Search results

This paper aims to examine how and why consumers respond to chief executive officer (CEO) activism on social media. The authors developed a conceptual model that proposes impression management as a mechanism for consumer response to CEO activism.

In Study 1a, the authors examined 83,259 tweets from 90 CEOs and compared consumer responses between controversial and noncontroversial tweets. In Study 1b, the authors replicated the analysis, using a machine-learning topic modeling approach. In Studies 2 and 3, the authors used experimental designs to test the theoretical mechanism.

On average, consumers tend to respond more to CEO posts dealing with noncontroversial issues. Consumers’ relative reluctance to like and share controversial posts is motivated by fear of rejection. However, CEO fame reverses this effect. Consumers are more likely to engage in controversial activist threads by popular CEOs. This effect holds for consumers high (vs low) in public self-consciousness. CEO fame serves as a “shield” behind which consumers protect their online image.

The study focused on Twitter (aka “X”) in the USA. Future research may replicate the study in other social media platforms and countries. The authors introduce “shielding” – liking and sharing content authored by a recognizable source – as a tactic for impression management on social media.

Famous CEOs should speak up about controversial issues on social media because their voice helps consumers engage more in such conversations.

This paper offers a theoretical framework to understand consumer reactions to CEO activism.

This study investigates the extent to which a firm’s centrality and autonomy in its supply network are associated with the intensity and complexity of its competitive actions.

Utilizing social network analysis and dynamic panel data models, this study analyzes a comprehensive panel dataset with 10,802 firm-year observations across various industries between 2011 and 2018 to test the hypotheses.

Our findings show that a firm’s level of centrality in its supply network has an inverted U-shaped relationship with both competitive intensity and competitive complexity. In addition, the turning points of these two inverted U-shaped relationships differ in that firms with a lower level of centrality tend to compete aggressively by launching more actions within fewer categories, while firms with a higher level of centrality tend to compete aggressively by launching fewer actions that cover a larger range of categories. Finally, we find that a firm’s structural autonomy has a positive relationship with competitive complexity.

This study bridges the gap between the supply chain management literature and strategic management literature and investigates how supply networks shape competitive aggressiveness. In particular, this research investigates how a firm’s structural position in its supply network affects its competitive actions, an important intermediate mechanism for competitive advantage that has been overlooked in the supply chain management literature.

As the primary decision makers, chief executive officers (CEOs) play pivotal roles in firm innovation. However, little is known regarding how CEOs influence the exploitation and exploration paradox. To advance theory and research, the purpose of this paper is to investigate the joint effects of CEO tenure and CEO–chair duality on a firm’s shifting emphasis between exploitative and exploratory innovation.

This paper takes the approach of a longitudinal sample of 81 US pharmaceutical firms.

As CEOs’ tenure advance, their firms’ percentage of exploitative innovation increases. Furthermore, non-duality (separation of board chair and CEO) further strengthens the positive relationship between CEO tenure and the percentage of exploitative innovation.

This study integrates upper echelons theory and behavioral agency theory to juxtapose the effects of CEOs on technological innovation. This study extends knowledge of strategic leadership and innovation by showing that CEOs influence the balance between exploitative and exploratory innovation. Furthermore, this study also contributes to the corporate governance literature by demonstrating that monitoring vigilance could inhibit capable CEOs from pursuing more exploratory innovation.

Boards of directors should allow CEOs to have greater discretion over innovation, and vigilant monitoring and control may force CEOs to focus less on exploration.

This is one of the few studies that explicitly investigate how CEO influences a firm’s emphasis on exploitative innovation and exploratory innovation.

By integrating perspectives from the resource-based view, attention-based view, upper echelon theory and competitive dynamics (CD), the authors seek to understand how chief executive officer (CEO) vigilance influences the way resources are utilized in relation to competitive behavior.

This study's empirical analysis is conducted using a longitudinal design in the US software and IT services industry with a final sample consisting of 44 publicly traded firms and 471 firm-year observations from 1995 to 2009. The authors respectively use the fixed-effects negative binomial model and generalized estimating equation (GEE) model to test the effects of technology resource breadth on competitive intensity and competitive deviance and the interacting effects with CEO attention broadness and uniqueness.

This study's results show that CEO vigilance (attention broadness and uniqueness) interacts with technology resource breadth to jointly influence competitive intensity and deviance. Firms with vigilant CEOs utilize firm resources to compete less intensively but in an unconventional way.

This study reveals that when CEOs have a broader focus and attend to a wide range of information, their ability to quickly utilize firm resources for formulating competitive actions decreases. Consequently, it is crucial for CEOs to acknowledge the limitations of their attentional capacity. They need to understand that the allocation of their attention and information processing capacity has significant implications for the speed and quality of their decision-making processes.

The authors conceptualize and operationalize CEO vigilance, which is a novel construct that has not been studied. The authors show that CEO vigilance plays critical roles in utilizing resources to compete. This study offers significant research implications for attention-based view, upper-echelons theory, CD perspective and resource-based view.

This study aimed to identify driving factors of safety attitudinal ambivalence (AA) and explore their influence. Construction workers' intention to act safely can be instable under conflicting information from safety management, co-workers and habitual unsafe behaviour. Existing research explained the mechanism of unsafe behaviours as individual decisions but failed to include AA, as the co-existence of both positive and negative attitude.

This study applied system dynamics to explore factors of construction workers' AA and simulate the process of mitigating the ambivalence for less safety behaviour. Specifically, the group model building approach with eight experts was used to map the causal loop diagram and field questionnaire of 209 construction workers were used to collect empirical data for initiating parameters.

The group model building identified five direct factors of AA, namely the organisational safety support, important others' safety attitude, emotional arousal, safety production experience and work pressure, with seven feedback paths. The questionnaire survey obtained the initial values of the factors in the SD model, with the average ambivalence at 0.389. The ambivalence between cognitive and affective safety attitude was the highest. Model simulation results indicated that safety experience and work pressure had the most significant effects, and safety experience and positive attitude of co-workers could compensate the pressure from tight schedule and budget.

This study provided a new perspective of the dynamic safety attitude under the co-existence of positive and negative attitude, identified its driving factors and their influencing paths. The group model building approach and field questionnaire surveys were used to provide convincible suggestions for empirical safety management with least and most effective approaches and possible interventions to prevent unsafe behaviour with tight schedule and budget.

The World Trade Organisation (WTO) Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies (AFS) requires all members to avoid subsidy policies and financial measures that weaken sustainability in fishing and instead divert public spending in such a way that it is more beneficial to fisheries sectors. This paper aims to argue that the WTO fisheries subsidies rules can be considered as a mechanism not only for achieving fisheries sustainability but also for supporting food security in Indonesia.

The methodology of this study consists of descriptive and analytical legal research that identifies the relation between fisheries subsidies and food security policies in Indonesia.

Fisheries subsidies policies in Indonesia focus on government support for small-scale fishers not only to promote fishing sustainability and marine resource protection but also to improve their ability to participate in food security strategies.

The elimination of harmful fisheries subsidies could be regarded as a mechanism for not only preserving and sustaining marine resources but also achieving food security in other developing countries.

The author’s knowledge of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is valuable in elaborating a new paradigm on how the WTO is achieving SDG 14 (Life below Water) and SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) in parallel by analysing Indonesia’s efforts to implement the AFS while also allocating public spending to fisheries sectors to accommodate food security.