IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/rvmgts/v15y2021i4d10.1007_s11846-020-00386-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The possible pitfalls of boards’ engagement in the strategic management process

Author

Listed:
  • Dmitry Khanin

    (Alfaisal University)

  • Ofir Turel

    (California State University Fullerton)

  • Chris Bart

    (McMaster University)

  • William C. McDowell

    (Bradley University)

  • Marianne Hock-Döpgen

    (COO Digitales Gründerzentrum)

Abstract

Scholars endorsing the embeddedness outlook call for directors’ greater engagement in the strategic management process. In contrast, scholars endorsing the control outlook argue that directors should focus on fulfilling their fiduciary duty of supervising top executives. Based on the behavioral-agency theory, this paper outlines a conduct outlook on boards. Recognizing the benefits of directors’ participation in the strategic management process, we hypothesize that it may boost directors’ satisfaction with firm’s performance, strategic planning, and strategy. This could lead to cognitive entrenchment and spur inertial tendencies. Structural equations modeling analysis of the data from a survey of 367 Canadian directors supports the hypotheses. These findings add knowledge to latest research on the advantages vs. disadvantages of activist boards.

Suggested Citation

  • Dmitry Khanin & Ofir Turel & Chris Bart & William C. McDowell & Marianne Hock-Döpgen, 2021. "The possible pitfalls of boards’ engagement in the strategic management process," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 1071-1093, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:rvmgts:v:15:y:2021:i:4:d:10.1007_s11846-020-00386-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s11846-020-00386-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11846-020-00386-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11846-020-00386-0?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xavier, CASTANER & Mikko, KETOKIVI, 2003. "Planning as an integrative device," HEC Research Papers Series 775, HEC Paris.
    2. Fama, Eugene F & Jensen, Michael C, 1983. "Agency Problems and Residual Claims," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(2), pages 327-349, June.
    3. Violina P. Rindova, 1999. "What Corporate Boards have to do with Strategy: A Cognitive Perspective," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(7), pages 953-975, December.
    4. Raj V. Mahto & Peter S. Davis & John A. Pearce II & Richard B. Robinson Jr., 2010. "Satisfaction with Firm Performance in Family Businesses," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 34(5), pages 985-1002, September.
    5. Roberto Fernández-Gago & Laura Cabeza-García & Mariano Nieto, 2016. "Corporate social responsibility, board of directors, and firm performance: an analysis of their relationships," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 85-104, January.
    6. Amy J. Hillman & Albert A. Cannella & Ramona L. Paetzold, 2000. "The Resource Dependence Role of Corporate Directors: Strategic Adaptation of Board Composition in Response to Environmental Change," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(2), pages 235-256, March.
    7. Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 1976. "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 305-360, October.
    8. Miguel Rivera-Santos & Carlos Rufin & Ulrich Wassmer, 2017. "Alliances between Firms and Non-profits : A Multiple and Behavioural Agency Approach," Post-Print hal-02312082, HAL.
    9. Luft, Joan & Shields, Michael D., 2003. "Mapping management accounting: graphics and guidelines for theory-consistent empirical research," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(2-3), pages 169-249.
    10. Pugliese, A. & Bezemer, P.J. & Zattoni, A. & Huse, M. & van den Bosch, F.A.J. & Volberda, H.W., 2009. "Boards of Directors’ Contribution to Strategy: A Literature Review and Research Agenda," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2009-013-STR, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    11. Brian R. Golden & Edward J. Zajac, 2001. "When will boards influence strategy? inclination × power = strategic change," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(12), pages 1087-1111, December.
    12. Thomas Dalziel & Richard J. Gentry & Michael Bowerman, 2011. "An Integrated Agency–Resource Dependence View of the Influence of Directors' Human and Relational Capital on Firms' R&D Spending," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48, pages 1217-1242, September.
    13. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    14. Bill Wooldridge & Steven W. Floyd, 1990. "The strategy process, middle management involvement, and organizational performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(3), pages 231-241, March.
    15. Fama, Eugene F & Jensen, Michael C, 1983. "Separation of Ownership and Control," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(2), pages 301-325, June.
    16. John A. Pearce & Shaker A. Zahra, 1991. "The relative power of ceos and boards of directors: Associations with corporate performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(2), pages 135-153, February.
    17. M. Rivera-Santos & C. Rufín & U. Wassmer, 2017. "Alliances between Firms and Non-profits: A Multiple and Behavioural Agency Approach," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(6), pages 854-875, September.
    18. Pepper, Alexander & Gore, Julie, 2015. "Behavioral agency theory: new foundations for theorizing about executive compensation," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 47569, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. Brian Boyd, 1990. "Corporate linkages and organizational environment: A test of the resource dependence model," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(6), pages 419-430, October.
    20. Michael D. Pfarrer & Ken G. Smith & Kathryn M. Bartol & Dmitry M. Khanin & Xiaomeng Zhang, 2008. "Coming Forward: The Effects of Social and Regulatory Forces on the Voluntary Restatement of Earnings Subsequent to Wrongdoing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(3), pages 386-403, June.
    21. Brian K. Boyd, 1995. "CEO duality and firm performance: A contingency model," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(4), pages 301-312.
    22. Fama, Eugene F, 1980. "Agency Problems and the Theory of the Firm," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 88(2), pages 288-307, April.
    23. Rainer Harms & Anja Schulz & Sascha Kraus & Matthias Fink, 2009. "The conceptualisation of 'opportunity' in strategic management research," International Journal of Entrepreneurial Venturing, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(1), pages 57-71.
    24. Robert M. Grant, 2003. "Strategic planning in a turbulent environment: evidence from the oil majors," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(6), pages 491-517, June.
    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. Henrique Faverzani Drago & Gilnei Luiz Moura & Luciana Santos Costa Vieira Silva & Claudimar Pereira Veiga & Fabíola Kaczam & Luciana Peixoto Santa Rita & Wesley Vieira Silva, 2023. "Reviewing the relationship between organizational performance, dynamic capabilities and strategic behavior," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 1-22, January.

    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. Naeem Tabassum & Satwinder Singh, 2020. "Corporate Governance and Organisational Performance," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-030-48527-6, January.
    2. Desender, Kurt A. & Garcia-Cestona, Miguel A. & Crespi, Rafel & Aguilera, Ruth V., 2009. "Board Characteristics and Audit Fees: Why Ownership Structure Matters?," Working Papers 09-0107, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    3. Michael C. Withers & Markus A. Fitza, 2017. "Do board chairs matter? The influence of board chairs on firm performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(6), pages 1343-1355, June.
    4. Amy J. Hillman & Gavin Nicholson & Christine Shropshire, 2008. "Directors' Multiple Identities, Identification, and Board Monitoring and Resource Provision," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(3), pages 441-456, June.
    5. Pugliese, A. & Bezemer, P.J. & Zattoni, A. & Huse, M. & van den Bosch, F.A.J. & Volberda, H.W., 2009. "Boards of Directors’ Contribution to Strategy: A Literature Review and Research Agenda," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2009-013-STR, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    6. Li, Yong & Aguilera, Ruth V., 2008. "Target Director Turnover in Acquisitions: A Conceptual Framework," Working Papers 08-0106, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    7. Niamh Brennan, 2010. "A review of corporate governance research : an Irish perspective," Open Access publications 10197/2962, Research Repository, University College Dublin.
    8. Yong Li & Ruth V. Aguilera, 2008. "Target Director Turnover in Acquisitions: A Conceptual Framework," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(6), pages 492-503, November.
    9. Winfried Ruigrok & Simon Peck & Sabina Tacheva & Peder Greve & Yan Hu, 2006. "The Determinants and Effects of Board Nomination Committees," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 10(2), pages 119-148, May.
    10. Elizabeth N. K. Lim & Brian T. McCann, 2014. "Performance Feedback and Firm Risk Taking: The Moderating Effects of CEO and Outside Director Stock Options," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(1), pages 262-282, February.
    11. Xiao, Jianqiang & Sun, Sunny Li & Weng, David H., 2021. "The unfriendly board: Antecedents and consequences of board dissent," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 135-146.
    12. Du, Yan & Deloof, Marc & Jorissen, Ann, 2015. "The Roles of Subsidiary Boards in Multinational Enterprises," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 169-181.
    13. Jaskiewicz, Peter & Klein, Sabine, 2007. "The impact of goal alignment on board composition and board size in family businesses," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(10), pages 1080-1089, October.
    14. Christopher, Joe, 2010. "Corporate governance—A multi-theoretical approach to recognizing the wider influencing forces impacting on organizations," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 21(8), pages 683-695.
    15. Conan Hom & Danny Samson & Christina Cregan & Peter Cebon, 2022. "Director independence: Going beyond misaligned incentives to resource dependence," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 47(1), pages 53-78, February.
    16. Heather R. Dixon-Fowler & Alan E. Ellstrand & Jonathan L. Johnson, 2017. "The Role of Board Environmental Committees in Corporate Environmental Performance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 423-438, February.
    17. Pugliese, Amedeo & Minichilli, Alessandro & Zattoni, Alessandro, 2014. "Integrating agency and resource dependence theory: Firm profitability, industry regulation, and board task performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(6), pages 1189-1200.
    18. Julija Winschel & Martin Stawinoga, 2019. "Determinants and effects of sustainable CEO compensation: a structured literature review of empirical evidence," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 69(3), pages 265-328, September.
    19. Tahseen Mohsan Khan & Safia Nosheen & Naveed ul Haq, 2020. "Corporate governance mechanism and comparative analysis of one-tier and two-tier board structures: evidence from ASEAN countries," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 17(2), pages 61-72, September.
    20. Phillip James & Il-woon Kim, 2018. "CEO Compensation in the U.S.: Are CEOs Underpaid or Overpaid ?," Accounting and Finance Research, Sciedu Press, vol. 7(3), pages 1-78, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Boards of directors; Strategic planning; Firm performance; Firm strategy;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M12 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Personnel Management; Executives; Executive Compensation
    • M14 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Corporate Culture; Diversity; Social Responsibility

    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:spr:rvmgts:v:15:y:2021:i:4:d:10.1007_s11846-020-00386-0. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.