Search results

The purpose of this study is to understand the impact of top management team (TMT) processes on firm innovativeness. Firm innovativeness is critical for organizational survival. Yet, the authors’ understanding about the key determinants of firm innovativeness is limited, particularly concerning the role of TMT dynamics. Drawing on upper echelon’s theory, the authors develop and test hypotheses concerning the influence of two TMT processes, namely affective conflict and cognitive conflict, on firm innovativeness. They also explore the boundary conditions of TMT dynamics by examining the moderating effect of environmental uncertainty on the relationship between TMT conflict (affective and cognitive conflict) and firm innovativeness.

The authors collected survey-based data from TMT members in 171 information technology organizations based in India. They used multiple regression analyses to test the study hypotheses.

The empirical findings indicate that TMT affective conflict is negatively associated with firm innovativeness, whereas TMT cognitive conflict has a negative curvilinear relationship with it. Both relationships are stronger in firms operating in environments characterized by a high degree of uncertainty.

This study highlights the role of TMT conflict in the pursuit of firm innovativeness. Significantly, the study shows that both TMT affective conflict and cognitive conflict can affect firm innovativeness. However, their effectiveness is contingent on environmental uncertainty. This contributes to the firm innovation literature by clarifying how specific types of TMT conflict influence firm innovativeness in different environmental conditions.

Ample evidence suggests that firm innovativeness is important for firm competitiveness. Despite the significance of the CEO for firm outcomes in general, the role of the CEO in firm innovativeness remains unclear. The purpose of this paper is to focus on the impact of two CEO characteristics – organizational identification and risk propensity – on firm innovativeness. The authors also adopt a contingency view to examine the moderating role of organizational size.

Using data from 159 information technology firms based in India, the authors hypothesize that CEO organizational identification and risk propensity will have a positive effect on firm innovativeness. The authors further hypothesize that smaller organizations will benefit more from the positive effects of CEO organizational identification and CEO risk propensity.

The empirical findings indicate that CEO organizational identification and risk propensity positively influence firm innovativeness. Also positive effects of CEO organizational identification and CEO risk propensity are more in smaller organizations.

This study highlights the role of CEO characteristics in the pursuit of firm innovativeness. Significantly, the study shows that both CEO organizational identification and risk propensity can enhance firm innovativeness. However, their effectiveness is contingent on organizational size.

In this chapter, we examine the role of M&A (mergers and acquisitions) leadership by conducting a review of recent empirical studies on M&A leadership. Our aim is to provide an overview of the current state of knowledge concerning M&A leadership. More specifically, we examine how M&A leadership has been studied (i.e., study methods, data sources), where M&A leadership has been studied (i.e., geographic distribution, industries, level of analysis), which leadership M&A outcomes and M&A leadership perspectives have been examined, and finally, how M&A leadership influences post-M&A outcomes. This allows us to identify main areas of interest and provide suggestions for further research.

Organizational innovation is critical for firm competitive advantage. Yet, we do not know enough about the relationship between leadership and organizational innovation. The purpose of this paper is to examine the influence of chief executive officer (CEO) transformational and transactional leadership on organizational innovation. The authors examine the moderating role of environmental dynamism.

The authors collected survey-based data from top management team members in 163 companies in services, construction, manufacturing and other industries in the USA. The authors used multiple regression analyses to test the study hypotheses.

The empirical findings indicate that CEO transformational and transactional leadership behaviors positively influence organizational innovation. However, organizations benefit more from transformational leadership in dynamic environments.

This study highlights the role of CEO leadership behavior in the pursuit of organizational innovation. Significantly, the study shows that both transformational and transactional leadership can enhance organizational innovation. However, their effectiveness is contingent on environmental dynamism. This contributes to the firm innovation literature by clarifying how specific types of CEO leadership influence organizational innovation in different environmental conditions.