CEO Power and Nonconforming Reference Group Selection

References

• Adams RB, Almeida H, Ferreira D (2005) Powerful CEOs and their impact on corporate performance. Rev. Financial Stud. 18(4):1403–1432.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Albuquerque AM, De Franco G, Verdi RS (2013) Peer choice in CEO compensation. J. Financial Econom. 108(1):160–181.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson C, Berdahl JL (2002) The experience of power: Examining the effects of power on approach and inhibition tendencies. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 83(6):1362–1377.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson C, Brion S (2014) Perspectives on power in organizations. Annual Rev. Organ. Psych. Organ. Behav. 1:67–97.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson C, Galinsky AD (2006) Power, optimism, and risk-taking. Eur. J. Soc. Psych. 36(4):511–536.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Audia PG, Greve HR (2006) Less likely to fail: Low performance, firm size, and factory expansion in the shipbuilding industry. Management Sci. 52(1):83–94.Link, Google Scholar
• Bailey J (1992) Are manager universes acceptable performance benchmarks? J. Portfolio Management 18(3):9–13.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bascle G (2008) Controlling for endogeneity with instrumental variables in strategic management research. Strategic Organ. 6(3):285–327.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baumann O, Eggers JP, Stieglitz N (2018) Colleagues and competitors: How internal social comparisons shape organizational search and adaptation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 64(2):275–309.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bebchuk L, Cohen A, Ferrell A (2009) What matters in corporate governance? Rev. Financial Stud. 22(2):783–827.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Benner MJ (2007) The incumbent discount: Stock market categories and response to radical technological change. Acad. Management Rev. 32(3):703–720.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Benner MJ (2010) Securities analysts and incumbent response to radical technological change: Evidence from digital photography and internet telephony. Organ. Sci. 21(1):42–62.Link, Google Scholar
• Benner MJ, Ranganathan R (2012) Offsetting illegitimacy? How pressures from securities analysts influence incumbents in the face of new technologies. Acad. Management J. 55(1):213–233.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bigley GA, Wiersema MF (2002) New CEOs and corporate strategic refocusing: How experience as heir apparent influences the use of power. Admin. Sci. Quart. 47(4):707–727.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 Econ. 90(2):152–168.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blackwell M, Iacus S, King G, Porro G (2009) CEM: Coarsened exact matching in Stata. Stata J. 9(4):524–546.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blagoeva R, Mom TJM, Jansen JJP, George G (2020) Problem-solving or self-enhancement? A power perspective on how CEOs affect R&D search in the face of inconsistent feedback. Acad. Management J. 63(2):332–355.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bromiley P, Harris JD (2014) A comparison of alternative measures of organizational aspirations. Strategic Management J. 35(3):338–357.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Caprotti F (2012) The cultural economy of cleantech: Environmental discourse and the emergence of a new technology sector. Trans. Inst. British Geographers 37(3):370–385.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carpenter MA, Geletkancz MA, Sanders WG (2004) Upper echelons research revisited: Antecedents, elements, and consequences of top management team composition. J. Management 30(6):749–778.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Child J (1972) Organizational structure, environment and performance: The role of strategic choice. Sociol. 6(1):1–22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cialdini RB, Goldstein NJ (2004) Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Rev. Psych. 55(1):591–621.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Crystal GS (1991) In Search of Excess: The Overcompensation of American Executives (WW Norton, New York).Google Scholar
• Cuñat V, Gine M, Guadalupe M (2012) The vote is cast: The effect of corporate governance on shareholder value. J. Finance 67(5):1943–1977.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cyert R, March JG (1963) A Behavioral Theory of the Firm (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• Daily CM, Johnson JL (1997) Sources of CEO power and firm financial performance: A longitudinal assessment. J. Management 23(2):97–117.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Davis GF, Thompson TA (1994) A social movement perspective on corporate control. Admin. Sci. Quart. 39(1):141–173.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Desai H, Hogan CE, Wilkins MS (2006) The reputational penalty for aggressive accounting: Earnings restatements and management turnover. Accounting Rev. 81(1):83–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• De Vaan M, Elbers B, DiPrete TA (2019) Obscured transparency? Compensation benchmarking and the biasing of executive pay. Management Sci. 65(9):4299–4317.Link, Google Scholar
• DiPrete TA, Eirich GM, Pittinsky M (2010) Compensation benchmarking, leapfrogs, and the surge in executive pay. Amer. J. Sociol. 115(6):1671–1712.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Falschlunger LM, Eisl C, Losbichler H, Greil AM (2015) Impression management in annual reports of the largest European companies. J. Appl. Accounting Res. 16(3):383–399.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fanelli A, Misangyi V, Tosi H (2009) In charisma we trust: The effects of CEO charismatic visions on securities analysts. Organ. Sci. 20(6):1011–1033.Link, Google Scholar
• Farrell K, Whidbee D (2003) Impact of firm performance expectations on CEO turnover and replacement decisions. J. Accounting Econ. 36(1):165–196.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Faulkender M, Yang J (2010) Inside the black box: The role and composition of compensation peer groups. J. Financial Econom. 96(2):257–270.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 (1990) Top-management-team tenure and organizational outcomes: The moderating role of managerial discretion. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35(3):484–503.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Firth D (1993) Bias reduction of maximum likelihood estimates. Biometrika 80(1):27–38.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Flammer C (2018) Competing for government procurement contracts: The role of corporate social responsibility. Strategic Management. J. 39(5):1299–1324.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Flynn MJ (1995) Universes and peer groups: Construction and use. AIMR Conf. Proc. (Association for Investment Management and Research, Charlottesville, VA), 104–107.Google Scholar
• Frank KA (2000) Impact of a confounding variable on a regression coefficient. Sociol. Methods Res. 29(2):147–194.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galinsky AD, Magee JC, Inesi ME, Gruenfeld DH (2006) Power and perspectives not taken. Psych. Sci. 17(12):1068–1074.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galinsky AD, Magee JC, Gruenfeld DH, Whitson JA, Liljenquist KA (2008) Power reduces the press of the situation: Implications for creativity, conformity, and dissonance. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 95(6):1450–1466.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Geletkanycz MA, Hambrick DC (1997) The external ties of top executives: Implications for strategic choice. Admin. Sci. Quart. 42(4):654–681.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gibbins M, Richardson A, Waterhouse J (1990) The management of corporate financial disclosure: Opportunism, ritualism, policies, and processes. J. Accounting Res. 28(1):121–143.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gillan SL, Starks L (2000) Corporate governance proposals and shareholder activism: The role of institutional investors. J. Financial Econom. 57(2):275–305.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Godfrey J, Mather P, Ramsay A (2003) Earnings and impression management in financial reports: The case of CEO changes. Abacus 39(1):95–123.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greenberg J, Ashton-James CE, Ashkanasy NM (2007) Social comparison processes in organizations. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 102(1):22–41.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greve HR (2003) Organizational Learning from Performance Feedback: A Behavioral Perspective on Innovation and Change (Cambridge University Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guinote A (2017) How power affects people: Activating, wanting, and goal seeking. Annu. Rev. Psych. 68(1):353–381.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guinote A, Judd CM, Brauer M (2002) Effects of power on perceived and objective group variability: Evidence that more powerful groups are more variable. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 82(5):708–721.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gupta AK (1984) Contingency linkages between strategy and general manager characteristics: A conceptual examination. Acad. Management Rev. 9(3):399–412.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haleblian J, Finkelstein S (1993) Top management team size, CEO dominance, and firm performance: The moderating roles of environmental turbulence and discretion. Acad. Management J. 36(4):844–863.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hambrick DC, Mason P (1984) Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Acad. Management Rev. 9(2):193–206.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hambrick DC, Geletkanycz MA, Fredrickson JW (1993) Top executive commitment to the status quo: Some of its determinants. Strategic Management J. 14(6):401–418.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haynes K, Hillman AJ (2010) The effect of board capital and CEO power on strategic change. Strategic Management J. 1163(31):1145–1163.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hitt MA, Hoskisson RE, Kim H (1997) International diversification: Effects on innovation and firm performance in product-diversified firms. Acad. Management J. 40(4):767–798.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoffman AJ, Ocasio W (2001) Not all events are attended equally: Toward a middle-range theory of industry attention to external events. Organ. Sci. 12(4):414–434.Link, Google Scholar
• Hsu G (2006) Jacks of all trades and masters of none: Audiences ’ reactions to spanning genres in feature film production. Admin. Sci. Quart. 51(3):420–450.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ioannou I, Serafeim G (2014) The impact of corporate social responsibility on investment recommendations: Analysts’ perceptions and shifting institutional logics. Strategic Management J. 36(7):1053–1081.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jensen M (2006) Should we stay or should we go? Accountability, status anxiety, and client defections. Admin. Sci. Quart. 51(1):97–128.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Johnson CS, Lammers J (2012) The powerful disregard social comparison information. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 48(1):329–334.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jordan AH, Audia PG (2012) Self-enhancement and learning from performance feedback. Acad. Management Rev. 37(2):211–231.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keltner D, Gruenfeld D, Anderson C (2003) Power, approach, and inhibition. Psych. Rev. 110(2):265–284.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim JW, Kogut B, Yang JS (2015) Executive compensation, fat cats, and best athletes. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 80(2):299–328.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kipnis D (1972) Does power corrupt? J. Personality Soc. Psych. 24(1):33–41.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Krause R, Filatotchev I, Bruton GD (2016) When in Rome, look like Caesar? Investigating the link between demand-side cultural power distance and CEO power. Acad. Management J. 59(4):1361–1384.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kulik CT, Ambrose ML (1992) Personal and situational determinants of referent choice. Acad. Management Rev. 17(2):212–237.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lerner JS, Tetlock PE (1999) Accounting for the effects of accountability. Psych. Bull. 125(2):255–275.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leung MD, Sharkey AJ (2014) Out of sight, out of mind? Evidence of perceptual factors in the multiple-category discount. Organ. Sci. 25(1):171–184.Link, Google Scholar
• Lewis B, Walls JL, Dowell G (2014) Difference in degrees: CEO characteristics and firm environmental disclosure. Strategic Management J. 35(5):712–722.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liu Y, Jiraporn P (2010) The effect of CEO power on bond ratings and yields. J. Empirical Finance 17(4):744–762.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lys T, Sohn S (1990) The association between revisions of financial analysts’ earnings forecasts and security-price changes. J. Accounting Econom. 13(4):341–363.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Magee JC, Smith PK (2013) The social distance theory of power. Personality Soc. Psych. Rev. 17(2):158–186.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marquis C, Tilcsik A (2016) Institutional equivalence: How industry and community peers influence corporate philanthropy. Organ. Sci. 27(5):1–17.Link, Google Scholar
• Martin G, Gomez-Mejia LR, Makri M (2017) Conflict between controlling family owners and minority shareholders: Much ado about nothing. Entrepreneurship Theory Practice 41(6):999–1027.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mokoaleli‐Mokoteli T, Taffler RJ, Agarwal V (2009) Behavioural bias and conflicts of interest in analyst stock recommendations. J. Bus. Finance Accounting 36(3–4):384–418.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Park SH, Westphal JD, Stern I (2011) Set up for a fall: The insidious effects of flattery and opinion conformity toward corporate leaders. Admin. Sci. Quart. 56(2):257–302.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pathan S (2009) Strong boards, CEO power and bank risk-taking. J. Banking Finance 33(7):1340–1350.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pfeffer J, Salancik GR (1974) Organizational decision making as a political process: The case of a university budget. Admin. Sci. Quart. 19(2):135–151.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Porac JF, Wade JB, Pollock TG (1999) Industry categories and the politics of the comparable firm in CEO compensation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(1):112–144.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Porac JF, Thomas H, Wilson F, Paton D, Kanfer A (1995) Rivalry and the industry model of Scottish knitwear producers. Admin. Sci. Quart. 40(2):203–227.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Raappana A, Gillman BM, Schoppig F, Kurki K (2017) Fixing the peer group problem. CFA Institute Magazine 28(2). Accessed February 23, 2021, https://www.cfainstitute.org/-/media/documents/article/cfa-magazine/2017/cfm-v28-n2-7.ashx.Google Scholar
• Rao H, Sivakumar K (1999) Institutional sources of boundary-spanning structures: The establishment of investor relations departments in the Fortune 500 industrials. Organ. Sci. 10(1):27–42.Link, Google Scholar
• Ryan P, Taffler RJ (2006) Do brokerage houses add value? The market impact of UK sell-side analyst recommendation changes. British Accounting Rev. 38(4):371–386.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Scott MB, Lyman SM (1968) Accounts. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 33(1):46–62.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sensoy BA (2009) Performance evaluation and self-designated benchmark indexes in the mutual fund industry. J. Financial Econom. 92(1):25–39.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shen W, Cannella AA (2002) Power dynamics within top management and their impacts on CEO dismissal followed by inside succession. Acad. Management J. 45(6):1195–1206.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shinkle GA (2012) Organizational aspirations, reference points, and goals: Building on the past and aiming for the future. J. Management 38(1):415–455.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Short JC, Palmer TB (2003) Organizational performance referents: An empirical examination of their content and influences. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 90(2):209–224.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith EB, Chae H (2017) The effect of organizational atypicality on reference group selection and performance evaluation. Organ. Sci. 28(6):1134–1149.Link, Google Scholar
• Stock J, Yogo M (2005) Testing for weak instruments in linear IV regression. Andrews DK, Stock J, eds. Identif. inference Econom. Model. Essays Honor Thomas Rothenb. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Google Scholar
• Tetlock PE (1983) Accountability and the perseverance of first impressions. Soc. Psych. Quart. 46(4):285–292.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tetlock PE (1992) The impact of accountability on judgment and choice: Toward a social contingency model. Adv. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 25:331–376.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tetlock PE, Sktika L, Boettger R (1989) Accountability: A social magnifier of the dilution effect. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 57(3):388–398.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van Essen M, Otten J, Carberry E (2015) Assessing managerial power theory: A meta-analytic approach to understanding the determinants of CEO compensation. J. Management 41(1):164–202.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Walls JL, Berrone P, Phan PH (2012) Corporate governance and environmental performance: Is there really a link? Strategic Management J. 33(8):885–913.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Washburn M, Bromiley P (2014) Managers and analysts: An examination of mutual influence. Acad. Management J. 57(3):849–868.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Westphal JD (1998) Board games: How CEOs adapt to increases in structural board independence from management. Admin. Sci. Quart. 43(3):511–537.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Westphal JD, Clement MB (2008) Sociopolitical dynamics in relations between top managers and security analysts: Favor rendering, reciprocity, and analyst stock recommendations. Acad. Management J. 51(5):873–897.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, Zajac EJ (1994) Substance and symbolism in CEOs’ long-term incentive plans. Admin. Sci. Quart. 39(3):367.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Westphal JD, Zajac EJ (2013) A behavioral theory of corporate governance: Explicating the mechanisms of socially situated and socially constituted agency. Acad. Management Ann. 7(1):607–661.Crossref, Google Scholar
• White H (1980) A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica 48(4):817–838.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wiersema M, Zhang Y (2011) CEO dismissal: The role of investment analysts. Strategic Management J. 51(2):1161–1182.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zajac EJ, Westphal JD (1996) Director reputation, CEO/board power, and the dynamics of board interlocks. Acad. Management Proc. 1996(1):254–258.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zuckerman E (1999) The categorical imperative: Securities analysts and the illegitimacy discount. Amer. J. Sociol. 104(5):1398–1438.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zuckerman EW (2017) The categorical imperative revisited: Implications of categorization as a theoretical tool. Durand R, Granqvist N, Tyllstrom A, eds. From Categories to Categorization: Studies in Sociology, Organizations and Strategy at the Crossroads (Emerald Publishing, Bingley, UK), 31–68.Google Scholar