Chief strategy officers: Contingency analysis of their presence in top management teams

Abstract

Drawing upon contingency theory, we analyze the antecedents and performance consequences of chief strategy officer (CSO) presence in top management teams (TMTs). We argue that strategic and structural complexity affects the decision to have a CSO in the TMT and its effect on firm performance. The results of a sample of S&P 500 firms over a five-year period reveal that diversification, acquisition activity, and TMT role interdependence are positively associated with CSO presence. However, we also find that the structural choice to have a CSO in the TMT does not significantly affect a firm's financial performance. This first systematic analysis of CSO presence informs research on CSOs and contributes to the emerging literature on TMT structure.

Chief human resources officers on top management teams: an empirical analysis of contingency, institutional, and homophily antecedents

“…By exploring the reasons for CHRO presence, we also intend to contribute to strategic management and upper echelon research by answering the key research questions of how contextual conditions, organizations, and CEOs affect TMT structures and which theories and research methods are suitable for studying this issue (Carpenter et al 2004). Our research shows that the contingency theory, which has been the dominant theoretical approach for identifying the antecedents of chief officers' presence in existing research (e.g., Hambrick and Cannella 2004;Menz and Scheef 2014;Nath and Mahajan 2008), should be supplemented by other approaches, such as homophily and the institutional theory. With regard to recent practitioneroriented recommendations highlighting the evolving role of the CHRO (Challah 2006;Charan et al 2015), our study helps to explain the reality behind CHRO choices.…”

“…Within this area, a growing body of research now examines the presence of diverse TMT members, who are the top executive officers responsible for certain functional domains and report directly to the chief executive officer (CEO) (Hambrick and Cannella 2004;Menz 2012;Menz and Scheef 2014;Nath and Mahajan 2008;Preston et al 2008;Strand 2013). A key premise of these studies is that the TMT structure, and the presence or absence of certain TMT positions, opens a ''window into organizations'' (Beckmann and Burton 2011, p. 52).…”

The Corporate Headquarters in the Contemporary Corporation: Advancing a Multimarket Firm Perspective

“…For example, CEOs with a finance background are likely to be found in firms that are more diversified and/or are more active acquirers (Jensen & Zajac, 2004;Song, 1982) and those CHQ executives may favor financial over other types of control systems. Further, there have recently been important (new) role additions to the TMT (Menz, 2012), such as the chief strategy officer position (Menz & Scheef, 2014), which have different task priorities and contribute different perspectives to the CHQ. Future studies should therefore examine how these executive characteristics and responsibilities affect the CHQ's functioning.…”

What Do We Know About Corporate Headquarters? A Review, Integration, and Research Agenda

“…Similar to a recent study on the corporate HR function (Gospel & Sako, 2010), we also encourage scholars to explore the nature and emergence of other corporate functions. For example, although recent studies findings' suggest that the corporate strategy function has become more important, as indicated by an increasing number of firm's with a chief strategy officer in the TMT (Menz & Scheef, 2013), we have little insights into the "functioning" of this corporate function.…”