Organization Science最新文献

The presence of independent directors on corporate boards is often seen as an important means of monitoring to address principal-agent problems and of providing external resources and advice to management. In joint ventures (JVs), however, shareholder-management frictions can be lessened by appointing insiders to management and board positions, whereas access to valuable expertise, resources, and networks are provided by the partners themselves. A natural question, then, is why and when do partners appoint independent directors to JV boards? We argue that the appointment of independent directors to joint venture boards is primarily driven by principal-principal conflict considerations, which are unique in the joint venture context compared with conventional widely held corporations. Consistent with this argument, we find that the likelihood of appointing independent directors increases when JVs face more exchange hazards due to the competitive overlap between partners and the broader functional scope of the JV. However, given that JVs also have alternative governance mechanisms to mitigate shareholder conflicts, we also find that more complex contractual agreements can potentially substitute for independent directors on JV boards. Although relational governance is often highlighted as a key facet of JV governance, we do not find such a substitution effect for this supporting governance mechanism. Overall, our research therefore highlights several interesting domain translation issues when applying existing corporate governance insights to the joint venture setting. Our paper concludes with a call for future research on independent directors serving on JV boards, as JVs represent an organizational form that has been neglected in corporate governance research.

We investigate how a firm’s positioning relative to category exemplars shapes security analysts’ evaluations. Using a two-stage model of evaluation (initial screening and subsequent assessment), we propose that exemplar similarity enhances a firm’s recognizability and legitimacy, increasing the likelihood that it passes the initial screening stage and attracts analyst coverage. However, exemplar similarity may also prompt unfavorable comparisons with exemplar firms, leading to lower analyst recommendations in the assessment stage. We further argue that category coherence, distinctiveness, and exemplar typicality influence the impact of exemplar similarity on firm evaluation. Leveraging natural language processing (NLP) techniques to analyze a sample of 7,603 U.S. public firms from 1997 to 2022, we find robust support for our predictions. By highlighting the intricate role of strategic positioning vis-à-vis category exemplars in shaping audience evaluations, our findings have important implications for research on positioning relative to category exemplars, category viability, optimal distinctiveness, and security analysts.

Supplemental Material: The online appendices are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2022.16855.

Research across a wide array of fields has established the organizational importance of fair treatment and why it should be a primary consideration of supervisors. As such, scholars have begun to unpack characteristics of organizations, supervisors, and employees that may promote fair treatment. Although this literature has been informative and is growing, we know little about how the dyadic interplay between leaders and followers—and, in particular, how both parties’ perceptions of that joint interplay—may facilitate or hinder views of fairness. The lack of clarity on this phenomenon is particularly problematic when one considers that there are several features of dyadic relationships within work units that—by their nature—work against the facilitation of fair treatment (e.g., supervisors inevitably provide some employees more/less information, support, and attention than others because they cannot establish high-quality exchange relationships with every employee). Drawing from common threads found in theories of fairness and role theory surrounding expectation alignment, we posit that the key to facilitating views of fair treatment at any level of relationship quality is for supervisors and employees to “see eye to eye” on LMX quality-LMX agreement. We further theorize that each party’s views of fair treatment flowing from LMX agreement (within the dyad) will ultimately result in leaders being more efficacious about their fairness-related abilities and employees performing at higher levels (beyond the dyad). Results of three field studies (and two supplemental preregistered experiments) largely support our theorizing and further show that fair treatment can result in a self-reinforcing positive fairness-efficacy spiral for supervisors.

Funding: This research was partially funded by the University of Georgia's Institute for Leadership Advancement Research Scholar Award.

Supplemental Material: The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2021.15475.

We study how restrictive immigration policies that result in the unexpected loss of coworkers affect the performance of skilled migrants employed in organizations. Specifically, we examine the impact of the loss of team members on their coworkers’ performance in response to the unexpectedly increased denials of extensions of H-1B work visas in the United States beginning in 2017. Losing a team member generally has a positive, albeit economically insignificant, effect on the performance of workers left behind. However, we find that individuals who lost peers of the same ethnic background experience a substantial decrease in their performance. To confirm that our results are not plagued by the presence of unobservable team or individual features that might impact visa denial decisions, we build an instrumental variable that exploits the fixed duration of the H-1B visa. Heterogeneity analyses suggest that our result is driven by workers in small teams, teams working on atypical tasks, and ethnically homogeneous teams. These analyses hint at the fact that ethnic ties may boost individual performance through preferential channels of knowledge and information spillovers.

Supplemental Material: The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2023.17319.

In creativity research, time is rarely conceptualized as a multidimensional phenomenon. Instead, it is conceived either as an external variable, for coordinating successive phases of an idea journey, interaction patterns, and moments of insight—or as an individual experience, encompassing aspects like stress or timelessness. Based on an ethnography of a music studio, I show how these temporalities coexist and how time is organized as a linear coordination process as well as an experience to enable and align individual and collective creativity. Time is thereby available in three dimensions, as planned time for linear sequencing of collective work steps, as assigned meantime for the spontaneous and parallel allocation of tasks to free time slots, and as idle meantime for indeterminate waiting periods afforded by the material temporality of artifacts and bodies. My findings elucidate that organizing the interplay of all three temporal dimensions favors both individual ideation in indeterminate situations of idleness and collective creative work on predefined tasks in planned phases and ad hoc structured situations. Importantly, I found how the time afforded by artifacts and bodies in creative work is key to enabling and aligning individual creative processes by providing opportunities for relaxation, defocusing, and humor during collective creative processes, based on coordinated interaction. My findings contribute to a social process perspective on creativity by reconsidering the role of individual experiences in creative collaboration from a temporal perspective.

Funding: This research was supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [Grant 10.55776/I4884].