This study linked CEO hubris to firm risk taking and examined the moderating role of managerial discretion in this relationship. Drawing on upper echelons theory and behavioral decision theory, we developed and tested hypotheses using original survey data from 2,790 CEOs of diverse manufacturing firms in China. The positive relationship between CEO hubris and firm risk taking was found to be stronger when CEO managerial discretion was stronger: when a firm faced munificent but complex markets; had less inertia and more intangible resources; had a CEO who also chaired its board; and had a CEO who was not politically appointed.

Nonlinear nanostructured surfaces provide a paradigm shift in nonlinear optics with new ways to control and manipulate frequency conversion processes at the nanoscale, also offering novel opportunities for applications in photonics, chemistry, material science, and biosensing. Here, we develop a general approach to employ sharp resonances in metasurfaces originated from the physics of bound states in the continuum for both engineering and enhancing the nonlinear response. We study experimentally the third-harmonic generation from metasurfaces composed of symmetry-broken silicon meta-atoms and reveal that the harmonic generation intensity depends critically on the asymmetry parameter. We employ the concept of the critical coupling of light to the metasurface resonances to uncover the effect of radiative and nonradiative losses on the nonlinear conversion efficiency.

Research Summary: While prior studies have predominantly shown that CEO narcissism and hubris exhibit similar effects on various strategic decisions and outcomes, this study aims to explore the mechanisms underlying how narcissistic versus hubristic CEOs affect their firms differently. Specifically, we investigate how peer influence moderates the CEO narcissism/hubris—corporate social responsibility (CSR). With a sample of S&P 1500 firms for 2003–2010, we find that the positive relationship between CEO narcissism and CSR is strengthened (weakened) when board‐interlocked peer firms invest less (more) intensively in CSR than a CEO's own firm; the negative relationship between CEO hubris and CSR is strengthened when peer firms are engaged in less CSR than a CEO's own firm. Managerial Summary: Some CEOs are more narcissistic while others may be more hubristic, but these two groups of CEOs hold different attitudes toward the extent to which their firms should engage in corporate social responsibility (CSR). Our findings with a large sample of U.S. publically listed firms suggest that narcissistic CEOs care more about CSR, but hubristic CEOs care less. Interestingly, when narcissistic CEOs observe their peer firms engaging in more or less CSR than their own firms, they tend to respond in an opposite manner; in contrast, hubristic CEOs will only engage in even less CSR when their peers also do not emphasize CSR. Our findings point to a fundamental difference between CEO narcissism and hubris in terms of how they affect firms' CSR decisions based on their social comparison with peer firms.