Metacritiques of Upper Echelons Theory: Verdicts and Recommendations for Future Research

Abstract

After more than 35 years, Hambrick and Mason’s upper echelons theory (UET) stands as one of the most influential perspectives in management research. However, as the literature and its attendant reviews have become more numerous and specialized, discussion of the fundamental conceptual and methodological critiques leveled against research utilizing the UET perspective has grown fragmented. As such, the first aim of the present review is to identify and synthesize a set of common critiques levied against UET research. In doing so, we unpack important nuance within each critique while establishing a common vocabulary to facilitate greater consistency in how these critiques are discussed by scholars, editors, and reviewers. Next, we analyze the past decade of UET research (i.e., empirical and conceptual articles) to provide a progress report on the state of the literature as it pertains to each critique. Based on this analysis, we issue a “verdict,” providing clear guidance on what issues still need to be resolved and offering clear recommendations for UET scholars moving forward. Finally, we close by taking stock of how our recommendations position UET scholars to embrace the task of providing impactful insights on emerging challenges facing top executives.

What is (s)he Worth? Exploring Mechanisms and Boundary Conditions of the Relationship Between CEO Extraversion and Pay

“…First, although we speculate that the lower pay received by more extraverted female CEOs compared to more extraverted male CEOs may be the result of greater interpersonal conflict between female CEOs and their boards, we were not able to directly assess this mechanism. The inability to directly tap into relational processes within the board room has long been a problem in strategic management research (Neely et al ., 2020). Thus, we encourage future research that employs creative methods to capture relational processes between CEOs and their boards.…”

How to respond to competitors' green success for improving performance: The moderating role of organizational ambidexterity

“…On the basis of upper echelons theory, firms will take strategic actions according to executives' perception of dynamic environment and their consideration of how firms' situations should be managed (Hambrick & Mason, 1984; Neely, Lovelace, Cowen, & Hiller, 2020; Steinbach et al, 2019). Executives with higher awareness of environmental risks are largely aware of negative environmental impacts and environmental pressures from legislations, stakeholders, and consumers, whereas executives with higher awareness of environmental benefits hold that environmental management practices contribute to reducing waste, saving costs, and improving product process and corporate reputation (Brammer et al, 2011; Gadenne & Mckeiver, 2009).…”

Strategic Leadership of Innovation: A Framework for Future Research

“…Reviews on strategic leadership have focused on synthesizing strategic leadership constructs, categorizing the motivations of executive behavior, and bringing order to the plethora of firm‐level constructs that strategic leaders influence (Bromiley and Rau 2016; Samimi et al., 2020; Wowak et al., 2017). Given the extensive number of studies in the field, some recent reviews have taken more specific approaches, such as focusing on strategic leadership interfaces or consolidating relevant critiques on the field (Georgakakis et al., 2019; Neely et al., 2020; Simsek et al., 2018). In turn, innovation reviews attempt to synthesize a field that spans multiple disciplines and levels of analysis, has a wide range of organizational predictors, and requires conceptualization and measurement directions (Acar et al., 2019; Anderson et al., 2014; Keupp et al., 2012).…”