Search results
1 – 3 of 3Shekhar Manelkar and Dharmesh K. Mishra
Since the idea of “Unethical Pro-organisational Behaviour” (UPB) was introduced in 2010, a substantial corpus of empirical research has contributed to its expanding, contemporary…
Abstract
Purpose
Since the idea of “Unethical Pro-organisational Behaviour” (UPB) was introduced in 2010, a substantial corpus of empirical research has contributed to its expanding, contemporary knowledge. This includes research studies on how leadership exerts an influence on UPB. This paper aims to consolidate the current understanding of organisational leadership’s impact on employee UPB and offer future research agendas.
Design/methodology/approach
A systematic literature review (SLR) using the “Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses” (PRISMA) guidelines was adopted for the study. Literature that satisfied the search conditions was examined. The factors determining leadership’s influence on UPB were studied, and the findings were thematically synthesised.
Findings
Leader behaviour plays a large part in influencing UPB in organisations. Leader-member exchange and organisational belonging create favourable circumstances for UPB in organisations. UPB is moderated by the employee’s personal moral orientation.
Originality/value
UPB is unethical behaviour that benefits the organisation and is likely to be rewarded. However, there is a cost that other stakeholders pay. UPB has been researched since 2010, as well as the role of leaders in perpetuating UPB. However, there has not been an SLR of this study. This paper seeks to capture the essence of the research so far and pave a path for future research on the subject. These insights would prove valuable to management practitioners and academic experts.
Details
Keywords
This study aims to contribute to the academic disciplines of entrepreneurship and management by developing a new theory that explains Founder-CEOs’ succession in family and…
Abstract
Purpose
This study aims to contribute to the academic disciplines of entrepreneurship and management by developing a new theory that explains Founder-CEOs’ succession in family and non-family firms. Many scholars failed to generate a specific theory to describe the succession of Founder-CEOs. Family firms remain complex enterprises comprising interconnectedness of cultural interests in which corporate governance occurs by families, Founder-CEOs and sometimes a board of directors.
Design/methodology/approach
This study’s design/methodology/approach reflects post-modernist epistemological and ontological perspectives for conducting systematic literature reviews. To identify relevant studies in the review, the several databases (Australian Business Dean’s Council Journal Quality List; EBSCO Database, including PsycINFO and Psych studies; Web of Science) and a mix of ranked journals from entrepreneurship, management and psychology were used.
Findings
The findings and results in this paper reflect the purpose, methodology and literature analysis culminating in 1,582 peer-reviewed studies. A total of 182 peer-reviewed studies met the criterion for review. Throughout the research process, a systematic literature review uncovered management literature gaps overlooked for decades during the theory-building process. Hence, developing a theory of Founder-CEOs succession used a combination of systematic, inductive, comparative and interactive approaches.
Originality/value
A Theory of Founder-CEOs Succession explains the strategic process of replacing a founder systematically. The promotion of, and incentives for, internal executives have been topics of great interest and deliberation among scholars and practitioners for a long time. This study contributes research implications for theory building in the academic disciplines of entrepreneurship and management by offering scholars and practitioners a theory that does not exist to describe Founder-CEOs’ succession encompassing both strategic successes and failures. By incorporating successes and failures, this study provides realistic reflections of Founder-CEOs.
Details
Keywords
Melissa Carlisle, Melanie I. Millar and Jacqueline Jarosz Wukich
This study examines shareholder and board motivations regarding corporate social responsibility (CSR) to understand boards' stewardship approaches to environmental issues.
Abstract
Purpose
This study examines shareholder and board motivations regarding corporate social responsibility (CSR) to understand boards' stewardship approaches to environmental issues.
Design/methodology/approach
Using content analysis, the authors classify CSR motivations in all environmental shareholder proposals and board responses of Fortune 250 companies from 2013 to 2017 from do little (a shareholder primacy perspective) to do much (a stakeholder pluralism perspective). The authors calculate the motivational dissonance for each proposal-response pair (the Talk Gap) and use cluster analysis to observe evidence of board stewardship and subsequent environmental disclosure and performance (ED&P) changes.
Findings
Board interpretations of stewardship are not uniform, and they regularly extend to stakeholders beyond shareholders, most frequently including profit-oriented stakeholders (e.g. employees and customers). ED&P changes are highest when shareholders narrowly lead boards in CSR motivation and either request both action and information or information only. The authors observe weaker ED&P changes when shareholders request action and the dissonance between shareholders and boards is larger. When shareholders are motivated to do little for CSR, ED&P changes are weak, even when boards express more pluralistic motivations.
Research limitations/implications
The results show the important role that boards play in CSR and may aid activist shareholders in determining how best to generate change in corporate CSR actions.
Originality/value
This study provides the first evidence of board stewardship at the proposal-response level. It measures shareholder and board CSR motivations, introduces the Talk Gap, and examines relationships among proposal characteristics, the Talk Gap, and subsequent ED&P change to better understand board stewardship of environmental issues.
Details