Group Polarization in Board Decisions About CEO Compensation

References

• Ansari SM, Fiss PC, Zajac EJ (2010) Made to fit: How practices vary as they diffuse. Acad. Management Rev. 35(1):67–92.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baron RS, Kerr NL (2003) Group Process, Group Decision, Group Action, 2nd ed. (Open University Press, Buckingham, UK).Google Scholar
• Baron RS, Hoppe SI, Kao CF, Brunsman B, Linneweh B, Rogers D (1996) Social corroboration and opinion extremity. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 32(6):537–560.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bebchuk LA, Fried JA (2003) Executive compensation as an agency problem. J. Econom. Perspect. 17(3):71–92.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Beckman CM, Haunschild PR (2002) Network learning: The effects of partners’ heterogeneity of experience on corporate acquisitions. Admin. Sci. Quart. 47(1):92–124.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Belsley DA, Kuh E, Welsch RE (1980) Regression Diagnostics: Identifying Influential Data and Sources of Collinearity (John Wiley & Sons, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bizjak JM, Lemmon ML, Naveen L (2008) Does the use of peer groups contribute to higher pay and less efficient compensation? J. Financial Econom. 90(2):152–168.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boyd BK (1995) CEO duality and firm performance: A contingency model. Strategic Management J. 16(4):301–312.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bunderson JS (2003) Team member functional background and involvement in management teams: Direct effects and the moderating role of power centralization. Acad. Management J. 46(4):458–474.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burnstein E, Vinokur A (1973) Testing 2 classes of theories about group induced shifts in individual choice. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 9(2):123–137.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burnstein E, Vinokur A (1977) Persuasive argumentation and social-comparison as determinants of attitude polarization. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 13(4):315–332.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Buss DM, Barnes M (1986) Preferences in human mate selection. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 50(3):559–570.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cooper J, Fazio RH (1984) A new look at dissonance. Berkowitz L, ed. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Academic Press, New York), 227–266.Google Scholar
• Crystal GS (1984) Questions and Answers on Executive Compensation (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• Cyert RM, March JG (1963) A Behavioral Theory of the Firm (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).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(3):269–290.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dasgupta N, Banaji MR, Abelson RP (1999) Group entitativity and group perception: Associations between physical features and psychological judgment. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 77(5):991–1003.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Davis GF (1991) Agents without principles: The spread of the poison pill through the intercorporate network. Admin. Sci. Quart. 36(4):583–613.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Davis GF, Yoo M, Baker WE (2003) The small world of the American corporate elite, 1982–2001. Strategic Organ. 1(3):301–326.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Davis JH, Schoorman FD, Donaldson L (1997) Toward a stewardship theory of management. Acad. Management Rev. 22(1):20–47.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DeBono KG, Klein C (1993) Source expertise and persuasion: The moderating role of recipient dogmatism. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 19(2):167–173.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Devers CE, Cannella AA, Reilly GP, Yoder ME (2007) Executive compensation: A multidisciplinary review of recent developments. J. Management 33(6):1016–1072.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Echterhoff G, Higgins ET, Groll S (2005) Audience-tuning effects on memory: The role of shared reality. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 89(3):257–276.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Esser JK (1998) Alive and well after 25 years: A review of groupthink research. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 73(2–3):116–141.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ezzamel M, Watson R (1998) Market comparison earnings and the bidding-up of executive cash compensation: Evidence from the United Kingdom. Acad. Management J. 41(2):221–231.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fama EF, Jensen MC (1983) Agency problems and residual claims. J. Law Econom. 26(2):327–349.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Festinger L (1957) A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (Row, Peterson, Evanston, IL).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, Haleblian J (2002) Understanding acquisition performance: The role of transfer effects. Organ. Sci. 13(1):36–47.Link, Google Scholar
• Finkelstein S, Hambrick DC, Cannella AA (2009) Strategic Leadership: Theory and Research on Executives, Top Management Teams, and Boards (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Fiske ST, Taylor SE (2008) Social Cognition: From Brains to Culture, 3rd ed. (McGraw-Hill, New York).Google Scholar
• Fong EA, Misangyi VF, Tosi HL (2010) The effect of CEO pay deviations on CEO withdrawal, firm size, and firm profits. Strategic Management J. 31(6):629–651.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Forsyth DR (2010) Group Dynamics, 5th ed. (Thomson Wadsworth, Belmont, CA).Google Scholar
• Friedkin NE (1999) Choice shift and group polarization. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 64(6):856–875.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gabaix X, Landier A (2008) Why has CEO pay increased so much? Quart. J. Econom. 123(1):49–100.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Glick WH, Miller CC, Huber GP (1993) The impact of upper-echelon diversity on organizational performance. Huber GP, Glick WH, eds. Organizational Change and Redesign: Ideas and Insights for Improving Performance (Oxford University Press, New York), 176–214.Google Scholar
• Gomez-Mejia L, Wiseman RM (1997) Reframing executive compensations: An assessment and outlook. J. Management 23(3):291–374.Google Scholar
• Gomez-Mejia LR (1992) Structure and process of diversification, compensation strategy, and firm performance. Strategic Management J. 13(5):381–397.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greve HR (2003) A behavioral theory of R&D expenditures and innovations: Evidence from shipbuilding. Acad. Management J. 46(6):685–702.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hambrick DC, Mason PA (1984) Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Acad. Management Rev. 9(2):193–206.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hambrick DC, Cho TS, Chen MJ (1996) The influence of top management team heterogeneity on firms’ competitive moves. Admin. Sci. Quart. 41(4):659–684.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harmon-Jones E, Mills J (1999) Cognitive Dissonance: Progress on A Pivotal Theory in Social Psychology (American Psychological Association, Washington, DC).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haunschild PR (1993) Interorganizational imitation: The impact of interlocks on corporate acquisition activity. Admin. Sci. Quart. 38(4):564–592.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hayes RM, Schaefer S (2009) CEO pay and the Lake Wobegon effect. J. Financial Econom. 94(2):280–290.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henderson AD, Fredrickson JW (1996) Information-processing demands as a determinant of CEO compensation. Acad. Management J. 39(3):575–606.Crossref, 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(3):215–235.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hubbard RG, Palia D (1995) Executive pay and performance: Evidence from the U.S. banking industry. J. Financial Econom. 39(1):105–130.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Isenberg DJ (1986) Group polarization: A critical review and meta-analysis. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 50(6):1141–1151.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Islam MR, Hewstone M (1993) Intergroup attributions and affective consequences in majority and minority groups. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 64(6):936–950.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jackson JE (1991) A User’s Guide to Principle Components (John Wiley & Sons, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Janis I (1972) Victims of Groupthink (Houghton Mifflin, Boston).Google Scholar
• Kalven HG Jr, Zeisel H, eds. (1966) The American Jury (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Google Scholar
• Kilduff M, Angelmar R, Mehra A (2000) Top management-team diversity and firm performance: Examining the role of cognitions. Organ. Sci. 11(1):21–34.Link, Google Scholar
• Levinthal DA, March JG (1993) The myopia of learning. Strategic Management J. 14(S2):95–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liang K-Y, Zenger SL (1986) Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika 73(1):13–22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lorsch JW, Maclver E (1989) Pawns or Potentates: The Reality of American’s Corporate Boards (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• MacCallum RC, Browne MW (1993) The use of causal indicators in covariance structure models: Some practical issues. Psych. Bull. 114(3):533–541.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McDonald ML, Khanna P, Westphal JD (2008) Getting them to think outside the circle: Corporate governance, CEOs’ external advice networks, and firm performance. Acad. Management J. 51(3):453–475.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miller DT, McFarland C (1991) When social comparison goes away: The case of pluralistic ignorance. Suls J, Wills TA, eds. Social Comparison: Contemporary Theory and Research (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ), 287–313.Google Scholar
• Milliken FJ, Martins LL (1996) Searching for common threads: Understanding the multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups. Acad. Management Rev. 21(2):402–433.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mizruchi MS (1996) What do interlocks do? An analysis, critique, and assessment of research on interlocking directorates. Annual Rev. Sociol. 22:271–298.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moscovici S, Doise W (1994) Conflict and Consensus: A General Theory of Collective Decisions (Sage, London).Google Scholar
• Myers DG, Lamm H (1976) Group polarization phenomenon. Psych. Bull. 83(4):602–627.Crossref, Google Scholar
• O’Reilly CA, Main BG, Crystal GS (1988) CEO compensation as tournament and social comparison: A tale of two theories. Admin. Sci. Quart. 33(2):257–274.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Palmer DA, Jennings PD, Zhou XG (1993) Late adoption of the multidivisional form by large United States corporations: Institutional, political, and economic accounts. Admin. Sci. Quart. 38(1):100–131.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Phillips KW, Loyd DL (2006) When surface and deep-level diversity collide: The effects on dissenting group members. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 99(2):143–160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ross L, Nisbett RE (1991) The Person and the Situation (McGraw-Hill, New York).Google Scholar
• Sanders WG, Tuschke A (2007) The adoption of institutionally contested organizational practices: The emergence of stock option pay in Germany. Acad. Management J. 50(1):33–56.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith KG, Smith KA, Olian JD, Sims HP Jr, O’Bannon DP, Scully JA (1994) Top management team demography and process: The role of social integration and communication. Admin. Sci. Quart. 39(3):412–438.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stern I, Westphal JD (2010) Stealthy footsteps to the boardroom: Executives’ backgrounds, sophisticated interpersonal influence behavior, and board appointments. Admin. Sci. Quart. 55(2):278–319.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stewart GL (2006) A meta-analytic review of relationships between team design features and team performance. J. Management 32(1):29–55.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stroebe W, Fraser C (1971) Relationship between riskiness and confidence in choice dilemma decisions. Eur. J. Soc. Psych. 1(4):519–526.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Suls J, Green P (2003) Pluralistic ignorance and college student perceptions of gender-specific alcohol norms. Health Psych. 22(5):479–486.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tajfel H, Turner JC (1979) An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. Austin WG, Worchel S, eds. The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (Brooks-Cole, Monterey, CA), 33–47.Google Scholar
• Tanford S, Penrod S (1984) Social influence model: A formal integration of research on majority and minority influence processes. Psych. Bull. 95(2):189–225.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(2):301–339.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Turner JC (1987) Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory (Basil Blackwell, New York).Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Kahneman D (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science 185(4157):1124–1130.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van der Vegt GS, Bunderson JS (2005) Learning and performance in multidisciplinary teams: The importance of collective team identification. Acad. Management J. 48(3):532–547.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vinokur A, Burnstein E (1978) Depolarization of attitudes in groups. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 36(8):872–885.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wade J, O’Reilly CA, Chandratat I (1990) Golden parachutes: CEOs and the exercise of social influence. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35(4):587–603.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wade JB, O’Reilly CA, Pollock TG (2006) Overpaid CEOs and underpaid managers: Fairness and executive compensation. Organ. Sci. 17(5):527–544.Link, Google Scholar
• Walker TG, Main EC (1973) Choice shifts in political decisionmaking: Federal judges and civil liberties cases. J. Appl. Soc. Psych. 3(1):39–48.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Walsh JP (1988) Selectivity and selective perception: An investigation of managers belief structures and information-processing. Acad. Management J. 31(4):873–896.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wasserman N (2006) Stewards, agents, and the founder discount: Executive compensation in new ventures. Acad. Management J. 49(5):960–976.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Westphal JD, Bednar MK (2005) Pluralistic ignorance in corporate boards and firms’ strategic persistence in response to low firm performance. Admin. Sci. Quart. 50(2):262–298.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Westphal JD, Khanna P (2003) Keeping directors in line: Social distancing as a control mechanism in the corporate elite. Admin. Sci. Quart. 48(3):361–398.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Westphal JD, Stern I (2006) The other pathway to the boardroom: Interpersonal influence behavior as a substitute for elite credentials and majority status in obtaining board appointments. Admin. Sci. Quart. 51(2):169–204.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Westphal JD, Stern I (2007) Flattery will get you everywhere (especially if you are a male Caucasian): How ingratiation, boardroom behavior, and demographic minority status affect additional board appointments at US companies. Acad. Management J. 50(2):267–288.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Westphal JD, Zajac EJ (1995) Who shall govern: CEO/board power, demographic similarity, and new director selection. Admin. Sci. Quart. 40(1):60–83.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Westphal JD, Seidel MDL, Stewart KJ (2001) Second-order imitation: Uncovering latent effects of board network ties. Admin. Sci. Quart. 46(4):717–747.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Whyte G (1993) Escalating commitment in individual and group decision making: A prospect theory approach. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 54(3):430–455.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Williams K, O’Reilly C (1998) Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. Staw BM, Cummings LL, eds. Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 20 (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), 77–140.Google Scholar
• Wood W, Lundgren S, Ouellette JA, Busceme S, Blackstone T (1994) Minority influence: A meta-analytic review of social influence processes. Psych. Bull. 115(3):323–345.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wooldridge JM (2009) Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach, 4th ed. (South-Western Cengage Learning, Mason, OH).Google Scholar
• Zalesny MD (1990) Rater confidence and social influence in performance appraisals. J. Appl. Psych. 75(3):274–289.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhu DH, Westphal JD (2011) Misperceiving the beliefs of others: How pluralistic ignorance contributes to the persistence of positive security analyst reactions to the adoption of stock repurchase plans. Organ. Sci. 22(4):869–886.Link, Google Scholar