Path-dependency is an unfortunate behavior (Choi, 2011). Although researchers acknowledge the omnipresent nature of path-dependent behavior (Gruber, 2010), especially in innovation processes and organizational developments (Mishina et al., 2012; Thrane et al., 2010), little research on understanding path-dependency in the context of entrepreneurial and managerial decision-making was carried out so far. Therefore, understanding antecedents and environmental conditions is the main focus of our research. This paper studies path-dependent behavior when selecting and combining means to solve entrepreneurial and managerial problems under different conditions. We focus on entrepreneurial self-efficacy (McGee et al., 2009) as its subdimensions can be utilized to distinguish entrepreneurs from managers (Chen et al., 1998). To account for several environmental conditions, we designed a unique experimental questionnaire inducing four specific scenarios in temporal order. We hypothesize that path-dependency can be burst in specific situations.
Many studies have shown a positive relationship between a strong brand and overall financial performance. Experiences of marketing specialists and initial scientific findings demonstrate that in all industries but especially in the service sector, personal communication by a firm's own employees in direct interaction with the customer plays - beside impersonal communication through mass media campaigns - a decisive role in achieving sustainable brand strength. More and more firms have discovered the potential of so-called behavioral branding as an effective way to differentiate themselves from their competition. In this article we argue that leadership within organizations is an essential instrument to foster and control behavioural branding.
This paper appraises and evaluates more than three decades of empirical research on strategic change. Strategic change research has traditionally built on either the deterministic view or the voluntaristic view – two opposing perspectives with fundamentally
different assumptions about the influence of managers on the fortunes of organizations. In addition, a dialectical view on strategic change, which aims to bridge the two traditional views, has emerged. Despite the richness and value of research within these
three perspectives, the continued accumulation of isolated and idiosyncratic insights adds little to the understanding of strategic change. In this paper, therefore, the authors assess, contrast and integrate research across the three perspectives in order to foster one cumulative body of knowledge about strategic change and to provide guidance for future research. Based on an analysis of 119 studies published in the leading academic journals in the fields of strategy and management, they consolidate existing knowledge and identify shortcomings in the cumulative body of research. On the basis of this assessment concerning prior research foci, study designs and assumptions, the authors propose four pathways for future research across the three perspectives that they believe can help foster full understanding of strategic change: (1) examinations of different types, processes and outcomes of strategic change; (2) expansion of the scope of actors considered in relation to strategic change; (3) exploration of the non-linear nature of strategic change; and (4) investigations of strategic change conundrums.
Research Summary:
We explore the selection of new CEOs with an international background as a key microfoundation of global strategy. Building on executive succession, upper echelons, and international business research, we argue that firms choose CEOs with an international background to match their task demands. We further argue that depending on the CEO’s origin from inside or outside the firm different task demands matter. Specifically, we propose that the relationship between internal (firm-level) task demands and the new CEO’s international background is more pronounced for inside successions, whereas the relationship between external (industry-level) task demands and the new CEO’s international background is more pronounced for outside successions. An analysis of a sample of 363 CEO successions in S&P 500 firms supports our reasoning.
Managerial Summary:
Choosing a CEO with the “right” experience is a crucial concern for many large firms. While firms seem to increasingly often select new CEOs with international backgrounds, by far not all firms do so. In this paper, we explore the factors that might influence this choice. Specifically, we find that the predecessor’s international background, the firm’s level of internationalization, as well as the firm’s industry internationalization have an influence on the selection of a CEO with an international background. While for inside successions the firm’s level of internationalization is particularly important, for outside successions, the level of internationalization of the firm’s industry is particularly important. Our findings inform those who search, select, and appoint new CEOs, including boards of directors and (executive search) consultants.
In ever-changing environments, strategic change manifests as a crucial concern for firms and is thus central to the fields ofmanagement and strategy. Common and foundational to
all strategic change research is time—whether recognized in the extant studies or not. In this article, we critically review the existing body of knowledge through a time lens. We organize this review along (1) conceptions of time in strategic change, (2) time and strategic change activities, and (3) time and strategic change agents. This approach facilitates our assessment of what scholars do and do not know about strategic change, especially its temporal components. Our review has particularly revealed a need to advance scholarly understanding about the processual dynamics of strategic change. We thus extend our assessment by proposing six pathways for advancing future research on strategic change that aim at fostering an understanding of its processual dynamics: (1) temporality, (2) actors, (3) emotionality, (4) tools and practices, (5) complexity, and (6) tensions.
Despite the importance that scholars and practicing managers attribute to the organizational design of the corporate headquarters (CHQ), research on changes in CHQ size is lacking. In an attempt to empirically explore the antecedents and potential consequences
of such changes, I draw on the contingency and organizational-adaptation perspectives to develop a set of hypotheses for the relationships between corporate-level strategic change (CSC) – defined as changes in the firm’s business portfolio –, changes
in the size of the CHQ and firm performance. To test the hypotheses, I analyse data from a comprehensive survey of large public firms in Europe and the US, and data from public sources pertaining to the surveyed firms. While the empirical results lend support to the hypothesized role of CSC, they also reveal differences between related CSC and unrelated CSC. However, I find no support for the expected performance implications. The study contributes to research on the CHQ, corporate-level strategic change, and the relationship between strategy and structure in the contemporary corporation. The findings also inform corporate managers and those involved in advising firms, such as strategy consultants.
