Testing and Visualizing Strategic Consensus Within and Between Teams

Research in strategic consensus mostly focuses on the degree of consensus about organizational strategy within a team and does not include other important elements of strategic consensus such as more fine-grained analysis of what different group members agree and disagree on, between-group consensus, or significance testing of differences in consensus (e.g., to evaluate a strategic intervention). We propose a new analytical approach to study strategic consensus to address these issues and to visualize strategic consensus in an intuitive and easy-to-grasp fashion. Using data from a field study, we also provide an illustration of the proposed methodology which includes a test of the effectiveness of a consensus-creating intervention. We conclude with guidelines for research and practice on utilizing the proposed methodology

Regulatory institutional distance and MNCs' subsidiary performance: climbing up Vs. climbing down the institutional ladder

We investigate the possibility of regulatory institutional distance exerting an asymmetric effect on multinational corporations' (MNCs') subsidiary performance depending on the direction of institutional distance. We use the term ‘institutional ladder’ to differentiate between upward distance, referred to as when the subsidiary is operating in a relatively stronger institutional environment than its parent-firm's home country, and downward distance for vice versa. Combining institutional theory with organisational imprinting and learning perspectives, we argue that the implications of regulatory institutional distance on subsidiary performance are relatively more positive (or less negative) when MNCs are climbing down the institutional ladder as compared to when MNCs are climbing up the institutional ladder. We also argue that subsidiary ownership strategy – i.e. the choice of a wholly owned subsidiary (WOS) versus joint venture (JV) – moderates the above-mentioned implications of institutional distance on subsidiary performance. We test these hypotheses based on a panel data-set of 1936 foreign subsidiaries representing 70 host countries and 66 home countries and spanning the 12-year period: 2002–2013

Politically connected boards and top executive pay in Chinese listed firms

Drawing on social comparison theory, this study examines the relationship between politically connected boards and top executive pay. Moreover, given the socialist orientation of China, tests are also carried out to establish the relationship between politically connected directors and pay dispersion across the firm. We find a negative association between politically connected boards and top executive pay. We also find that politically connected boards are negatively associated with pay dispersion, i.e., the higher the number of political directors on the board the smaller the gap between top executive pay and average employee pay. Finally, our study shows that politically connected directors weaken the pay-performance link. These findings have important theoretical, policy, and managerial implications

Theory and research in strategic management: Swings of a pendulum

The development of the field of strategic management within the last two decades has been dramatic. While its roots have been in a more applied area, often referred to as business policy, the current field of strategic management is strongly theory based, with substantial empirical research, and is eclectic in nature. This review of the development of the field and its current position examines the field’s early development and the primary theoretical and methodological bases through its history. Early developments include Chandler’s (1962) Strategy and Structure and Ansoff’s (1965) Corporate Strategy. These early works took on a contingency perspective (fit between strategy and structure) and a resource-based framework emphasizing internal strengths and weaknesses. Perhaps, one of the more significant contributions to the development of strategic management came from industrial organization (IO) economics, specifically the work of Michael Porter. The structure-conduct-performance framework and the notion of strategic groups, as well as providing a foundation for research on competitive dynamics, are flourishing currently. The IO paradigm also brought econometric tools to the research on strategic management. Building on the IO economics framework, the organizational economics perspective contributed transaction costs economics and agency theory to strategic management. More recent theoretical contributions focus on the resource-based view of the firm. While it has its roots in Edith Penrose’s work in the late 1950s, the resource-based view was largely introduced to the field of strategic management in the 1980s and became a dominant framework in the 1990s. Based on the resource-based view or developing concurrently were research on strategic leadership, strategic decision theory (process research) and knowledge-based view of the firm. The research methodologies are becoming increasingly sophisticated and now frequently combine both quantitative and qualitative approaches and unique and new statistical tools. Finally, this review examines the future directions, both in terms of theory and methodologies, as the study of strategic management evolves.Yeshttps://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/manuscript-submission-guideline

Managerial and organizational Hungarian-Western joint ventures

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:5359.0952(14/92) / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreGBUnited Kingdo