British Journal of Management最新文献

This study contributes to the understanding of the speed of the effects of publicly funded research – R&D grants – on firm R&D, innovation and innovation behaviour. We argue that while the speed of the positive effects on R&D (i.e. input additionality; IA) tightly relates to public support programmes’ requirement of private contribution in R&D spending, the positive effects on innovation (i.e. output additionality; OA) and innovation behaviour (i.e. behavioural additionality; BA) are temporally delayed, linked to the explorative nature of learning associated with publicly funded projects and obstacles to changes in the innovation behaviour of firms. We empirically test our theoretical framework for a sample of R&D-intensive UK firms to find that while IA occurs in the year following receipt of R&D grants, BA takes 3 years after receipt of R&D grants to occur. We do not find that grants have a positive effect on either product or process innovation. In measuring BA, we employ a ‘classical’ treatment and control group evaluation without relying on firms’ perceptions of how the receipt of grants affected their innovation behaviour. Our findings have significant implications for both management practice and policy.

While most firms do not grow, a small number of firms grow and enhance their equity and debt capital intensity. Researchers, managers and policymakers question the role that digital technologies play in propelling firm growth and resource mobilization. Using a longitudinal dataset from emerging industries in the United Kingdom during 2010–2019, we distinguish three types of firms and examine their growth and resource mobilization. First, we find that digitally advanced firms grow faster and enhance equity capital intensity while reducing debt capital intensity. Second, we find that the relationship between digitally advanced firms and firm growth is mediated by equity capital intensity. Third, firm size positively moderates the effect of digitally advanced firms on firm growth. Firm age does not moderate this relationship. Other firm-level characteristics, such as number of digital tools, firm productivity, accelerator experience and stage of growth, may either impede or facilitate a firm's growth and resource mobilization. This study helps policymakers and firm managers in emerging industries better understand the role of digitalization and resources in firm growth.

Employee proactivity has been discussed as a key predictor of firm success and organizational performance. However, previous proactivity research has rarely focused on customers, and the few available proactivity studies from retail settings are either cross-sectional, solely based on subjective outcomes (e.g. customer satisfaction) or restricted to aggregated data of objective outcomes (e.g. profits per store). We investigate the causal effect of employee proactivity in retail service encounters on customers’ actual purchase behaviour and satisfaction ratings at the fine-grained level of individual customers. By integrating theories on social perception with prior proactivity findings, we find that employee proactivity positively predicts customers’ shopping responses. This finding extends from correlational to experimental designs across sample types and paradigms, is replicated in actual retail settings, and is mediated by customers’ perceptions of employee warmth and competence. Furthermore, the effect generalizes across several focal outcomes, including behavioural variables (spending and purchase likelihood), and is moderated by the time to employee-initiated contact in a way that goes against customers’ own beliefs. In sum, the present research quantifies the financial consequences of employee proactivity and indicates that in ordinary retail service encounters, high proactivity can compensate for delays, thus counteracting the aversive aspects of waiting.

How does a founder's knowledge of debt financing influence his/her new firm's ability to obtain the amount of debt financing it desires? Building on the cognitive psychology literature, we propose that the depth of a founder's debt financing knowledge is positively associated with the new firm's ability to obtain debt financing as he/she will be better at selecting and acquiring relevant sources of debt financing. Integrating insights on entrepreneurial growth-oriented strategies, we further argue that this relationship will be more pronounced when the new firm internationalizes and innovates more. Using a Heckman full information maximum likelihood model, we analyse survey data on 1845 Flemish new firms. The first stage of the model estimates the new firm's probability of raising debt financing. The second stage tests the relationship between the founder's knowledge depth of debt financing and the new firm's debt financing ability, conditional on the decision to raise debt financing. We find that the founder's knowledge depth of debt financing is positively associated with the new firm's ability to obtain debt financing. This association becomes even more pronounced when the new firm internationalizes more. These findings extend the entrepreneurial finance, entrepreneurial strategy and cognitive psychology literature.

We propose a novel multi-factor metric of homophily between the CEOs of the acquirer and target firms as a causal determinant of mergers and acquisitions (M&As). We find strong evidence that higher homophily among the two CEOs increases the likelihood of M&A deal initiation and completion. When homophily is high, deals are more likely to be paid in cash, exhibit significantly larger long-term value creation and are less subject to ex-ante overpricing as measured by ex-post goodwill write-offs. These effects stem from similarity between CEOs creating trust, reducing information asymmetry and facilitating effective communication. Our approach resolves prior conflicting results on the effect of homophily on large corporate decisions and strongly indicates the need for a multi-dimensional estimation of homophily to obtain conclusive results.

This study investigates how foreign acquirers’ environmental, social and governance (ESG) misbehaviour exposure affects the completion of cross-border acquisitions (CBAs), and how this impact varies according to citizen power in the target country and the presence of deal rumours. Using a sample of CBAs attempted by Chinese listed firms from 2011 to 2019, we find that foreign acquirers with higher ESG misbehaviour exposure are more likely to fail in CBA completions. As citizen power in the target country increases, such acquirers face greater challenges in CBA completion. In addition, deal rumours can make matters worse (akin to pouring fuel on a fire), putting foreign acquirers with high ESG misbehaviour exposure in a more unfavourable position. Overall, our findings shed light on the concerns and resistance of stakeholders in the target country towards a foreign acquirer with ESG misbehaviour exposure and demonstrate boundary conditions for such an adverse effect.

Although recent years have seen a proliferation of research on organizational ambidexterity, important questions remain about the role that leaders play in leveraging learning ambidexterity for organizational benefits. Drawing on the conservation of resources theory, we investigate the indirect links between servant leadership and middle managers’ learning ambidexterity, with structural empowerment and role breadth self-efficacy (RBSE) as serial mediators. We also examine the importance of leader boundary-spanning behaviour as a moderating factor for these relationships. Using time-lagged and multi-source data from 344 middle managers and their supervisors, we show that servant leadership has a positive indirect influence on two forms of learning ambidexterity: exploitative and explorative learning. In particular, servant leadership promotes structural empowerment (as a contextual resource), which in turn influences RBSE (as a personal resource) and encourages learning ambidexterity. In addition, we show that when leaders engage in boundary-spanning behaviour, these indirect relationships become more prominent. This research offers new theoretical and practical insights to assist organizations in improving learning ambidexterity and achieving higher levels of performance.

This paper examines how the fragmented ownership of complementary intellectual property (IP) rights affects firms’ acquisition behaviour. We theorize that as the ownership of complementary IP rights fragments, the rate at which a focal firm engages in technology acquisitions will increase. Our predictions suggest that firms will expand their IP portfolios through acquisitions as a strategy to continue innovating when the ownership over strategic IP becomes exceedingly spread among technology holders. Furthermore, we propose that this positive relationship between fragmentation and acquisitions will be stronger for firms whose patent portfolios hold relatively less value compared to their peers, owing primarily to their diminished control over strategic IP. Using a unique longitudinal dataset from the biopharmaceutical industry, we find empirical support for our hypotheses.

We study investors’ preferences for corporate political connections in the United States using a novel measure: shareholder votes given to individual directors. We find that, after fully accounting for all firm-year specific information and a wide range of director characteristics, politically connected directors on average do not obtain significantly greater shareholder support. During our sample period (2010–2020), we observe a diminishing popularity of politically connected directors. Political alignment to the incumbent government matters in the sense that Democrat directors are viewed as valuable to shareholders during the Obama administration. However, during Donald Trump's presidency, a Democrat party affiliation instead turned into a liability. We also find that shareholders have a stronger preference for politically connected directors in heavily regulated industries, suggesting that board members can alleviate regulatory risk. Our study has implications for director selection and the role of political connections in shaping corporate governance practices.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how managers can develop ‘parallel’ supply chains to overcome the efficiency/flexibility trade-offs of offshored versus reshored/nearshored production. Primary evidence is gathered from 22 field interviews with eight companies from multiple countries, all operating in the textile and apparel industry. The interview data is triangulated using a cross-industry focus group with 28 participants and secondary sources including company annual reports and website information. The study contributes to organizational ambidexterity theory by identifying how companies embed structural ambidexterity in their supply chains, and in so doing create ‘parallel supply chains’. Our findings show that companies partition their production in terms of width (meaning that specific product lines were relocated) and depth (meaning that specific production activities were relocated). Companies then use a mix of offshored production facilities to manufacture low-margin, long-lead-time products as well as reshored/nearshored production facilities to make high-margin, quick-response items. The ability to swap production volumes between parallel supply chains enables supply chain ambidexterity, which in turn allows companies to exploit efficiency and flexibility benefits simultaneously. Managers are provided with an empirically informed, step-by-step framework for developing structural ambidexterity and building parallel supply chains.