Communication Within Firms: Evidence from CEO Turnovers

References

• Alonso R, Dessein W, Matouschek N (2008) When does coordination require centralization? Amer. Econom. Rev. 98(1):145–179.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Alvarez-Miranda M, Watkins MD (2021) How new CEOs can balance strategy and execution. Harvard Bus. Rev. (July 13), https://hbr.org/2021/07/how-new-ceos-can-balance-strategy-and-execution.Google Scholar
• Aral S, Brynjolfsson E, Van Alstyne M (2012) Information, technology, and information worker productivity. Inform. Systems Res. 23(3):849–867.Link, Google Scholar
• Arrow KJ (1974) The Limits of Organization (Norton, New York).Google Scholar
• Bandiera O, Guiso L, Prat A, Sadun R (2015) Matching firms, managers, and incentives. J. Labor Econom. 33(3):623–681.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bandiera O, Prat A, Hansen S, Sadun R (2020) CEO behavior and firm performance. J. Political Econom. 128(4):1325–1369.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barrero JM, Bloom N, Wright I (2017) Short and long run uncertainty. NBER Working Paper No. 23676, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Battiston D, Blanes I Vidal J, Kirchmaier T (2021) Face-to-face communication in organizations. Rev. Econom. Stud. 88(2):574–609.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bennedsen M, Perez-Gonzalez F, Wolfenzon D (2020) Do CEOs matter? Evidence from hospitalization events. J. Finance 75(4):1877–1911.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bertrand M, Schoar A (2003) Managing with style: The effect of managers on firm policies. Quart. J. Econom. 118(4):1169–1208.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Birshan M, Meakin T, Strovink K (2016) How new CEOs can boost their odds of success. McKinsey Quart. (May 20), https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/leadership/how-new-ceos-can-boost-their-odds-of-success.Google Scholar
• Bloom N, Sadun R, Van Reenen J (2016) Management as a technology? NBER Working Paper No. 22327, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Bloom N, Genakos C, Sadun R, Van Reenen J (2012) Management practices across firms and countries. Acad. Management Perspect. 26(1):12–33.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Borusyak K, Jaravel X, Spiess J (2021) Revisiting event study designs: Robust and efficient estimation. Preprint, submitted August 27, https://arxiv.org/abs/2108.12419.Google Scholar
• Calvó‐Armengol A, De Martí J, Prat A (2015) Communication and influence. Theoret. Econom. 10(2):649–690.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coase R (1937) The theory of the firm. Economica (N.S.) 4(16):386–405.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coles JL, Daniel ND, Naveen L (2014) Co-opted boards. Rev. Financial Stud. 27(6):1751–1796.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coyne KP, Coyne EJ Sr (2007) Surviving your new CEO. Harvard Bus. Rev. 85(5):62–69.Google Scholar
• Cremer J, Garicano L, Prat A (2007) Language and the theory of the firm. Quart. J. Econom. 122(1):373–407.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cziraki P, Jenter D (2022) The market for CEOs. European Corporate Governance Institute – Finance Working Paper No. 831/2022. Preprint, submitted June 22, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3644496.Google Scholar
• DeFilippis E, Impink SM, Singell M, Polzer JT, Sadun R (2022) The impact of COVID-19 on digital communication patterns. Humanities Soc. Sci. Comm. 9(1):1–11.Google Scholar
• Denis DJ, Denis DK (1995) Performance changes following top management dismissals. J. Finance 50(4):1029–1057.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Denis J-L, Langley A, Sergi V (2012) Leadership in the plural. Acad. Management Ann. 6(1):211–283.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dessein W, Santos T (2006) Adaptive organizations. J. Political Econom. 114(5):956–995.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dessein W, Galeotti A, Santos T (2016) Rational inattention and organizational focus. Amer. Econom. Rev. 106(6):1522–1536.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dikolli SS, Mayew WJ, Nanda D (2014) CEO tenure and the performance-turnover relation. Rev. Accounting Stud. 19(1):281–327.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Espinosa M, Stanton CT (2022) Training, communications patterns, and spillovers inside organizations. NBER Working Paper No. 30224, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Fee CE, Hadlock CJ, Pierce JR (2013) Managers with and without style: Evidence using exogenous variation. Rev. Financial Stud. 26(3):567–601.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Finkelstein S (1992) Power in top management teams: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Acad. Management J. 35(3):505–538.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Finkelstein S, Hambrick DC, Cannella AA (2009) Strategic Leadership: Theory and Research on Executives, Top Management Teams, and Boards. Strategic Management Series (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Friedman SD, Saul K (1991) A leader’s wake: Organization member reactions to CEO succession. J. Management 17(3):619–642.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gant J, Ichniowski C, Shaw K (2002) Social capital and organizational change in high‐involvement and traditional work organizations. J. Econom. Management Strategy 11(2):289–328.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Garicano L, Rayo L (2016) Why organizations fail: Models and cases. J. Econom. Lit. 54(1):137–192.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gibbons R, Henderson R (2012) Relational contracts and organizational capabilities. Organ. Sci. 23(5):1350–1364.Link, Google Scholar
• Giroud X (2013) Proximity and investment: Evidence from plant-level data. Quart. J. Econom. 128(2):861–915.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gompers PA, Kaplan SN, Mukharlyamov V (2023) The market for CEOs: Evidence from private equity. NBER Working Paper No. 30899, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Gumpert A, Steimer H, Antoni M (2022) Firm organization with multiple establishments. Quart. J. Econom. 137(2):1091–1138.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hambrick DC (1995) Fragmentation and the other problems CEOs have with their top management teams. Calif. Management Rev. 37(3):110–127.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hambrick DC (2007) Upper echelons theory: An update. Acad. Management Rev. 32(2):334–343.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hambrick DC, Cannella AA Jr (2004) CEOs who have COOs: Contingency analysis of an unexplored structural form. Strategic Management J. 25(10):959–979.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hart O, Holmstrom B (2010) A theory of firm scope. Quart. J. Econom. 125(2):483–513.Google Scholar
• Hayek FA (1945) The use of knowledge in society. Amer. Econom. Rev. 35(4):519–530.Google Scholar
• Ibarra H, Rattan A (2018) Microsoft: Instilling a growth mindset. London Bus. School Rev. 29(3):50–53.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Impink SM, Prat A, Sadun R (2020) Measuring collaboration in modern organizations. AEA Papers Proc. 110:181–186.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jacobs AZ, Watts DJ (2021) A large-scale comparative study of informal social networks in firms. Management Sci. 67(9):5489–5509.Link, Google Scholar
• Johnson WB, Magee RP, Nagarajan NJ, Newman HA (1985) An analysis of the stock price reaction to sudden executive deaths: Implications for the managerial labor market. J. Accounting Econom. 7(1–3):151–174.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karaevli A (2007) Performance consequences of new CEO ‘outsiderness’: Moderating effects of pre‐and post‐succession contexts. Strategic Management J. 28(7):681–706.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karaevli A, Zajac EJ (2013) When do outsider CEOs generate strategic change? The enabling role of corporate stability. J. Management Stud. 50(7):1267–1294.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keck SL, Tushman ML (1993) Environmental and organizational context and executive team structure. Acad. Management J. 36(6):1314–1344.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kleinbaum AM (2012) Organizational misfits and the origins of brokerage in intrafirm networks. Admin. Sci. Quart. 57(3):407–452.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kleinbaum AM, Stuart TE (2014) Inside the black box of the corporate staff: Social networks and the implementation of corporate strategy. Strategic Management J. 35(1):24–47.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kleinbaum AM, Stuart TE, Tushman ML (2013) Discretion within constraint: Homophily and structure in a formal organization. Organ. Sci. 24(5):1316–1336.Link, Google Scholar
• Kotter JP (2012) Leading Change (Harvard Business Press, Brighton, MA).Google Scholar
• Larson J, Zuzul T, Pahnke EC, Shah NP, Bourke P, Caurvina N, Amini F, et al. (2021) Dynamic silos: Modularity in intra-organizational communication networks before and during the Covid-19 pandemic. Preprint, submitted April 1, https://arxiv.org/abs/2104.00641v1.Google Scholar
• Ma S, Seidl D (2018) New CEOs and their collaborators: Divergence and convergence between the strategic leadership constellation and the top management team. Strategic Management J. 39(3):606–638.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marshak J, Radner R (1972) Economic Theory of Teams (Yale University Press, New Haven, CT).Google Scholar
• Milgrom P, Roberts J (1988) An economic approach to influence activities in organizations. Amer. J. Sociol. 94:S154–S179.Google Scholar
• Murphy KJ, Zimmerman JL (1993) Financial performance surrounding CEO turnover. J. Accounting Econom. 16(1–3):273–315.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pan Y, Wang TY, Weisbach MS (2015) Learning about CEO ability and stock return volatility. Rev. Financial Stud. 28(6):1623–1666.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pan Y, Wang TY, Weisbach MS (2016) CEO investment cycles. Rev. Financial Stud. 29(11):2955–2999.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Polzer JT, DeFilippis E (2020) The consequences of collaboration overload. Acad. Management Proc., vol. 2020(1) (Academy of Management, Briarcliff Manor, NY), 21045.Google Scholar
• Polzer JT, DeFilippis E, Tobio K (2018) Countries, culture, and collaboration. Acad. Management Proc. 2018(1):17645.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Powell M (2015) An influence-cost model of organizational practices and firm boundaries. J. Law Econom. Organ. 31(Suppl. 1):i104–i142.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rantakari H (2008) Governing adaptation. Rev. Econom. Stud. 75(4):1257–1285.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rotemberg JJ, Saloner G (2000) Visionaries, managers, and strategic direction. RAND J. Econom. 31(4):693–716.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sandvik JJ, Saouma RE, Seegert NT, Stanton CT (2020) Workplace knowledge flows. Quart. J. Econom. 135(3):1635–1680.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schein EH (1994) Chapter 14: Management of change: The case of information technology. Allen TJ, Morton MSS, eds. Information Technology and the Corporation of the 1990s. Research Studies (Oxford University Press, New York), 325.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shen W, Cannella AA Jr (2002) Revisiting the performance consequences of CEO succession: The impacts of successor type, postsuccession senior executive turnover, and departing CEO tenure. Acad. Management J. 45(4):717–733.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simon HA (1947) Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organization (Macmillan, New York).Google Scholar
• Sloan AP (1964) My Years with General Motors (Doubleday, New York).Google Scholar
• Srivastava SB (2015) Intraorganizational network dynamics in times of ambiguity. Organ. Sci. 26(5):1365–1380.Link, Google Scholar
• Sun L, Abraham S (2021) Estimating dynamic treatment effects in event studies with heterogeneous treatment effects. J. Econometrics 225(2):175–199.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Syverson C (2011) What determines productivity? J. Econom. Lit. 49(2):326–365.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tushman ML, Rosenkopf L (1996) Executive succession, strategic reorientation and performance growth: A longitudinal study in the US cement industry. Management Sci. 42(7):939–953.Link, Google Scholar
• Van den Steen EJ (2005) Organizational beliefs and managerial vision. J. Law Econom. Organ. 21(1):256–283.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van den Steen E (2017) A formal theory of strategy. Management Sci. 63(8):2616–2636.Link, Google Scholar
• Weick KE (1995) Sensemaking in Organizations. Foundations for Organizational Science, vol. 3 (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
• Williamson OE (1979) Transaction-cost economics: The governance of contractual relations. J. Law Econom. 22(2):233–261.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yang L, Holtz D, Jaffe S, Suri S, Sinha S, Weston J, Joyce C, et al. (2022) The effects of remote work on collaboration among information workers. Nature Human Behav. 6(1):43–54.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhang E, Aven B, Kleinbaum AM (2020) Left but not forgotten: Gender differences in networks and performance following mobility. GSIA Working Paper No. 2020-E8, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh.Google Scholar