In this study we integrate insights from ‘top‐down’ and ‘bottom‐up’ traditions in organizational change research to understand employees’ varying dispositions to support change. We distinguish ...between change initiation and change execution roles and identify four possible role configurations in which top managers (TMs) and middle managers (MMs) can feature in change. We contend that both TMs and MMs can play change initiation and/or change execution roles, TMs and MMs have different strengths and limitations for taking on different change roles, and their relative strengths and limitations are compounded or attenuated based on the specific configuration of change roles. We subsequently hypothesize employee support for change in relation to different TM‐MM change role configurations. Our findings show that change initiated by TMs does not engender above‐average level of employee support. However, change initiated by MMs engenders above‐average level of employee support, and even more so, if TMs handle the change execution.
Management innovation entails the introduction of new-to-the-firm changes in management structures, processes, and practices intended to improve organizational functioning. We draw on relational ...demography theory to elucidate how behavioral dispositions stemming from top management and middle management similarity in professional characteristics (functional background and educational level) and biodemographic characteristics (age and gender) may facilitate management innovation. We argue that while a throughput functional orientation of top management can be expected to stimulate management innovation, greater similarity between top and middle management will strengthen the association between top management throughput orientation and management innovation by (1) engendering consistency in behavioral expectations between the managerial echelons and (2) motivating middle management to engage in extrarole behaviors. We test our theory on a sample of more than 8,000 top and middle managers in a cross-section of 33 organizations from 2000 to 2008 and adopt a novel content analysis-based measure of management innovation. We find compelling support for the moderating influence of professional similarity between top and middle management but uncover more complex patterns for cross-echelon similarity in biodemographic characteristics. We discuss implications for understanding the role of managers in management innovation, joint consideration of top and middle management characteristics in organizational change processes, the interplay between various types of innovation, and the measurement of management innovation. Promising future research directions are suggested.
•We advance a market-based view on ambidexterity-as-paradox.•We examine cost of capital in response to disclosure of exploration, exploitation, and combined disclosure information about innovation ...activities on a sample of UK FTSE350 (2011-2016).•Firms generally disclose more exploration information, although investors mainly reward exploitation disclosure.•The sub-sample of R&D-active firms seems to particularly benefit from combined disclosure of exploration and exploitation information.
We draw on information risk theory and paradox theory to examine the additive and combined effects of disclosing exploration and exploitation information on cost of equity capital. We build on theory that presupposes that the information disclosed by a firm about its innovation activities will reduce information risk of investors. However, we contend that disclosure of exploration and exploitation innovation activities could convey potentially paradoxical expectations about a firm's future value. Based on longitudinal data of the UK FTSE 350 firms from 2011–2016, we show that firms tend to disclose more information related to exploration than exploitation. However, the bulk of market benefits are driven by exploitation rather than exploration disclosures—except for R&D-active firms that are rewarded for exploration disclosure. We also find that the combined disclosure is negatively associated with cost of equity capital, with the sub-population of R&D-active firms particularly accruing synergies from combined disclosure of both exploration and exploitation. These findings suggest that the market differentiates between exploration and exploitation information in addressing information risk, more so than previously assumed. We discuss implications for information-type-dependency in information-risk theory, the outward projection of internal paradoxes, capital market valuations of disclosure by R&D-active firms, opportunity-seeking by large publicly listed corporations, and policy implications.
Hostile takeover attempts are considered a key external governance mechanism aimed at addressing perceived managerial underperformance in a target firm. Studies show that target chief executive ...officers (CEOs) are usually dismissed shortly after a takeover attempt, regardless of whether the bidder actually completes the acquisition. Yet, little is known about the investment behaviors of target CEOs who actually retain their positions in the wake of an unsuccessful hostile takeover attempt. Engaging with this underexplored governance context, we advance a behaviorally informed model of CEO investment behaviors in response to external governance as a function of the negative performance feedback event of the takeover attempt and the timing of the market’s attempt in terms of the stage of the target CEO’s tenure. Based on a matched-pair study of 71 failed takeover attempts from 1995 to 2006, we find evidence of a nonlinear relation between target CEO tenure and degree of uncertainty of expected returns in subsequent strategic investments in the wake of a failed hostile takeover attempt. We discuss the implications for research on external governance, behavioral agency, and executives’ influences on firm processes and outcomes.
In this study, we examine the influence of senior leadership on firms' corporate social responsibility (CSR). We integrate upper echelons research that has investigated either the influence of the ...CEO or the top management team (TMT) on CSR. We contend that functional experience complementarity between CEOs and TMTs in formulating and implementing CSR strategy may underlie differentiated strategies in CSR. We find that when CEOs who have predominant experience in output functions are complemented by TMTs with a lower proportion of members who have experience in output functions, there is a pronounced effect on the community, product, and diversity dimensions of CSR. In turn, when output-oriented CEOs are complemented by output-oriented TMTs, we observe an effect on the employee relations dimension of CSR. Interestingly, we find no influence of CEO-TMT complementarity on the environment dimension of CSR. In general, our empirical results support the relevance of the interaction between CEOs and their TMTs in defining their firms' CSR profile.
We examine the relation between boards of directors' knowledge heterogeneity and organizational ambidexterity (OA) (i.e. simultaneous exploration and exploitation) in knowledge-intensive firms ...(KIFs). Although the literature on OA has started to emphasize its antecedents, the role of the board remains unaddressed. This is an important omission, as boards have become increasingly involved in strategy-making. In turn, studies on boards have looked at their influence on either exploration- or exploitation-type strategies. Yet, KIFs particularly need to balance both exploration and exploitation to renew their knowledge base. We draw on knowledge-based perspectives to disentangle the benefits and costs of board knowledge heterogeneity for driving OA in KIFs. Our empirical analysis based on a longitudinal panel of UK pharmaceutical firms provides support for our hypothesized U-shaped relation. Our findings suggest that the benefits of knowledge heterogeneity only outweigh the costs beyond a particular threshold. Overall, our theoretical approach and allied findings advance the literature by introducing boundary conditions to the resource provision role of boards in KIFs. We discuss contributions for organizational learning, strategic leadership, and human resource management. We conclude with implications for theory and practice, as well as key opportunities for future research.
Abstract
Middle management ranks are once again being questioned by scholars and practitioners alike. This introduction to the special issue represents a timely reference point for consolidating, ...reviving, and guiding the next wave of researchers seeking to engage this debate. We review the foundations and recent advances in middle management research and develop an organizing framework in terms of middle management's organizational roles, coordination processes, and agentic behaviours. We also identify how new ways of organizing, technology, and middle manager needs are changing to shape each of these themes. The collection of works we synthesize in this introduction offer theoretical advances and empirical evidence on how these changes affect middle management roles, processes, and behaviours. We conclude by mapping out promising research avenues for future research in middle management.
Hiring managers regularly encounter job applicants with atypical levels of experience across several common domains-For example, occupational experience, general work experience, educational ...experience, and life experience. Surprisingly, few large-scale studies have investigated how hiring managers respond to applicants with atypical experience for the job, leaving a substantial lacuna in our knowledge. The primary goal of the present study is to examine the association between relative under- and over-experience in the aforementioned domains and the likelihood of applicants being subsequently interviewed and eventually hired. We draw on insights from attribution theory to introduce the concept of red flags in the judgment of applicant experience. In doing so, we propose that hiring managers may avoid interviewing and hiring applicants with atypical experience relative to the applicant pool (i.e., relative over- or underexperience). Overall, our red flags perspective posits that job applicants with typical amounts of experience will be favored by hiring managers, which may be a useful lens for explaining why highly experienced applicants are not always considered. We test these predictions on a unique dataset parsed from 53,194 résumés and the corresponding application forms from 42 different organizations. Our results are broadly consistent with the red flags perspective, notably uncovering some intricate nonlinear effects. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.
PDF
