Search results

The purpose of this paper is to use Stewart’s model of role as a lense from which to explore chairperson and CEO role dynamics in addressing strategic paradox and tension.

The paper draws on 29 semi-structured, in-depth interviews with chairpersons and CEOs of UK-listed companies. Interview data are subjected to role analysis using Stewart’s (1982) Demands-Constraints-Choice (DCC) model of role.

Findings indicate that relationship levels of trust, communication and chairperson time enable strategic tensions to be raised and confronted in the relationship reducing defensiveness. Two distinct approaches to handle strategic tensions are found. The CEO-led approach predominates and rests on less flexible role boundaries, requiring the chairperson to proactively identify strategic tensions and perform an advisory/mentoring role. The shared leadership approach, less prevalent, rests on highly flexible role boundaries where the skills and experience of each incumbent become more relevant, enabling the separation of efforts and integration of strategic tensions in the relationship in a “dynamic complementarity of function”.

The paper only applies to the UK context and is limited to contexts where CEO and chairperson roles are separate. The paper draws on individual perceptions of chairperson and CEOs (i.e. not pairs).

The paper provides insights to practicing CEOs and chairperson on two distinct ways of working through strategic paradox and tensions.

The paper adds to the scarce literature at chairperson and CEO roles and strategic paradox and tension.

Boards presently are considered the most critical component in improving corporate governance (CG). Board diversity is increasingly being recommended as a tool for enhancing firm performance. Academic research and regulatory action regarding board diversity are focussed mainly on gender and ethnic composition of boards. However, the perspective of board members on board diversity and its impact is mostly missing. Moreover, while strategic leadership perspective suggests that a broader set of upper echelon’s characteristics may shape their actions, empirical evidence investigating the impact of less-explored attributes of diversity is almost non-existent. While the research on the input–output relationship between board diversity and firm performance remains equivocal, an intervening relationship between board diversity and board effectiveness needs to be understood. The purpose of this paper is to address all three limitations and explore the subject from board members’ perspective.

The paper presents the findings of qualitative, exploratory research conducted by interviewing 42 board members of FTSE 350 companies. The data are analysed thematically.

The findings of the research suggest that board members of FTSE 350 companies consider the diversity of functional experience to be a critical requirement for boards’ role-effectiveness. Functionally diverse boards manage external dependencies more effectively and challenge assumptions of the executive more efficiently, thus improving CG. The findings significantly contribute to the literature on board diversity, as well as to strategic leadership theory and other applicable theories. The research is conducted with a relatively small but elite and difficult to approach set of 42 board members of FTSE 350 companies.

The paper makes a unique and significant contribution to praxis by presenting the perspective of practitioners of CG – board members. The findings may encourage board nomination committees to seek board diversity beyond the gender and ethnic characteristics of directors. The findings may also be relevant for policy formulation, as they indicate that functionally diverse boards have improved effectiveness in a range of board roles.

Board diversity is about building a board that accurately reflects the make-up of the population and stakeholders of the society where the company operates. The aim of board diversity is to cultivate a broad range of attributes and perspectives that reflects real-world demographics as boards need to continue to earn their “licence to operate in society” as organisations have a responsibility to multiple constituents and stakeholders, including the community and the wider society within which they exist. Building social capital through diversity has value in the wider context of modern society and achieving social justice.

The paper makes an original and unique contribution to strategic leadership theory by strengthening the argument of the theory. The paper explores beyond widely researched attributes of gender and ethnicity on boards and explores the impact of a less-researched characteristic of directors – their functional experience. Moreover, the paper opens the “black box” of CG – boards, and presents the perspectives of board members. The findings indicate that board members in FTSE 350 boards define diversity more broadly than academics and regulatory agencies often do.

Although the current wave of globalization is the result of unprecedented scientific and technological advances, through history, movements of an international nature have been, to a large extent, about the spread of political and economic ideas across borders. “Geopolitical realism is based on the interests of the state”. Scientific and technological advances, together with the opening of markets to the free passage of goods, services and finance, has led to a huge growth in world trade. However, such positive developments have also their downside. The findings of the United Nations Human Development Programme Report highlight that global inequalities in income and living standards have reached grotesque proportions. Further, such disparities are linked to ever‐intensified environmental degradation and the extinction of some 11,046 species. Such circumstances have witnessed the growth of community‐based local currencies, the emergence of a social movement advocating corporate social reasonability (CSR) and a growing literature critical of the Anglo‐American corporate governance model, where shareholder wealth maximization is the driving force. Yet, the philosophy and practice of shareholder wealth maximization persists. This paper explores the effects of free‐market economics, globalization and western capitalist practices in terms of their consequences for the planet, people, profit and posterity (the four Ps). A case is made outlining the need for an advanced corporate governance model that integrates the four Ps. In so doing, the paper seeks inspiration from the ancient philosophy of Buddhism and, in conclusion, examines the role of the Business School in developing future, reflexive practitioners, equipped to effectively provide the necessary balance between shareholder expectations and stakeholder needs within a new paradigm of a balanced society.

States that the major reasons for difficulties in cross‐cultural communication stem from the fact that actors from different cultures have different understandings regarding the interaction process and different styles of dialogue. Suggests that better understanding of communication within other cultures is the key to success. Uses past literature to suggest a number of cultural variability constructs concerning preferred interaction behaviours and the common themes they share. Presents three case studies to illustrate this.

This paper aims to present the outcomes from 40 one-to-one semi-structured interviews and 12 focus group sessions with company secretaries, chairmen, CEOs, chief financial officer (CFOs), senior independent director (SIDs) and NEDs, about the role of the company secretary.

Lukes’ (1974, 2005) third dimension of power is engaged in thematic analysis of this strategic leadership role and its contribution to Board effectiveness.

The findings identify “discretionary capacity” as being critical to effective role contribution.

Whilst the inquiry included international participants, e.g. multi-national Board members and company secretaries, it was conducted within the UK.

Having a range of discretion is particularly necessary at this time, when the new governance regime is broadening its demands on the role of the company secretary to interact with wider stakeholders.

Better Board effectiveness is critical to broader sustainability of business in society.

An emergent model of the company secretary role is offered as a tool for building discretionary capacity, based on key technical, commercial and social characteristics, in their contexts – understood together as “Breadth” and “Majesty”. Breadth establishes a competency, whereas majesty, the refined high-level social qualities. This study concludes that the company secretary role is highly dependent on the preferences of the chairman, in enabling them to make an effective contribution to the Board.

This paper aims to review the latest management developments across the globe and pinpoint practical implications from cutting‐edge research and case studies.

This briefing is prepared by an independent writer who adds their own impartial comments and places the articles in context.

The global financial crisis has renewed the drive for passionate leaders who can build winning teams and achieve great results for their organization. However, visceral behaviors or “passion” have historically been viewed as destructive to decision making. With this in mind, in their work “Visceral behaviors and leadership: a dark side of boardroom life?”, Geoff Shear, Nada Kakabadse and Andrew Kakabadse explore the visceral behavior of senior managers and its impact on boardroom dynamics.

The paper provides strategic insights and practical thinking that have influenced some of the world's leading organizations.

The briefing saves busy executives and researchers hours of reading time by selecting only the very best, most pertinent information and presenting it in a condensed and easy‐to digest format.

With ever greater needs to account for the demands and desires of multiple stakeholders, it is proposed that governance considerations need, as much, to apply to the application of IS/IT challenges as to the whole corporation. The arguments for greater governance attention in the IS/IT arena are presented. Two key models of governance are highlighted, the control and stakeholder models. It is concluded that the stakeholder philosophy to governance will become pre‐eminent in the future.

Outsourcing of services has been receiving increasing attention in management literature and praxis. It is considered that greatest attention has been given to the enhanced efficiency of transaction costs through outsourcing. In contrast, this paper explores what is being outsourced, the drivers for outsourcing and the IT commodification influence on outsourcing. Particular attention is given to examining supplier‐client relationships and the consequently new emerging outsourcing arrangements and organisational forms. The benefits and costs of outsourcing and client satisfaction are discussed as well as outsourcing in the public sector. The paper highlights that a fundamental paradigm shift is underway from strictly provider/supplier relationships to an emerging array of partner based relationships comparable with the Japanese kieretsu relationship model. The paper concludes by identifying areas for further research for increasing understanding of the paradigm shift that is highlighted.

This paper critically examines the influence of information technology (IT) on women’s career structures. Globalization is forcing an increasing inter‐dependence of radically re‐engineered labour forces and the further “internal” exploitation of the internationalization of the dual labour market many women have endured. The global trend is towards further fragmenting a shrinking, gender‐based set of career opportunities and creating an increasingly marginalized, part‐time, “pink collar” labour force, associated with the putative revolution of the tertiary sector transforming out of industrial, manufacturing economies. The implications of the emergence of a “pink collar” labour force largely go unexamined. The much heralded argument that IT will transform “coercive” organizational structures and work practices needs, yet again, to be critically examined in the context of the further destruction of professional opportunities for women in radically re‐engineered public sectors, aggressively “micro‐economized” labour forces and rapidly dissipating organizational and social contracts.