Research Summary We draw upon applied psychology literature to explore interagent differences in perceived risk to their equity when making strategic risk decisions. Our theory suggests behavioral agency's predicted negative relationship between equity risk bearing and strategic risk taking is contingent upon four personality traits. Our empirical analyses, based on personality profiles of 158 Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) of S&P 1,500 firms in manufacturing industries, indicate the relationship between executive risk bearing and strategic risk taking crosses from negative to positive for high extraversion, greater openness, and low conscientiousness. These findings demonstrate that agency based predictions of CEO risk taking in response to compensation—and board attempts at creating incentive alignment using compensation—are enhanced by integrating insights from personality trait literature. Managerial Summary We study the effect of CEO personality on their behavioral responses to stock option pay. Our findings reveal that CEOs that score high on extraversion or openness and low on conscientiousness are less likely to decrease their firm's strategic risk taking as the value of their stock options increases. That is, the tendency of CEOs to become more risk averse in their strategic choices as their option wealth increases (due to loss aversion) is weaker for highly extraverted and more open CEOs, but stronger for more conscientiousness CEOs. Overall, our findings suggest that board of directors need to consider personality traits of their CEOs when designing compensation packages with the intention to align incentives of CEOs with shareholder risk preferences.

Academy of Management Journal AbstractDrawing on theories of behavioral decision making and situational strength, we developed and tested a multilevel model that explains how the performance outcomes of personal initiative tendency depend on the extent of alignment between organizational control mechanisms and proactive individuals' risk propensities. Results from a sample of 383 middle managers operating in 34 business units of a large multinational corporation indicated that risk propensity weakens the positive relationship between personal initiative tendency and job performance. This negative moderating effect was further amplified when middle managers receive high job autonomy but was attenuated in business units with a strong performance management context. We discuss the implications of these findings for research on proactivity, risk taking, and organizational control.

Drawing on corporate entrepreneurship (CE) and social network research, this study focuses on strategic renewal as a form of CE and examines the impact of boundary-spanning at top and middle management levels on business units' exploratory innovation. Analyses of multi-source and multi-level data, collected from 72 top managers (TMs) and 397 middle managers (MMs) operating in 34 units of a multinational organization, indicate that TMs' boundaryspanning is positively related to units' exploratory innovation, but also has a cascading effect on MMs by increasing their perceived role conflict. MMs' role conflict is negatively related to units' exploratory innovation and thus offsets some of the benefits gained through TMs' boundary-spanning activities. Taking a configurational perspective on social exchanges at multiple levels, we show that role conflict is reduced by overlapping boundary-spanning ties among TMs and MMs. Surprisingly, MMs' boundary-spanning does not relate to exploratory innovation. Our study shows that with regard to boundary-spanning, a top-down approach to CE as strategic renewal may be most effective because TMs play a key role in driving exploratory innovation. However, TMs need to be aware of the cascading social liabilities of their boundary-spanning behavior and ensure MMs develop similar networks. We advance ongoing debates in studies about CE and social networks by providing empirically validated insights into who drives strategic renewal and by uncovering the benefits and costs of social exchanges for strategic renewal. Furthermore, we uncover potential causes of mixed findings in network theory research and highlight a remedy to social liabilities.

No abstract

The following full text is an Author's version postprint which may differ from the publisher's version.For additional information about this publication click this link. https://repository.ubn.ru.nl/handle/2066/253280Please be advised that this information was generated on 2023-01-02 and may be subject to change.