Explore the vast range of titles available.

While theory and evidence show that firms' competitive actions mediate the resource-performance relationship, details of top managements' roles in shaping resource utilization choices have been underemphasized. We address this oversight by integrating top management team heterogeneity and any resulting faultline strength with the resource-action-performance model to investigate how TMT composition differentially affects the model's two linkages. Specifically, we argue that TMT heterogeneity positively affects the resource-action linkage, yet negatively affects the action-performance linkage. Moreover, when heterogeneity begets strong faultlines, all such positive effect is lost. Supportive evidence from the in-vitro medical diagnostic substance manufacturing industry allows us to discuss how our findings contribute to upper echelons theory, as well as the emerging stream on resource utilization.

Dynamic managerial capabilities focus on managers' resource-related decisions. Asset orchestration, a central component of dynamic managerial capabilities and of resource management, highlights the importance of integrating (matching) resource investment and deployment decisions. Building on these recent theoretical advances, we examine the contingent nature of resource investment and deployment decisions. The results, based on a sample of banking firms, indicate that firm performance suffers when managers' investment decisions deviate from the norms of rivals for both human and physical capital. However, when deployment decisions support investment decisions, greater investment deviation, both high and low, generally enhances performance. Specifically, firm performance is optimized by making congruent resource investment and deployment decisions as opposed to maximizing or economizing either decision independently. Therefore, resource management via asset orchestration is vital for superior performance.

We address current criticisms of the RBV (oversight of dynamism, environmental contingencies, and managers' role) by linking value creation in dynamic environmental contexts to the management of firm resources. Components of the resource management model include structuring the resource portfolio; bundling resources to build capabilities; and leveraging capabilities to provide value to customers, gain a competitive advantage, and create wealth for owners. Propositions linking resource management and value creation are offered to shape future research.

Although resources are instrumental to a competitive advantage, management must effectively bundle and deploy an organization's resources for an advantage to be realized. Despite their importance, little research has examined these managerial actions. Using a sample of competitive dyads, we tested theory regarding the effects of rivals' comparative resource stocks and managers' bundling and deployment actions on competitive outcomes. Results indicate that both comparative advantages in resource stocks and managerial actions affect performance. However, their efficacy depends on contextual factors and the deployment flexibility of specific resources. Thus, resource management actions are critical to achieving and sustaining competitive advantage.

Prior research on mergers and acquisitions (M&As) has substantially advanced our understanding of how isolated acquirer- and deal-specific factors affect abnormal stock returns. However, investors are likely to perceive and evaluate M&As holistically—that is, as complex configurations (i.e., gestalts) of characteristics, rather than as a list of independent factors. And, yet, extant M&A literature has not addressed why and how configurations of factors elicit positive or negative reactions. Overlooking the interdependent nature of factors known to influence acquisition success has limited our understanding of both M&As and investor judgment. Taking an inductive approach to addressing this important issue, the present study relies on fuzzy set methodology. Our results provide compelling evidence that investor perceptions of M&A announcements are not only configurational in nature but also characterized by equifinality (or the presence of multiple paths to success) and asymmetric causality (i.e., configurations that represent bad deals are not simply a mirror image of good deals, but differ fundamentally). By constructing a typology of \"good\" and \"bad\" deals as perceived by market participants, we develop a mid-range theory of M&A stock market performance. As such, this study offers novel theoretical and empirical insights to scholars as well as implications for practitioners.

Building on the resource-based view (RBV) and competitive dynamics literatures, this paper proposes that considering resources or actions independently offers an incomplete understanding of the drivers of superior performance. Instead, we hypothesize that resources enable competitive actions and that when these actions leverage the firm's resources, superior performance results. We tested these hypotheses with panelized data on the technological resources and competitive actions of firms in the in-vitro medical diagnostic substance manufacturing industry. The results provide substantial support for our hypotheses, specifically with respect to mediation. Our theory and results underscore how the integration of the competitive dynamics and RBV literatures can significantly improve our understanding of firm performance.

Boards of directors' attention to monitoring represents an understudied topic in corporate governance. By analyzing hundreds of board meeting transcripts, we find that board members do not maintain constant levels of attention toward monitoring, but instead selectively allocate attention to their monitoring function. Drawing from the attention-based view, prospect theory, and the literature on power, we find that deviation from prior performance and CEO duality affect this allocation. Specifically, while negative deviation from prior performance increases boards' attention to monitoring, positive deviation from prior performance reduces it. The presence of duality also reduces the boards' allocation of attention to monitoring. Additional analysis demonstrates that the effects of duality are realized in part by the CEO-chair's control of the meeting's agenda and location. Finally, the results show that duality and deviation from prior performance interactively affect boards' attention to monitoring. In total, we find that board members do not consistently monitor management in order to protect shareholder value, a proposition often assumed within governance research; rather, our results demonstrate that board members' monitoring behaviors are contextually dependent. The contextual dependency of board attention to monitoring suggests that additional efforts may be needed to ensure the protection of shareholders' interests.

The entrepreneurial process drives economic activities in the formal economy; however, little is known theoretically about how the entrepreneurial process works in the informal economy. To address this theoretical gap, we employ a multilevel perspective integrating entrepreneurship theory (microlevel) with institutional (macrolevel) and collective identity (mesolevel) theories to examine the role institutions and collective identity play in the recognition and exploitation of opportunities in the informal economy. Additionally, we explore factors that influence the transition to the formal economy.

The foci of strategic entrepreneurship (SE) are broad and rich, building on research from multiple disciplines such as economics, psychology, and sociology, along with other subdisciplines in management including organizational behavior and organization theory. Herein, we examine the contributions of strategic management and entrepreneurship to SE. Building on a previous model of SE, we develop an input-process-output model to extend our understanding of the SE construct. We examine the resource inputs into SE, such as individual knowledge and skills. In addition, we explore the resource orchestration processes that are important for SE and the outcomes, including creating value for customers, building wealth for stockholders, and creating benefits for other stakeholders, especially for society at large. Individual entrepreneurs also benefit through financial wealth, but other outcomes such as personal satisfaction and fulfillment of personal needs (e.g., self-actualization) may be of equal or even greater importance. Therefore, we incorporate in the model of SE multilevel outcomes that motivate entrepreneurs.

Foundational RBV work suggests that firms possess capabilities that represent strengths and others that represent weaknesses. In contrast, contemporary research has examined capability strengths while largely ignoring weaknesses. Addressing this oversight, we examine the direct and integrated effects of sets of capability strengths and capability weaknesses on competitive advantage and its empirical correlate—relative performance. Additionally, we explore how environmental and firm-specific factors influence change in these drivers of competitive advantage over time. Results suggest that weakness sets have a negative effect on relative performance, while strength sets have an increasingly positive effect. The integrative effects of strength and weakness sets affect relative performance in a complex manner. For example, while high strength/low weakness firms perform at high levels, firms integrating high strength with high weakness perform well, but experience considerably more variance in their realized outcomes. Lastly, we find that the strength and weakness sets change significantly over time in markets where competition is more intense, thereby undermining the durability of competitive advantage. Our theory and results indicate that achieving temporary advantage is more difficult than previously thought and that the erosion of advantage occurs routinely as a result of dynamic and interactive rivalry.