IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v140y2022icp143-154.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When a dominant CEO hinders exploration in a firm: A longitudinal case study from Japan

Author

Listed:
  • Matsuo, Kenji

Abstract

This study aims to elucidate when, how, and why a dominant CEO hinders exploration, by using a longitudinal case study of a Japanese firm. Many studies suggest that dominant CEOs facilitate exploration; however, two problems cause researchers to overlook failures: they did not fully consider the context or perform a long-term analysis. Although some studies argue the negative influence of dominant CEOs on firms' performance, they neither fully clarify the mechanisms nor explicitly address exploration. Our study argues that when board power is weak, and a dominant CEO exercises his/her power coercively, exploration-related activities can be hindered. First, a dominant CEO can suppress at will resource allocation for exploration. Second, technological adaptation can be inhibited by a dominant CEO’s explicit and implicit influence. Third, when a dominant CEO sets stretch goals for exploration and coercively demands their achievement, market development failure could occur.

Suggested Citation

  • Matsuo, Kenji, 2022. "When a dominant CEO hinders exploration in a firm: A longitudinal case study from Japan," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 143-154.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:140:y:2022:i:c:p:143-154
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.11.042
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014829632100850X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.11.042?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    2. Michael Shayne Gary & Miles M. Yang & Philip W. Yetton & John D. Sterman, 2017. "Stretch Goals and the Distribution of Organizational Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 395-410, June.
    3. Catherine Welch & Rebecca Piekkari & Emmanuella Plakoyiannaki & Eriikka Paavilainen-Mantymaki, 2011. "Theorising from case studies: Towards a pluralist future for international business research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 42(5), pages 740-762, June.
    4. L. J. Bourgeois & David R. Brodwin, 1984. "Strategic implementation: Five approaches to an elusive phenomenon," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(3), pages 241-264, July.
    5. Linda Argote & Ella Miron-Spektor, 2011. "Organizational Learning: From Experience to Knowledge," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1123-1137, October.
    6. James G. Combs & David J. Ketchen & Alexa A. Perryman & Maura S. Donahue, 2007. "The Moderating Effect of CEO Power on the Board Composition–Firm Performance Relationship," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(8), pages 1299-1323, December.
    7. Daniel A. Levinthal & James G. March, 1993. "The myopia of learning," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(S2), pages 95-112, December.
    8. Auh, Seigyoung & Menguc, Bulent, 2005. "Balancing exploration and exploitation: The moderating role of competitive intensity," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(12), pages 1652-1661, December.
    9. Shahzad (Shaz) Ansari & Raghu Garud & Arun Kumaraswamy, 2016. "The disruptor's dilemma: TiVo and the U.S. television ecosystem," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(9), pages 1829-1853, September.
    10. Bachrach, Peter & Baratz, Morton S., 1963. "Decisions and Nondecisions: An Analytical Framework," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 57(3), pages 632-642, September.
    11. Sheikh, Shahbaz, 2018. "The impact of market competition on the relation between CEO power and firm innovation," Journal of Multinational Financial Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 36-50.
    12. Jianyun Tang & Mary Crossan & W. Glenn Rowe, 2011. "Dominant CEO, Deviant Strategy, and Extreme Performance: The Moderating Role of a Powerful Board," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(7), pages 1479-1503, November.
    13. Sariol, Ana M. & Abebe, Michael A., 2017. "The influence of CEO power on explorative and exploitative organizational innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 38-45.
    14. Turnheim, Bruno & Geels, Frank W., 2013. "The destabilisation of existing regimes: Confronting a multi-dimensional framework with a case study of the British coal industry (1913–1967)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(10), pages 1749-1767.
    15. John A. Pearce & Shaker A. Zahra, 1991. "The relative power of ceos and boards of directors: Associations with corporate performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(2), pages 135-153, February.
    16. Robert A Burgelman, 2011. "Bridging history and reductionism: A key role for longitudinal qualitative research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 42(5), pages 591-601, June.
    17. Burgelman, Robert A., 2011. "Bridging History and Reductionism: A Key Role for Longitudinal Qualitative Research," Research Papers 2045r, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    18. Tsuyoshi Numagami, 1998. "Perspective—The Infeasibility of Invariant Laws in Management Studies: A Reflective Dialogue in Defense of Case Studies," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(1), pages 1-15, February.
    19. Zeki Simsek, 2009. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Towards a Multilevel Understanding," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(4), pages 597-624, June.
    20. Jerker Denrell, 2003. "Vicarious Learning, Undersampling of Failure, and the Myths of Management," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 227-243, June.
    21. Marcie J. Tyre & Wanda J. Orlikowski, 1994. "Windows of Opportunity: Temporal Patterns of Technological Adaptation in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 98-118, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vinit Parida & Tom Lahti & Joakim Wincent, 2016. "Exploration and exploitation and firm performance variability: a study of ambidexterity in entrepreneurial firms," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 1147-1164, December.
    2. Li, Yuan & Wei, Zelong & Zhao, Jie & Zhang, Chenlu & Liu, Yi, 2013. "Ambidextrous organizational learning, environmental munificence and new product performance: Moderating effect of managerial ties in China," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(1), pages 95-105.
    3. Sariol, Ana M. & Abebe, Michael A., 2017. "The influence of CEO power on explorative and exploitative organizational innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 38-45.
    4. Marina Estrada-Cruz & Noelia Rodriguez-Hernández & Antonio J. Verdú-Jover & Jose Maria Gómez-Gras, 2022. "The effect of competitive intensity on the relationship between strategic entrepreneurship and organizational results," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 1-24, March.
    5. Kotabe, Masaaki & Kothari, Tanvi, 2016. "Emerging market multinational companies’ evolutionary paths to building a competitive advantage from emerging markets to developed countries," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 51(5), pages 729-743.
    6. Hsu, Chia-Wen & Lien, Yung-Chih & Chen, Homin, 2013. "International ambidexterity and firm performance in small emerging economies," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 58-67.
    7. Pamela R. Haunschild & Francisco Polidoro & David Chandler, 2015. "Organizational Oscillation Between Learning and Forgetting: The Dual Role of Serious Errors," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(6), pages 1682-1701, December.
    8. Marina Estrada-Cruz & Noelia Rodriguez-Hernández & Antonio J. Verdú-Jover & Jose Maria Gómez-Gras, 0. "The effect of competitive intensity on the relationship between strategic entrepreneurship and organizational results," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-24.
    9. Alexander Linhart & Maximilian Röglinger & Katharina Stelzl, 2020. "A Project Portfolio Management Approach to Tackling the Exploration/Exploitation Trade-off," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 62(2), pages 103-119, April.
    10. Johannes G. Jaspersen & Richard Peter, 2017. "Experiential Learning, Competitive Selection, and Downside Risk: A New Perspective on Managerial Risk Taking," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(5), pages 915-930, October.
    11. Ojha, Divesh & Struckell, Elisabeth & Acharya, Chandan & Patel, Pankaj C., 2018. "Supply chain organizational learning, exploration, exploitation, and firm performance: A creation-dispersion perspective," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 70-82.
    12. Andreas Schwab, 2007. "Incremental Organizational Learning from Multilevel Information Sources: Evidence for Cross-Level Interactions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(2), pages 233-251, April.
    13. Lin, H.E., 2010. "Effects of strategy, context and antecedents and capabilities on the outcomes of ambidexterity : A multiple country case study of the US, China and Taiwan," Other publications TiSEM c0eab7d6-d6c7-4b55-9822-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    14. Olga Kassotaki, 2022. "Review of Organizational Ambidexterity Research," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, March.
    15. Yuliya Snihur & Llewellyn D. W. Thomas & Robert A. Burgelman, 2018. "An Ecosystem‐Level Process Model of Business Model Disruption: The Disruptor's Gambit," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(7), pages 1278-1316, November.
    16. Carolina Rojas-Córdova & Amanda J. Williamson & Julio A. Pertuze & Gustavo Calvo, 2023. "Why one strategy does not fit all: a systematic review on exploration–exploitation in different organizational archetypes," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(7), pages 2251-2295, October.
    17. Li, Mingxiang, 2021. "Exploring novel technologies through board interlocks: Spillover vs. broad exploration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    18. Sabyasachi Sinha, 2015. "The Exploration–Exploitation Dilemma: A Review in the Context of Managing Growth of New Ventures," Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers, , vol. 40(3), pages 313-323, September.
    19. Burt, Steve & Coe, Neil M. & Davies, Keri, 2019. "A tactical retreat? Conceptualising the dynamics of European grocery retail divestment from East Asia," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 177-189.
    20. Choo Yeon Kim & Myung Sub Lim & Jae Wook Yoo, 2019. "Ambidexterity in External Knowledge Search Strategies and Innovation Performance: Mediating Role of Balanced Innovation and Moderating Role of Absorptive Capacity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-23, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:140:y:2022:i:c:p:143-154. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.