IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i10p2914-d233465.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Influence of Managerial Mindfulness on Innovation: Evidence from China

Author

Listed:
  • Yuanyuan Hu

    (School of Economics and Management, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China)

  • Xiaoping Zhao

    (Antai College of Economics and Management, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200030, China)

  • Yang Chen

    (Department of Biochemical Engineering, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK)

Abstract

This study attempts to investigate the influence of managerial mindfulness on firm innovation. Managerial mindfulness is defined as a collective psychological state shared by top management team (TMT) members and represents their collective attention to present-moment events and experiences. Drawing from two psychological mechanisms of mindfulness, we argue that managerial mindfulness can positively affect R&D intensity—a proxy for firm innovation. The first psychological mechanism is that mindfulness facilitates self-regulation. By facilitating self-regulation, managerial mindfulness enables TMT members to behave less opportunistically and act in a less self-serving manner. Therefore, TMT members are concerned about the shareholders’ interests in long-term value creation and hence are willing to take more risk such as investing more in R&D. The second psychological mechanism is that mindfulness facilitates goal-pursuit, especially for intrinsic goals. Mindful TMT members are autonomously motivated to pursue goals that are more satisfying, persist for longer durations, and show greater success than goals that are extrinsically motivated; mindful TMT members are likely to view R&D as an intrinsic goal to pursue. In addition to the main effect, this study also examines several moderators and suggests that the positive relationship between managerial mindfulness and R&D intensity is moderated by firm age, slack resources, and past financial performance. Specifically, this relationship becomes weaker when a firm grows older and the firm has better past financial performance, while it is stronger when a firm has greater slack resources. To empirically test our hypotheses, we rely on a sample of Chinese listed companies and collect data from the China Stock Market and Accounting Research (CSMAR). Feasible generalized least squares (FGLS) regression is adopted due to the presence of significant autocorrelations and heteroskedasticity. The empirical analyses provide full support for our hypotheses. Therefore, this study contributes to literature of mindfulness, as well as studies on TMT’s influence on firm strategy and decision-making.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuanyuan Hu & Xiaoping Zhao & Yang Chen, 2019. "The Influence of Managerial Mindfulness on Innovation: Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-20, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:10:p:2914-:d:233465
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/10/2914/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/10/2914/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jun Xia & Xufei Ma & Jane W. Lu & Daphne W. Yiu, 2014. "Outward foreign direct investment by emerging market firms: A resource dependence logic," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(9), pages 1343-1363, September.
    2. Hongjin Zhu & Toru Yoshikawa, 2016. "Contingent value of director identification: The role of government directors in monitoring and resource provision in an emerging economy," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(8), pages 1787-1807, August.
    3. Lori Rosenkopf & Atul Nerkar, 2001. "Beyond local search: boundary‐spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 287-306, April.
    4. Christian Omobhude & Shih-Hsin Chen, 2019. "The Roles and Measurements of Proximity in Sustained Technology Development: A Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-30, January.
    5. Giovanni Dosi, 2000. "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation," Chapters, in: Innovation, Organization and Economic Dynamics, chapter 2, pages 63-114, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Aija Leiponen, 2005. "Organization of Knowledge and Innovation: The Case of Finnish Business Services," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 185-203.
    7. Cuili Qian & Heli Wang & Xuesong Geng & Yangxin Yu, 2017. "Rent appropriation of knowledge-based assets and firm performance when institutions are weak: A study of Chinese publicly listed firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(4), pages 892-911, April.
    8. Cohen, Wesley M & Levinthal, Daniel A, 1989. "Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(397), pages 569-596, September.
    9. Enrique Loredo & Nuria Lopez-Mielgo & Gustavo Pineiro-Villaverde & María Teresa García-Álvarez, 2019. "Utilities: Innovation and Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-13, February.
    10. Elitsa R. Banalieva & Kimberly A. Eddleston & Thomas M. Zellweger, 2015. "When do family firms have an advantage in transitioning economies? Toward a dynamic institution-based view," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(9), pages 1358-1377, September.
    11. Don Knight & Craig L. Pearce & Ken G. Smith & Judy D. Olian & Henry P. Sims & Ken A. Smith & Patrick Flood, 1999. "Top management team diversity, group process, and strategic consensus," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(5), pages 445-465, May.
    12. William Ocasio, 2011. "Attention to Attention," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1286-1296, October.
    13. BarNir, Anat & Gallaugher, John M. & Auger, Pat, 2003. "Business process digitization, strategy, and the impact of firm age and size: the case of the magazine publishing industry," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 789-814, November.
    14. Langzi Chen & Zhihong Chen & Jian Li, 2019. "Can Trade Credit Maintain Sustainable R&D Investment of SMEs?—Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-16, February.
    15. Yuanyuan Hu & Shouming Chen & Jian Wang, 2018. "Managerial Humanistic Attention and CSR: Do Firm Characteristics Matter?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-18, November.
    16. Chang-Yang Lee, 2002. "Industry R&D intensity distributions: regularities and underlying determinants," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 307-341.
    17. Brian K. Boyd, 1995. "CEO duality and firm performance: A contingency model," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(4), pages 301-312.
    18. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    19. Dane M. Christensen & Dan S. Dhaliwal & Steven Boivie & Scott D. Graffin, 2015. "Top management conservatism and corporate risk strategies: Evidence from managers' personal political orientation and corporate tax avoidance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(12), pages 1918-1938, December.
    20. Zhipeng Zang & Qiwei Zhu & Helena Mogorrón-Guerrero, 2019. "How Does R&D Investment Affect the Financial Performance of Cultural and Creative Enterprises? The Moderating Effect of Actual Controller," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-19, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Qiuzhen Ren & Yingjie Xu & Ranran Zhou & Jingdong Liu, 2020. "Can CEO’s Humble Leadership Behavior Really Improve Enterprise Performance and Sustainability? A Case Study of Chinese Start-Up Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-25, April.
    2. Unai Arzubiaga & Manel Plana-Farran & Agnès Ros-Morente & Albert Joana & Sílvia Solé, 2021. "Mindfulness and Next-Generation Members of Family Firms: A Source for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-13, May.
    3. Mavis Agyemang Opoku & Suk Bong Choi & Seung-Wan Kang, 2019. "Servant Leadership and Innovative Behaviour: An Empirical Analysis of Ghana’s Manufacturing Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-18, November.
    4. Chunjia Hu & Haili Zhang & Michael Song & Dapeng Liang, 2019. "Past Performance, Organizational Aspiration, and Organizational Performance: The Moderating Effect of Environmental Jolts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-16, August.
    5. Manel Plana-Farran & Àngel Blanch & Silvia Solé, 2022. "The Role of Mindfulness in Business Administration (B.A.) University Students’ Career Prospects and Concerns about the Future," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-10, January.
    6. Panditharathne Nishantha Kumara Wijesekara Panditharathne & Zhixia Chen, 2021. "An Integrative Review on the Research Progress of Mindfulness and Its Implications at the Workplace," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-27, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wang, Heli & Chen, Wei-Ru, 2010. "Is firm-specific innovation associated with greater value appropriation? The roles of environmental dynamism and technological diversity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 141-154, February.
    2. Nanditha Mathew & George Paily, 2022. "STI-DUI innovation modes and firm performance in the Indian capital goods industry: Do small firms differ from large ones?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 435-458, April.
    3. Mathew, Nanditha & Paily, George, 2020. "STI-DUI innovation modes and firm performance in the Indian capital goods industry: Do small firms differ from large ones?," MERIT Working Papers 2020-008, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    4. Jatinder S. Sidhu & Harry R. Commandeur & Henk W. Volberda, 2007. "The Multifaceted Nature of Exploration and Exploitation: Value of Supply, Demand, and Spatial Search for Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(1), pages 20-38, February.
    5. Hoppmann, Joern & Wu, Geng & Johnson, Jillian, 2021. "The impact of demand-pull and technology-push policies on firms’ knowledge search," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    6. Stefan Wagner & Karin Hoisl & Grid Thoma, 2014. "Overcoming localization of knowledge — the role of professional service firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(11), pages 1671-1688, November.
    7. Lahr, Henry & Mina, Andrea, 2016. "Venture capital investments and the technological performance of portfolio firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 303-318.
    8. Uwe Cantner, 2017. "Foundations of Economic Change: An Extended Schumpeterian Approach," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Andreas Pyka & Uwe Cantner (ed.), Foundations of Economic Change, pages 9-49, Springer.
    9. Haji Ali Beigi, Maryam, 2021. "Is more diverse always the better? External knowledge source clusters and innovation performance in Germany," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 156, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    10. Dennys Eduardo Rossetto & Roberto Carlos Bernardes & Felipe Mendes Borini & Cristiane Chaves Gattaz, 2018. "Structure and evolution of innovation research in the last 60 years: review and future trends in the field of business through the citations and co-citations analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(3), pages 1329-1363, June.
    11. Wei-Ru Chen, 2008. "Determinants of Firms' Backward- and Forward-Looking R&D Search Behavior," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(4), pages 609-622, August.
    12. Mincheol Choi & Chang-Yang Lee, 2020. "Power-law distributions of corporate innovative output: evidence from U.S. patent data," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 519-554, January.
    13. Dau, Luis Alfonso, 2018. "Contextualizing international learning: The moderating effects of mode of entry & subsidiary networks on the relationship between reforms & profitability," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 403-414.
    14. Lee, Chang-Yang, 2009. "Competition favors the prepared firm: Firms' R&D responses to competitive market pressure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 861-870, June.
    15. Fan, Shuangrui & Wang, Cong, 2021. "Firm age, ultimate ownership, and R&D investments," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 1245-1264.
    16. Haji Ali Beigi, Maryam, 2021. "Organizational innovation: Interactive role of external knowledge strategies and market dynamisms," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 159, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    17. Peeters, T.J.G., 2013. "External knowledge search and use in new product development," Other publications TiSEM 300ebb34-b090-4210-b95e-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    18. Chang-Yang Lee & Ji-Hwan Lee & Ajai S. Gaur, 2017. "Are large business groups conducive to industry innovation? The moderating role of technological appropriability," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 313-337, June.
    19. Henri A. Schildt & Markku V.J. Maula & Thomas Keil, 2005. "Explorative and Exploitative Learning from External Corporate Ventures," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 29(4), pages 493-515, July.
    20. Kuosmanen, Natalia & Valmari, Nelli, 2023. "Renewal of Companies Through Product Switching," ETLA Working Papers 104, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:10:p:2914-:d:233465. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.