Search

Tradicionalmente la literatura ha considerado la necesidad del doble ajuste, vertical y horizontal, de la estrategia de recursos humanos en las organizaciones. Su importancia estratégica ha sido demostrada en buena parte de los estudios empíricos planteados. Sin embargo, la complejidad de este proceso requiere de un análisis más profundo que permita identificar los elementos que lo hacen posible. En el presente trabajo, partiendo de la revisión de la literatura de las perspectivas de investigación en dirección estratégica de recursos humanos y del concepto «fortaleza del sistema de recursos humanos» propuesto por Bowen y Ostroff (2004), discutimos los 3 factores que integran dicho concepto y su relación con el ajuste del sistema. Como consecuencia de ello, definimos 3 proposiciones teóricas que explican la vinculación entre ambas dimensiones y la fortaleza del sistema.

The perception of academic researchers on management instruments has generated significant controversy in the literature. Studies have highlighted that these perceptions affect research performance more than management itself. This work addresses this issue by proposing a subjective measurement that explains research incentives in a public university. The study was conducted using a mixed-methodology approach. To initially identify the research incentives, a Delphi study was developed through the inclusion of 62 experts. Based on the Delphi results, to contrast the internal composition of the research incentive system, 259 academic researchers from a Spanish university were subjected to an exploratory factor analysis. The results revealed four potential incentives that were perceived by the researchers. The analysis of these factors contributes to the debate about the way in which academic managers can promote the design of effective incentives that could be assumed and accepted by researchers.

This paper discusses the relationship between multidisciplinarity and research performance in the academic context. The paper explains how scholars' scientific performance is affected by the multidisciplinarity of the network of colleagues with whom they conduct their research. Furthermore, this paper explores the potential moderating role of academics' social capital, assuming that relational dynamics can mitigate the potential problems associated with disciplinary diversity. To build the proposed model, the paper draws on previous literature on diversity and social capital. The resulting hypotheses are tested through a quantitative study developed on the basis of a sample of scholars in the field of management. Information about multidisciplinarity and research performance was extracted from the Scopus database, while social capital variables were measured through social network analysis techniques. Econometric estimations were used to test the proposed relationships. The findings suggest that the effect of multidisciplinarity and researchers' performance can be depicted as an inverted U-shaped relationship, so an optimal intermediate level of diversity can be found. Estimations also show that relational, cognitive and structural social capital moderates this curvilinear relationship, making it possible to achieve higher research performance at higher levels of multidisciplinarity.

Management scholarship should be placed in a unique position to develop relevant scientific knowledge because business and management organizations are deeply involved in most global challenges. However, different critical voices have recently been raised in essays and editorials, and reports have questioned research in the management field, identifying multiple deficiencies that can limit the growth of a relatively young field. Based on an analysis of published criticisms of management research, we would like to shed light on the current state of management research and identify some limitations that should be considered and should guide the growth of this field of knowledge. This work offers guidance on the main problems of the discipline that should be addressed to encourage the transformation of management research to meet both scientific rigor and social relevance. The article ends with a discussion and a call to action for directing research toward the possibility and necessity of reinforcing "responsible research" in the management field. JEL CLASSIFICATION: M00, M10 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is burgeoning literature on principal investigators (PIs) and their influential role in science, technology transfer and research commercialisation. However, there is yet no analysis of this actor from the perspective of their human capital (HC), i.e., the combination of knowledge, abilities and skills that they possess. Consequently, the purpose of this paper is to fill this gap by identifying whether a range of different PI profiles exists, based on their different HC. A cluster analysis was developed using a database comprised of 224 PIs of research teams, from a wide range of scientific fields. Three different PI profiles were identified, research-oriented PIs, accomplished PIs, management-focused PIs. The relationship between each of these profiles and their performance was analysed at both individual and research team level, and our findings reinforce the idea that there is not a size that fits all. Indeed, contrary to the 'more is better' statement, higher levels of HC are not necessarily connected to better results, our findings suggested an adequate combination of HC as the best option for PIs. Results of the relationship between PI gender, performance and the three different PI profiles have been examined, as well. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The lack of consensus about overcoming the negative impact of conflict on team performance within research teams has become a challenge. Based on the complex context of knowledge‐intensive teams, this study examines the effect that a transformational leadership style of the Principal Investigator has on the relationship between team conflict and team performance. We propose an inverted U‐shaped relationship between research team conflict and research team performance, and examine the impact that the Principal Investigators' transformational leadership has on this curvilinear relationship. Using survey data from 205 research teams, our results confirm both hypotheses. Actually, those PIs who apply the transformational leadership style will extend the positive conflict area, so, they will be able to manage a higher level of conflict in the research team. Our findings contribute to enhancing the understanding of the impact of conflict and the principal investigator's transformational leadership style on team performance. Both theoretical and practical considerations are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article aims to analyse the influence of team members' motivation and leaders' behaviour on knowledge sharing among the academics of a research project team. To that end, a study of 678 academic researchers belonging to project teams linked to several Spanish universities was conducted. Hierarchical regression analysis was used to analyse the data, and the results reveal that leaders with a knowledge-oriented style have a positive influence on the knowledge shared among the members of their research team. Nevertheless, and contrary to expectations, the results also show that academics' extrinsic motivation has a negative effect on knowledge sharing, while intrinsic motivation has no effect. The findings are similar when considering the scientific field. This article makes an important contribution to the knowledge management literature in the particular context of academic research. It reveals the importance of a knowledge-oriented leadership style as a key determinant of knowledge sharing within research teams. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this article is to discuss the relationship between disciplinary diversity (multidisciplinarity) and the performance of researchers, exploring the moderating role of social capital. The article contributes to the literature explaining the internal processes of multidisciplinary research units and how they affect the scientific performance of researchers. Furthermore, the article explores the potential moderating role of social capital and how relational dynamics can mitigate the potential problems associated with multidisciplinarity. To test the hypotheses proposed, we performed a quantitative study based on a sample of 155 researchers in the field of academic management. Multiple regression analysis was used in the empirical analysis. The findings suggest that a positive relationship between researchers' performance and multidisciplinarity exists (an inverted U-shaped relationship). Estimations also show that internal social capital moderates this curvilinear relationship, making it possible to achieve higher research performance at higher levels of multidisciplinarity. Points for practitioners: • Research and development managers at supranational, national and university levels should consider promoting the formation of multidisciplinary research groups. Our results provide evidence that multidisciplinary research groups support higher research performance, at least to some extent. • The research performance of multidisciplinary groups is assisted by the social capital of the research groups. Therefore, leaders of research groups should promote initiatives that allow collaboration and the exchange of ideas, knowledge and information among researchers, thus creating trust and increasing the internal social capital of the groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To survive and grow public Research and Development (R&D) centres need to raise competitive funds (Bazeley 1998; Lee and Om 1996; Muñoz 2007; Santamaría, Brage-Gil and Modrego 2010). The factors that can influence the capacity of national R&D teams within R&D centres to apply for and obtain competitive funding does not seem to have been studied in depth. The purpose of study is to firstly, to examine whether a consistent set of priorities defined by R&D centre lead principal investigators secures more competitive funding. Secondly, to examine whether the PI gender moderates the effect of the PI's priorities on the amount of competitive public funds that the R&D team of the PI obtains. Our study focuses on R&D activities carried out in Spanish public centres in the areas of Health and Biomedicine. Our results found that there were no gender differences in relation to the acquisition of competitive funding which is contrary to findings of other studies (Mayer and Rathmann 2018; Lerchenmueller and Sorenson, 2018). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]