CEO-TMT Interface Perspective: CEO-TMT Isolation and Enterprise Innovation Intensity under CEO Succession Background

Abstract

Abstract: Under the context of the CEO succession, new CEOs always face challenges from new positions and new top management teams. Their comparative attributes with existing top managers indicate the interaction and integration process between new CEOs and the existing top managers, thus impacting how new CEOs and top management teams (TMTs) will make decisions on corporate innovation strategies. Based on CEO-TMT interface perspective and team faultline theory, this research proposes that CEO-TMT isolation is a new concept about CEO-TMT relational demography in describing the multiple comparative attributes between a new CEO and the rest of the TMT. The research tests how CEO-TMT isolation will influence corporate innovation intensity. Through analyzing the data from 657 Chinese mainboard-listed companies over the period 2012-2014, this study finds that knowledge-based CEO-TMT isolation is positively associated with corporate innovation, while the identity-based CEO-TMT isolation mitigates this effect and the status-based CEO-TMT isolation strengthens this effect. In addition, this research suggests that knowledge-based CEO-TMT isolation will have the most positive effect on corporate innovation intensity under contender succession. Overall, this research deepens our understanding about the configuration of TMT composition and enriches the research about the impact of the CEO-TMT interface on corporate innovation.

Key words: CEO-TMT isolation, CEO-TMT interface, CEO succession, corporate innovation intensity, team faultlines

Zhang Yue, Liang Qiaozhuan, Chen Hui. CEO-TMT Interface Perspective: CEO-TMT Isolation and Enterprise Innovation Intensity under CEO Succession Background[J]. Management Review, 2021, 33(12): 100-114.

References

[1] Seong S., Kim Y., Szulanski G. Leadership, Innovation, and Strategic Change:A Conversation with Michael Tushman[J]. Journal of Management Inquiry, 2015, 24(4):370-381
[2] Nijstad B. A., Bergerselman F., De Dreu C. K. W. Innovation in Top Management Teams:Minority Dissent, Transformational Leadership, and Radical Innovations[J]. European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology, 2014, 23(2):310-322
[3] Hambrick D. C., Mason P. A. Upper Echelons:The Organization as a Reflection of Its Top Managers[J]. Social Science Electronic Publishing, 1984, 9(2):193-206
[4] 李小青, 宋淑利, 王亚宏. CEO知识禀赋对探索性创新的影响研究——董事会社会网络的调节作用[J]. 科技进步与对策, 2017, 34(5):127-134
[5] 薛跃, 陈巧. CEO特征对R&D投入的影响[J]. 华东师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2014, 46(6):129-153
[6] 崔小雨, 陈春花, 苏涛. 高管团队异质性与组织绩效的关系研究:一项Meta分析的检验[J]. 管理评论, 2018, 30(9):152-163
[7] 张平, 黄智文, 高小平. 企业政治关联与创业企业创新能力的研究——高层管理团队特征的影响[J]. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2014, 35(3):117-125
[8] 蔡俊亚, 党兴华. 创业导向与创新绩效:高管团队特征和市场动态性的影响[J]. 管理科学, 2015, 28(5):42-53
[9] 杨国忠, 杨明珠. 基于CEO变动调节效应的高管团队特征对企业研发投资及技术创新绩效的影响研究[J]. 工业技术经济, 2016, 35(2):51-59
[10] 潘清泉, 唐刘钊, 韦慧民. 高管团队断裂带、创新能力与国际化战略——基于上市公司数据的实证研究[J]. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2015, 36(10):111-122
[11] 卫武, 易志伟. 高管团队异质性、断层线与创新战略——注意力配置的调节作用[J]. 技术经济, 2017, 36(1):35-40
[12] 赵丙艳, 葛玉辉, 刘喜怀. TMT认知、断裂带对创新绩效的影响:战略柔性的调节作用[J]. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2016, 37(6):112-122
[13] 刘志迎, 赵雪. 高管团队断裂带对二元创新的影响——基于中国上市医药企业的实证研究[J]. 技术经济, 2017, 36(12):45-52
[14] Cannella A. A., Holcomb T. R. A Multi-Level Analysis of the Upper-Echelons Model:Planting Seeds for Future Research[J]. Research in Multi-Level Issues, 2016, 4(5):263-273
[15] 韩洁, 田高良, 司毅. CEO变更对企业研发投入的影响研究[J]. 西安交通大学学报(社会科学版), 2015, 35(2):27-35
[16] 刘鑫, 薛有志. CEO继任、业绩偏离度和公司研发投入——基于战略变革方向的视角[J]. 南开管理评论, 2015, 18(3):34-47
[17] Shen W., Cannella A. A. Revisiting the Performance Consequences of CEO Succession:The Impacts of Successor Type, Post Succession Senior Executive Turnover, and Departing CEO Tenure[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2002, 45(4):717-733
[18] Tsui A. S., Egan T. D., O'reilly C. A. Being Different:Relational Demography and Organizational Attachment[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1992, 37(4):549-579
[19] Nathan B. R., Mohrman A. M., Milliman J. Interpersonal Relations as a Context for the Effects of Appraisal Interviews on Performance and Satisfaction:A Longitudinal Study[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 1991, 34(2):352-369
[20] 谢荷锋, 周伟伟. 高管流动、关系人口学与跨企业战略学习——基于国内制造业上市公司的实证检验[J]. 商业研究, 2015, 59(7):121-130
[21] 刘鑫. 基于年龄视角的CEO接班人遴选机制对企业战略创新的影响[J]. 管理学报, 2015, 12(5):668-678
[22] 曹乐宇. CEO-技术高管团队垂直对特征与企业创新绩效[D]. 西安工业大学博士学位论文, 2017
[23] Tsui A. S., O'reilly C. A. Beyond Simple Demographic Effects:The Importance of Relational Demography in Superior-Subordinate Dyads[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 1989, 32(2):402-423
[24] Lau D. C., Murnighan J. K. Demographic Diversity and Faultlines:The Compositional Dynamics of Organizational Groups[J]. Academy of Management Review, 1998, 23(2):325-340
[25] Harrison D. A., Gavin J. H., Florey A. T. Time, Teams, and Task Performance:Changing Effects of Surface- and Deep-Level Diversity on Group Functioning[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2002, 45(5):1029-1045
[26] Carton A. M., Cummings J. N. A Theory of Subgroups in Work Teams[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2012, 37(3):441-470
[27] Van Knippenberg D., De Dreu C. K., Homan A. C. Work Group Diversity and Group Performance:An Integrative Model and Research Agenda[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2004, 89(6):1008-1022
[28] Haleblian J., Finkelstein S. Top Management Team Size, CEO Dominance, and Firm Performance:The Moderating Roles of Environmental Turbulence and Discretion[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 1993, 36(4):844-863
[29] Hambrick D. C. Upper Echelons Theory:An Update[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2007, 32(2):334-343
[30] Smith K. G., Smith K. A., Olian J. D., et al. Top Management Team Demography and Process:The Role of Social Integration and Communication[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1994, 39(3):412-438
[31] Xie X. Y., Wang W. L., Qi Z. J. The Effects of TMT Faultline Configuration on a Firm's Short-term Performance and Innovation Activities[J]. Journal of Management & Organization, 2015, 21(5):558-572
[32] Stewart G. L., Barrick M. R. Team Structure and Performance:Assessing the Mediating Role of Intrateam Process and the Moderating Role of Task Type[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2000, 43(2):135-148
[33] Tajfel H., Turner J. C. The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior[J]. Political Psychology, 1986, 13(3):7-24
[34] Eisenhardt K. M., Bourgeois L. J. Politics of Strategic Decision Making in High-Velocity Environments:Toward a Midrange Theory[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 1988, 31(4):737-770
[35] 贾新华, 董保宝. CEO权力支配性对组织创新行为的倒U型影响[J]. 税务与经济, 2020, (2):28-35
[36] 张维今, 李凯, 王淑梅. CEO权力的调节作用下董事会资本对公司创新的内在机制影响研究[J]. 管理评论, 2018, 30(4):70-82
[37] Ocasio W., Kim H. The Circulation of Corporate Control:Selection of Functional Backgrounds of New CEOs in Large U.S. Manufacturing Firms, 1981-1992[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1999, 44(3):532-562
[38] Helmich D. L., Brown W. B. Successor Type and Organizational Change in the Corporate Enterprise[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1972, 17(3):371-381
[39] Austin J. R. Transactive Memory in Organizational Groups:The Effects of Content, Consensus, Specialization, and Accuracy on Group Performance[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2003, 88(5):866-878
[40] 黄海艳, 武蓓. 交互记忆系统、动态能力与创新绩效关系研究[J]. 科研管理, 2016, 37(4):68-76
[41] 吕逸婧, 陈守明, 邵婉玲. 高管团队交互记忆系统与组织绩效:战略柔性的中介作用[J]. 南开管理评论, 2018, 21(1):216-224
[42] 黄海艳. 交互记忆系统与研发团队的创新绩效:以心理安全为调节变量[J]. 管理评论, 2014, 26(12):91-99
[43] Hambrick D. C., Geletkanycz M. A., Fredrickson J. W. Top Executive Commitment to the Status Quo:Some Tests of Its Determinants[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 1993, 14(6):401-418
[44] 孟祥展, 张俊瑞, 白雪莲. 外聘CEO职业经历、任期与公司经营战略变革的关系[J]. 管理评论, 2018, 30(8):168-181
[45] 李卫宁, 张祎宁. 新任CEO特征、管理团队调整与企业绩效——基于ST上市公司的数据实证[J]. 中国管理科学, 2014, 22(8):47-55
[46] Hansen J. A. Innovation, Firm Size, and Firm Age[J]. Small Business Economics, 1992, 4(1):37-44
[47] Chung Y., Shaw J. B., Jackson S. E. Faultline Index for Groups (FIG):A Guide for SAS Users[EB/OL]. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309121718_Faultline_Index_for_Groups_FIG_SAS_Code, 2006
[48] Carton A. M., Cummings J. N. The Impact of Subgroup Type and Subgroup Configurational Properties on Work Team Performance[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2013, 98(5):732-758
[49] Oakley J. G. Gender-based Barriers to Senior Management Positions:Understanding the Scarcity of Female CEOs[J]. Journal of Business Ethics, 2000, 27(4):321-334
[50] 郭葆春, 刘艳. 高管团队垂直对异质性与R&D投资行为研究——基于生物医药行业的实证分析[J]. 科技管理研究, 2015, 35(21):35-40
[51] Cullen M. M., Brennan N. M. Differentiating Control, Monitoring and Oversight:Influence of Power Relations on Boards of Directors-Insights from Investment Fund Boards[J]. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 2017, 30(8):1867-1894
[52] Finkelstein S. Power in Top Management Teams:Dimensions, Measurement, and Validation[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 1992, 35(3):505-538
[53] 潘越, 戴亦一, 吴超鹏, 等. 社会资本、政治关系与公司投资决策[J]. 经济研究, 2009, 44(11):82-94
[54] Choi S. B., Williams C. The Impact of Innovation Intensity, Scope, and Spillovers on Sales Growth in Chinese Firms[J]. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 2014, 31(1):25-46
[55] 刘新民, 王垒, 吴士健. CEO继任类型对战略变革的影响研究:高管团队重组的中介作用[J]. 管理评论, 2013, 25(8):102-112
[56] Zajac E. J. CEO Selection, Succession, Compensation and Firm Performance:A Theoretical Integration and Empirical Analysis[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 1990, 11(3):217-230
[57] Edwards J. R., Lambert L. S. Methods for Integrating Moderation and Mediation:A General Analytical Framework Using Moderated Path Analysis[J]. Psychological Methods, 2007, 12(1):1-22
[58] Han S., Nanda V. K., Silveri S. CEO Power and Firm Performance Under Pressure[J]. Financial Management, 2016, 45(2):369-400
[59] 卫旭华, 刘咏梅, 岳柳青. 高管团队权力不平等对企业创新强度的影响——有调节的中介效应[J]. 南开管理评论, 2015, 18(3):24-33