PERSPECTIVE—The Myth of Firm Performance

References

• Accenture (2009) High performance business research program overview. . Accessed July 2011, http://accenture.com/Global/High_Performance_Business/HPBHighlevelOverview.htm.Google Scholar
• Barney JB. (2001) Gaining and Sustaining Competitive Advantage, 2nd ed. (Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ).Google Scholar
• Brouthers KD, Brouthers LE, Werner S. (2003) Transaction cost-enhanced entry mode choices and firm performance. Strategic Management J. 24:1239–1248.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Campbell JP. (1982) Some remarks from the outgoing editor. J. Appl. Psych. 67:691–700.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Capon N, Farley JU, Hoenig S. (1990) Determinants of financial performance: A meta-analysis. Management Sci. 36:1143–1159.Link, Google Scholar
• Certo ST, Lester RH, Dalton CM, Dalton DR. (2006) Top management teams, strategy, and financial performance: A meta-analytic examination. J. Management Stud. 43:813–839.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chakravarthy BS. (1986) Measuring strategic performance. Strategic Management J. 7:437–458.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coff RW. (1999) When competitive advantage doesn’t lead to performance: The resource-based view and stakeholder bargaining power. Organ. Sci. 10:119–133.Link, Google Scholar
• Coff RW. (2010) The coevolution of rent appropriation and capability development. Strategic Management J. 31:711–733.Google Scholar
• Combs JG, Crook TR, Shook CL. (2005) The dimensionality of organizational performance and its implications for strategic management research. , Ketchen DJ, Bergh DD, eds. Research Methodology in Strategy and Management, Vol. 2 (Emerald, Bingley, UK), 259–286.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Combs J, Liu Y, Hall A, Ketchen D. (2006) How much do high-performance work practices matter? A meta-analysis of their effects on organizational performance. Personnel Psych. 59:501–528.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cronbach LJ, Meehl PE. (1955) Construct validity in psychological tests. Psych. Bull. 52:281–302.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dacin MT, Goodstein J, Scott WR. (2002) Institutional theory and institutional change: Introduction to the special research forum. Acad. Management J. 45:45–57.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dalton DR, Daily CM, Certo ST, Roengpitya R. (2003) Meta-analyses of financial performance and equity: Fusion or confusion? Acad. Management J. 46:13–26.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dalton DR, Daily CM, Ellstrand AE, Johnson JL. (1998) Meta-analytic reviews of board composition, leadership structure, and financial performance. Strategic Management J. 19:269–290.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dalton DR, Daily CM, Johnson JL, Ellstrand AE. (1999) Number of directors and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Acad. Management J. 42:674–686.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Davidson WN, Jiraporn P, Kim YS, Nemec C. (2004) Earnings management following duality-creating succession: Ethnostatistics, impression management, and agency theory. Acad. Management J. 47:267–275.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Davies H, Walters P. (2004) Emergent patterns of strategy, environment, and performance in a transition economy. Strategic Management J. 25:347–364.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dess GG, Robinson RB. (1984) Measuring organizational performance in the absence of objective measures: The case of the privately-held firm and conglomerate business unit. Strategic Management J. 5:265–273.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DiMaggio PJ, Powell WW. (1983) The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 48:147–160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dunnette MD. (1966) Fads, fashion, and folderol in psychology. Amer. Psychologist 21:637–644.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eccles RG. (1991) The performance measurement manifesto. Harvard Bus. Rev. 69(1):131–137.Google Scholar
• Edwards JR. (2001) Multidimensional constructs in organizational behavior research: An integrative analytical framework. Organ. Res. Methods 4:144–192.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ellis PD. (2006) Market orientation and performance: A meta-analysis and cross-national comparisons. J. Management Stud. 43:1090–1107.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Florin J, Lubatkin M, Schulze W. (2003) A social model of high-growth ventures. Acad. Management J. 46:374–384.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fryxell GE, Barton SL. (1990) Temporal and contextual change in the measurement structure of financial performance: Implications for strategy research. J. Management 16:553–568.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Glick WH. (1985) Conceptualizing and measuring organizational and psychological climate: Pitfalls, in multi-level research. Acad. Management Rev. 10:601–616.Google Scholar
• Glick WH, Miller CC, Cardinal LB. (2007) Making a life in the field of organization science. J. Organ. Behav. 28:817–835.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Godfey PC, Hill CWL. (1995) The problem of unobservable in strategic management research. Strategic Management J. 16:519–533.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goodman PS, Pennings JM. (1977) New Perspectives on Organizational Effectiveness (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco).Google Scholar
• Hackman JR, Oldham GR. (1980) Work Redesign (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).Google Scholar
• Hitt MA. (1988) The measuring of organizational effectiveness: Multiple domains and constituencies. Management Internat. Rev. 28:28–40.Google Scholar
• Hoskisson RE, Hitt MA, Johnson RA, Moesel DD. (1993) Construct validity of an objective (entropy) categorical measure of diversification strategy. Strategic Management J. 14:215–235.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huber GP, Miller CC, Glick WH. (1990) Developing more encompassing theories about organizations: The centralization-effectiveness relationship as an example. Organ. Sci. 1:11–40.Link, Google Scholar
• Hult GTM, Ketchen DJ, Griffith DA, Chabowski BR, Hamman MK, Dykes BJ, Pollitte WA, Cavusgil ST. (2008) An assessment of the measurement of performance in international business research. J. Internat. Bus. Stud. 39:1064–1080.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jensen MC, Meckling WH. (1976) Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. J. Financial Econom. 3:305–360.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kanter RM, Brinkerhoff D. (1981) Organizational performance: Recent developments in measurement. Annual Rev. Sociol. 7:321–349.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaplan RS, Norton D. (1992) The balance scorecard—Measures that drive performance. Harvard Bus. Rev. 70(1):71–79.Google Scholar
• Keats BW. (1988) The vertical construct validity of business economic performance measures. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 24:151–160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim H, Hoskisson RE, Wan WP. (2004) Power dependence, diversification strategy, and performance in keiretsu member firms. Strategic Management J. 25:613–636.Crossref, Google Scholar
• King DR, Dalton DR, Daily CM, Covin JG. (2004) Meta-analyses of post-acquisition performance: Indications of unidentified moderators. Strategic Management J. 25:187–200.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kor YY. (2003) Experience-based top management team competence and sustained growth. Organ. Sci. 14:707–719.Link, Google Scholar
• Law KS, Wong C, Mobley WH. (1998) Toward a taxonomy of multidimensional constructs. Acad. Management Rev. 23:741–755.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lev B, Petrovits C, Radhakrishnan S. (2010) Is doing good good for you? How corporate charitable contributions enhance revenue growth. Strategic Management J. 31:182–200.Google Scholar
• Lewin K. (1951) Field Theory in Social Science (Harper & Row, New York).Google Scholar
• Love LG, Priem RL, Lumpkin GT. (2002) Explicitly articulated strategy and firm performance under alternative levels of centralization. J. Management 28:611–627.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lubatkin M, Shrieves RE. (1986) Towards reconciliation of market performance measures to strategic management research. Acad. Management Rev. 11:497–512.Crossref, Google Scholar
• March JG, Sutton RI. (1997) Organizational performance as a dependent variable. Organ. Sci. 8:698–706.Link, Google Scholar
• Meyer JW, Rowan B. (1977) Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. Amer. J. Sociol. 83:340–363.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miller CC, Cardinal LB. (1994) Strategic planning and firm performance: A synthesis of more than two decades of research. Acad. Management J. 37:1649–1665.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Morgan RE, Strong CA. (2003) Business performance and dimensions of strategic orientation. J. Bus. Res. 56:163–176.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Murphy GB, Trailer JW, Hill RC. (1996) Measuring performance in entrepreneurship research. J. Bus. Res. 36:15–23.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nair A. (2006) Meta-analysis of the relationship between quality management practices and firm performance—Implications for quality management theory development. J. Oper. Management 24:948–975.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Orlitzky M, Schmidt FL, Rynes SL. (2003) Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organ. Stud. 24:403–441.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Palich LE, Cardinal LB, Miller CC. (2000) Curvilinearity in the diversification-performance linkage: An examination of over three decades of research. Strategic Management J. 21:155–174.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Perreault WD, Leigh LE. (1989) Reliability of nominal data based on qualitative judgments. J. Marketing Res. 26:135–148.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ray G, Barney JB, Muhanna WA. (2004) Capabilities, business processes, and competitive advantage: Choosing the dependent variable in empirical tests of the resource-based view. Strategic Management J. 25:23–37.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rhoades DL, Rechner PL, Sundaramurthy C. (2000) Board composition and financial performance: A meta-analysis of the influence of outside directors. J. Managerial Issues 12:76–92.Google Scholar
• Richard PJ, Devinney TM, Yip GS, Johnson G. (2009) Measuring organizational performance: Towards methodological best practice. J. Management 35:718–804.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roberts KH, Hulin CL, Rousseau DM. (1978) Developing an Interdisciplinary Science of Organizations (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco).Google Scholar
• Rosenthal R. (1979) The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psych. Bull. 86:638–641.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rowe WG, Morrow JL. (1999) A note on the dimensionality of the firm financial performance construct using accounting, market, and subjective measures. Revue Canadienne des Sci. de l’Admin. 16:58–70.Google Scholar
• Rumelt RP. (1991) How much does industry matter? Strategic Management J. 12:167–185.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sánchez-Ballesta JP, García-Meca E. (2007) A meta-analytic vision of the effect of ownership structure on firm performance. Corporate Governance 15:879–893.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schendel DE, Hofer CW. (1979) Strategic Management: A New View of Business Policy and Planning (Little-Brown, Boston).Google Scholar
• Schneiderman AM. (1999) Why balanced scorecards fail. J. Strategic Performance Management 3:6–11.Google Scholar
• Shenhav Y, Shrum W, Alon S. (1994) “Goodness” concepts in the study of organizations: A longitudinal survey of four leading journals. Organ. Stud. 15:753–776.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tosi HL, Werner S, Katz JP, Gomez-Mejia LR. (2000) How much does performance matter? A meta-analysis of CEO pay studies. J. Management 26:301–339.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Venkatraman N, Ramanujam V. (1986) Measurement of business performance in strategy research: A comparison of approaches. Acad. Management Rev. 11:801–814.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weick KE. (1979) Social Psychology of Organizing (McGraw-Hill, New York).Google Scholar
• Wernerfelt B. (1984) A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management J. 5:171–180.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhang Y, Rajagopalan N. (2004) When the known devil is better than an unknown god: An empirical study of the antecedents and consequences of relay CEO successions. Acad. Management J. 47:483–500.Crossref, Google Scholar