.,
2018; Li et al., 2018). Thus, to understand why some firms develop greater
levels of employee human and social capital develop based on the choice
to pursue an HCHR strategy, researchers need to identify the organiza-
tional factors that increase the likelihood that leaders across the firm will
implement the policies that underly this HR strategy.
Second, the extant research examining the RBV-based model of an
HCHR system have failed to examine the organizational fit of the
employee-based resources that develop based on the consistent
 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 337

implementation of HR policies despite consistent calls in the strategy lit-

erature to better understand when firms are able to put potentially valu-
able resources to work for competitive advantage (Barney, Ketchen, &
Wright, 2011; Foss, 2011). Firms are more likely to achieve competitive
advantage when they have capabilities that enable them to effectively
orchestrate employee-based resources (Hitt et al., 2011; Sirmon et al.,
2007) and where the rents from these resources accrue to the firm rather
than the individual employees (Coff, 1997). Importantly, the effective
implementation of HCHR and the emergence of potentially valuable and
rare employee-based resources is not sufficient to explain how HR can
lead to competitive advantage; instead, additional research is needed to
explore the organizational capabilities that explain when the employee-
based resources that emerge from an HCHR strategy are more likely to
be put to productive use for competitive advantage.

Dynamic managerial capabilities

The dynamic managerial capabilities literature offers a theoretical per-
spective that helps to address both of these gaps in the RBV-based
approach strategic HR. The literature on dynamic managerial capabilities
has emerged to examine how a wide array of attributes and characteris-
tics of senior leaders impact the resource advantages of organizations
(Augier & Teece, 2009; Helfat & Martin, 2015). Dynamic managerial
capabilities are the processes through which organizational leaders effect-
ively acquire, develop, extend, recombine, and deploy organizational
resources to drive strategic change or overcome changes in the external
marketplace (Adner & Helfat, 2003; Helfat & Peteraf, 2015). CEOs have
been seen as especially critical for creating, reconfiguring, and deploying
organizational resources because of their position and role which influen-
ces the behavior of other leaders in the firm and puts them in control of
decisions regarding resource allocation and strategic direction (Hambrick
& Mason, 1984; Teece, 2012). Specifically, CEO dynamic managerial
capabilities enable companies to effectively spot external market opportu-
nities that align with organizational resources, reconfigure and deploy
these resources to pursue market opportunities, and motivate employees
to align resources to support strategic change efforts (Helfat & Martin,
2015; Teece, 2012).
Because the underlying processes are difficult, if not impossible, to
measure in a research setting, dynamic managerial capabilities scholars
have focused on assessing the personal factors and characteristics that
underpin these processes (Helfat & Martin, 2015; Huy & Zott, 2019).
Specifically, extant research has focused on managerial cognition, social
338 C. J. COLLINS

capital, and human capital as the underpinnings of dynamic managerial

capabilities. Managerial cognition has been defined as the beliefs, mental
models, cognitive capabilities, and emotions that support leaders’ ability
to understand complex situations, identify choices in resource orchestra-
tion and reconfiguration, and take action in deploying resources to pur-
sue opportunities (Helfat & Peteraf, 2015; Garbuio, King, & Lovallo,
2011). Managerial social capital encompasses the formal and informal
relationships of leaders that enable them to gather diverse information
about external opportunities, understand internal resources and capabil-
ities, and influence others within and outside of the firm to support
change efforts or new strategic directions (Helfat & Martin, 2015;
Eisenhart & Martin, 2000). Managerial human capital includes the firm-
specific and general knowledge, skills, and abilities developed through
experiences and education that enable leaders to spot market threats and
opportunities, deeply understand organizational resource advantages, and
understand how to recombine existing resources in new ways (Helfat &
Martin, 2015).
I focus on the role of CEOs in helping to drive the enaction of an
HCHR strategy and effective utilization of employee-based resources for
several reasons. First, as the primary driver of organizational culture, the
behaviors exhibited by CEOs play a significant role in setting a clear
tone regarding cultural norms and providing visible signals of the goals,
vison, and expectations of the organization to lower level leaders (Bass,
1985; Waldman & Yammarino, 1999). Second, the decisions and actions
of CEOs carry more weight than other leaders in terms of impacting
organizational structure, responding to competitive pressures, and clarify-
ing how employees in the firm should be managed (Calori, Johnson, &
Sarnin, 1994). Third, as the top decision maker, other leaders within the
organization are likely to look to their example when interpreting how to
implement company strategies (Hambrick & Mason, 1984). Finally, given
their positional power, CEOs are in the best position to reconfigure and
deploy organizational resources to pursue new growth opportunities or
to respond to changes in the external environment (Rosenbloom, 2000;
Teece, 2012).

CEO dynamic managerial capabilities and firm employee-based resources

To understand how CEO dynamic capabilities affect the extent to which
a firm-wide HR strategy leads to greater employee-based resources, it is
critical to first understand how employee-based resources develop at the
firm level. When an organization creates a climate where employees
develop similar perceptions of the employer-employee relationship and
 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 339

expectations for their actions and behaviors, then employees collectively

respond in ways that lead to the emergence of employee outcomes at a
higher unit of analysis (Nishii & Wright, 2008; Ployhart & Moliterno,
2011). Importantly, the underlying policies supporting an HR strategy
work together to create a work climate which supports a common
experience and response across a larger group of employees (Bowen &
Ostroff, 2004). Thus, the development of greater firm-level employee-
based resources is dependent on the extent to which employees across
the firm consistently experience HCHR policies (Li et al., 2018; Nishii
et al., 2008).
While the choice in an HR strategy at the top of an organization pro-
vides one signal of the expected employer-employee relationship,
employees are more like to respond to their perceptions of how they
believe frontline leaders have enacted these policies (Fu et al., 2018;
Weller, Sub, Evanschitzky, & Von Wangenheim, 2019). Because the poli-
cies of the firm-level HR strategy may not be consistently implemented
by frontline leaders, employees across the firm may develop different
perceptions of how they are being managed reducing the likelihood that
employees across the firm will respond similarly and limiting the extent
to which firm-level employee-based resources will develop (Fu et al.,
2018; Nishii et al., 2008). Even when there is a clear firm-wide HR strat-
egy in place, a great deal of variability may exist in how frontline manag-
ers implement specific policies based on their own beliefs and potential
mis-interpretations of the firm-level strategy or their understanding of
underlying HR policies (Jiang, Takeuchi, & Lepak, 2013; Nishii et al.,
2008). Despite the increasing volume of research examining the role of
frontline leaders in creating shared perceptions of the employer-
employee relationship across employees, prior research has failed to
address the organizational factors that increase the likelihood that front-
line leaders across the firm will implement HCHR policies.
To address the above gap, I argue that CEO’s play an essential role in
creating consistent perceptions of HR across employees within a firm by
creating more consistency in how frontline leaders enact specific HR pol-
icies that support the firm’s HCHR strategy such that employees across
the firms develop similar perceptions of the employer-employee relation-
ship. CEOs are particularly important for driving consistent behaviors
and enaction of strategy by frontline leaders because their behaviors and
actions set a clear tone for other leaders in terms of how to behave as a
leader and clarifies the organizational culture for how to treat and man-
age employees (Bass, 1985; Wang, Tsui, & Xin, 2011). Further, their
actions and attributes carry more weight than other leaders in terms of
shaping company policies and communicating strategic expectations as
340 C. J. COLLINS

other leaders look to them for examples and to understand what is really
important to the organization (Calori et al., 1994; Hambrick & Mason,
1984). I argue that the underpinnings of CEO dynamic managerial capa-
bilities provide a unique perspective for understanding how an array of
CEO attributes and behaviors reinforce a more consistent implementa-
tion of an HCHR strategy across frontline managers. Managerial cogni-
tion, social capital, and human capital are potentially correlated with one
another (Helfat & Martin, 2015), but consistent with the literature on
dynamic managerial capabilities, I examine at each of the three separately
to understand how each may contribute to increasing the extent to which
employees perceive and respond to a firm’s HCHR strategy.

CEO managerial cognition

CEO managerial cognition has been defined in the strategy literature as
the knowledge structures, mental models, attention and reasoning, and
emotional regulation that play a role in how these leaders understand
the world around them (Helfat & Peteraf, 2015; Walsh, 1995). These
forms of automatic or deliberate mental processing enable CEOs to reli-
ably take in and evaluate new information, develop responses, and per-
form the key activities of their role under different conditions (Helfat &
Peteraf, 2015). Further, managerial cognitions form the building blocks
that shape how CEOs behave and act and how they are seen by others
(Helfat & Martin, 2015; Huy & Zott, 2019). Importantly, I argue that
aspects of CEO managerial cognition can shape CEOs’ approaches and
behaviors in ways that may impact the likelihood that frontline leaders
more consistently implement the policies of an HCHR strategy leading
to the development of firm employee-based resources.
One key mental model or knowledge structure is their understanding
of employees as resources and the importance of employees for strategy
execution and firm success (Calori et al., 1994; Chadwick, Super, &
Kwon, 2015). CEOs’ emphasis on employees as a source of competitive
advantage can affect the extent to which lower level managers enact
practices and behaviors consistent with HCHR when managing employ-
ees. Upper-Echelon’s Theory suggests that CEOs influence strategy exe-
cution by other leaders through the clear articulation and consistent
messaging of firm strategy (Hambrick & Mason, 1984). Indeed, lower
level managers are more likely to carry out behaviors and actions
required of a particular HR strategy when they receive consistent mes-
saging and support for the strategy from CEOs (Fenton-O’Creevy, 2001,
Fu et al., 2018). CEO’s who believe that employees are a strategic asset
are likely to provide clear signals to lower level managers that employees
are valuable and should be managed as strategic assets in ways consistent
 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 341

with an HCHR strategy. For example, Chadwick et al. (2015) found that
middle managers are more likely to implement commitment HR policies
when the CEO places a high emphasis on strategic human resource man-
agement. Thus, when frontline leaders receive strong signals about the
importance of HCHR and communications about HCHR policies from
the CEO, they will be more likely to implement HCHR practices consist-
ently across the firm, leading to more employees perceiving a high com-
mitment employer-employee relationship resulting in greater firm-level
employee human and social capital.
A second key aspect of managerial cognition is the CEO’s mental
model for leadership (Helfat & Martin, 2015). Leaders’ behaviors provide
employees strong contextual cues on the employer-employee relationship,
influencing employees’ understanding of what to expect from the organ-
ization and what is expected of them in return (Rousseau, 1995). The
behaviors and actions of the CEO provide strong signals that help front-
line leaders interpret and understand the strategy (Hambrick & Mason,
1984) and the behaviors and actions expected from other organizational
leaders (Sirmon et al., 2007; Wang et al., 2011). Further, because both
HR strategy and CEO leadership behaviors provide signals and salient
cues as to expected behaviors, work norms, and cultural expectations, the
two aspects of the overall employee management system need to work
synergistically in order to enhance the creation of desired employee-
based resources (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004; Chuang, Jackson, &
Jiang, 2016).
Transformational leadership, one of the most frequently studied forms
of leadership behaviors (Colbert, Kristof-Brown, Bradley, & Barrick,
2008), is comprised of four primary behaviors—inspirational motivation,
intellectual stimulation, idealized influence, and individual consideration
(Bass, 1985). CEO transformational leadership behaviors signal the intent
of the organization to create a high commitment employer-employee
relationship with employees (Colbert et al., 2008; McClean & Collins,
2019); thus, CEO transformation leadership behaviors reinforce the mes-
sages and signals from the company’s HCHR strategy to increase the
likelihood that front line managers implement HCHR policies when
managing employees. By modeling transformational leadership behaviors,
CEO reinforce the messages of an HCHR strategy to support an environ-
ment where other leaders are more aware of and motivated to implement
policies consistent with an HCHR strategy (McClean & Collins, 2019).
For example, idealized influence and individual consideration behaviors
demonstrate a CEO’s commitment to building employee capabilities and
send a strong signal to other managers within the firm that similar
behaviors are expected of them (Conger & Kanungo, 1998).
342 C. J. COLLINS

In addition, CEO transformational leadership behaviors will increase

frontline managers awareness of the HCHR strategy and reinforce the
importance of creating a high commitment employer-employee relationship.
For example, through inspirational motivation, transformational CEOs com-
municate higher level organizational goals and objectives to frontline leaders
(Bass, 1985; Colbert et al., 2008), increasing the likelihood that frontline
leaders and HR managers understand the HR strategy of the organization.
CEO transformational leadership demonstrates a commitment to employee
well-being, growth, and value in a way that reinforces the signals of the
HCHR strategy (Weller et al., 2019) and should increase the likelihood that
frontline leaders and HR managers across the firm enact practices consist-
ent with the system. Transformational CEOs also have more high-quality
exchanges with other leaders in which they more clearly articulate the prin-
ciples underlying their intended HR strategy, enhancing the extent to which
frontline managers will be able to identify and enact specific practices that
support an HCHR strategy. Overall, by increasing the likelihood that more
frontline leaders consistently and effectively implement high-commitment
HR practices, CEO transformational leadership behaviors create a context
where more employees will perceive and experience the intended HCHR
strategy leading to the development of greater collective employee human
and social capital.
Proposition 1: CEO managerial cognition will increase the extent to which
frontline leaders implement policies and practices supporting an intended
company HCHR strategy resulting in higher firm-level human and social capital.

CEO managerial social capital

CEO managerial social capital is based on the formal and informal rela-
tionships that these leaders have with other individuals both inside and
outside the organization that can be drawn on for goodwill and influence
(Adler & Kwon, 2002; Smith, Collins, & Clark, 2005). Networks of rela-
tionships enable CEOs to influence behaviors, communicate strategic dir-
ection and intent, and gather information on the extent to which
frontline leaders understand and are enacting intended strategy (Adner
& Helfat, 2003; Helfat & Martin, 2015). Following this literature, I argue
that there are different CEO social network attributes that enhance the
likelihood frontline leaders will consistently implement HCHR policies
such that more employees perceive the existence of a high commitment
employer-employee relationship leading to the development of firm-level
human and social capital.
First, large and broad internal network ties enhance the ability of
CEOs to widely communicate strategic intent (Adler & Kwon, 2002;
 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 343

Burt, 1992). CEOs with large networks who are connected to a wide
range of leaders across the firm will be better able to widely communi-
cate the value and intentions of an HCHR strategy. Specifically, CEOs
with larger networks will have greater direct access to frontline leaders
(Adler & Kwon, 2002), enabling these CEOs to communicate the intent
and value of an HCHR strategy directly with those leaders responsible
for enacting underlying policies. Large and broad network connections
will enable CEOs to reinforce the importance of the HR strategy and
effectively communicate specific and detailed information about intended
HR policies across a wide of range leaders which should lead to more
consistent implementation and execution of the intended HCHR strategy
across the firm (Chadwick et al., 2015). Thus, CEO with large and broad
internal networks directly enhance the likelihood that frontline leaders
adopt and implement HCHR policies to manage their direct reports.
Second, the strength of a CEO’s ties to other leaders in the firm affects
the extent to which these other leaders implement the policies underlying
an HCHR system. Strong ties have been defined as network relationships
that are characterized by high levels of connection, trust, and reciprocity
(Adler & Kwon, 2002; Burt, 1992). Strong ties enhance the ability of
CEOs to influence the behaviors of others and to draw on these relation-
ships to gather information and knowledge (Adler & Kwon, 2002; Smith
et al., 2005). Thus, CEOs with strong ties to frontline leaders can draw
on these relationships to influence these leaders to implement the
intended HR strategy, increasing the likelihood that the employees man-
aged by these leaders will experience a high commitment employer-
employee relationship. Because of the trust inherent in strong ties, CEOs
can also collect accurate information about the extent to which other
leaders understand and are enacting practices and actions tied to an
organizational strategy (Adler & Kwon, 2002). The combination of trust
and influence inherent in strong ties enables CEOs to gather information
on the extent to which an HCHR strategy is being implemented and pro-
vide corrective advice to their contacts when the HCHR strategy is not
being effectively implemented. Taken collectively, these arguments sug-
gest that large and broad CEO networks characterized by strong ties
increase the extent to which a company’s HCHR strategy is consistently
implemented by frontline leaders increasing the extent to which more
employees perceive the existence of a high commitment employer-
employee relationship and respond by developing firm-specific human
and social capital.
Proposition 2: CEO managerial social capital will increase the extent to which
frontline leaders implement policies and practices supporting an intended
company HCHR strategy resulting in higher firm-level human and social capital.
344 C. J. COLLINS

CEO managerial human capital

CEO managerial human capital has been conceptualized as the combined
skills and knowledge developed through experiences and education
(Helfat & Martin, 2015). Following existing research, I argue that CEO
managerial human capital affects the extent to which frontline leaders
across the organization consistently implement HR policies that reflect a
firm-wide HCHR strategy. First, the level of experience and education of
the CEO can provide signals regarding the extent to which the firm val-
ues these factors in its employee population and for organizational per-
formance, positively impacting the extent to which other leaders
implement HCHR policies across the firm. For example, in companies
that have promoted a CEO with high levels of prior experience in the
company, frontline leaders receive a strong confirmation of the underly-
ing value of internal labor markets and career growth signaled by an
HCHR strategy, increasing the extent to which they apply similar HCHR
policies with their own direct reports. Further, longer organizational ten-
ure, internal succession, and higher levels of education for the CEO pro-
vide clear signals to frontline managers that reinforce the importance of
practices such as investments in employee development and learning and
promoting their own talent that are part of the HCHR strategy. In fact,
these CEO attributes may be the most visible signals to frontline manag-
ers that the company is serious about high investment in employees,
influencing them to more consistently execute high investment
HR policies.
Additionally, longer tenured CEOs tend to have more stability in stra-
tegic directions and choices on supporting internal structures, whereas
CEOs who are relatively new to their role often look to pursue new ini-
tiatives, structures, and actions to shake up the organization or demon-
strate their capability for leadership (Luo, Kanuri, & Andrews, 2014; Wu,
Levitas, & Priem, 2005). In the context of enacting an HR strategy, CEOs
with less tenure are likely to attempt to change the HR strategy and send
new signals about what is valued regarding the employer-employee rela-
tionship which is likely to confuse frontline managers as to what is
expected of them (Baron, Hannan, & Burton, 1999). In contrast, the lon-
ger a CEO has been in place, the more likely they are to have decided
on a path regarding strategy resulting in consistent messaging and signal-
ing as to the firm’s strategic direction and underlying required actions
(Baron et al., 1999). Consistent strategic intention, decision-making, and
behaviors by CEOs reinforce the value and intention of a company’s
HCHR strategy leading to more consistent implementation of HCHR
policies across leaders increasing the extent to which employees will per-
ceive the presence of a high commitment employer-employee
 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 345

relationship and the development of greater firm-level employee human

and social capital.
Proposition 3: CEO managerial human capital will increase the extent to which
frontline leaders implement policies and practices supporting an intended
company HCHR strategy resulting in higher firm-level human and social capital.

CEO dynamic managerial capabilities and utilization of employee-

based resources
While it is important to understand the conditions that increase the like-
lihood that a firm’s HR strategy leads to the development of potentially
valuable employee-based resources, it is equally important to understand
the conditions that enhance the ability of firms to put employee-based
resources to productive use for competitive advantage (Greer, Lusch, &
Hitt, 2017; Hitt et al., 2011). From this perspective, attracting, develop-
ing, and retaining valuable employee-based resources is necessary, but
insufficient, for creating competitive advantage; firms must also be able
to coordinate and deploy these resources effectively in order to achieve
competitive advantage (Eisenhart & Martin, 2000; Kor & Mahoney,
2005). Thus, to fully understand how an HCHR strategy can lead to
organizational competitive advantage, scholars must also identify key
organizational capabilities that enable effective orchestration of the
employee-based resources that emerge from an HR system. Examining
resource orchestration is particularly important in the context of
employee-based resources because these resources are tied to individual
employees and, thus, are more complex for organizations to coordinate
and deploy in a manner that leads to competitive advantage (Coff, 1997;
Hitt et al., 2011).
Given their positional power, overall firm strategic responsibilities, and
key role in strategic decision making, CEOs are the best positioned
organizational leaders to effectively orchestrate and deploy collective
employee-based resources for firm competitive advantage (Greer et al.,
2017; Hitt et al., 2011). CEOs play a key role in identifying how to effect-
ively manage, bundle, and deploy resources in order to ensure firms can
put these resources to productive use and sustain resource advantages
over a period of time (Eisenhart & Martin, 2000; Kor & Mahoney, 2005).
Further, CEOs play a critical role in spotting external opportunities and
reconfiguring resources to create competitive advantages for growth and
survival (Adner & Helfat, 2003). They are also critical for identifying
resource complementarities and new resource combinations to that lead
to new organizational growth opportunities (Augier & Teece, 2009;
Eisenhart & Martin, 2000). Finally, CEOs directly impact the extent to
346 C. J. COLLINS

which firms can put employee-based resources to productive use by

effectively communicating change efforts and building leader and
employee commitment to direct resources in support of the change
(Eisenhart & Martin, 2000).

CEO managerial cognition

As noted above, CEO managerial cognition has been defined in the strat-
egy literature as the knowledge structures, mental models, attention and
reasoning, and emotions that play a role in how these leaders understand
the world around them (Helfat & Peteraf, 2015; Walsh, 1995). In the
context of resource orchestration, managerial cognition enables CEOs to
recognize and sense opportunities, reflect and problem solve to identify
ways to seize market opportunities, and effectively communicate with
and influence leaders and employees in order to recombine resources to
carry out new strategies or overcome resistance to change (Eisenhart &
Martin, 2000; Helfat & Peteraf, 2015). Indeed, prior research suggests
that CEO managerial cognition may be critical for the effective orches-
tration of employee-based resources.
First, CEOs’ knowledge structures impact the extent to which they can
effectively identify opportunities or understand how existing resources
can be applied to overcome disruptions or pursue growth (Helfat &
Martin, 2015). For example, CEO resource schemas—how senior leaders
understand resources and their potential application—impact the ability
of firms to understand how resources could be applied in new ways to
overcome disruption in their business environment (Danneels, 2011). In
the context of employee-based resources, CEOs likely face a large chal-
lenge in developing a comprehensive and representative schema of their
firms’ human and social capital resources because these employee-based
resources are embedded within individual employees and are widely dis-
persed across the organization making them hard to track (Coff, 1997;
Coff & Kryscynski, 2011). Importantly, CEOs who have developed a
more complete schema of existing employee-based resources will be bet-
ter able to understand how to deploy these resources more effectively or
in new ways to create new sources of competitive advantage and pursue
new growth opportunities (Greer et al., 2017; Hitt et al., 2011).
Second, leadership behaviors impact the ability of CEOs to effectively
redeploy employee-based resources during times of change or to pursue
new growth opportunities (Wang, Holmes, Oh, & Zhu, 2016). Further,
there is evidence that transformational CEOs impact the ability of the
firm to deploy, reconfigure, and motivate employees to apply their
human and social capital towards new strategic directions or overcome
external marketplace disruptions. For example, Huy and Zott (2019)
 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 347

found evidence that, through open dialogue with employees and showing
support and consideration for employees, leaders can effectively mobilize
the human and social capital of employees. Importantly, these behaviors
match with two of the dimensions of transformational leadership (i.e.
vision setting and individualized concern). In addition, CEO vision set-
ting and idealized influence behaviors help to create a line of site for
both frontline leaders and employees so that they better understand
organizational strategic direction and how their behaviors and actions
should align to help support a change in strategic direction (Colbert
et al., 2008). Thus, by clearly communicating their vision and goals,
CEOs can help leaders and employees to apply their human and social
capital in ways that align with new tasks or activities required to pursue
new directions.
In addition, CEO’s intellectual stimulation and consideration behaviors
toward other leaders and employees help to create safe environments for
employees to experiment with new ideas and approaches and thereby
uncover novel ways of attaining organizational goals (Colbert et al.,
2008). When CEOs create an environment of psychological safety by
exhibiting intellectual stimulation and consideration behaviors, leaders
and employees will be more willing to contribute their knowledge and
insights and become more creatively engaged in work (Edmondson,
1999). Thus, CEOs who exhibit intellectual stimulation and consideration
behaviors create an environment where leaders and employees are more
aware of changes in strategy, more motivated to apply their human and
social capital to support this change, and more motivated to apply their
human and social capital to pursue new ideas that could support organ-
izational growth.
Proposition 4: CEOs’ managerial cognition affects the ability of firms to effectively
orchestrate employee-based resources for competitive advantage.

CEO managerial social capital

As noted above, CEO managerial social capital has been defined as the
goodwill and influence derived from the leader’s internal and external
relationships (Adler & Kwon, 2002). CEO managerial social capital is
important for enabling them to spot and pursue external market oppor-
tunities, understand current organizational resources and how they can
be deployed to pursue new opportunities, and communicate and influ-
ence employees in order to direct resources against change initiatives
(Helfat & Martin, 2015). Further, there is some limited initial evidence
to support the notion that different aspects of CEO’s social capital net-
works enable CEOs to more effectively deploy resources for competitive
348 C. J. COLLINS

advantage. CEO social capital may be particularly critical for understand-

ing why some firms are more capable of identifying and effectively
deploying employee human and social capital for competitive advantage
and new growth.
CEO external networks that are large, broad, and characterized by
strong ties can help to support effective resource utilization. For example,
CEOs with more network ties drawn from a broader array of external
relationships can access diverse and unique knowledge bases that help to
provide insights into new market opportunities or potential oncoming
challenges (Helfat & Martin, 2015; McDonald & Westphal, 2003).
Similarly, strong ties to a range of external experts create trust and
motivation for those contacts to share unique information or knowledge
that enhances the ability of CEOs to spot and understand the resource
requirements of new opportunities (Helfat & Martin, 2015). Thus, ties to
other leaders and actors outside of the firm give CEOs greater capability
to identify new entrepreneurial opportunities against which they can
deploy existing employee-based resources for growth and create new
forms of competitive advantage in the marketplace.
CEO internal relationships and network ties are also critical for sup-
porting the effective reconfiguration, mobilization, and deployment of
employee-based resources to support competitive advantage. For
example, large and broad internal network ties enhance the ability of
CEOs to widely communicate information, increasing the likelihood that
leaders across the organization are aware of strategic changes and realign
the human and social capital in their department against this change
(Helfat & Martin, 2015). Further, CEO strong ties to other leaders
enhance the level of trust and willingness of these leaders to share infor-
mation with the CEO (Adler & Kwon, 2002), enabling CEOs to under-
stand, shape, and apply employee-based resources. Specifically, CEOs
with strong internal ties will have great ability to gather information and
develop a deeper understanding of where employee-based resources exist
within the organization (Helfat & Martin, 2015). Further, based on the
trust and reciprocity inherent in strong ties, leaders and employees are
more willing to redirect their own human and social capital to support
new directions communicated by the CEO. Thus, CEOs with large and
broad internal networks characterized by strong ties have a greater
understanding of the location and potential value of employee-based
resources and more effectively communicate strategic directions to
motivate other leaders and employees to apply their human and social
capital to pursue new opportunities.
Proposition 5: CEOs’ managerial social capital affects the ability of firms to
effectively orchestrate employee-based resources for competitive advantage.
 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 349

CEO managerial human capital

CEO managerial human capital enhances the ability of firms to more effect-
ively utilize physical, financial, and human resources for competitive advan-
tage (Greer et al., 2017; Sirmon et al., 2007). Importantly, CEOs’ human
capital affects their ability to spot market trends and opportunities in the
marketplace and deploy organizational resources to take advantage of these
opportunities (Hitt et al., 2011; Greer et al., 2017). In addition, CEOs with
higher levels of firm-specific human capital are better able to identify, locate
and understand existing employee-based resources (Sirmon et al., 2007) and
effectively redeploy or reconfigure these resources to create new organiza-
tional capabilities for growth (Eisenhart & Martin, 2000; Helfat & Peteraf,
2015). Prior research has linked multiple measures of CEO managerial
human capital to resource orchestration.
First, greater firm-specific experience increases tacit knowledge of and
understanding of existing resources, enabling CEOs to more effectively
organize and recombine resources for competitive advantage (Kor &
Mahoney, 2005; Luo et al., 2014). Higher levels of firm-specific work
experience enable CEOs to develop deeper insights on market patterns
and identify how to leverage organizational resources to pursue opportu-
nities or mitigate threats (Carpenter, Geletkanycz, & Sander, 2004; Luo
et al., 2014). Firm-specific experience may be particularly important with
respect to employee-based resources because these resources are captured
in the minds and relationships of employees, making them more com-
plex to understand and manage (Coff, 1997). Greater knowledge of
where unique employee human and social capital sits within the firm
provides CEOs with insights on where to leverage knowledge and under-
standing to support a growth initiative or where to connect employees
with unique knowledge to foster novel combinations of knowledge to
drive innovation (Luo et al., 2014; Smith et al., 2005). Greater firm-
specific experience also provides CEOs with the insights to more effect-
ively deploy and coordinate employee’s social capital against current or
new strategic directions (Hitt et al., 2011).
Second, CEOs’ industry-specific experience is critical for resource
orchestration (Helfat & Martin, 2015). Greater industry-specific experi-
ence increases the ability of CEOs to sense opportunities and threats in
the external environment and restructure organizational resources in
response (Luo et al., 2014). CEOs with greater industry-specific experi-
ence are also more likely to understand how to reconfigure existing
employee-based resources to respond to market opportunities that they
have spotted in the external environment. Specifically, accumulated
industry experience gives CEOs insights on past changes and competitor
responses in the marketplace enabling them to identify and develop
350 C. J. COLLINS

more effective resource reconfigurations to overcome market challenges

(Cohen & Levinthal, 1990; Carpenter et al., 2004).
Finally, CEOs’ formal education has been linked to their ability to
effectively identify and deploy resources. For example, education pro-
vides a unique set of knowledge and insights that enhance executives’
abilities to evaluate organizational resources and understand their useful-
ness for pursuing market opportunities (Hitt et al., 2011). In particular,
formal education enhances leaders’ absorptive capacity for integrating
new internal and external experiences to which they are exposed (Cohen
& Levinthal, 1990) enabling them to understand the potential of resour-
ces and how they may fit together in new ways for competitive advan-
tage (Carpenter et al., 2004). Education also enhances CEO’s learning
orientation (Wang et al., 2016) enabling leaders to potentially see existing
employee-based resources in new ways or identify new market opportu-
nities that are a fit to the existing human and social capital resources of
the organization (Helfat & Martin, 2015).
Proposition 6: CEOs’ managerial human capital affects the ability of firms to
effectively orchestrate employee-based resources for competitive advantage.

Discussion
In this paper, I contributed to the literature on the RBV-based model of
strategic HR by incorporating recent research to address to two key
shortcomings in the extant strategic HR literature. As noted above, stra-
tegic HR research has typically failed to address (1) why there are per-
sistent employee-based resource differences across firms that adopt the
same HR strategy and (2) why some firms are better able to leverage
employee-based resources for competitive advantages. I argued that
CEOs play a unique and critical role in explaining firm differences in
organizational resource creation and orchestration. Specifically, I drew
on the extant literature on dynamic managerial capabilities to help add
to our understanding of (1) when an intended HCHR strategy is more
likely to lead to greater firm-level employee human and social capital
and (2) when organizations are more likely to put these employee-based
resources to productive use for competitive advantage.
First, I argued that the underpinnings of CEO dynamic managerial
capabilities—managerial cognition, social capital, and human capital—
play a critical role in increasing the likelihood that employees across the
firm consistently experience and perceive an intended HCHR strategy
and the development of greater firm-level human and social capital.
CEO managerial cognition, social capital, and human capital send signals
directly to frontline leaders about the intended firm HCHR strategy and
 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 351

motivates these leaders to implement HR policies consistent with this

strategy. Further, these underpinnings of CEO dynamic managerial capa-
bilities work to signal to frontline leaders the importance of employee
resources and reinforce the signals and messages of a firm-level HCHR
strategy. By reinforcing and supporting the HCHR strategy, CEO man-
agerial cognition, social capital, and human capital will increase the con-
sistency with which frontline leaders implement HCHR policies across
employees in the organization, leading to more employees developing
perceptions of the presence of a HCHR system and high-commitment
employer-employee relationships leading to the development of greater
firm-level employee human and social capital. Thus, this paper contrib-
utes to the literature on strategic HR by articulating how one key organ-
izational resource (CEO dynamic managerial capabilities) enhance the
extent to which adoption of a firm-wide HCHR strategy leads to greater
firm-level employee human and social capital.
Second, I drew on the extant literature on dynamic managerial capa-
bilities to explicate how CEO managerial cognition, social capital, and
human capital help us to understand when the employee-based resources
that emerge from an HCHR system are more likely to be effectively put
to use to create competitive advantage. Specifically, I argued that CEO
managerial cognition, social capital, and human capital enable organiza-
tions to more effectively spot and identify the location and nature of
employee-based resources and then to pursue new growth opportunities
that are a fit for the firm-level employee human and social capital that
emerge from an HCHR system. Further, these underpinnings of CEO
dynamic managerial capabilities enable firms to motivate leaders and
employees to apply human and social capital to support organizational
strategic objectives and growth opportunities. Thus, this paper adds to
the literature on strategic HR by outlining how one key organizational
resource enhances the orchestration of employee-based resources for
competitive advantage.

Future research implications

The dynamic managerial capability perspective is valuable for helping to
explicate how and when an HCHR system may lead to competitive
advantage, and this expanded RBV-based model of strategic HR opens
up multiple directions for future research that can enhance our under-
standing of the relationships between HR strategies and competitive
advantage. First, although I draw on extant theoretical and empirical lit-
eratures, I found little to no empirical research that has directly tested
the propositions in this paper. For example, new empirical work should
352 C. J. COLLINS

examine the predicted interactions between HCHR strategy and CEO

dynamic managerial capabilities and the development of greater firm-
level employee human and social capital. Empirical work on the role of
CEOs in orchestrating employee-based resources can also add to the
extant strategy literatures on dynamic managerial capabilities and
resource orchestration because, while there is some work examining the
role of CEOs in orchestrating physical and financial resources, there is
little to no work that has empirically examined when firms can orches-
trate employee-based resources for competitive advantage.
Second, this expanded RBV-based model of strategic HR should help
to inform and drive additional research on the role of leaders in HR
strategy execution and the orchestration of the employee-based resources
that emerge from the effective implementation of an HR strategy. The
dynamic managerial capabilities framework offers a unique unifying per-
spective for strategic HR scholars to simultaneously examine a wide
range of CEO characteristics and behaviors to more completely under-
stand how these senior leaders can impact the implementation of an HR
strategy and the effective deployment of the employee-based resources
that emerge from an HR strategy. The nature of the relationship between
CEOs and organizational outcomes is complex because a wide array of
their leadership attributes, characteristics and behaviors may simultan-
eously affect resource creation and orchestration through different theor-
etical mechanisms (Helfat & Martin, 2015). Thus, the dynamic
managerial capabilities framework offers a unique perspective for HR
scholars to simultaneously identify and investigate a wide range of lead-
ership factors that influence the effectiveness of HR strategies. Research
in this direction seems important because prior strategic HR research
has largely ignored CEOs when trying to explain how and when HR
strategies potentially lead to competitive advantage despite the theoretical
importance of these top leaders for strategy implementation and resource
orchestration.
In addition while I chose to focus on CEOs, the dynamic managerial
capabilities framework can also provide a unique unifying perspective to
examine how other firm leaders may play a critical role in understanding
when HR strategies lead to firm-level employee-based resources and
when firms can effectively utilize these resources. In particular, as firms
grow larger and begin to pursue multiple business strategies across mul-
tiple divisions or geographic regions, it is likely that these firms will start
to pursue different business strategies and HR strategies across units.
This increased organizational complexity might limit the potential impact
of CEO dynamic managerial capabilities as they become further removed
from influencing HR strategy execution and making decisions regarding
 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 353

resource orchestration. In these larger and more complex firms, the

dynamic managerial capabilities of divisional or regional leaders may be
critical for understanding how units can effectively implement their
unique HR strategy or how units can effectively orchestrate the
employee-based resources that emerge from these business unit HR strat-
egies. Future research should look at the extent to which organizational
size and complexity reduces the impact of CEO dynamic managerial
capabilities. In addition, future research should also theoretically and
empirically explore the role of other leaders in helping to enhance the
implementation of an HCHR strategy to shape the development of
employee-based resources and to enhance the extent to which firms can
effectively recombine and deploy these resources for competitive advan-
tage. Further, it would seem valuable for future research to examine the
conditions under which CEO and mid-level manger dynamic managerial
capabilities have relatively more or less impact on the development and
deployment of employee resources.
Third, future research should also examine dynamic managerial capa-
bilities of CEOs and other senior leaders in the context alternative HR
strategies. As noted above, different HR strategies draw on different
arrays of HR policies that should shape unique organizational climates
and the emergence of unique sets of employee-based resources. Thus,
future research should examine how specific aspects of managerial cogni-
tion, social capital, and human capital may work to support the effective
implementation of alternative HR strategies to create unique firm-level
employee-based resources. Additionally, scholars should also examine
how specific dynamic managerial capabilities might moderate the impact
of the unique forms of employee-based resources that emerge from these
alternative HR strategies.
Finally, the expanded RBV-based model of strategic HR that I present in
this paper should also encourage researchers to examine other organiza-
tional resources and contextual factors that may affect when a particular
HR strategy is more likely to lead to the development of employee-based
resources and when these resources will be more likely to lead to competi-
tive advantage. Beyond dynamic managerial capabilities, firms also have
unique mixes of other tangible and intangible resources that may impact
the extent to which HR strategies can be effectively implemented or the
extent to which the resources that emerge from these strategies can be
effectively orchestrated to support competitive advantage. For example,
future research should also examine a wider array of organizational factors
beyond CEO dynamic managerial capabilities (e.g. firm slack, information
systems, organizational brands) that may impact the extent to which an HR
strategy may be implement and lead to the development of firm-level
354 C. J. COLLINS

employee-based resources. Further, future research should explore how the

relationship between employee-based resources and competitive advantage
may also be affected by the extent to which these resources are a fit to
other organizational factors besides CEO dynamic managerial capabilities
(e.g. the strategic direction of the firm, customer expectations, and the com-
petitive characteristics of the industry in which the firm competes).

Conclusion
In conclusion, this work provides several implications for strategy and stra-
tegic HR scholars by expanding our understanding of when an HR strategy
is likely to lead to competitive advantage. Specifically, I address two key
unanswered questions underling the RBV-based perspective on strategic HR
that have not been effectively explained or examined in prior research.
First, by drawing on the dynamic managerial capabilities literature, I have
offered a theoretical perspective to explain how CEO managerial cognition,
social capital, and human capital enhance the likelihood that an HCHR
strategy will be more widely and consistently implemented by frontline
leaders to increase the development of firm-level employee human and
social capital. Second, I have offered a theoretical perspective to help explain
how CEO dynamic managerial capabilities impact the extent to which firms
can effectively orchestrate the employee-based resources that emerge from
an HCHR strategy for competitive advantage. Finally, this expanded RBV-
based model of strategic HR offers a unique perspective to help strategic
HR researchers begin to more comprehensively explore how leaders and
other organizational factors and resources may impact the effectiveness of
HR strategies.

References
Adler, P. S., & Kwon, S. W. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy
of Management Review, 27(1), 17–40.
Adner, R., & Helfat, C. E. (2003). Corporate effects of dynamic managerial capabilities.
Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 1011–1010-25.
Arthur, J. B. (1994). Effects of human resource systems on manufacturing performance
and turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 670–687.
Augier, M., & Teece, D. J. (2009). Dynamic capabilities and the roles of managers in
business strategy and economic performance. Organization Science, 20(2), 410–421.
Barney, J., Ketchen, D. J., & Wright, M. (2011). The future of resource-based theory:
Revitalization or decline? Journal of Management, 37(5), 1299–1315.
Baron, J. N., Hannan, M. T., & Burton, M. D. (1999). Building the iron cage:
Determinants of managerial intensity in the early years of organizations. American
Sociological Review, 64(4), 527–547.
 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 355

Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free
Press.
Batt, R. (2002). Managing customer services: Human resource practices, quit rates, and
sales growth. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 587–597.
Bowen, D. E., & Ostroff, C. (2004). Understanding HRM-financial performance linkages:
The role of the “strength” of the HRM system. Academy of Management Review, 29,
203–221.
Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press
Calori, R., Johnson, G., & Sarnin, P. (1994). CEOs’ cognitive maps and the scope of the
organization. Strategic Management Journal, 15 (6), 437–457.
Carpenter, M. A., Geletkanycz, M. A., & Sander, W. G. (2004). Upper echelons research
revisited: Antecedents, elements, and consequences of top management team compos-
ition. Journal of Management, 30(6), 749–778.
Chadwick, C. C., Super, J. F., & Kwon, K. (2015). Resource orchestration in practice:
CEO emphasis on SHRM, commitment-based HR systems, and firm performance.
Strategic Management Journal, 36(3), 360–376.
Chang, S., Jia, L., Takeuchi, R., & Cai, Y. (2014). Do high-commitment work systems
affect creativity? A multilevel combinational approach to employee creativity. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 99(4), 665–680.
Chuang, C., Jackson, S. E., & Jiang, Y. (2016). Can knowledge-intensive teamwork be
managed? Examining the roles of HRM systems, leadership, and tacit knowledge.
Journal of Management, 42(2), 524–554.
Coff, R. W. (1997). Human assets and management dilemmas: Coping with hazards on
the road to resource-based theory. Academy of Management Review, 22(2), 374–402.
Coff, R., & Kryscynski, D. (2011). Drilling for micro-foundations of human capital-based
competitive advantages. Journal of Management, 37(5), 1429–1443.
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on
learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152. doi:10.
2307/2393553
Colbert, A. E., Kristof-Brown, A. L., Bradley, B. H., & Barrick, M. R. (2008). CEO trans-
formational leadership: The role of goal importance congruence in top management
teams. Academy of Management Journal, 51(1), 81–96.
Collins, C., & Kehoe, R. (2017). Examining strategic fit and misfit in the management of
knowledge workers. ILR Review, 70(2), 308–335.
Collins, C. J., & Smith, K. G. (2006). Knowledge exchange and combination: The role of
human resource practices in the performance of high-technology firms. Academy of
Management Journal, 49(3), 544–560.
Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1998). Charismatic leadership in organizations.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383.
Eisenhart, K. M., & Martin, J. A., (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic
Management Journal, Special Issue, 2(10–11), 1105–1121.
Danneels, E. (2011). Trying to become a different type of company: Dynamic capability
at Smith Corona. Strategic Management Journal, 32(1), 1–31. doi:10.1002/smj.863
Fenton-O’Creevy, M., (2001). Employee involvement and the middle manager: Saboteur
or scapegoat? Human Resource Management, 11, 24–40.
356 C. J. COLLINS

Foss, N. J. (2011). Why micro-foundations for resource-based theory are needed and
what they may look like. Journal of Management, 37(5), 1413–1428.
Fu, N., Flood, P. C., Rousseau, D. M., & Morris, T. (2018). Line managers as paradox
navigators in HRM Implementation: Balancing consistency and individual responsive-
ness. Journal of Management. doi:10.1177/0149206318785241
Garbuio, M., King, A. W., & Lovallo, D. (2011). Looking inside: Psychological influences
on structuring a firm’s portfolio of resources. Journal of Management, 37(5),
1444–1463.
Gittell, J. H., Seidner, R., & Wimbush, J. (2010). A relational model of how high- per-
formance work systems work. Organization Science, 21(2), 490–506.
Greer, C. R., Lusch, R. F., & Hitt, M. A. (2017). A service perspective for human capital
resources: A critical base for strategy implementation. Academy of Management
Perspectives, 31(2), 137–158.
Hambrick, D., C., & Mason, P. C. (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reflec-
tion of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 193–207.
Helfat, C. E., & Martin, J. A. (2015). Dynamic managerial capabilities: Review and
assessment of managerial impact on strategic change. Journal of Management, 41(5),
1281–1312.
Helfat, C. E., & Peteraf, M. A. (2015). Managerial cognitive capabilities and the micro-
foundations of dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 36(6), 831–850.
Hitt, M. A., Ireland, R. D., Sirmon, D. G., & Trahms, C. A. (2011). Strategic entrepre-
neurship: Creating value for individuals, organizations, and society. Academy of
Management Perspectives, 25(2), 57–75.
Huy, Q., & Zott, C. (2019). Exploring the affective underpinnings of dynamic managerial
capabilities: How managers’ emotion regulation behaviors mobilize resources for their
firms. Strategic Management Journal, 40(1), 28–54.
Jackson, S. E., Schuler, R. S., & Jiang, K. (2014). An aspirational framework for strategic
human resource management. Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 1–56.
Jiang, K., Lepak, D. P., Hu, J., & Baer, J. (2012). How does human resource management
influence organizational outcomes? A meta-analytic investigation of mediating mecha-
nisms. Academy of Management Journal, 55(6), 1264–1294.
Jiang, K., Takeuchi, R., & Lepak, D. P. (2013). Where do we go from here? New per-
spectives on the black box in strategic human resource management research. Journal
of Management Studies, 50(8), 1448–1480.
Kehoe, R. R., & Collins, C. J. (2017). Human resource management and unit perform-
ance in knowledge-intensive work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(8), 1222–1236.
Kor, Y. Y., & Mahoney, J. T. (2005). How dynamics, management, and governance of
resource deployments influence firm-level performance. Strategic Management
Journal, 26(5), 489–496.
Lepak, D. P., Marrone, J. A., & Takeuchi, R. (2004). The relativity of HR systems:
Conceptualising the impact of desired employee contributions and HR philosophy.
International Journal of Technology Management, 27(6/7), 639–655.
Lepak, D. P., Smith, K. G., & Taylor, M. S. (2007). Value creation and value capture: A
multilevel perspective. Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 180–194.
Lepak, D. P., & Snell, S. A. (1999). The human resource architecture: Toward a theory
of human capital allocation and development. Academy of Management Review, 24(1),
31–48.
Li, Y., Wang, M., Van Jaarsveld, D. D., Lee, G. K., & Ma, D. G. (2018). From employee-
experienced high-involvement work system to innovation: An emergence-based
 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 357

human resource management framework. Academy of Management Journal, 61(5),

2000–2019.
Luo, X., Kanuri, V. K., & Andrews, M. (2014). How does CEO tenure matter? The
Mediating role of firm-employee and firm-customer relationships. Strategic
Management Journal, 35(4), 492–511.
McClean, E., & Collins, C. J. (2019). Expanding the concept of fit in strategic human
resource management: An examination of the relationship between human resource
practices and charismatic leadership on organizational outcomes. Human Resource
Management, 58(2), 187–202.
McDonald, M. L., & Westphal, J. D. (2003). Getting by with the advice of their friends:
CEOs’ advice networks and firms’ strategic responses to poor performance.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(1), 1–32.
Nishii, L. H., Lepak, D. P., & Schneider, B. (2008). Employee attributions of the “why”
of HR practices: Their effects on employee attitudes and behaviors, and customer sat-
isfaction. Personnel Psychology, 61(3), 503–545.
Nishii, L. H., & Wright, P. M. (2008). Variability within organizations: Implications for
strategic human resources management. In D. B. Smith (Ed.), The people make the
place: Dynamic linkages between individuals and organizations (pp. 225–248). New
York: Lawrence Earlbaum.
Ployhart, R. E., & Moliterno, T. P. (2011). Emergence of the human capital resource: A
multilevel model. Academy of Management Review, 36(1), 127–150. doi:10.5465/amr.
2009.0318
Rosenbloom, R. S. (2000). Leadership, capabilities, and technological change: The trans-
formation of NCR in the electronic era. Strategic Management Journal, 21(10–11),
1083–1103. doi:10.1002/1097-0266(200010/11)21:10/11<1083::AID-SMJ127>3.0.CO;2-
4
Rousseau, D. M. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations: Understanding written
and unwritten agreements. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Shaw, J. D., Duffy, M. K., Johnson, J. L., & Lockhart, D. E. (2005). Turnover, social cap-
ital losses, and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 48(4), 594–606.
Sirmon, D. G., Hitt, M. A., & Ireland, R. D. (2007). Managing firm resources in dynamic
environments to create value: Looking inside the black box. Academy of Management
Review, 32(1), 273–292.
Smith, K. G., Collins, C. J., & Clark, K. D. (2005). Existing knowledge, knowledge cre-
ation capability, and the rate of new product introduction in high-technology firms.
Academy of Management Journal, 48(2), 346–357.
Snell, S., & Dean, J. (1992). Integrated manufacturing and human resource management:
A human capital perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 467–504. doi:10.
2307/256484
Takeuchi, R., Lepak, D. P., Wang, H., & Takeuchi, K. (2007). An empirical investigation
of the mechanisms mediating between high-performance work systems and the per-
formance of Japanese organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 1069–1083.
Teece, D. J. (2012). Dynamic capabilities: Routines versus entrepreneurial action. Journal
of Management Studies, 49(8), 1395–1401. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2012.01080.x
Waldman, D. A., & Yammarino, F. J. (1999). CEO Charismatic Leadership: Levels-of-man-
agement and levels-of-analysis effects. The Academy of Management Review, 24(2),
266–285. doi:10.2307/259082
Walsh, J. P. (1995). Managerial and organizational cognition: Notes from a trip down
memory lane. Organization Science, 6(3), 280–321. doi:10.1287/orsc.6.3.280
358 C. J. COLLINS

Wang, G., Holmes, R. M., Oh, I., & Zhu, W. (2016). Do CEOs matter to firm strategic
actions and firm performance? A meta-analytic investigation based on upper-echelons
theory. Personnel Psychology, 69(4), 775–862. doi:10.1111/peps.12140
Wang, H., Tsui, A. S., & Xin, K. R. (2011). CEO leadership behaviors, organizational
performance, and employee attitudes. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(1), 92–105.
Weller, I., Sub, J., Evanschitzky, H., & Von Wangenheim, F. (2019). Transformational
leadership, high-performance work system consensus, and customer satisfaction.
Joural of Management. doi:10.1177/0149206318817605
Wright, P. M., Dunford, B. B., & Snell, S. A. (2001). Human resources and the resource
based view of the firm. Journal of Management, 18, 701–721.
Wu, S., Levitas, E., & Priem, R. L. (2005). CEO tenure and company intervention under
different levels of technological dynamism. Academy of Management Journal, 48(5),
859–873.
Copyright of International Journal of Human Resource Management is the property of
Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv
without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.