战略变革董事会决策中的群体极化:来自中国上市公司的证据(2008-2018)

IF 2.6 4区 管理学 Q3 MANAGEMENT
Ming Zhang, Xufei Ma, Weihong Chen, Hailin Lan
{"title":"战略变革董事会决策中的群体极化:来自中国上市公司的证据(2008-2018)","authors":"Ming Zhang, Xufei Ma, Weihong Chen, Hailin Lan","doi":"10.1017/mor.2022.58","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Strategic management scholars have shown increasing interest in explaining strategic change from the perspective of cognitive bias. However, most studies focus on individual cognitive bias but pay little attention to group cognitive bias. This study introduces a typical group cognitive bias (group polarization) to explain strategic change decisions made by the board of directors. Following the theory of group polarization, we argue that, when the average prior strategic change experienced in performance decline by board directors is relatively high (or low), the focal strategic change in performance decline will become even higher (or lower). We further contend that the proportion of female directors and board versus CEO power as the contingencies can mitigate this group polarization effect. Our hypotheses were strongly supported by a longitudinal sample of Chinese publicly listed companies during 2008–2018. The study's framework and findings contribute to the contextualization of social psychology research on group polarization in the study of board's strategic decision-making.","PeriodicalId":47798,"journal":{"name":"Management and Organization Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Group Polarization in Board Decisions about Strategic Change: Evidence from Chinese Publicly Listed Companies (2008–2018)\",\"authors\":\"Ming Zhang, Xufei Ma, Weihong Chen, Hailin Lan\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/mor.2022.58\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Strategic management scholars have shown increasing interest in explaining strategic change from the perspective of cognitive bias. However, most studies focus on individual cognitive bias but pay little attention to group cognitive bias. This study introduces a typical group cognitive bias (group polarization) to explain strategic change decisions made by the board of directors. Following the theory of group polarization, we argue that, when the average prior strategic change experienced in performance decline by board directors is relatively high (or low), the focal strategic change in performance decline will become even higher (or lower). We further contend that the proportion of female directors and board versus CEO power as the contingencies can mitigate this group polarization effect. Our hypotheses were strongly supported by a longitudinal sample of Chinese publicly listed companies during 2008–2018. The study's framework and findings contribute to the contextualization of social psychology research on group polarization in the study of board's strategic decision-making.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47798,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Management and Organization Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Management and Organization Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/mor.2022.58\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Management and Organization Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/mor.2022.58","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

战略管理学者对从认知偏差的角度解释战略变革越来越感兴趣。然而,大多数研究关注的是个体认知偏差,而对群体认知偏差的关注较少。本研究引入一种典型的群体认知偏差(群体极化)来解释董事会的战略变革决策。根据群体极化理论,我们认为,当董事在业绩下降中经历的平均先验战略变革相对较高(或较低)时,其在业绩下降中的焦点战略变革会更高(或更低)。我们进一步认为,女性董事和董事会比例与CEO权力作为偶然性可以缓解这种群体极化效应。我们的假设得到了2008-2018年中国上市公司纵向样本的有力支持。本研究的框架和结果有助于将董事会战略决策研究中群体极化的社会心理学研究情境化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Group Polarization in Board Decisions about Strategic Change: Evidence from Chinese Publicly Listed Companies (2008–2018)
ABSTRACT Strategic management scholars have shown increasing interest in explaining strategic change from the perspective of cognitive bias. However, most studies focus on individual cognitive bias but pay little attention to group cognitive bias. This study introduces a typical group cognitive bias (group polarization) to explain strategic change decisions made by the board of directors. Following the theory of group polarization, we argue that, when the average prior strategic change experienced in performance decline by board directors is relatively high (or low), the focal strategic change in performance decline will become even higher (or lower). We further contend that the proportion of female directors and board versus CEO power as the contingencies can mitigate this group polarization effect. Our hypotheses were strongly supported by a longitudinal sample of Chinese publicly listed companies during 2008–2018. The study's framework and findings contribute to the contextualization of social psychology research on group polarization in the study of board's strategic decision-making.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
3.40%
发文量
41
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信