IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/ausman/v49y2024i4p636-656.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

CEO cognitive competencies in managing turnaround: Complexity and focus

Author

Listed:
  • Xin Liang

Abstract

This study examines the knowledge structures (KSs) of CEOs of firms that attempted turnaround from performance decline. We developed and tested a theoretical model that describes how two cognitive characteristics of CEOs, complexity and centrality, influence the likelihood of turnaround. It is found that CEO KS centrality directly increases the chance of turnaround. In addition, CEO KS complexity is found to increasingly improve the chance of turnaround as a firm in decline launches a greater extent of strategic change to their organization. Together, in theory, our research suggests that CEO cognitive competencies matter for managing successful turnaround attempts. Practically speaking, the findings of this article imply that to improve their chance of achieving successful turnaround, declining firms should look for CEOs who are cognitively focused or who are cognitively complex enough to engage in the degree of strategic changes launched to save the firm. JEL Classification: L20, M1

Suggested Citation

  • Xin Liang, 2024. "CEO cognitive competencies in managing turnaround: Complexity and focus," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 49(4), pages 636-656, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:ausman:v:49:y:2024:i:4:p:636-656
    DOI: 10.1177/03128962231168009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/03128962231168009
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/03128962231168009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barker, Vincent III & Barr, Pamela S., 2002. "Linking top manager attributions to strategic reorientation in declining firms attempting turnarounds," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 55(12), pages 963-979, December.
    2. Theresa K. Lant, 1992. "Aspiration Level Adaptation: An Empirical Exploration," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(5), pages 623-644, May.
    3. Colin Eden & Sue Jones & David Sims & Tim Smithin, 1981. "The Intersubjectivity Of Issues And Issues Of Intersubjectivity," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 37-47, January.
    4. C. Marlene Fiol & Anne Sigismund Huff, 1992. "Maps For Managers: Where Are We? Where Do We Go From Here?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 267-285, May.
    5. John Joseph & Vibha Gaba, 2015. "The fog of feedback: Ambiguity and firm responses to multiple aspiration levels," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(13), pages 1960-1978, December.
    6. Marjorie A. Lyles & Charles R. Schwenk, 1992. "Top Management, Strategy And Organizational Knowledge Structures," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 155-174, March.
    7. John D. Sterman, 1989. "Modeling Managerial Behavior: Misperceptions of Feedback in a Dynamic Decision Making Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 321-339, March.
    8. James P. Walsh, 1995. "Managerial and Organizational Cognition: Notes from a Trip Down Memory Lane," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 280-321, June.
    9. Sameer B. Srivastava, 2015. "Intraorganizational Network Dynamics in Times of Ambiguity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(5), pages 1365-1380, October.
    10. Vincent L. Barker Iii & Irene M. Duhaime, 1997. "Strategic Change In The Turnaround Process: Theory And Empirical Evidence," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 13-38, January.
    11. James M. Carman & Eric Langeard, 1980. "Growth strategies for service firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 1(1), pages 7-22, January.
    12. Colin Eden & Fran Ackermann & Steve Cropper, 1992. "The Analysis Of Cause Maps," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 309-324, May.
    13. Roland Calori & Gerry Johnson & Philippe Sarnin, 1994. "Ceos' cognitive maps and the scope of the organization," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(6), pages 437-457, July.
    14. Sucheta Nadkarni & V. K. Narayanan, 2007. "Strategic schemas, strategic flexibility, and firm performance: the moderating role of industry clockspeed," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 243-270, March.
    15. J. P. Eggers & Sarah Kaplan, 2009. "Cognition and Renewal: Comparing CEO and Organizational Effects on Incumbent Adaptation to Technical Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 461-477, April.
    16. Boris Kabanoff & Shane Brown, 2008. "Knowledge structures of prospectors, analyzers, and defenders: content, structure, stability, and performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 149-171, February.
    17. Marjorie A. Lyles, 1981. "Formulating strategic problems: Empirical analysis and model development," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 2(1), pages 61-75, January.
    18. Lorenz Graf-Vlachy & Jonathan Bundy & Donald C. Hambrick, 2020. "Effects of an Advancing Tenure on CEO Cognitive Complexity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 936-959, July.
    19. Wood, Robert E., 1986. "Task complexity: Definition of the construct," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 60-82, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Sucheta Nadkarni & V. K. Narayanan, 2007. "The Evolution of Collective Strategy Frames in High- and Low-Velocity Industries," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 688-710, August.
    2. Dean A. Shepherd & Jeffery S. Mcmullen & William Ocasio, 2017. "Is that an opportunity? An attention model of top managers' opportunity beliefs for strategic action," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 626-644, March.
    3. Henk W. Volberda & Nicolai J. Foss & Marjorie A. Lyles, 2010. "PERSPECTIVE---Absorbing the Concept of Absorptive Capacity: How to Realize Its Potential in the Organization Field," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 931-951, August.
    4. Fernández-Pérez, Virginia & García-Morales, Victor J. & Pullés, Dainelis Cabeza, 2016. "Entrepreneurial decision-making, external social networks and strategic flexibility: The role of CEOs' cognition," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 296-309.
    5. John Joseph & Alex J. Wilson, 2018. "The growth of the firm: An attention‐based view," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(6), pages 1779-1800, June.
    6. Schaffernicht, Martin F.G. & Groesser, Stefan N., 2014. "The SEXTANT software: A tool for automating the comparative analysis of mental models of dynamic systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 238(2), pages 566-578.
    7. Holzmayer, Florian & Schmidt, Sascha L., 2020. "Dynamic managerial capabilities, firm resources, and related business diversification – Evidence from the English Premier League," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 132-143.
    8. David P. Tegarden & Linda F. Tegarden & Steven D. Sheetz, 2009. "Cognitive Factions in a Top Management Team: Surfacing and Analyzing Cognitive Diversity using Causal Maps," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 18(6), pages 537-566, November.
    9. Hendrik Stouten & Andreas Größler, 2017. "Task Complexity in Individual Stock Control Tasks for Laboratory Experiments on Human Understanding of Dynamic Systems," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(1), pages 62-77, January.
    10. Xue, Jinjie & Liu, Junqi & Geng, Zizhen & Yuan, Hongping & Chao, Lei, 2023. "Why and when do paradoxical management capabilities matter to paradoxical pressure? An empirical investigation of the role of coopetition," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    11. van den Oever, Koen, 2017. "Uncharted waters : A behavioral approach to when, why and which organizational changes are adopted," Other publications TiSEM 0136c8c2-ecdd-4f82-8ca7-d, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    12. William Ocasio, 2011. "Attention to Attention," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1286-1296, October.
    13. Lorenz Graf-Vlachy & Jonathan Bundy & Donald C. Hambrick, 2020. "Effects of an Advancing Tenure on CEO Cognitive Complexity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 936-959, July.
    14. Hutzschenreuter, Thomas & Kleindienst, Ingo, 2013. "(How) Does discretion change over time? A contribution toward a dynamic view of managerial discretion," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 264-281.
    15. Linan Lei & Xiaobo Wu, 2022. "Thinking like a specialist or a generalist? Evidence from hidden champions in China," Asian Business & Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 21(1), pages 25-57, February.
    16. R Volkema, 2009. "Natural language and the art and science of problem/opportunity formulation: a transportation planning case analysis," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(10), pages 1360-1372, October.
    17. Jerker. Denrell & Christina. Fang & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2004. "From T-Mazes to Labyrinths: Learning from Model-Based Feedback," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(10), pages 1366-1378, October.
    18. Hazhir Rahmandad & Nelson Repenning, 2016. "Capability erosion dynamics," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 649-672, April.
    19. Nicodemus M. Mutinda & James M. Kilika, 2019. "TMT Cognitive Capability and Organizational Outcomes: A Theoretical Review," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(8), pages 31-52, August.
    20. F Ackermann & C Eden & T Williams & S Howick, 2007. "Systemic risk assessment: a case study," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(1), pages 39-51, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    CEO knowledge structure centrality; CEO knowledge structure complexity; firm turnarounds; strategic change;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L20 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - General
    • M1 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:sae:ausman:v:49:y:2024:i:4:p:636-656. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.agsm.edu.au .

    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.