Does proactive personality matter in leadership transitions? Effects of proactive personality on new leader identification and responses to new leaders and their change agendas

Despite the growing frequency of leadership transitions and their significant impact on team and organizational performance, little research has examined why and how teams develop an identification with a new leader or their subsequent receptiveness to the new leader’s change initiatives. Drawing from the contrast and congruence effects and the theoretical perspectives of leader identification, this study empirically tests a model in which the congruence of new leaders’ and their teams’ proactive personalities foster new leader identification, as well as the team’s behavioral responses to the new leader’s change agenda. This effect is strongest when the new leader’s proactive personality is higher than that of the former leader’s proactive personality (positive contrast). Our findings of a four-wave “before-and-after” transition survey of 155 hotel employees and 51 new leaders, achieved through polynomial regression analyses, proved very insightful. Essentially, we found that the congruence between a new leader’s and his/her team’s proactive personalities and the positive contrast between a former leader’s and the new leader’s proactive personalities enhanced new leader identification and the team’s shared identification with the new leader’s change agenda, and, thereby led the team to exhibit more behavioral engagement with, and voice behavior about, the new leader’s change agenda

CEO succession and the CEO’s commitment to the status quo

Chief executive officer (CEO) commitment to the status quo (CSQ) is expected to play an important role in any firm’s strategic adaptation. CSQ is used often as an explanation for strategic change occurring after CEO succession: new CEOs are expected to reveal a lower CSQ than established CEOs. Although widely accepted in the literature, this relationship remains imputed but unobserved. We address this research gap and analyze whether new CEOs reveal lower CSQ than established CEOs. By analyzing the letters to the shareholders of German HDAX firms, we find empirical support for our hypothesis of a lower CSQ of newly appointed CEOs compared to established CEOs. However, our detailed analyses provide a differentiated picture. We find support for a lower CSQ of successors after a forced CEO turnover compared to successors after a voluntary turnover, which indicates an influence of the mandate for change on the CEO’s CSQ. However, against the widespread assumption, we do not find support for a lower CSQ of outside successors compared to inside successors, which calls for deeper analyses of the insiderness of new CEOs. Further, our supplementary analyses propose a revised tenure effect: the widely assumed relationship of an increase in CSQ when CEO tenure increases might be driven mainly by the event of CEO succession and may not universally and continuously increase over time, pointing to a “window of opportunity” to initiate strategic change shortly after the succession event. By analyzing the relationship between CEO succession and CEO CSQ, our results contribute to the CSQ literature and provide fruitful impulses for the CEO succession literature