Orchestrators shape ecosystem development by aligning diverse participants while advancing their own competitive agendas. This alignment becomes fragile when a new entrant offers an alternative value proposition that appeals to ecosystem participants but threatens an orchestrator’s position. Whereas prior research highlights the success of new entrants, less is known about how an orchestrator defends its competitive interests and position while addressing expectations of cooperation from ecosystem participants, which we call the “orchestrator’s dilemma.” We investigate these dynamics through a longitudinal study of Ericsson’s responses as Intel attempted to promote WiMAX as an alternative to LTE, Ericsson’s fourth-generation mobile technology. Our analysis shows how Ericsson recombined its substantive resource commitments and signaling tactics to develop three distinct strategic responses—avoiding competition, covert competition, and overt competition—as ecosystem support for the new entrant’s value proposition changed over time. We show how an orchestrator can defend its position against disruptive entrants by decoupling signaling tactics from substantive resource commitments to influence ecosystem dynamics. We contribute by theorizing these dynamic strategic responses as a way to overcome the orchestrator’s dilemma and by highlighting the social aspects of ecosystem alignment and its fragility.
{"title":"The Orchestrator’s Dilemma: How Ericsson Strategically Recombined Resource Commitments and Signaling Tactics to Outmaneuver WiMAX","authors":"Saeed Khanagha, Shahzad (Shaz) Ansari, Violina Rindova, Hakan Ozalp","doi":"10.1177/01492063251395674","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251395674","url":null,"abstract":"Orchestrators shape ecosystem development by aligning diverse participants while advancing their own competitive agendas. This alignment becomes fragile when a new entrant offers an alternative value proposition that appeals to ecosystem participants but threatens an orchestrator’s position. Whereas prior research highlights the success of new entrants, less is known about how an orchestrator defends its competitive interests and position while addressing expectations of cooperation from ecosystem participants, which we call the “orchestrator’s dilemma.” We investigate these dynamics through a longitudinal study of Ericsson’s responses as Intel attempted to promote WiMAX as an alternative to LTE, Ericsson’s fourth-generation mobile technology. Our analysis shows how Ericsson recombined its substantive resource commitments and signaling tactics to develop three distinct strategic responses—avoiding competition, covert competition, and overt competition—as ecosystem support for the new entrant’s value proposition changed over time. We show how an orchestrator can defend its position against disruptive entrants by decoupling signaling tactics from substantive resource commitments to influence ecosystem dynamics. We contribute by theorizing these dynamic strategic responses as a way to overcome the orchestrator’s dilemma and by highlighting the social aspects of ecosystem alignment and its fragility.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.5,"publicationDate":"2025-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145893942","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Interorganizational alliances have been extensively studied as strategic arrangements that enable firms to manage risks arising from their embeddedness in external relationships. However, the unique dynamics of business-to-government (B2G) relationships, where firms often face regulatory and political risks, remain underexplored. In this study, we examine how firms reliant on U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) contracts use strategic alliances to mitigate these challenges. Drawing on resource dependence theory and the resource-based view of the firm, we theorize that firms with higher government contract value are more likely to form alliances with other government contractors to help share risk and navigate government contracting challenges. We further identify two boundary conditions—an internal buffer (whether a firm operates as a generalist or specialist contractor) and an external buffer (the level of market-demand risk)—that moderate this relationship. Our analysis of 339 U.S. publicly traded DoD contractors from 2001 to 2019 provides robust support for our hypotheses. A post hoc mediation analysis further shows that alliances partially mediate the relationship between government contract value and market performance. Our study contributes to interorganizational relationships and business-government interface literatures by articulating the unique dynamics of B2G alliances and offering nuanced insights into how firms manage their relationships with powerful government buyers.
{"title":"Risk Sharing in Government Contracting: Strategic Alliances as Safeguards in Government Supplier Relationships","authors":"Mirzokhidjon Abdurakhmonov, Shavin Malhotra, Izuchukwu Mbaraonye","doi":"10.1177/01492063251392213","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251392213","url":null,"abstract":"Interorganizational alliances have been extensively studied as strategic arrangements that enable firms to manage risks arising from their embeddedness in external relationships. However, the unique dynamics of business-to-government (B2G) relationships, where firms often face regulatory and political risks, remain underexplored. In this study, we examine how firms reliant on U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) contracts use strategic alliances to mitigate these challenges. Drawing on resource dependence theory and the resource-based view of the firm, we theorize that firms with higher government contract value are more likely to form alliances with other government contractors to help share risk and navigate government contracting challenges. We further identify two boundary conditions—an internal buffer (whether a firm operates as a generalist or specialist contractor) and an external buffer (the level of market-demand risk)—that moderate this relationship. Our analysis of 339 U.S. publicly traded DoD contractors from 2001 to 2019 provides robust support for our hypotheses. A post hoc mediation analysis further shows that alliances partially mediate the relationship between government contract value and market performance. Our study contributes to interorganizational relationships and business-government interface literatures by articulating the unique dynamics of B2G alliances and offering nuanced insights into how firms manage their relationships with powerful government buyers.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.5,"publicationDate":"2025-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145847243","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-26DOI: 10.1177/01492063251398774
Christopher C. Winchester, Emily Hsu, Elizabeth M. Campbell, Matthew L. Call
Recent workplace trends reveal that workers frequently discuss and engage in deliberate underperformance, underscoring the growing relevance of intentional underperformance at work. Although various disciplines have long studied purposeful reductions in work effort, these investigations have remained largely siloed, hindering conceptual clarity. In this scoping review, we integrate perspectives from management, social and educational psychology, and economics to establish a unified conceptualization of intentional underperformance (i.e., the deliberate suppression of task contributions, such that contributions fall below a relevant benchmark). In doing so, we make five primary contributions to the performance literature. First, we review and consolidate 36 related constructs to develop an umbrella conceptualization that can promote cumulative scientific understanding. Second, based on our review, we present an organized view of the antecedents and proximal motives of intentional underperformance. Third, we introduce the Intentional Underperformance Framework, a two-by-two that organizes forms of intentional underperformance, and organize the associated outcomes of these different forms. Fourth, we identify cross-disciplinary patterns in operationalizations, summarizing prevailing methods and their implications. Fifth, we outline a research agenda to guide future inquiry into when, why, and how intentional underperformance arises, as well as how organizations can constructively intervene. By integrating disconnected literatures and promoting a shared language, this review provides a foundation for more integrative theoretical and empirical inquiries. Ultimately, we aim to equip scholars and practitioners with a clearer, more comprehensive understanding of intentional underperformance in today’s workplace.
{"title":"Underperformance by Design: A Scoping Review and Research Agenda of Intentional Task Underperformance at Work","authors":"Christopher C. Winchester, Emily Hsu, Elizabeth M. Campbell, Matthew L. Call","doi":"10.1177/01492063251398774","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251398774","url":null,"abstract":"Recent workplace trends reveal that workers frequently discuss and engage in deliberate underperformance, underscoring the growing relevance of intentional underperformance at work. Although various disciplines have long studied purposeful reductions in work effort, these investigations have remained largely siloed, hindering conceptual clarity. In this scoping review, we integrate perspectives from management, social and educational psychology, and economics to establish a unified conceptualization of intentional underperformance (i.e., the deliberate suppression of task contributions, such that contributions fall below a relevant benchmark). In doing so, we make five primary contributions to the performance literature. First, we review and consolidate 36 related constructs to develop an umbrella conceptualization that can promote cumulative scientific understanding. Second, based on our review, we present an organized view of the antecedents and proximal motives of intentional underperformance. Third, we introduce the Intentional Underperformance Framework, a two-by-two that organizes forms of intentional underperformance, and organize the associated outcomes of these different forms. Fourth, we identify cross-disciplinary patterns in operationalizations, summarizing prevailing methods and their implications. Fifth, we outline a research agenda to guide future inquiry into when, why, and how intentional underperformance arises, as well as how organizations can constructively intervene. By integrating disconnected literatures and promoting a shared language, this review provides a foundation for more integrative theoretical and empirical inquiries. Ultimately, we aim to equip scholars and practitioners with a clearer, more comprehensive understanding of intentional underperformance in today’s workplace.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.5,"publicationDate":"2025-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145829874","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-24DOI: 10.1177/01492063251390419
Giacomo Marchesini, Raffaele Conti, Giovanni Valentini
Whether more information available in capital markets fosters or hinders corporate innovation—and ultimately long-term firm value—remains a contentious question. Does enhanced transparency discipline managerial decision-making, or does it induce short-termism? This study addresses this tension by proposing that firms’ R&D capabilities critically moderate these opposing effects. Leveraging the European Union’s mandate for quarterly reporting as a quasi-natural experiment, we employ a difference-in-differences design to a panel of EU-listed manufacturing firms. We uncover a dual pathway: For firms with weaker R&D capabilities, greater transparency exerts a disciplining effect, leading to reduced R&D investment and enhancing firms’ value. Conversely, firms with stronger capabilities reallocate R&D toward more familiar domains to deliver quicker returns, consistent with a myopic response that limits exploration and undermines long-term value. Our findings contribute to management theory by unpacking how capital market pressures differentially affect the “whether” and “where” of innovation decisions and offer policymakers important insights into the unintended consequences of disclosure regulation.
{"title":"More Light but Less Sight? The Dual Effect of Information Transparency on Firm Innovation","authors":"Giacomo Marchesini, Raffaele Conti, Giovanni Valentini","doi":"10.1177/01492063251390419","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251390419","url":null,"abstract":"Whether more information available in capital markets fosters or hinders corporate innovation—and ultimately long-term firm value—remains a contentious question. Does enhanced transparency discipline managerial decision-making, or does it induce short-termism? This study addresses this tension by proposing that firms’ R&D capabilities critically moderate these opposing effects. Leveraging the European Union’s mandate for quarterly reporting as a quasi-natural experiment, we employ a difference-in-differences design to a panel of EU-listed manufacturing firms. We uncover a dual pathway: For firms with weaker R&D capabilities, greater transparency exerts a disciplining effect, leading to reduced R&D investment and enhancing firms’ value. Conversely, firms with stronger capabilities reallocate R&D toward more familiar domains to deliver quicker returns, consistent with a myopic response that limits exploration and undermines long-term value. Our findings contribute to management theory by unpacking how capital market pressures differentially affect the “whether” and “where” of innovation decisions and offer policymakers important insights into the unintended consequences of disclosure regulation.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.5,"publicationDate":"2025-12-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145812769","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-19DOI: 10.1177/01492063251389882
Ludovica Castiglia
Affective polarization, a division marked by animosity between members of opposing political groups, has dramatically increased, particularly in the United States. This paper examines the extent to which affective polarization may spill over into organizations and influence strategic outcomes—specifically, corporate innovation. I theorize how politically balanced organizations, that is, those that lack a prevailing political ideology and have workforces that are more evenly divided between opposing political stances, are less innovative due to heightened animosity and reduced collaboration. Furthermore, I propose that the negative relationship between political balance and innovation intensifies at higher levels of partisan animosity in society and political engagement among organizational members. Conversely, I theorize that the relationship weakens when a firm is led by a CEO who does not overtly signal a clear political leaning. I test and find support for these predictions using a novel donation-based index of organizational political balance for 744 publicly traded U.S. companies from 2002 to 2015. This paper highlights the role of political balance as a potential conduit of intrafirm rivalry that hinders innovation. The findings advance our understanding of the mechanisms and conditions through which political polarization may influence organizations and their outcomes.
{"title":"Striking a Political Balance? Political Polarization and Firm Innovation","authors":"Ludovica Castiglia","doi":"10.1177/01492063251389882","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251389882","url":null,"abstract":"Affective polarization, a division marked by animosity between members of opposing political groups, has dramatically increased, particularly in the United States. This paper examines the extent to which affective polarization may spill over into organizations and influence strategic outcomes—specifically, corporate innovation. I theorize how politically balanced organizations, that is, those that lack a prevailing political ideology and have workforces that are more evenly divided between opposing political stances, are less innovative due to heightened animosity and reduced collaboration. Furthermore, I propose that the negative relationship between political balance and innovation intensifies at higher levels of partisan animosity in society and political engagement among organizational members. Conversely, I theorize that the relationship weakens when a firm is led by a CEO who does not overtly signal a clear political leaning. I test and find support for these predictions using a novel donation-based index of organizational political balance for 744 publicly traded U.S. companies from 2002 to 2015. This paper highlights the role of political balance as a potential conduit of intrafirm rivalry that hinders innovation. The findings advance our understanding of the mechanisms and conditions through which political polarization may influence organizations and their outcomes.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.5,"publicationDate":"2025-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145801080","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-18DOI: 10.1177/01492063251390851
Qinglin Zhao, Huiwen Lian
Vision communication plays a crucial role in leadership, strategic management, and organizational change. However, current research on vision communication is fragmented, leading to a limited understanding of the topic. To advance this topic, this paper synthesizes the existing literature on the dimensions, theoretical mechanisms, moderators, and outcomes of vision communication, drawing on 150 papers. In particular, we identify four key dimensions of vision communication: vision attributes (e.g., imagery, metaphor), vision content (e.g., emphasis on profits or product quality), vision communication frequency (e.g., infrequent vs. frequent), and non-verbal delivery (e.g., emotional displays, eye gaze). Furthermore, we integrate four theoretical perspectives—motivation-based, identification-based, affect-based, and cognition-based—to explain the effects of vision communication. In essence, vision influences various outcomes by ensuring that employees are motivated and feel confident in their ability to achieve them (i.e., motivation-based), identify with the vision or leadership (i.e., identification-based), experience emotional inspiration or positive affect (i.e., affect-based), or understand the vision (i.e., cognition-based). Based on these mechanisms, we outline four categories of moderating factors that shape their impact (e.g., leader factors, follower factors, leader-follower relationships, and contextual factors). Finally, we outline future research directions to further advance research on vision communication.
{"title":"Vision Communication: A Systematic Review","authors":"Qinglin Zhao, Huiwen Lian","doi":"10.1177/01492063251390851","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251390851","url":null,"abstract":"Vision communication plays a crucial role in leadership, strategic management, and organizational change. However, current research on vision communication is fragmented, leading to a limited understanding of the topic. To advance this topic, this paper synthesizes the existing literature on the dimensions, theoretical mechanisms, moderators, and outcomes of vision communication, drawing on 150 papers. In particular, we identify four key dimensions of vision communication: vision attributes (e.g., imagery, metaphor), vision content (e.g., emphasis on profits or product quality), vision communication frequency (e.g., infrequent vs. frequent), and non-verbal delivery (e.g., emotional displays, eye gaze). Furthermore, we integrate four theoretical perspectives—motivation-based, identification-based, affect-based, and cognition-based—to explain the effects of vision communication. In essence, vision influences various outcomes by ensuring that employees are motivated and feel confident in their ability to achieve them (i.e., motivation-based), identify with the vision or leadership (i.e., identification-based), experience emotional inspiration or positive affect (i.e., affect-based), or understand the vision (i.e., cognition-based). Based on these mechanisms, we outline four categories of moderating factors that shape their impact (e.g., leader factors, follower factors, leader-follower relationships, and contextual factors). Finally, we outline future research directions to further advance research on vision communication.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":"246 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.5,"publicationDate":"2025-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145770656","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-16DOI: 10.1177/01492063251377429
Seok-Hyun (Stephen) Hwang, Edward J. Zajac
This study examines shareholder activism and its consequences for corporate directors’ career trajectories. We begin by highlighting that the inherent ambiguity surrounding activist interventions implies variation in director careers beyond an overall negative effect. Specifically, we posit and test the notion that the director labor market will differentiate between financially based versus socially based shareholder unrest, with the latter having a stronger negative effect based on (1) its greater information value above and beyond what is already knowable about the firm, and (2) heightened recognition of the need for directors to balance financial performance pressures with responsiveness to evolving environmental, social, and governance concerns. Empirically, we analyze U.S. shareholder activism events between 2014 and 2018, and using Coarsened Exact Matching combined with a Difference-in-Differences approach, we find evidence consistent with our disambiguation perspective on shareholder activism. Our theoretical and empirical analyses also further disambiguate whether director exits reflect market or/and director preferences, and we find evidence for both. We conclude by discussing how our theoretical perspective and empirical findings contribute to research on shareholder activism, director labor markets, and corporate governance.
{"title":"Disambiguating the Effects of Shareholder Activism on Corporate Director Careers","authors":"Seok-Hyun (Stephen) Hwang, Edward J. Zajac","doi":"10.1177/01492063251377429","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251377429","url":null,"abstract":"This study examines shareholder activism and its consequences for corporate directors’ career trajectories. We begin by highlighting that the inherent ambiguity surrounding activist interventions implies variation in director careers beyond an overall negative effect. Specifically, we posit and test the notion that the director labor market will differentiate between financially based versus socially based shareholder unrest, with the latter having a stronger negative effect based on (1) its greater information value above and beyond what is already knowable about the firm, and (2) heightened recognition of the need for directors to balance financial performance pressures with responsiveness to evolving environmental, social, and governance concerns. Empirically, we analyze U.S. shareholder activism events between 2014 and 2018, and using Coarsened Exact Matching combined with a Difference-in-Differences approach, we find evidence consistent with our disambiguation perspective on shareholder activism. Our theoretical and empirical analyses also further disambiguate whether director exits reflect market or/and director preferences, and we find evidence for both. We conclude by discussing how our theoretical perspective and empirical findings contribute to research on shareholder activism, director labor markets, and corporate governance.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":"154 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.5,"publicationDate":"2025-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145759705","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-16DOI: 10.1177/01492063251390850
Patricia Hein, Marjo-Riitta Diehl, Karin Kreutzer
Although networking is critical for career advancement, prior research has primarily examined women’s networking in comparison to men’s, often concluding that it plays a less instrumental role due to gendered organizational structures. Women-only networking events are organized to enable women to leverage gender homophily for mutual support and career advancement. However, the mechanisms of gender homophily in women’s networking are not straightforward. Drawing on observations of women-only networking events, interviews, and secondary data, we identify three meanings women attach to homophilic networking (status-driven, instrumental, and expressive) and show how these meanings shape networking behaviors. In networking contexts characterized by “enforced homophily,” where support is offered under the guise of benevolence, women are more aware of these differences in meanings, which prevent them from leveraging the potential benefits of networking with other women. In contexts characterized by “agentic homophily,” the relevance of these differences is less salient, empowering women to challenge, rather than reproduce, gendered organizational structures. Our research extends the understanding of gender homophily as a multifaceted force that is dynamically shaped by the context and interactions.
{"title":"Magic Will Happen if You Gather Us in One Room: Gender Homophily and Women-Only Networking","authors":"Patricia Hein, Marjo-Riitta Diehl, Karin Kreutzer","doi":"10.1177/01492063251390850","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251390850","url":null,"abstract":"Although networking is critical for career advancement, prior research has primarily examined women’s networking in comparison to men’s, often concluding that it plays a less instrumental role due to gendered organizational structures. Women-only networking events are organized to enable women to leverage gender homophily for mutual support and career advancement. However, the mechanisms of gender homophily in women’s networking are not straightforward. Drawing on observations of women-only networking events, interviews, and secondary data, we identify three meanings women attach to homophilic networking (status-driven, instrumental, and expressive) and show how these meanings shape networking behaviors. In networking contexts characterized by “enforced homophily,” where support is offered under the guise of benevolence, women are more aware of these differences in meanings, which prevent them from leveraging the potential benefits of networking with other women. In contexts characterized by “agentic homophily,” the relevance of these differences is less salient, empowering women to challenge, rather than reproduce, gendered organizational structures. Our research extends the understanding of gender homophily as a multifaceted force that is dynamically shaped by the context and interactions.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.5,"publicationDate":"2025-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145760058","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-04DOI: 10.1177/01492063251387664
Sohrab Soleimanof, G. Tyge Payne, Curt Moore, Matthew W. Rutherford
Cronyism promotes the exchange of favors among connected parties based on relationships rather than merit, granting them undue advantages in securing opportunities and resources. This study examines the impact of cronyism on the quantity and quality of entrepreneurship. The analysis of data from 98 countries over 8 years (482 country-year observations) indicates that cronyism is negatively associated with the quantity of productive entrepreneurship, and positively associated with the prevalence of unproductive entrepreneurship. Furthermore, the results reveal that cronyism diminishes the quality of entrepreneurship productivity across countries. Interestingly, the findings suggest that a stronger rule of law exacerbates the detrimental effects of cronyism on entrepreneurship productivity. These results extend our understanding of cronyism as a crucial yet understudied informal institution with major implications for management and entrepreneurship.
{"title":"Cronyism, Rule of Law, and Entrepreneurship: A Country-Level Examination","authors":"Sohrab Soleimanof, G. Tyge Payne, Curt Moore, Matthew W. Rutherford","doi":"10.1177/01492063251387664","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251387664","url":null,"abstract":"Cronyism promotes the exchange of favors among connected parties based on relationships rather than merit, granting them undue advantages in securing opportunities and resources. This study examines the impact of cronyism on the quantity and quality of entrepreneurship. The analysis of data from 98 countries over 8 years (482 country-year observations) indicates that cronyism is negatively associated with the quantity of productive entrepreneurship, and positively associated with the prevalence of unproductive entrepreneurship. Furthermore, the results reveal that cronyism diminishes the quality of entrepreneurship productivity across countries. Interestingly, the findings suggest that a stronger rule of law exacerbates the detrimental effects of cronyism on entrepreneurship productivity. These results extend our understanding of cronyism as a crucial yet understudied informal institution with major implications for management and entrepreneurship.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.5,"publicationDate":"2025-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145664426","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-11-17DOI: 10.1177/01492063251381323
Robert Langan, Ryan Krause, Markus Menz
Prior research suggests that firm-specific human capital is important in enabling board chairs to effectively lead their boards in their oversight duties. Despite this, some boards appoint newcomer directors to the chair position. This paper seeks to explain why. Building on power circulation and faultline theories, we posit that boards characterized by strongly divided subgroups with none dominant over the board may have difficulty in agreeing on promoting a director from among their ranks to the chair position, and instead select a board newcomer as a compromise solution. We further argue that this will be moderated by factors that affect either the power dynamics or the degree of contestation on the board. Analyses on a sample of 2,199 board chair appointments at S&P 1500 firms between the years 2001 and 2017 support our hypotheses.
{"title":"Compromise Leadership: Competing Board Subgroups and the Appointment of a Newcomer Chair","authors":"Robert Langan, Ryan Krause, Markus Menz","doi":"10.1177/01492063251381323","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251381323","url":null,"abstract":"Prior research suggests that firm-specific human capital is important in enabling board chairs to effectively lead their boards in their oversight duties. Despite this, some boards appoint newcomer directors to the chair position. This paper seeks to explain why. Building on power circulation and faultline theories, we posit that boards characterized by strongly divided subgroups with none dominant over the board may have difficulty in agreeing on promoting a director from among their ranks to the chair position, and instead select a board newcomer as a compromise solution. We further argue that this will be moderated by factors that affect either the power dynamics or the degree of contestation on the board. Analyses on a sample of 2,199 board chair appointments at S&P 1500 firms between the years 2001 and 2017 support our hypotheses.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":"120 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.5,"publicationDate":"2025-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145531472","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：