Wiley: Strategic Management Journal: Table of Contents

Scaling high and wide: How firms leverage AI and organizational design to overcome the scale‐scope trade‐off

Feng Wan, Tianxi Yang, Xianwei Shi, Ke Rong, Shahzad Ansari — Mon, 20 Apr 2026 22:02:34 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

The trade-off between scale and scope has long posed a strategic dilemma, especially in digital settings, where specialization enables hyperscaling. Drawing on a longitudinal case study of ByteDance, we theorize how digital firms can overcome this constraint through the use of artificial intelligence (AI) combined with an adaptive organizational design. AI evolves and improves through self-learning and cross-fertilization across domains, becoming increasingly valuable as learning accumulates. This, however, is contingent on access to structurally related data that allow learning to transfer across domains. We show how AI reverses the conventional logic of the resource-based view: rather than valuable resources enabling diversification, diversification amplifies the value of resources. AI thus transforms the scale-scope nexus from being a trade-off into a source of strategic advantage.

Managerial Summary

The growing centrality of AI and digital platforms is reshaping how firms pursue and sustain growth. This study examines how ByteDance leveraged AI and adaptive organizational design not only to scale rapidly but also to diversify across industries and markets. Rather than incurring rising costs or coordination complexity, the firm's AI capabilities improved with each deployment through cross-fertilization across domains, enabling more efficient growth across multiple domains. For managers, the findings highlight how dynamic combinations of AI and organizational structure can help overcome traditional trade-offs between scale and scope, opening new pathways for scalable, cross-market expansion in increasingly competitive environments.

Throwing curveballs: A language‐based model of curveball questions in quarterly earnings calls uncovers their consequences and antecedents

Nandil Bhatia, Wei Cai, Sameer B. Srivastava — Mon, 20 Apr 2026 01:49:03 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

In evaluative contexts, evaluatees typically seek to present themselves in a favorable light, while evaluators ask penetrating questions to assess these claims. Here we develop a framework to identify curveball questions: ones that are on-topic yet perplexing (i.e., difficult to predict) relative to past discourse. We develop a language-based measure of curveball questions and apply it to a corpus of quarterly earnings calls. After validating this question-level measure, we next demonstrate that a call-level curveball measure predicts absolute returns, absolute abnormal returns, and changes in a firm's average analyst rating. Finally, we identify the types of analysts who are most likely to pose curveball questions, the types of firms that are most likely to receive them, and the conditions under which they tend to arise.

Managerial Summary

Even a carefully crafted presentation can be derailed by a challenging question. What makes a question challenging in ways that can be disruptive and how can such a question be measured? We propose that such questions, which we label curveballs, are on-topic, and thus difficult to dismiss or deflect, yet difficult to predict based on prior knowledge. We harness the tools of computational linguistics to develop a measure of curveball questions and apply it to the context of quarterly earnings calls. We show that this measure predicts consequential economic outcomes and highlight the conditions under which curveball questions tend to arise. Our measurement strategy can be readily extended to other evaluative contexts such as job interviews and venture capital pitches.

Organizing across cognitive asymmetry in human–AI collaboration: A study of perfume creation

Tomoko Yokoi, Daniella Laureiro‐Martinez, Federico Magni, Stefano Brusoni — Thu, 16 Apr 2026 23:24:17 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

As organizations increasingly adopt generative AI (GenAI), they face a strategic challenge: not only deciding which tasks AI should perform, but also how to organize the integration of human and AI efforts to produce viable solutions. We propose that a cognitive asymmetry between human's tacit, embodied knowledge and AI's codified knowledge creates a representational gap that complicates human–GenAI collaboration. Through a qualitative study of professional perfume creation, we identify representational integration as an organizing process through which humans and GenAI coordinate to bridge this gap. This process unfolds across three practices: allocating tasks based on cognitive advantages, converting knowledge across tacit and codified forms, and steering GenAI outputs as problem solving evolves. This study advances a novel organizing perspective on human–GenAI collaboration under conditions of cognitive asymmetry.

Managerial Summary

Organizations increasingly deploy GenAI in knowledge-intensive work, yet many struggle to convert human and AI contributions into strategic value. This study takes a cognitive lens, showing that humans and GenAI rely on different forms of cognition—and that value emerges when organizations can coordinate and combine them. Successful human–GenAI collaboration therefore requires more than adopting powerful models. It depends on organizing practices that help employees translate across representational formats, relate GenAI outputs to embodied expertise, and iteratively steer GenAI as their interpretations evolve. Investing in these practices and skills allows organizations to harness GenAI's generativity while recognizing that human sensemaking, tacit knowledge, and contextual understanding remain indispensable for producing coherent, high-quality outcomes.

Persuasion in the political marketplace: How firms snitch on rivals to encourage regulatory enforcement

Benjamin Barber IV, Gianluigi Giustiziero, Simon Weschle — Thu, 16 Apr 2026 18:34:13 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

We study an important, but largely overlooked, non-market strategy used by firms in the enforcement stage of policy: “snitching,” that is, providing intelligence about potential violations of their rivals in an attempt to persuade regulators to fine them. Building on political marketplace theory, we develop and test a theoretical model of how firms use snitching during regulatory enforcement. We show that in equilibrium, firms snitch when the rival's violations are likely to cause significant harm to the population. We then derive several boundary conditions outlining when firms will engage in more or less snitching. We find support for our theory in panel data on enforcement actions by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for more than 8000 facilities over 12 years.

Managerial Summary

Firms can use their corporate political activity (CPA) not only to help themselves, but also to snitch on their rivals. Using a formal model, we look at how CPA influences regulatory enforcement. We find firms are most likely to snitch on their rivals when their rivals' potential violations are likely to cause significant harm, since this is when regulators care the most. Our model also outlines when this is most and least likely to occur. We then test our theory using data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and find support for our claims. The EPA is more likely to fine facilities for infractions that process many toxic chemicals, but this effect is much greater when a firm's rivals are actively lobbying the EPA.

From armed roots to airline routes in South America: A dual imprinting perspective

Kunyuan Qiao, Shon R. Hiatt, Wesley D. Sine — Thu, 09 Apr 2026 04:13:24 -0700

Abstract

Reserch Summary

We propose that founding partner relationships can leave distinct imprints on organizations that differ in durability and in how they respond to subsequent changes involving the founding partner. Examining South American airlines founded between 1919 and 1984, we argue and find that such relationships simultaneously create an internal capability imprint, enhancing operational performance and facilitating international expansion, and an external identity imprint, constraining expansion by triggering national security concerns among foreign regulators. Internal capabilities persist longer because they are embedded in organizational structures and tacit knowledge, while external identity resides in more malleable stakeholder perceptions. Post-founding changes to the imprinter reshape these effects asymmetrically: the transition to civilian air traffic control erodes the competitive advantage of military-derived capabilities by diffusing previously scarce expertise, while military coups intensify the negative consequences of a military-associated identity. These findings advance a dual imprinting perspective and contribute to strategy research by explaining persistent organizational heterogeneity through founding-era capabilities and identities.

Managerial Summary

When launching a venture, founders instinctively seek to collaborate with powerful partners such as celebrated investors and high-profile board members. Those relationships leave two distinct legacies. The first is operational: the knowledge and systems a powerful partner brings embed themselves deeply, sharpening capabilities that sustain competitive advantage for years. The second is reputational: the outside world immediately begins to categorize your organization through that association, and that categorization can be hard to escape. Our research on South American airlines shows how military-era founding partners produced operational excellence that fueled international growth, while simultaneously creating a security-sensitive identity that blocked market access in politically sensitive contexts. The lesson for founders: think several moves ahead. The question is not solely what this partner can give us today, but how will we be seen if his or her reputation shifts tomorrow.

Beyond coal: When can outsider stakeholders drive transformative change?

Todd Schifeling, Thomas P. Lyon, Ion Bogdan Vasi — Wed, 08 Apr 2026 20:19:34 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

Organizations grant stakeholders who provide valuable resources insider status in governance, excluding less valuable outsiders. Firms thereby assemble a value-maximizing resource portfolio but face challenges when environmental shifts require adaptation that harms some insiders. We combine and extend new stakeholder and social movement theories, hypothesizing how various stakeholders influence such adaptation. Outsiders can enable adaptation depending on organizational governance and the array of insider stakeholders. For-profit firms are less open to outsider influence, but a wider array of insiders enables outsiders to align with certain groups to overcome the opposition of others who resist change. The nature of these alignments shapes whether adaptation involves transformative divestments or exploratory investments. We test our theory in the context of the Beyond Coal movement to divest coal plants.

Managerial Summary

To gain access to valuable resources, organizations commit to stakeholders who provide these resources. However, this creates problems when adapting to changes in the environment that undermine the value of these resources. How can managers balance their stakeholder commitments with the need to integrate the concerns of other stakeholders demanding adaptive changes? We find that organizational governance and the configuration of stakeholder interests can create openings for adaptation. Studying a period of rapid environmental change in the US electric utility industry, for-profit utilities were more likely to retire coal generators when activists aligned with consumer advocates, and more likely to invest in solar generators when activists aligned with prosumers.

Issue Information

Wed, 08 Apr 2026 03:36:25 -0700

Strategic Management Journal, Volume 47, Issue 5, Page 1209-1210, May 2026.

Task co‐use and product improvement: An organization design perspective

Johanna Glauber, Tobias Kretschmer — Wed, 08 Apr 2026 03:36:25 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

Co-using tasks—using the same task to produce more than one product—promises economies of scope. However, task co-use also ties products together, changing a firm's task network by introducing cross-product interdependencies. In light of these interdependencies, we identify an unrecognized downside of task co-use for product reliability: Cross-product interdependencies complicate task design and increase the risk of malfunctions. Hence, task co-use may carry a reliability penalty. Second, we propose that the reliability penalty of task co-use may shrink with experience as cross-product interdependencies allow for cross-improvements and therefore potentially higher improvement rates of task co-using products. We study the US automotive industry and find our predictions supported, indicating that task co-use is a critical design parameter with important consequences for reliability and product improvement.

Managerial Summary

Using the same tasks to produce multiple products can help firms lower costs and achieve economies of scope. However, this practice also links products more tightly together, creating interdependencies across product lines. These interdependencies can make tasks harder to design and manage, increasing the likelihood of errors or malfunctions. As a result, task co-use may reduce product reliability—an important but often overlooked drawback. At the same time, co-used tasks can enable portfolio-wide improvements— improvements across products. As firms gain experience, problems identified in one product can lead to improvements that benefit others using the same tasks. Over time, these cross-improvements accelerate product improvement for task co-using products and can reduce the initial reliability disadvantage. Evidence from the U.S. automotive industry supports these arguments. The findings show that task co-use is a key design decision that involves meaningful trade-offs between cost savings, reliability, and improvement. For managers, this highlights the importance of carefully evaluating when and how tasks should be co-used across products, as these choices have lasting implications for product quality and improvement.

Beyond feasibility filters: How expertise heterogeneity enables innovation recognition

Jacqueline N. Lane, Zoe Szajnfarber, Jason Crusan, Michael Menietti — Wed, 08 Apr 2026 03:36:25 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

Organizations often struggle to identify promising innovations that balance novelty and feasibility in multidisciplinary domains, yet how does evaluator expertise heterogeneity shape these assessments? This study examines how evaluator expertise influences innovation evaluation through a field experiment with National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Astrobee Robotic Arm Challenge, involving 354 evaluators assessing 101 solutions. Domain-spanning evaluators assign higher novelty ratings while maintaining similar feasibility ratings compared to domain-specific evaluators. Domain-adjacent evaluators show higher ratings on both dimensions. Human-LLM analysis of 3007 evaluator comments reveals a two-stage process: feasibility filtering (evaluating minimum viability) followed by integrative assessment (evaluating enhancement potential). Different expertise types serve complementary functions: domain-spanning evaluators recognize enhancement potential while maintaining rigorous standards; domain-adjacent evaluators show openness to novel approaches; domain-specific evaluators ensure technical rigor. These findings suggest effective innovation evaluation depends on strategically combining complementary expertise types rather than identifying optimal individual evaluators.

Managerial Summary

Organizations often struggle to identify innovations that are both novel and feasible, risking missed breakthroughs or wasted resources. We study how evaluator expertise shapes innovation assessments in a field experiment with NASA, in which 354 evaluators reviewed 101 robotic arm designs. Evaluators with expertise spanning multiple domains recognize more novel yet feasible ideas. Those with single-domain expertise provide essential technical gatekeeping but overlook cross-domain improvements, while adjacent-field experts are more open but less rigorous. Organizations can strengthen innovation selection by strategically combining these complementary expertise types—using domain-specific experts for initial feasibility screening and domain-spanning experts to identify integrative opportunities—rather than seeking one “ideal” evaluator.

Does entrepreneurship narrow the gender earnings gap?

Tiantian Yang, Aleksandra (Olenka) Kacperczyk, Lucia Naldi — Wed, 08 Apr 2026 03:36:25 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

Prior research has examined whether individuals earn greater returns in entrepreneurship than in wage work but has paid little attention to gender differences in these returns. Using Swedish employee–employer data from 1990 to 2020, we compare individuals' earnings before and after they transitioned to entrepreneurship. We find that women founders earn less than men, yet this gap is smaller than in wage employment. Additionally, entrepreneurship yields disproportionately greater returns for (a) high-ability women facing glass ceilings in salaried positions, and (b) women in male-typed industries who encounter greater barriers to advancement in wage work. Together, these findings show that entrepreneurship can enable women to realize greater returns to their human capital, particularly when they face stronger constraints in paid employment.

Managerial Summary

This study examines whether entrepreneurship widens or narrows the gender earnings gap compared to wage work. Using comprehensive Swedish data that track individuals before and after founding new businesses, we show that, although women founders earn less than men in absolute terms, they experience substantially larger earnings gains than men when moving from wage work to entrepreneurship. This advantage is most pronounced for high-ability women and for women in male-dominated industries, who face stronger barriers to advancement in salaried work. Our findings indicate that entrepreneurship offers women a pathway to realize greater returns to their skills and experience, yielding disproportionately higher earnings compared to remaining in salaried jobs. For organizations, these results highlight how structural constraints in wage employment can push talented women toward entrepreneurship.

The technological uniqueness paradox

Yang Fan, Lubomir Litov, Mu‐Jeung Yang, Todd Zenger — Wed, 08 Apr 2026 03:36:25 -0700

Abstract

Research summary

We establish a new paradox surrounding technological uniqueness, defined as the degree to which a firm's patented technology portfolio differs from its competitors. On the one hand, technological uniqueness acts as a barrier to incoming technology spillovers and impedes firm performance. On the other hand, technological uniqueness reduces outgoing technology spillovers and contributes to a strategic resource that is more costly to imitate. We empirically examine these competing arguments and find evidence that the strategic resource argument dominates for average firms in the data with more technologically unique firms performing better. At the same time, we show that pursuing technological uniqueness is costly, as unique firms indeed benefit less from incoming technology spillovers, are harder to understand by equity analysts and have higher costs of equity capital.

Managerial Summary

We establish empirically for a sample of public corporations that being technologically unique pays off-companies with distinctive patent portfolios outperform their peers on average. This uniqueness creates a competitive moat that is difficult for rivals to overcome. But there is a catch: the same uniqueness that protects a company also isolates it. When technology is so different from conventional wisdom, it becomes difficult for outsiders to understand, then a contrarian company will also struggle to learn from others' breakthroughs. We empirically document a double penalty: contrarian companies benefit less from innovations by peer firms and equity analysts can't easily evaluate the business, driving up the cost of capital.

How to grow new applications out of old research? Evidence from firm cumulative investments in deep learning

Xirong (Subrina) Shen — Wed, 08 Apr 2026 03:36:25 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

Firm technological research has the potential to spawn multiple applications. Despite recognizing such potential, past literature disagrees on the process through which firms discover and grow new applications out of their past technological research. I examine this question in the context of deep learning, taking a question-driven approach. Difference-in-difference analysis suggests that firms radically increased cumulative investments in past deep learning research upon signals indicating elevated application potential of deep learning. Furthermore, rather than investing in proprietary efforts, firms disclosed their cumulative development trajectories to engage external innovation efforts from which they learn and build. Grounded in these findings, I propose that the discovery and growth of new applications of past research entails unfolding innovation interdependence which motivates firms to co-evolve with external innovators.

Managerial Summary

Firm technological research has the potential to spawn multiple applications. This article examines how firms cumulatively invest in their past technological research to grow new applications in the context of deep learning. Employing a difference-in-difference approach, analysis suggests that firms radically increased cumulative investments in deep learning after a shock elevating the application potential of their past deep-learning research. Furthermore, firms publicly disclosed their cumulative development trajectories to attract innovation efforts from application sectors while actively learning from the attracted efforts to innovate further. These findings suggest that firms engaged, leveraged and co-evolved with external innovation efforts to discover and grow new applications of their past research.

When do nice guys finish last? Prosociality and the psychological model of CEO‐firm matching

Dongil Daniel Keum, Nandil Bhatia — Wed, 08 Apr 2026 03:36:25 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

Prosocial CEOs, characterized by greater concern for their employees, enhance employee motivation but incur higher costs when implementing layoffs. We develop a psychological model of CEO-firm matching wherein negative industry shocks requiring downsizing asymmetrically erode the match quality for prosocial CEOs. Leveraging increases in Chinese import competition, we show that layoff pressures lead to higher rates of both forced and voluntary turnover among prosocial CEOs. They are succeeded by less prosocial CEOs who are externally recruited, use less employee-friendly language, lean Republican in political orientation, or are less likely to volunteer at charities. Our study highlights psychological characteristics as a key consideration in the executive labor market and draws attention to the “first-stage” selection dynamics that shape the types of CEOs who lead firms.

Managerial Summary

Which firms CEOs choose to join and which CEOs are selected or retained by boards depend not only on their skills but also on the fit between their ‘personality’ and the firm's needs. We show that during industry downturns that require aggressive downsizing, prosocial CEOs are more likely to depart voluntarily, and boards actively replace them with low-prosocial “wartime” CEOs. This dynamic nature of the CEO-firm fit provides insights into why and when previously effective leadership may become ineffective and empirical grounds for the common distinction between peacetime and wartime CEOs. A key implication is that increasing Chinese import competition has shaped not only firm economic activities but also the psychological profiles of business leaders.

When do firms learn by hiring? How complexity moderates the value of new knowledge

Dong Nghi Pham, Luis A. Rios, Maciej Workiewicz — Wed, 08 Apr 2026 03:36:25 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

Organizations often hire employees hoping to acquire new knowledge. While the literature has paid considerable attention to the role of the characteristics of the source of knowledge, the recipient firm, and the knowledge being transferred, it has largely overlooked those of the knowledge being replaced. Using a computational model, we examine how the pre-existing knowledge of the hiring firm—specifically its degrees of internal and external fit—influences its ability to learn. Our findings suggest that firms with lower internal fit absorb new knowledge more quickly, even when controlling for initial external fit. We identify several mechanisms driving this dynamic, demonstrating how persistent resistance to new knowledge and sudden shifts can emerge solely through mutual learning dynamics between individuals and organizations, independent of social or cognitive constraints.

Managerial Summary

Companies frequently hire employees from competitors to gain new knowledge and improve performance. We show that success in learning by hiring depends not only on who firms hire but also on the characteristics of their existing knowledge. Our findings reveal two counterintuitive dynamics. First, firms whose practices exhibit a high degree of fit face greater difficulty in absorbing new knowledge. Such extant knowledge is stickier, as incumbent employees find it harder to abandon their old approaches and keep pulling the organization back to the status quo. Second, in complex environments, struggling firms that hire aggressively may learn less effectively, as multiple hires provide conflicting advice. Thus, while such firms stand to learn more from hiring, the internal dynamics of learning within the organization frustrate the firm's effort to absorb the knowledge. We subsequently present and analyze the mechanisms responsible for these outcomes.

Curious and analytical: How analysts evaluate and respond to executive communications about firm strategy

John C. Eklund, Michael J. Mannor — Wed, 08 Apr 2026 03:36:25 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

How do analysts react to communication about firms' strategies? Research has shown that executive communication influences markets, but we know little about reactions to the deeper strategy content communicated. Drawing from research on how evaluative frames and expectation violations shape cognition, we show that when executives focus on growth strategies, analysts react by becoming more curious and analytically intensive. These changes in cognition partially mediate a positive effect on analysts' evaluations. Further, we consider two situations that reveal how analysts react to information that reinforces or violates their expectations, demonstrating different analyst reactions to similar strategies among S&P 500 firms. In doing so, we contribute new theory about how the evaluative assumptions of these influential market actors change and can be influenced by managerial framing.

Managerial Summary

This paper focuses on how securities analysts react to executive communications about their business' strategies. We know that top executive communications influence markets, but this paper probes further to understand reactions to the specific strategies that are communicated. We show that when executives focus on new growth strategies, this piques analyst interest. Specifically, we find that this makes analysts more curious and analytically intensive, thereby shaping their forecasts and evaluations. However, we find that analyst reactions also depend on how well the strategies that executives talk about fit with what is expected from the company. When the strategy articulated aligns with expectations, firms are rewarded with yet stronger evaluations. In contrast, when a strategy does not align with expectations, firms are punished with lower evaluations.

Thinking and feeling about novelty: How cognition and emotion shape investment in novel ideas

Matthew P. Mount, Henry Tue Le, Gary Bowman, Christopher Golding — Sat, 04 Apr 2026 00:39:17 -0700

Abstract

While prior research on the strategic framing of innovation highlights the cognitive mechanisms underlying novelty evaluation, we know little about the corresponding emotional mechanisms. Drawing on appraisal theory, construal level theory, and the literature on emotions, we theorize two distinct appraisal-emotion pathways through which the framing of novel ideas evokes hope and awe among investors with different motives. We argue that high-construal framing supplements economically motivated investors' low-level feasibility orientation, which evokes hope and increases their willingness to invest. By contrast, low-construal framing supplements non-economically motivated investors' high-level desirability orientation, which evokes awe and increases their willingness to invest. We test and find some support for these within-motive pathways across three studies. Our study offers new theoretical and practical insights on the strategic framing of novel ideas.

Families in venture capital

Valerio Pelucco — Mon, 30 Mar 2026 21:50:38 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

This exploratory paper introduces a new type of family business by studying the investment strategies of family-managed venture capital funds (“Family VCs”) across a multi-country setting. It shows that Family VCs are more likely to invest in (syndicate with) geographically proximate startups (investors), indicating a preference for local investments. This tendency is stronger when the VC is named after the family and the family is closely involved in the decision-making process of the fund. I provide suggestive evidence that this pattern reflects both superior local knowledge (rational response) and home bias (non-rational response), with the latter becoming more pronounced when performance pressure is lower.

Managerial Summary

Family-managed VC funds (Family VCs), managing roughly $29 billion, represent an important segment of the venture capital industry. I show that family control shapes both the selection of startups and syndicate partners. Family VCs are indeed more likely to support ventures and partner with investors from their communities, particularly when family members are highly involved in investment decisions and the fund is named after the family. I provide suggestive evidence that this local preference stems from both rational factors, like superior local knowledge and networks, and a non-rational preference for local investments. Their local focus becomes relatively less pronounced when families must demonstrate strong financial performance, such as when a follow-on fund has not yet been raised and during competitive market conditions.

When creation and capture diverge: Why breakthrough inventions do not break through alike

Giacomo Marchesini, Giovanni Valentini — Mon, 30 Mar 2026 00:00:00 -0700

Abstract

Reserch Summary

Breakthrough inventions are central to firms' competitive advantage, yet what constitutes a breakthrough remains unclear. We examine the relationship between technological quality (measured by forward citations) and economic value (measured by grant-day abnormal stock-returns) of patents. Using U.S. patents assigned to publicly listed firms, we find that among the most exceptional inventions—that is, breakthroughs—the correlation between these two measures disappears: technologically outstanding patents are not necessarily the most economically valuable. We attribute this divergence to a structural tension between value creation and value capture in patenting, driven by novelty, the availability of complementary assets, and competitive dynamics. Firms that successfully manage both dimensions earn a disproportionate market premium. This outcome is often associated with firms that diversify their technological portfolios asynchronously across technology S-curves.

Managerial Summary

Breakthrough innovations are widely viewed as the lifeblood of corporate success. Yet what truly defines a breakthrough—and how its value should be assessed—remains unclear. Companies typically rely on two indicators: technological quality (measured by forward citations) and economic value (captured by stock market reactions at patent grant). Conventional wisdom assumes these move together. Our analysis of U.S. patents challenges this view. For the most exceptional inventions, technological quality and economic value diverge. We identify the drivers of this tension and show that firms able to manage it earn disproportionate market returns.

Social comparison and the value of performance trajectory information: A field experiment in the workplace

Hugh Xiaolong Wu, Yucheng Liang — Wed, 25 Mar 2026 17:24:01 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

Many new employees leave their firms before realizing the returns to experience. One reason is that they cannot see how performance evolves with tenure. We study whether making performance trajectories visible improves retention and firm performance. In a randomized controlled trial at a multinational spa chain in China, workers received twice-weekly information for 28 weeks about the performance path of a high-performing senior coworker. The intervention reduces new-worker attrition by 11–12% and increases revenue by 15% in stores with more new workers. These effects are largely driven by reduced stress and improved mental health, as the information lowers their beliefs about how well senior coworkers performed early in their careers. By contrast, showing only the current performance of a similar-tenure peer has no detectable effect.

Managerial Summary

In many firms, new employees leave before realizing the returns to experience because they lack information about how performance evolves with tenure. We examine whether making senior workers’ performance trajectories visible improves retention and firm performance. In a randomized controlled trial involving over 7,000 workers at a multinational spa chain in China, employees received twice-weekly information for 28 weeks about the performance trajectory of a high-performing senior coworker. The intervention reduces new-worker attrition by 11–12% and increases revenue by 15% in stores with more new workers. These effects are driven by reduced stress and improved mental health, as the information lowers beliefs about senior coworkers’ early-career performance. Overall, our findings show that making senior workers’ performance trajectories visible can mitigate social comparison costs within firms.

Information‐seeking lobbying and strategic stockpiling under trade policy uncertainty

Bo Yang — Wed, 25 Mar 2026 01:30:35 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

This study investigates how firms engage in information-seeking lobbying to address trade policy uncertainty. I argue that lobbying enables firms to gain early insights into forthcoming tariff actions, allowing them to strategically stockpile products likely to be targeted. Using shipping records of US firms during the 2018 US–China trade war, I find that lobbying firms increased imports of soon-to-be-tariffed products before tariff lists were publicly released, compared to non-lobbying firms. This selective stockpiling pattern disappeared after tariff announcements. Further analysis shows that lobbying firms were less likely to request tariff exemptions for products they had preemptively stockpiled, suggesting that information-seeking lobbying during policy formulation provides an additional benefit by reducing the need for costly government engagement during the implementation phase.

Managerial Summary

To manage heightened trade policy uncertainty, firms often adjust global supply chains or engage with the government—but how can they integrate these strategies? This study proposes that firms can engage in lobbying not just to influence policy outcomes, but to gain early insights into pending trade actions. Using data from the 2018 US–China trade war, I find that lobbying firms stockpiled more of the products that were later targeted by tariffs before those tariffs were publicly announced. These firms were also less likely to request tariff exemptions for products they had preemptively stockpiled, indicating potential cost savings by avoiding expensive government engagement. The findings underscore the strategic value of early-stage lobbying and highlight the importance of coordination between government affairs and operation departments.

Shaping expectations, losing flexibility: A study of CEO promises as strategic communication tools

Majid Majzoubi, Alex Murray, William J. Mayew — Fri, 20 Mar 2026 00:00:00 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

CEO promises are powerful but understudied communication tools. We develop a dual-mechanism framework theorizing that while CEO promises elevate stakeholder expectations, they simultaneously constrain strategic flexibility. We argue that CEO promise-making is shaped by two competing pressures: making more promises when the need to manage expectations upward is heightened and fewer promises when the need to preserve flexibility is increased. Further, we predict that under heightened uncertainty, CEOs preserve flexibility through strategic ambiguity (i.e., issuing promises with extended or vague time horizons and lower specificity). Leveraging Large Language Models (LLMs) to analyze over 69,000 earnings-call transcripts from S&P 1500 firms (2010–2022), we identify 74,017 CEO promises and find support for our predictions. We contribute an original, publicly available dataset of CEO promises.

Managerial Summary

When CEOs publicly promise positive future results, they shape how investors and analysts view the company. These promises are a double-edged sword: they can boost investor and stakeholder confidence, but they also lock the company into a pre-determined path and make later shortfalls or pivots reputationally costly. Analyzing more than 69,000 earnings calls (2010–2022), we find that CEOs make more promises when needing to prove their legitimacy, such as during early tenure, when facing gender bias, or after missing earnings targets. However, in uncertain environments, CEOs often pull back from promise-making or employ “strategic ambiguity” by making promises with vaguer timelines and details to maintain flexibility. Our analysis suggests that failing to deliver on these public commitments significantly increases the likelihood of CEO dismissal.

Patent regime shift and firm innovation strategy: Evidence from the Second Amendment to China's Patent Law

Tony W. Tong, Wenlong He, Liang Chen, Zi‐Lin He, Jiangyong Lu — Fri, 20 Mar 2026 00:00:00 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

While changes in intellectual property rights (IPR) protection significantly shape firm innovation, the mechanisms driving firms' responses remain poorly understood. Leveraging the Second Amendment to China's Patent Law, which strengthens appropriability particularly for state-owned enterprises (SOEs), as a natural experiment, we show that stronger IPR has mixed effects on SOEs' innovation. While SOEs increase the rate of innovation subsequent to the Amendment, they shift the direction of innovation toward more familiar areas in which they face a lesser need to adjust existing routines. This directional change suggests a quality decline in SOEs' innovation that may be attributed to path dependence. We further show that this change varies systematically depending on different firm- and industry-level characteristics that loosen or tighten the historical grip of path dependence.

Managerial Summary

This study offers valuable insights for corporate leaders navigating intellectual property rights (IPR) reforms and shaping their firms' innovation strategies, particularly in emerging economies. While stronger IPR protection can increase innovation output, it may also lead firms to concentrate on familiar technologies rather than pursue more novel ideas. Thus, corporate leaders should look beyond patent volume as a performance metric and instead foster creative thinking and engage in external collaborations to access new, cutting-edge knowledge. Such efforts can help firms move beyond established routines and strengthen their long-term competitiveness. To promote innovation of greater novelty, policymakers must complement stronger IPR protection with broader institutional support, including enhancing economic freedom, encouraging market competition, and cultivating a culture that values breakthrough innovation.

Hiring at the tip of the funnel: Externalizing the work of integrating and coordinating diverse human capital

Sang Won Han, Shinjae Won — Wed, 18 Mar 2026 06:44:29 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

We adopt a network-based perspective to examine the effects of hiring strategies in terms of the diversity of hiring sources. Considering the transferability of general and firm-specific skills, we propose that firms can reduce integration costs while gaining diversity benefits when they hire from a focused set of firms that themselves hire broadly. We suggest that occupying this position in the mobility network enhances both innovation and productivity outcomes. Moreover, we posit that a strong cultural orientation, characterized by high intensity and consistency, further amplifies these benefits. Our analysis of mobility data from US public firms between 2005 and 2021 uncovers the pathways through which firms attain this position. Evidence from the panel matching method and fixed-effects regressions provides support for our hypotheses.

Managerial Summary

We take a network perspective to understand how firms' hiring choices—particularly the range of companies they recruit from—shape their performance. We argue that firms can benefit when they hire from a small, consistent group of companies that themselves draw talent from many different firms. This approach allows firms to gain a wide variety of skills and experiences while keeping integration and onboarding challenges low, leading to more innovation and higher productivity. We also suggest that firms with a strong and consistent culture are even better positioned to take advantage of these benefits. Using data on employee movements among US public firms from 2005 to 2021, we show how firms attain this position, and find evidence in support of our hypotheses using panel matching and fixed effects models.

Resource redeployment in multi‐business firms: Centralized or decentralized?

Arkadiy V. Sakhartov, Constance E. Helfat — Fri, 13 Mar 2026 19:45:08 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

Although multi-business firms can benefit from resource redeployment, we know little about the effects of alternative organizational arrangements on profits. This study examines a critical organizational choice, namely the centralization or decentralization of decision making. A formal model demonstrates that in the presence of business unit agency costs and costs of centralization, the profits from centralization versus decentralization depend not only on business relatedness—as emphasized in prior research—but also on return asymmetries between businesses. Moreover, in contrast with much of the research on contemporaneous resource sharing, the profitability of centralization does not increase monotonically with relatedness. The monotonic relationship holds only when relatedness leads to potential profits from redeployment in the intermediate range. As relatedness increases further, the advantage of centralization may decrease.

Managerial Summary

Diversified firms often redeploy resources from one business to another, and the firms must decide whether to centralize or decentralize their redeployment decisions. Much of the literature on related diversification in general, and with respect to redeployment in particular, suggests that related diversification will lead to higher profits when decisions are centralized. However, the analysis presented here shows that centralization may not lead to higher profits from redeployment for highly related diversification, and firms may be able to obtain equivalent or higher profits by decentralizing these decisions.

When does category spanning hurt or help producers?

Jungsoo Ahn, Jean‐Philippe Vergne, Amanda Sharkey — Fri, 13 Mar 2026 19:39:46 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

Scholars have theorized many factors shaping whether category spanning helps or hurts producers. We first synthesize evidence by meta-analyzing 25 years of empirical research, which reveals a null effect of spanning on average, yet with significant subsample heterogeneity. To unpack it, we theorize and find that spanning hurts producers more (i) when spanning occurs within bounded (vs. unbounded) category systems, (ii) when category associations are made by third parties (vs. insiders), (iii) when spanning is located at the product (vs. producer) level, and (iv) when spanning is occurring at once (vs. over time). Two mechanisms underpin these relationships: on the audience side, spanning influences evaluations when it is salient; on the producer side, spanning results in more positive outcomes when producers can control how their spanning behavior is conveyed to audiences. Because these two mechanisms operate jointly, their combined influence can result in spanning having a null, a positive, or a negative net effect. Our study identifies, across 16 theoretical configurations, where these three baseline effects should be expected and clarifies why.

Managerial Summary

Firms face a strategic dilemma: should they span across categories or stay focused? Prior studies show mixed results on whether spanning helps or hurts performance. Our findings suggest that outcomes depend on how salient spanning is to audiences and how controllable it is for producers. Spanning tends to hurt performance (i) when the categorization system is bounded (vs. unbounded), (ii) when third parties (vs. insiders) highlight the diversification, (iii) when individual products (vs. producers) span categories, and (iv) when spanning occurs simultaneously (vs. over time). Firms can benefit from spanning, but success depends on managing these four factors to reduce saliency and enhance controllability.

Unlocking novel knowledge recombinations: The effect of artificial intelligence on inventive activity

Xinying Qu, J. P. Eggers, M. V. Shyam Kumar — Thu, 12 Mar 2026 02:53:19 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

Complementing the role of AI in facilitating search and identifying combinations of high value in inventive activity, we argue that AI fundamentally alters the innovation landscape by unlocking new combinations that were previously infeasible. This effect arises because AI acts as a powerful shared layer due to its predictive capabilities and its ability to transmit solutions across domains, thereby creating a bridge between previously unconnected elements. Utilizing a matched sample of patents, we show that inventions incorporating AI exhibit a greater degree of novel recombinations compared to those without AI, and that our proposed bridging mechanism is consistent with these novel recombinations. Our study contributes by identifying a new mechanism by which recombinations emerge in inventive activity while also highlighting the role of enabling technologies such as AI in facilitating such recombinations.

Managerial Summary

How does AI impact inventive activity? We examine the question by studying the patenting activity of US firms over the period 2005–2023. We argue that AI fundamentally alters the innovation landscape by unlocking new combinations that were previously infeasible. This effect arises because AI acts as a powerful shared layer due to its predictive capabilities and its ability to transmit shared solutions, thereby creating a bridge between previously unconnected technological elements. Our analysis demonstrates that inventions that build on AI involve novel recombinations to a greater degree compared to inventions that don’t, and that AI bridges and connects knowledge domains that were hitherto disparate. These findings indicate that AI is more than just an invention of a new method of invention, and that it fundamentally reshapes the nature of inventive activity.

Inter‐platform ecosystems

Thu, 12 Mar 2026 00:00:00 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

We extend ecosystem theory to cases in which platforms are complementors to each other: inter-platform ecosystems. Analyzing web traffic data on 241 European platforms, we identify and characterize demand-side inter-platform ecosystems, and propose a theory of why they emerge. We posit that demand-side inter-platform ecosystems solve matching problems generated by externalities platforms impose on each other. We describe four strategies platforms implement to solve these problems: network fusion (hosting competitor content), user-community-driven interactions (facilitating cross-posting), meta-platform (aggregating another platform), and platform concatenation (referring users to another platform for customized complementary services). We link these strategies to the nature of the externalities, the types of platforms involved and their competitive relationship. We conclude with implications for theory and suggestions for further research.

Managerial Summary

Platforms increasingly act as complementors to each other, creating “inter-platform ecosystems” to boost cross-platform interactions and reduce search costs. Using web traffic data on 241 European platforms, we identify four strategies they use to that end: network fusion (hosting competitor content), user-community-driven interactions (facilitating cross-posting), meta-platform (aggregating another platform), and platform concatenation (referring users to another platform for customized complementary services). These strategies pose three main management challenges. First, because no single platform necessarily orchestrates the ecosystem, platforms must navigate complex multi-party coordination through bilateral agreements. Second, platforms face coopetition tensions: cooperating multiplies interactions but increases disintermediation risk. Third, pricing structures must account for cross-platform interdependencies, where a platform's value depends on how its users interact with other platforms’.

AI orchestrator: How recommendation algorithms shape complementor strategy and market equality

Wed, 04 Mar 2026 06:10:27 -0800

Abstract

Research Summary

This study investigates how AI recommendation algorithms shape complementor strategies and market equality on digital platforms. Using two quasi-natural experiments from a food-sharing platform, we examine impacts of sequential algorithmic upgrades: from a location-based baseline to popularity-based (PopRec) and then personalization-based (PersRec). Analyses of over 1.7 million observations reveal that PopRec drives complementors to concentrate on a few offerings, while PersRec encourages new product introduction; yet these strategic shifts come at the expense of one another. Furthermore, PopRec reduces revenues of superstars but boosts revenues for long-tail complementors, enhancing market equality. Conversely, PersRec exacerbates market inequality by asymmetrically benefiting superstars. By bridging platform orchestration and AI frontiers, this study demonstrates the strategic potential of AI in platform management while underscoring the importance of algorithmic accountability.

Managerial Summary

Digital platforms increasingly deploy AI recommendation algorithms to manage ecosystem performance. This study reveals that these algorithms also function as effective orchestration mechanisms, incentivizing and shaping complementor offering strategies at scale. We find that popularity-based algorithms incentivize complementors to specialize and concentrate on a few core product offerings, while personalization-based algorithms foster broader new product introduction. Our results demonstrate the vital strategic value of AI for managing platform ecosystems. Crucially, both algorithms present inherent trade-offs for complementor strategies and trigger unforeseen market dynamics. Platform owners must meticulously design and implement algorithmic systems, balancing ecosystem generativity with operational control and considering far-reaching market inequality implications.

Regulated versus unregulated competition: How drug shortages boost illegal pharmacy sales

Luis Diestre, Benjamin Barber IV — Fri, 27 Feb 2026 00:00:00 -0800

Abstract

Research Summary

This study examines how product shortages among legal firms create competitive opportunities for illegal firms. We analyze 713 drug shortages in the United States between 2017 and 2023 and show that shortages substantially increase illicit pharmacies’ sales of affected drugs, which rise by 40.5% during shortages and remain 32.8% higher in the six months after shortages are resolved. The effects are strongest for drugs treating chronic conditions, drugs with fewer substitutes, and drugs experiencing more intense shortages. We also find spillover effects, as illegal sales of drugs typically consumed alongside the shortage drug also increase during shortages and remain higher after shortages are resolved. This evidence underscores how regulatory constraints that limit legal firms’ flexibility create opportunities for illegal competitors to capture unmet demand.

Managerial Summary

We examine how product shortages reshape competition between legal and illegal firms in highly regulated markets. Looking at prescription drug shortages in the United States, we show that illicit pharmacies experience substantial and lasting increases in sales when legal firms are unable to meet demand. These gains extend beyond the drugs in shortage to related medications, indicating both direct and spillover effects. The results reveal a paradox: regulatory frameworks designed to ensure consumer safety may also restrict legal firms’ flexibility, strengthening illegal competitors. These findings highlight the importance of designing regulatory systems and supply chains that safeguard consumer safety without undermining the competitiveness of compliant firms. Coordination between regulatory policy, supply resilience, and enforcement is essential to prevent illicit actors from exploiting market disruptions.

Collision in the boardroom: Director skill interdependence and corporate entrepreneurship in technology‐intensive firms

Stevo Pavićević, Thomas Keil, Shaker A. Zahra — Wed, 18 Feb 2026 17:39:21 -0800

Abstract

Research Summary

Board human capital theory posits that directors' skills shape firm behavior. Most studies, however, examine one skill type at a time, assuming that each director contributes independently of the other skills represented on the board. We introduce the concept of director skill interdependence, theorizing that a director's influence depends on the skills of fellow directors and their committee assignments. Focusing on entrepreneurial directors in technology-intensive firms, we find that they increase resource allocation toward corporate entrepreneurship (CE); however, this effect diminishes as the number of finance-skilled directors increases, whether on the board or on its corporate development committee. These findings challenge the view of directors' skills as isolated inputs. Instead, the effects of directors' skills are contingent on the board's skill composition and committee structure.

Managerial Summary

In technology-intensive firms, directors with entrepreneurial skills are often expected to stimulate corporate entrepreneurship (CE). Our findings suggest this relationship is less straightforward. While entrepreneurial directors do increase investment in CE, their impact weakens when directors with finance skills are prevalent on the board or its corporate development committee. These results underscore the importance of director skill interdependence—the idea that a director's influence depends on the skills and roles of fellow directors. Boards should therefore consider not only who is appointed, but also how directors' skills align with one another and how those skills are deployed through committee assignments. Preventing the dominance of conflicting skill sets may enhance the board's ability to support innovation, venturing, and long-term strategic renewal.

Strategic positioning and accelerating regulatory clearance for new ventures

Emily Cox Pahnke, Tiona Zuzul, Michael Howard — Sun, 15 Feb 2026 20:44:07 -0800

Abstract

Research Summary

How do new ventures strategically position their products to accelerate regulatory clearance? We investigate this question in the medical device industry, where regulatory clearance is a prerequisite for market entry. We examine 239 new firms' 510(k) device clearances by the FDA between 2001 and 2019. Our approach combines quantitative analysis of firms' claims of similarity with extensive field research. We find that strategic positioning significantly impacts time to clearance, and that effective strategies evolve over time. For first products, firms accelerate clearance by citing fewer reference products while strategically positioning relative to same-category products and to category exemplars; for second products, firms accelerate clearance by referencing their own products. These findings extend positioning theory into regulatory contexts and reveal how a firm's optimal strategic positioning changes across successive products.

Managerial Summary

We study how new medical device startups can speed up regulatory approval by strategically positioning their products for the FDA. Analyzing 239 firms' 510(k) clearances from 2001 to 2019, we find that the way companies frame their products for regulators plays a key role in how quickly they are cleared. For their first products, firms benefit from referencing fewer existing devices and aligning with well-known or similar products. For their second product, referencing their own previously cleared device helps accelerate the process. Our findings show that positioning is a powerful tool for navigating regulatory hurdles. We highlight how the most effective strategy changes as a company grows, offering practical guidance for leaders bringing new medical technologies to market.

Mapping the landscape of research findings: Generalization across contexts in strategic management research

Daniel A. Levinthal, Lori Rosenkopf — Wed, 11 Feb 2026 00:00:00 -0800

Abstract

Research Summary

Knowledge accumulation requires that we understand whether and when relationships identified in any research setting generalize to others—that is, suggesting domains where results hold (or not). Strategy scholars carefully identify how theoretical mechanisms operate in their chosen research contexts, but attend less to whether their findings apply in other contexts. Accordingly, we recommend reframing empirical contexts, typically described in terms of nominal categories (e.g., industries, countries, or time periods), by highlighting contextual attributes of the nominal settings (e.g., industry concentration or technological modularity), which in turn reflect more abstract conceptual categories (e.g., uncertainty, interdependence, and variance) across potential research contexts. This approach can help integrate prior findings and suggest future study contexts to better enhance our understanding of the research landscape.

Managerial Summary

Academic research in strategic management tends to derive findings in very specific nominal settings—particular industries, years, and regions. Since strategy practitioners operate across a wide variety of industries and regions, they need to assess whether available research findings are applicable in their own settings. We suggest that understanding whether and when research findings apply to unstudied settings can be facilitated by categorizing research settings using more abstract conceptual constructs (such as environment uncertainty, variance across firms, or interdependence between firms), rather than by the traditional emphasis on nominal settings. We discuss a variety of research setting attributes (such as industry concentration and technological modularity) that can aid the translation of extant research findings to settings where practitioners are operating.

Platform competition and strategic trade‐offs for complementors: Heterogeneous reactions to the entry of a new platform

Johannes Loh, Ambre Elsas‐Nicolle — Sat, 07 Feb 2026 00:00:07 -0800

Abstract

Research Summary

We study how the entry of a rival platform affects the strategies of the incumbent's complementors. The latter face a trade-off: While the entry threatens their benefits from indirect network effects, it also allows them to escape intense within-platform competition. Studying Epic Games' entry into the PC video game market—until then dominated by Steam—we show that this trade-off does not resolve uniformly, driving heterogeneity in strategic reactions. Complementors with weaker strategic resources (independent developers) were more likely to multihome and became less responsive to the incumbent's attempts to orchestrate collective action through platform-wide sales promotions. In contrast, complementors more reliant on indirect network effects (multiplayer developers) were less likely to multihome and became more responsive to orchestration attempts.

Managerial Summary

As competition between digital platforms intensifies, complementors—firms that provide complementary products or services—must adjust how they engage with platform owners. The entry of a rival platform creates both opportunities and risks: it offers an alternative with less intense competition but also fragments the user base that underpins network benefits. We find that these opposing effects shape complementors' behavior differently. Those with fewer strategic resources are more likely to join the new platform and become less willing to follow the incumbent's coordinated initiatives. In contrast, complementors whose products rely strongly on network effects tend to remain with the incumbent and cooperate more closely with its orchestration efforts. For managers, this highlights that platform competition not only shifts market dynamics but also reshapes the motivations and strategies of heterogeneous complementors.

Managerial actions using historical values for tackling hyper‐competitive environments: The case of Toyota

Katsuki Aoki — Wed, 04 Feb 2026 03:23:25 -0800

Abstract

Research Summary

This study provides a causal explanation concerning how managerial actions using historical values contribute to dynamic capabilities, or sustaining competitive advantage in changing environments. Based on historical methods that consist mainly of hermeneutics, contextualization, and source criticism, it analyzes sources and data on how Toyota strategically responded to the competitive dynamics of the automotive industry centered around modularization. This resulted in the identification of three types of managerial action using historical values—filtering, integrating, and modifying—which have a rhetorical influence on the processes of strategic diagnosis, choice, and action respectively in ways that strengthen the microfoundations of dynamic capabilities. This enables the firm to adapt to hyper-competitive environments while maintaining the idiosyncrasies of its core capabilities.

Managerial Summary

Toyota has sustained its competitive advantage for decades by consistently relying on its core capabilities, especially the Toyota Production System and its longstanding supplier relations. How has Toyota been able to do so while facing rapidly changing environments? This paper seeks to explore this question by comparing Toyota's and Nissan's strategies in response to modularization in the automotive industry in the 1990s and 2000s. It uncovers how a firm's managers can utilize historical values in ways that influence the processes of strategy formation and implementation. This allows the firm to incorporate key elements of new strategies that its rivals introduce in the marketplace alongside the firm's strategies based on its core capabilities, thereby adapting to hyper-competitive environments while sustaining its idiosyncrasies and competitive advantage.

Overcoming barriers? The mixed results of social innovation accelerator programs for women entrepreneurs

Nilanjana Dutt, Sarah Kaplan — Thu, 29 Jan 2026 00:00:00 -0800

Abstract

Research Summary

Entrepreneurship accelerators are increasingly promoted as structural interventions to close gender gaps, yet studies have not established a differential impact of participation for women. This prior evidence—drawn from high-tech, male-dominated settings—may overlook how outcomes differ in more feminized domains such as social innovation. Using unique multi-level data from 1417 ventures applying to 33 accelerators, we examine whether average effects conceal variation across institutional environments and program designs. We find that in more gender-egalitarian countries, women-led ventures performed better than peers after participating, especially in programs aiming to support women. In less egalitarian environments, however, participation offered negative or no such advantages even in gender supportive programs. These results suggest that well-intended interventions to advance women entrepreneurs are context-dependent and may sometimes reinforce the very disparities they intended to diminish.

Managerial Summary

Social innovation accelerators are often championed as a way to help women entrepreneurs thrive. But our analysis of 1417 ventures applying to 33 programs shows that results vary—and context matters. In more egalitarian countries, participation is associated with improved performance for women-led ventures, especially when programs are explicitly designed to support them. Surprisingly, the pattern flips in less egalitarian environments: women founders who join even women-focused programs often see no performance gains—or even declines—relative to peers. These findings suggest that well-intentioned support can backfire if it doesn't fit the local institutional environment. For program designers and leaders, this is a call to move beyond one-size-fits-all approaches and carefully align equity goals with the realities of the ecosystems they operate in.

Searching together versus searching apart: Evidence from Kaggle

Marco S. Minervini, Tianyu He, Phanish Puranam — Tue, 27 Jan 2026 00:00:00 -0800

Abstract

Research Summary

How does the mode of search—independently or jointly—affect collective search, a central component of organizational adaptation and innovation? Using naturally occurring data from a strongly incentivized online competition platform, we find that compared to their counterfactuals that search apart, groups searching together exhibit less exploration in their search outcomes as noted in prior experimental and computational modeling studies. However, groups searching together stimulate a greater number of search attempts from their members than groups searching apart, an effect that has so far remained unnoticed. Further, both search attempts and exploration contribute positively to search performance. This suggests that the choice of search mode should depend on the demands of strategic contexts that make either the variety or volume of solutions relatively more important for collective search.

Managerial Summary

How members of a team interact when looking for solutions to problems shapes their success. Using evidence from online machine learning competitions, we find that looking for solutions together encourages members to examing more alternatives but narrows the range of these ideas, while working independently generates greater variety but fewer alternatives being examined. We propose that the choice between the two depends on context. When innovation requires novel, distinctive solutions, as in early-stage R&D, independent work may be more effective. When speed and volume matter, as in patent races or crowded digital markets, searching for solutions together delivers faster iteration. Managers can improve innovation outcomes by aligning the mode of teamwork with the strategic demands of the problem.

Values and visibility: How CEO activism influences private and public consumer choices

Young Hou, Christopher Poliquin — Sun, 25 Jan 2026 00:00:00 -0800

Abstract

Research Summary

Firms' and executives' stances on controversial issues affect consumer behavior. This “political consumerism” might be motivated by ideology and a desire to signal to peers, and thus vary for private and public purchases. We conduct an experiment with 1198 consumers to study how purchase visibility affects responses to CEO activism. Participants are randomly shown either generic product information or that plus a CEO statement supporting gun rights. They then choose between receiving the product or receiving cash, with half assigned to a condition where their choice is visible to someone they know. We find that CEO activism reduces demand among people who disagree with the CEO regardless of purchase visibility, indicating minimal signaling motives. Our results have implications for firms using politics to differentiate products.

Managerial Summary

Business leaders who speak out on controversial social and political issues may attract or repel consumers who agree or disagree with their stance. Consumers may react more intensely when others can observe their purchases or boycotts, allowing them to “signal” their beliefs. We experimentally manipulate whether the decision to purchase a product from a firm whose CEO vocally supports gun rights is observable and whether consumers are aware of the CEO's stance. We find that consumers change their behavior in response to CEO political activism regardless of whether their choices are visible to others. This suggests that CEO activism can impel boycotts and that firms can differentiate themselves by taking political positions even when their products are less known or consumed privately.

Does corporate social responsibility increase access to finance? A commentary on Cheng et al. (2014)

Andrew A. King — Thu, 03 Jul 2025 18:54:15 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

Scholars have long investigated the possible benefits of corporate social responsibility (CSR). One of the most influential of these studies tests and supports the hypothesis that CSR increases access to finance. Yet, I show here that the finding is unsound because the report's empirical method limits what can be inferred from its analysis. I rectify a key weakness and replicate the study. I observe a cross-sectional association but find no evidence that CSR increases access to finance. My analysis suggests new directions for research on the effect of CSR.

Managerial Summary

Numerous articles have explored the possible benefits of CSR. A highly influential study claims that CSR improves a corporation's ability to access capital, and this finding has been widely used by scholars, fund managers, and policymakers. Unfortunately, the finding is unsound because the study's research method used predicted values of access to capital rather than direct measures. A rectification and extension of the original analysis fails to uncover evidence that firm-level changes in CSR are associated with access to capital.

The allocation of resource control within the corporate structure: Evidence from post‐acquisition patent reassignments

Shivaram V. Devarakonda, Martin C. Goossen, Louis Mulotte — Thu, 28 Nov 2024 00:29:25 -0800

Abstract

Research Summary

This study explores the decision to centralize control over technological resources. We posit that opportunity costs arising from the firm's administrative structure impact this choice. These opportunity costs stem from differences in identifying and evaluating opportunity sets between the unit level (decentralized) and headquarters level (centralized). We propose that a resource's versatility increases the opportunity costs associated with decentralized control, thereby raising the likelihood of its control being centralized. Using a sample of patents acquired through corporate acquisitions in the medical device industry, we find that patents with greater technological and product-market versatility are more likely to be reassigned to the central level. These findings contribute to elucidating the interplay between resources, strategy, and structure.

Managerial Summary

In the process of integrating a newly acquired firm, acquirers must decide whether to retain the resources within the acquired subsidiary or reallocate them to the headquarters. Decentralizing resources enables managers at the divisional level to spot, sort, select, and seize opportunities in their specific product-market domains. However, centralizing resources can help exploit opportunities with a broad scope, spanning across divisions. The key consideration is determining which resources should be centralized after an acquisition? Analysis of data on 507 US acquisitions in the medical device industry undertaken between 1996 and 2015 reveals that acquirers tend to centralize versatile technological resources, especially when the acquirers themselves have a diverse technological base.

Balancing allocative and dynamic efficiency with redundant R&D allocation: The role of organizational proximity and centralization

Vivek Tandon, Anand Nandkumar, Ronak Mogra, Kannan Srikanth — Mon, 02 Sep 2024 03:08:36 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

Resource-based-view scholars have mainly examined two resource allocation approaches for competitive advantage in multiunit firms: resource sharing and resource redeployment. These approaches emphasize allocative efficiency—the optimal allocation of resources to maximize their current value. In technology-intensive industries, firm success also requires achieving dynamic efficiency to increase its future value-creation. We propose that the redundant allocation of resources—the parallel deployment of non-scale-free resources towards the same objective—although allocatively inefficient, increases dynamic efficiency by stimulating inter-unit competition. Firms' structural features moderate these effects. An analysis of large pharmaceutical firms reveals that redundant R&D increases innovations with high firm-specific value but simultaneously increases project terminations to reduce wastage. Organizational proximity increases the former effect and decreases the latter. Firm's R&D centralization amplifies the effect of unit proximity.

Managerial Summary

In technology-intensive industries, multiunit firms often employ redundant allocation of R&D resources, that is, the parallel deployment of scientists and equipment in different units towards realizing the same business objective. Although common, there is little managerial guidance on how this practice impacts firms' R&D outcomes, and how organizational characteristics influence this relationship. An analysis of large pharmaceutical firms reveals that redundant allocation of R&D resources across units increases wastage but also stimulates competing units to create innovations with high firm-specific value. Organizationally proximate units are less likely to have their redundant projects terminated, while creating more high-value-innovations. Centralization of the firm's R&D amplifies the effect of unit proximity.

Who gets redeployed? Inventor characteristics and resource redeployment decisions

Kyungsoo Kim, Isin Guler, Samina Karim — Tue, 27 Aug 2024 00:00:00 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

While the literature highlights the benefits of internally redeploying resources, there is less empirical guidance on which resources are most likely to be redeployed. We examine the relationship between inventor characteristics and redeployment decisions, motivated by the tension between costs and benefits of keeping a resource at the source unit versus moving it to a new target unit. We argue that inventors with inventive breadth are more likely to be redeployed, whereas broker inventors are less likely to be redeployed. Moreover, we consider two source-unit characteristics that influence internal opportunity costs: resource slack and knowledge interdependence. We test our arguments on the redeployment of inventors following an exogenous profitability shift in the US petrochemical industry in 2012 and find support for our predictions.

Managerial Summary

Managers move resources between business units to respond to profitability shocks, but which specific resources do they move? Examining the inter-unit transfers (redeployments) of inventors between business units following the unexpected profitability disparity between ethylene-based business units and others in the US petrochemical industry, we find that generalist inventors are more likely to be redeployed, while brokers in the collaboration network (inventors who connect others) are less likely to be redeployed. In addition, conditions that alter opportunity costs at the source unit matter. Larger proportions of generalists (and brokers) facilitate redeployment of either type, and knowledge interdependencies in the source unit mitigate redeployment.

Fading corporate survival prospects: Impact of co‐selection bias in resource allocation on strategic intent

Robert A. Burgelman, Pertti Aaltonen — Thu, 08 Aug 2024 00:00:00 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

Our field study of new business development in a German-based global pharmaceutical company reveals that the emergence of co-selection bias in project-level stage-gate resource allocation engendered a corporate-level innovation portfolio imbalance. We show how the corporate portfolio imbalance resulted from incoherent managerial activities in the multilevel resource allocation process (RAP) decision context and how this caused fizzling out of the proactively established incipient strategic context of the favored-for-growth business unit. Moreover, we identify strategic RAP exploitation challenges that explain why sequential exploitation capability and exploitation drive deficits caused an exploitation trap that limited strategic discretion and stymied top management strategic intent to maintain the company's independence. Our integrated frameworks augment strategic management theory of corporate RAP and offer guidance for future research.

Managerial Summary

We draw attention to the little-noticed phenomenon of co-selection bias emerging in the project-level stage-gate resource allocation to new business development and maladaptive corporate-level innovation portfolio outcomes that it may produce. We show how top management can use the Bower–Burgelman RAP model to analyze the multilevel RAP decision context and identify the forces that may engender out-of-context managerial agency, such as co-selection bias. We highlight strategic RAP exploitation challenges that top management must meet by matching the RAP exploitation drive with a commensurate RAP exploitation capability to avoid an exploitation trap, thereby increasing the chances of company survival.

Resource reallocation across successive systemic innovations: How Rolls‐Royce shaped the evolution of the turbojet, turboprop, and turbofan

Gino Cattani, Mariano Mastrogiorgio, Giuseppe Carignani — Sun, 04 Aug 2024 18:49:38 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

Despite the importance of resource reallocation in shaping a variety of strategic outcomes, strategy scholars have paid only limited attention to the processes by which firms reallocate their resources across successive systemic innovations. To explore these processes, we conducted an in-depth historical case study on Rolls-Royce's role in three distinct systemic innovations that marked the transition from piston engines to jet engines in the civil aviation industry: the turbojet, the turboprop, and the turbofan. The analysis helps explain how and why Rolls-Royce's central role stemmed from its ability to reallocate existing non-scale free organizational and technical resources. A key finding of this study is the identification of the horizontal transfer of functional modules as a critical process, especially during the incipient phase of a systemic innovation. The analysis also highlights the role that specific organizational arrangements, particularly a firm's integrative capabilities, have in shaping the effectiveness with which resources are reallocated.

Managerial Summary

Focusing on resource reallocation is important to understand why some firms effectively reallocate their resources through successive systemic innovations while others cannot, even if they have similar resources and face the same environmental conditions. By delving into the technological aspects of aeroengine development and exploring why Rolls-Royce had the capabilities to successfully integrate key functional modules across various modular levels, we clarify the relationship between technology and organization that underlies resource reallocation—a topic that has received only scant attention in the strategy literature.

Resource redeployment as an entry advantage in resource‐poor settings

Jasmina Chauvin, Carlos Inoue, Christopher Poliquin — Sun, 26 May 2024 19:54:36 -0700

Abstract

Research Summary

Scarcity of productive factors poses a challenge for firms entering underdeveloped regions. We theorize that incumbent firms can overcome scarcity of skilled human capital in local labor markets by redeploying workers from existing units. We predict that redeployment is more valuable when factor markets exhibit large differences in resource scarcity. Redeployment is also more valuable when output is highly sensitive to worker skill and is responsive to complementarities between labor and other inputs. Important implications are that redeployment can endow firms with superior resources and enable them to enter more markets. Data on sugar mills in Brazil, where a sudden demand boom incentivized expansion, corroborate the predictions. Our research identifies a new mechanism of value-creation from resource redeployment across factor markets.

Managerial Summary

Firms entering underdeveloped regions often struggle to obtain inputs needed for production, such as skilled labor. We propose that incumbent firms expanding into such regions can overcome resource scarcity by redeploying resources from their existing units. Redeployment allows firms to move resources—such as skilled workers—from markets where resources are relatively abundant to markets where they are scarce. We show that such factor market “arbitrage” is most valuable when firms operate across markets with large differences in resource scarcity and when production is sensitive to worker skill and to complementarities between inputs. By redeploying into markets suffering from resource scarcity, firms can enter more markets and seed units with superior resources. This gives incumbent firms with redeployment capabilities an advantage over de novo entrants.

Resource allocation and growth strategies in a multi‐plant firm: Kanegafuchi Spinners in the early 20th century

Shotaro Yamaguchi, Serguey Braguinsky, Tetsuji Okazaki, Takenobu Yuki — Thu, 30 Nov 2023 22:43:03 -0800

Abstract

Research Summary

Using detailed plant- and individual-level data from a major Japanese cotton spinning company in the early 20th century, we examine the within-firm allocation of skilled human capital in conjunction with investment in physical capital, accompanying the firm's evolving strategic priorities. We show that the firm leveraged unit-level two-way complementarity between managerial talent and strategically important plants when the task was achieving large-scale output and positioning for a competitive cost advantage. The task of conducting product differentiation, however, ushered in “three-way complementarity,” where educated engineering human capital and capable managers needed to be bundled with specialized physical capital. A deeper dive into the “nano-economics” of resource allocation reveals that educated engineers experiencing product differentiation in pioneering plants were reallocated to other plants also pursuing product differentiation.

Managerial Summary

Effectively allocating critical resources, such as skilled human capital, across establishments in alignment with strategic priorities is a key managerial issue. Through an in-depth case study of a major Japanese cotton spinning company in the early 20th century, we illustrate how the company shifted the resource allocation policy in response to different strategic management priorities. Initially, the company assigned managerial talent to larger plants requiring operational improvement, leveraging a competitive cost advantage for a standard product. Yet, as the company transitioned toward product differentiation via new production technologies, skilled engineers and plant managers were allocated together to a few selected plants initiating product differentiation. Engineers' experiences in product differentiation in those selected plants were diffused to other plants also pursuing product differentiation through their reallocations.