Abstract: Time is an overlooked but important condition in the TMT heterogeneity—performance link. Drawing on upper echelon and signaling theories, we examine the moderating effect of time (the age of the firm) on the relationship between informational and social category heterogeneity of top management teams (TMTs) and firm outcomes. We argue that the costs of heterogeneity will reduce the book value of the firm, but also that this negative effect will decline over time. We also suggest that when the firm is new, investors rely on TMTs’ heterogeneity as a signal for firm quality. TMT informational heterogeneity will increase the market value of the firm, while social category based heterogeneity will decrease this value. Over time, however, investors will rely less on the signals from TMT characteristics and rely more on the firm’s track record; hence as firms age, the impact of TMT heterogeneity on market value will lessen.

Abstract: This study examines the intricate relationships between CEO dominance, perceived environment, and competitive behavior, and the implications of those interplays for firm performance. Research results based on a large sample collected from firms in Taiwan and China show that CEO dominance exerts a negative influence on competitive aggressiveness, especially in more munificent environments, while aggressiveness produces better performance in less munificent environments. Competitive aggressiveness also plays a prominent mediating role in converting CEO dominance into firm performance. Moreover, moderated-mediation analyses show that the intermediary role of aggressiveness is more significant in less munificent environments. The research contributes to the competitive dynamics and upper-echelons theories by revealing the significance of TMT power concerns and competitive initiatives that are required for enhancing firm performance under resourceful environments.

Abstract: Extant innovation literature accords either a passive role to corporate managers or views their involvement negatively due to their perceived interference with individual level creativity. I adapt an evolutionary perspective to the innovation process within a multidivisional firm to propose that the involvement of corporate managers allows large multidivisional companies to innovate more efficiently and at a higher quality level. In the empirical test of my theory using data from the US pharmaceutical industry I exploit a natural experiment related to the change of constituency laws in the US increasing the involvement of senior managers in organizational matters in the treated group. This study should contribute to our understanding of top-down influences on firm’s ability to commercialize its innovation effort.

Abstract: The top management team (TMT) plays an important role in determining how resources are allocated and reallocated among the business units of the large, multi-business firm. However, firms tend to maintain spending levels from one year to the next, rather than strategically reallocating their resources. From an assessment of more than 137,000 executives and their professional titles, we develop a cluster of configuration profiles to capture the interdependence of executives by characterizing their overall functional structures. Our primary analysis indicates that firms with a balanced, functional and business unit influence within the TMT tend to strategically reallocate resources more actively than firms with functionally-focused configuration profiles.

Abstract: This paper brings together the “upper echelons” perspective and the imprinting literature to explore where top management team (TMT) tenure heterogeneity effects come from. Our theory suggests that, when joining an organization, employees adopt the logics most prevalent in the industry at the time, and bear their imprint for the rest of their tenure in the organization. This leads us to conclude that the dispersion of tenures leads to heterogeneity of cognitions and choices because members of a common tenure cohort have all been imprinted by the same industry logic. We find support for our predictions using extensive data from the population of U.S. public pharmaceutical firms from 1992 through 2006.