CEOS AND CORPORATE STRATEGY. 61 good questions, nicely answered!

Q: What does the study by Chen et al. (2016) focus on regarding female board representation and corporate acquisition intensity?

Focuses on the impact of female board representation on firm-level strategic behavior in mergers and acquisitions (M&A) Predicts that greater female representation is negatively associated with the number of acquisitions and acquisition size

Q: How does the study of Chen et al. (2016) build upon social identity theory to make predictions?

Builds upon social identity theory Predicts that greater female representation on a firm's board will be negatively associated with acquisition intensity

Q: What methodology was used to demonstrate the robustness of the findings in the study by Chen et al. (2016)?

Utilized a comprehensive sample of U.S. public firms Conducted a difference-in-differences analysis on a subsample of firms with exogenous changes in board gender composition

Q: Why is understanding the impact of board gender characteristics considered a vitally important practical matter?

Female representation on boards has traditionally been low Increasing pressure to address gender imbalance in public corporate boards Legislation and firms under pressure to redress this imbalance

Q: What are some of the contributions of the study by Chen et al. (2016) to strategic management?

Provides a theoretically grounded explanation on why female board representation influences strategic actions Accounts for impact of various forms of intra-board diversity Offers insights on the influence of board characteristics, particularly gender , on acquisition behavior

Q: What key methodological approach did Chen et al. (2016) use to examine the impact of female board representation on firm-level strategic behavior in mergers and acquisitions?

Conducted a study using a comprehensive and multiyear sample of U.S. public firms Demonstrated findings through a difference-in-differences analysis on firms with changes in board gender composition

Q: In what way did the study by Chen et al. (2016) contribute to mergers and acquisitions research?

Provided insights into the influence of board characteristics, particularly gender , on acquisition behavior Offered a novel and econometrically rigorous response to the challenge of assessing firm-level impact of board characteristics

What does the study by Chen et al. (2016) focus on regarding female board representation and corporate acquisition intensity?

Focuses on the impact of female board representation on firm-level strategic behavior in mergers and acquisitions (M&A)
Predicts that greater female representation is negatively associated with the number of acquisitions and acquisition size

How does the study of Chen et al. (2016) build upon social identity theory to make predictions?

Builds upon social identity theory
Predicts that greater female representation on a firm's board will be negatively associated with acquisition intensity

What methodology was used to demonstrate the robustness of the findings in the study by Chen et al. (2016)?

Utilized a comprehensive sample of U.S. public firms
Conducted a difference-in-differences analysis on a subsample of firms with exogenous changes in board gender composition

Why is understanding the impact of board gender characteristics considered a vitally important practical matter?

Female representation on boards has traditionally been low
Increasing pressure to address gender imbalance in public corporate boards
Legislation and firms under pressure to redress this imbalance

What are some of the contributions of the study by Chen et al. (2016) to strategic management?

Provides a theoretically grounded explanation on why female board representation influences strategic actions
Accounts for impact of various forms of intra-board diversity
Offers insights on the influence of board characteristics, particularly gender, on acquisition behavior

What key methodological approach did Chen et al. (2016) use to examine the impact of female board representation on firm-level strategic behavior in mergers and acquisitions?

Conducted a study using a comprehensive and multiyear sample of U.S. public firms
Demonstrated findings through a difference-in-differences analysis on firms with changes in board gender composition

In what way did the study by Chen et al. (2016) contribute to mergers and acquisitions research?

Provided insights into the influence of board characteristics, particularly gender, on acquisition behavior
Offered a novel and econometrically rigorous response to the challenge of assessing firm-level impact of board characteristics

What is the theoretical perspective considered in the paper regarding female board representation and board decision-making processes?

The paper considers the impact of female board representation from the perspective of social identity theory.
This theory explains how individuals categorize themselves into in-groups and out-groups based on shared characteristics.
It posits that individuals derive self-esteem from social groups they belong to.

According to social identity theory, how are individuals categorized and how does this influence interactions among individuals from different groups?

Individuals are categorized into groups by themselves and others based on different dimensions.
Identification with a category is strongest when it is highly psychologically salient.
Highly salient categories, like gender, are represented cognitively as prototypes maximizing intra and inter-category differences.

How does social identity theory affect interactions among individuals from different groups within a superordinate group like a board of directors?

Categories have a depersonalizing influence, seeing others more as part of a group rather than individuals.
Within a board of directors, it can highlight differences between sub-groups even more than between individuals.
Prototypes are used to maximize perceptions of similarities within categories and differences between categories.

How does social identity theory explain the impact of female board representation on board decision-making processes?

Individuals derive self-esteem from the social groups they belong to.
Identification with a category is strongest when it is highly psychologically salient.
Highly salient categories, like gender, are represented cognitively as prototypes.

What does social identity theory suggest about how individuals categorize themselves and others into groups?

Individuals categorize themselves and others into in-groups and out-groups based on shared characteristics.
Self-categorization and categorization by others can occur along various dimensions.
Identification with a particular category is stronger when it reflects central, valued, and frequently employed aspects of an individual.

How does social identity theory explain interactions among individuals from different groups within a collective setting like a board of directors?

Categories have a depersonalizing influence, emphasizing group membership over individual characteristics.
The theory posits that highlighting differences between sub-groups within a superordinate group can be amplified.
Individuals' self-esteem and sense of self-worth can be influenced by the social groups they belong to within these settings.

How are inter-subgroup differences sharpened based on research findings?

Process of categorization linked to "interindividual-intergroup discontinuity effect"
Intergroup responses more hostile than interindividual responses
Ingroup may fear outgroup and exhibit greed response
More competitive, less cooperative in intergroup contexts

How do people behave differently towards their own group compared to other groups according to the discussed paper?

Ingroup favouritism versus outgroup derogation
Favor own group, share opinions, and feel comfortable
Uncomfortable around/avoid those from different groups
Outgroup, especially minorities, feel threatened

How does the presence of female directors impact the decision-making processes in a board as per the paper?

Multiple salient categories lead to more competitive interactions
Decision-making more contentious, thorough, and comprehensive
Less characterized by acquiescence, rapid consensus, or groupthink
Increased female board representation influences decision-making thoroughness

What impact does the presence of multiple salient categories within a board have on decision-making processes, as per the paper?

Associated with more competitive interactions
Decision-making likely more contentious, thorough, and comprehensive
Less likely characterized by acquiescence, rapid consensus, or groupthink
Increased female board representation influences decision-making thoroughness

How do individuals in an ingroup typically view those from an outgroup, according to the information presented?

See outgroup as representatives, not individuals
Might fear outgroup due to competition and distrust
Ingroup may perceive outgroup as vulnerable for exploitation
Consequently, individuals tend to be more competitive and less cooperative

What behaviors do individuals usually exhibit towards their own group members versus those from different groups, based on the discussed paper?

Ingroup favoritism and outgroup derogation observed
Prefer own group, share opinions, and feel comfortable
Uncomfortable around or avoid individuals from different groups
Outgroup, especially minorities, often feel threatened and strive to differentiate themselves

Why might individuals from the outgroup, particularly minorities like women on a board of directors, feel threatened according to the information provided?

Might worry about living up to negative stereotypes
Feel the need to differentiate themselves
Often act more competitively with the ingroup
This behavior stems from fear of not meeting expectations and pressure to counter stereotypes

What are some possible explanations for the finding that acquisitions are more likely to destroy than enhance the value of the acquiring firm?

Acquisitions undertaken without adequate rationale (reasoning)
Managers irrationally overconfident about potential synergies
Acquiring managers benefit disproportionately in the short-term through status and compensation
Success evaluation of acquisitions is challenging until years afterward

What context does M&A provide where directors face the dilemma of balancing potential benefits and potential harms of their actions?

Directors know that a given action may benefit the firm
Action in M&A highly uncertain and likely to be harmful in the long-term
Directors balancing potential benefits and potential harm in making decisions

What does a firm's acquisition intensity concern?

The number of deals it engages in
The typical size of each deal

According to the paper, what are some characteristics associated with boards with one or more female directors in terms of intra-board discussions and executive evaluation?

More thorough intra-board discussions
More active oversight in evaluating executives' recommendations
More comprehensive decision-making
Increased time taken to reach a decision, especially a supportive decision

In contrast to boards with zero female directors, what are some characteristics associated with their decision-making process when it comes to acquisitions?

Much more likely to sign off on any given acquisition
Sign off on acquisitions more rapidly
Engage in less debate
More homogeneous intra-board opinions
Streamlined discussions
Executives' recommendations scrutinized less rigorously

What does Hypothesis 1 propose with regards to the association between female board representation and the number of acquisitions?

- Greater female board representation will be associated with fewer acquisitions

According to the paper, what type of deals are female board representation associated with among firms that do engage in acquisitions?

Smaller deals
Target size is a smaller percentage of the acquiring firm size

How does the study operationalize female board representation and acquisition size in the context of the investigated firms from 1998 to 2010?

Female board representation as the proportion of female directors to total board size
Acquisition size as the total value of all transactions scaled by the acquirer's annual sales

What statistical models were used in the study to analyze the data concerning female board representation and acquisition variables?

Poisson regression models
Linear regression models
Heckman two-stage model for correcting estimation biases

What supplementary analysis was conducted to validate the study's findings regarding female director influence and its impact on acquisitiveness and acquisition size?

Difference-in-differences analysis
Using director deaths as a natural experiment
Treatment group: firms with male director deaths
Results confirmed a decrease in acquisitiveness and acquisition size with female director influence

What are the implications of higher female board representation on decision-making and potential challenges?

Comprehensive decision-making may be affected
Potential challenges like reduced group cohesiveness
Potential challenges like higher coordination cost

What does the study by Shi, Zhang, & Hoskisson (2017) propose regarding CEOs and acquisition activities after their competitors win CEO awards?

CEOs may undertake more intensive acquisition activities to increase social recognition and status after competitors win CEO awards
This effect is stronger when the focal CEOs had a high likelihood of winning CEO awards themselves

How does the study by Shi, Zhang, & Hoskisson (2017) find CEOs' acquisition activities in the postaward period compared to the preaward period?

CEOs engage in more intensive acquisition activities in the postaward period after their competitors win CEO awards
Acquisitions by focal CEOs firms in the postaward period have lower announcement returns than in the preaward period

According to the managerial summary, what is the focus of the study in relation to superstar CEOs and their competitors?

The study explores how competitors of superstar CEOs react to not winning CEO awards
Competitors undertake more intensive acquisition activities in the postaward period compared to the preaward period

What is the main contribution of the study by Shi, Zhang, & Hoskisson (2017) to the management literature?

The study sheds light on the influence of superstar CEOs on competitor CEOs' acquisition activities
It extends CEO award research beyond award winners to competitor firms
It highlights possible negative externality effects of organizational awards, such as lower announcement returns post-award

In what way does the study by Shi, Zhang, & Hoskisson (2017) contribute to the behavioral perspective of acquisition research?

The study highlights the role of pursuing social recognition and status in motivating CEOs' acquisition activities
It shows how acquisitions may be used by CEOs to elevate their social status and recognition

What specific implications does the study by Shi, Zhang, & Hoskisson (2017) have on the broader CEO award research?

It extends the focus of CEO award research beyond winners and their firms to competitor firms
Shows that CEO awards can have implications on competitors' acquisition activities and performance

How does the study by Shi, Zhang, & Hoskisson (2017) contribute to the organizational award literature?

It emphasizes the possible negative externality effects of organizational awards
Provides insights into how awards like CEO awards can impact nonwinning competitors' actions

What is highlighted by the study conducted by Shi, Zhang, & Hoskisson (2017) in relation to behavioral perspectives of acquisition research?

It emphasizes the influence of pursuing social recognition and status on CEOs' acquisition activities
Shows how the motivation for social recognition can drive the behavior of CEOs in terms of acquisitions

What does social comparison theory suggest about humans' behavior?

Humans have an inherent drive to evaluate their own status to similar others.
They tend to select similar comparison referents to reduce the complexity of comparison and gain precise information about themselves.
Individuals typically compare themselves with others who share similar observable factors like gender and age.

How can social comparison be classified based on the direction of comparison?

Upward social comparison involves comparing with superior others, facilitating self-evaluation and motivating individuals to improve themselves.
Downward social comparison entails comparing with inferior others, leading to perceived self-enhancement and boosting self-esteem.

How can corporate leaders improve their subjective well-being through social comparison?

Corporate leaders are less inclined to improve well-being through downward comparison
More likely to evaluate themselves through upward comparison
Upward comparison can lead to levelling-up motivation

What are the necessary conditions for a levelling-up motivation to occur through social comparison?

Comparison targets must be similar to comparing parties but superior along a dimension
The domain of comparison where targets excel must be self-relevant

What did upper echelons research find regarding social comparison in executive compensation context?

Positive correlation between CEO pay and compensation committee members' pay
Committee members may use own pay as reference when deciding CEO salaries
Intra-company social comparison due to pay disparities among executives

What motivation effects can awards have compared to monetary compensation?

Awards associated with low material costs
Can generate strong motivation due to immediate social distinction
Can create "discontinuity out of continuity" for award winners

How can awards influence non-awarded individuals according to research?

Awards can create role models and motivate behavior imitation
Awards may have a negative impact on disappointed or angry non-awarded individuals
Limited research on how awards affect non-awarded individuals

Why is upward social comparison more likely to inspire individuals to achieve more for themselves?

Upward comparison can give rise to a levelling-up motivation
Requires comparison targets to be superior in some aspects while being similar to the comparing party
Comparison must be in a self-relevant domain

What does the paper suggest regarding the influence of CEO awards on nonwinners based on their awareness of such awards?

Nonwinners unaware of CEO awards do not respond to them
Competitors are aware of each other's actions and responses
CEOs are likely aware of prestigious CEO awards won by competitors with similar firm sizes

According to social comparison research, what increases the likelihood of social comparison between CEOs?

Similarity between the self and others
CEOs in the same product market and with similar firm sizes closely compare with each other
CEOs benchmark themselves with superstar CEOs to evaluate their relative social standing

How can witnessing peers becoming superstar CEOs impact competitor CEOs' motivation?

Witnessing peers' success may lead to a levelling-up motivation among competitor CEOs
Competitor CEOs may focus on winning future CEO awards to enhance their own social recognition and status
Acquisitions provide a short-term way for competitor CEOs to improve social recognition and visibility

What does the paper suggest about the importance of firm performance in determining CEO award winners?

Firm performance is a critical criterion for selecting CEO award winners
Competitor CEOs might focus on improving firm performance to enhance their chances of winning CEO awards
Factors beyond CEOs' control can affect firm performance, introducing uncertainty in winning awards

How does the paper propose competitor CEOs can enhance their social recognition and status in the short run?

Acquisitions serve as an effective channel for enhancing social recognition and status quickly
Mass coverage of acquisitions can boost competitor CEOs' social visibility
Acquisitions can provide a tool for competitor CEOs to rapidly improve their social standing in the industry

According to the behavioral theory of the firm, how do firms typically compare their performance with competitors?

Firms often compare their performance with their competitors to determine their relative positions
Comparing performance helps firms identify strengths and weaknesses relative to competitors
CEOs aim to benchmark their firms against competitors to evaluate their relative competitive standing

How does CEOs' awareness of awards won by competitors contribute to their behavior, according to the paper?

Awareness of competitors' awards leads CEOs to likely benchmark their firms against successful competitors
CEOs might be motivated to improve their firm's performance after witnessing competitors' success
Comparison with successful competitors can drive CEOs to seek ways to enhance their own social recognition and status

What takes less time to achieve firm growth goals compared to internal expansion through R&D investments?

External expansion through acquisitions
Acquisitions are perceived negatively by investors
Adverse influence on firm short-term performance
Negative impact on winning CEO awards

Why do competitor CEOs focus on short-term goals and neglect the negative implications of acquisitions on winning future awards?

Managers have bounded rationality and are loss-averse
Not winning CEO awards puts competitor CEOs in a "loss" situation
Upward social comparison with superstar CEOs motivates competitor CEOs
Seeking ways to boost social recognition and status

According to the first hypothesis, what is expected about competitor CEOs of award-winning CEOs in the post-award period?

Larger number of acquisitions
Higher value (size) of acquisitions
More focus on acquisitions in post-award period
Contrast with the pre-award period behavior

What moderating factor is proposed to strengthen the effect of the first hypothesis?

Product similarity between competitor CEO firms and superstar CEO firms
High product similarity indicating belonging to the same strategic group in an industry
Enhanced direct rivalry between superstar CEOs and competitor CEOs

What is suggested in Hypothesis 2A regarding the increase in acquisitions by competitor CEOs of award-winning CEOs?

The increase in the number of acquisitions will be stronger when firms have greater product similarity
Proposed increase in acquisitions from pre-award to post-award period

What does Hypothesis 2B propose about the value of acquisitions by competitor CEOs of award-winning CEOs?

The increase in the value of acquisitions will be stronger with greater product similarity
Highlighted increase in the value of acquisitions post-award period compared to pre-award period

How does the presence of high product similarity between competitor CEO firms and superstar CEO firms impact competitor CEOs?

Indicates belonging to the same strategic group in an industry
Leads to more direct rivalry and competition for the same resources and markets
Increases competitor CEOs' awareness of their direct rivals and their CEO awards
Strengthens the motivation to strive for success to match their rivals

CEOS AND CORPORATE STRATEGY

61 important questions on CEOS AND CORPORATE STRATEGY