Search results

Financial flexibility and investment efficiency are of vital importance in strategic choices at boardrooms, particularly in post-crisis recovery strategies. This study examines the moderating effects of investment efficiency and investment scale on the relationship between financial flexibility and firm performance.

The authors use sample of 10,755 US-listed firms over the period 2010–2021 to examine the relationships between investment scale, investment efficiency, financial flexibility and firm performance. Particular attention is paid to overinvestment and underinvestment.

Findings of this study reveal that financial flexibility mitigates investment inefficiency through reducing overinvestment. Financial flexibility contributes to boost a firm’s accounting and market performance. Additionally, investment efficiency and investment scale have moderating effects on the relationship between financial flexibility and firm performance. However, the influence of investment efficiency is greater than the influence of investment scale. Finally, the authors find that the direct and indirect effects of financial flexibility are stronger on market performance than accounting performance, implying that market is more sensitive to corporate financial policies.

Findings of this study have implications for scholars, decision-makers policymakers, investors and other stakeholders.

This study has its own limitations due to the sample selection issues, country context and the research model adopted by this study.

The novel contribution to the extant literature is incorporating the influence of investment scale and investment efficiency into the relationship between financial flexibility and firm performance.

Financial flexibility, investment efficiency and effective corporate governance mechanisms have been issues of concern to stakeholders. Yet, little empirical evidence on the combined moderating effects investment efficiency and corporate governance mechanisms on the nexus between financial flexibility and firm performance. This study aims to address this gap and extend the extant literature by examining the moderating effects of corporate governance and investment efficiency on the nexus between financial flexibility and financial performance.

The empirical study is based on progression analysis using a sample of 13,865 US listed companies selected from BoardEx (WRDS) for the period (2010–2022) with 89,198 firm-year observations.

Findings of this study indicate that financial flexibility improves firm value as well as accounting performance. Furthermore, the results reveal that both investment efficiency and corporate governance moderate the effect of financial flexibility on firm performance. The authors complement and extend the literature on the optimal investment strategies domain by showing that the combined impact of corporate governance mechanisms and investment efficiency strengthens the nexus between financial flexibility and firm performance.

Key limitations of this study due to the characteristics of the sample selection: country-specific context and proxies used by this study.

Findings of this study have managerial and theoretical implications for firms’ boardrooms, institutional and individual investors, regulators, academics and other stakeholders regarding behavioural aspects of investment decision-making.

The authors’ novel contribution to the extant literature is articulated by the conceptual framework underlying this study and by the new evidence regarding exploring the combined effect of corporate governance mechanisms on nexus between financial flexibility and companies’ performance.

This paper aims to explore the ways to solve the dilemma of balancing between efficiency and flexibility in project-oriented organizations (POOs). It investigates the characteristic of the relationship between efficiency and flexibility in the context of POOs. Based on the framework of organizational design, this study tries to open the “black box” of how POOs make a balance between efficiency and flexibility, and examines the influence of organizational design in this process.

This study is a comparative multiple case study based on four project-oriented enterprises, whose relationships between efficiency and flexibility are diverse from one another. It follows the process of building theory from case study, applying within-case and cross-case analysis and replication logic in shaping hypotheses.

The results show that the relationship between efficiency and flexibility in POOs can be divided into four different situations. The contradictory factors are identified as functional structure and project structure, standardized process and temporary plan, as well as strategic-level centralization and project-level decentralization. It is found that the key to achieve a balance between efficiency and flexibility is to coordinate the relationship of contradictory factors through the effective integration of organizational level and project level.

This study introduces the framework of organizational design in solving the dilemma of balancing between efficiency and flexibility, responding to the call for developing the project management theory from a strategic perspective. It provides theoretical support for POOs to achieve balancing between efficiency and flexibility, and suggests an effective synergy of organizational design in both organizational and project level.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the interplay between firm boundary decisions and the management of both efficiency and flexibility and the implications this has for modular design in the provision of advanced services.

A single case study in the defence industry employs semi-structured interviews supplemented by secondary data. Data are analysed using thematic analysis.

The findings provide a process model of boundary negotiations for the design of efficient and flexible modular systems consisting of three phases; boundary ambiguity, boundary defences and boundary alignment.

The study provides a process framework for boundary negotiations to help organisations navigate the management of both-and efficiency and flexibility in the provision of advanced services.

Drawing upon modularity, paradox and systems theory, this article provides novel theoretical insight into the relationship between firm boundary decisions and the management of both-and efficiency vs. flexibility in the provision of product upgrade services.

The purpose of this paper is to present and test a new model for competitive capabilities. Traditionally, a cumulative model has been viewed as having one sequence of building competitive capabilities in a firm in support of market needs, including quality, delivery, cost efficiency and flexibility. Although appealing as a conceptual model, empirical testing has not been able to fully support the cumulative model. This paper acknowledges the need for a hybrid approach to managing capability progression. It brings together the literature on trade‐offs, cumulative capabilities, and order winners and qualifiers.

A new hybrid approach for modelling competitive capabilities is tested empirically using data from the high performance manufacturing (HPM) study, round 3, including three industries and seven countries – a total of 211 plants.

The hybrid model shows significantly better fit with the data from the sample than the cumulative models suggested by previous literature. Empirical support is found for the traditional perception that a high level of quality is a prerequisite for a high level of delivery performance. However, cost efficiency and flexibility do not exhibit a cumulative pattern. Instead, the results show that they are developed in parallel. The findings suggest that a balance between cost efficiency and flexibility is built upon high levels of quality and delivery performance.

Since we limit the empirical investigation to three industries and seven countries, it would be interesting to extend the testing of this model to more industries and countries. This research shows that combining perspectives and insights from different research streams – in this case, trade‐off theory and the concepts of cumulative capabilities, and order winners and qualifiers – can be fruitful.

The results of this paper provides managers with guidelines concerning the configuration of competitive capabilities. First, a qualifying level of quality needs to be attained, followed by a qualifying level of delivery. Then, a balance between potential order winners, i.e. cost efficiency and flexibility, needs to be attained.

This paper presents a new approach to modelling competitive capabilities that synthesises previous research streams and perspectives from cumulative capabilities, contesting capabilities (trade‐offs), and order winners and qualifiers.

The purpose of this paper is to scrutinize the performance effects of supply chain risk management (SCRM). Besides financial performance, two aspects of operational performance are examined: operational efficiency and flexibility. Moreover, the authors explore the moderating role of supplier integration in the relationship between SCRM and operational performance.

A survey-based methodology was adopted. Based on the data from an international survey, this study applied the structural equation modeling and latent moderated structural equations approach to test the hypotheses.

The results indicate that SCRM positively influences both operational efficiency and flexibility, and has an indirect effect on financial performance. In addition, supplier integration enhances the impact of SCRM on operational flexibility, but does not moderate the relationship between SCRM and operational efficiency.

This study extends the existing literature by providing a comprehensive analysis of the performance effects of SCRM. It also provides managerial insights on both risk management and supplier integration.

The purpose of this paper is to provide the results from empirically testing the effects of different combinations of organizational forms and combinative capabilities on the efficiency, scope and flexibility of firm‐level knowledge integration, given the influence of knowledge types and forms.

The research is based on a case‐study methodology employed to collect data from ten firms of low, medium and high knowledge complexity environs; manual and automated data mining techniques were employed.

The findings suggest that organizational form and combinative capabilities explain the effects of efficiency, scope and flexibility on firm‐level knowledge integration. In turn, differences in knowledge types and forms necessitate the use of secondary combinative capabilities.

While the study provides a coherent and detailed understanding of firm‐level knowledge integration and explain the development of a firm's knowledge architecture through organizational structures and synthesize existing literature contributing to an emergent understanding of the ambiguities surrounding combinative capabilities, further research identifying the effects of and relationship with the deep knowledge in combinative capabilities on strategic capabilities and a firm's knowledge vision would be beneficial.

Of practical relevance is the strategic and operational management implications detailing the specific organizational structures to achieve desired firm‐level knowledge integration capacity and manage particular integration efficiency, scope and flexibility requirements to enhance the development of architectural knowledge and, thus, firm capabilities.

The original contribution of this paper is reflected in providing empiric and theoretic insights, which directly address the specific combinations of organizational structures that influence integration process characteristics and thus accommodate differences in knowledge types and forms.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the tradeoffs between efficiency and flexibility in production processes involve a cross-trained workforce. The study quantifies production losses that stem from worker learning and forgetting in a cross-training environment.

The paper examines multiple levels of cross-training in the context of several workplace factors including absenteeism, turnover, process change frequency, and process change magnitude using discrete event simulation. The parameters of the simulation model are informed by data from a operating manufacturing system.

Results suggest that productivity gains obtained from a moderate level of cross-training (e.g. two tasks) can outweigh the production losses from additional training, and that adding further cross-training beyond this may negatively affect system performance.

Production systems exist in an environment of process change and competitive pressure. Cross-training is an often-used operational technology for managing process knowledge in an environment of change as well as providing employees with a richer work environment. While the potential benefits of enriching the workplace experience include greater motivation, less boredom and fatigue, greater task vigilance, and other effects generally regarded as beneficial, productivity losses brought about by training and retraining disruptions associated with cross-training have not been examined as widely.

Flexibility and efficiency are dual attributes of the organizational structure that are crucial for project-driven enterprises to achieve sustainable development in a dynamic environment. However, there is a lack of research on the patterns by which the dual attributes of a project-driven enterprise’s organizational structure affect business model innovation. Employing organizational theory, this study aims to assess the mediating mechanisms and dynamic capabilities through which the dual attributes of the organizational structure influence business model innovation in project-driven enterprises.

Data were collected from 242 employees from four project-driven companies across 26 cities (e.g. Beijing, Tianjin, Guangzhou and Shenzhen) in China. Structural equation modeling revealed the relationship between organizational structure’s dual attributes and business model innovation.

The findings show that the dual attributes (flexibility and efficiency) of the organizational structure have positive impacts on business model innovation. Moreover, dynamic capabilities mediate the relationship between the dual attributes and business model innovation in project-driven enterprises.

This study provides contributions to innovation research in the context of project-driven enterprises by revealing the influence of organizational structure on business model innovation through the firms’ dynamic capabilities. Such knowledge can enable managers of project-driven enterprises to develop effective interventions to promote business model innovation.

As the capital market in China is still developing, several constraints on a Chinese-listed firm’s financing strategy have a direct impact on its financial flexibility. The purpose of this paper is to reconstruct traditional financial flexibility index (FFI) derived from the western context, provide empirical evidence within eastern context by modified FFI and examine how the managerial efficiency of Chinese-listed firms is demonstrated with modified FFI to escort corporate life cycle hypothesis.

By tailored FFI to fit the contemporary operations of Chinese-listed firms, this study investigates how managerial efficiency varies across different life stages to demonstrate the moderating power in the firm performance of financially flexible firm.

It is found that financially flexible firms in the Chinese stock market generally experience good firm performance, yet the managerial efficiency could gradually be diminishing at their mature stage even firms’ financial flexibility remains consistent with the agency theory. This paper sheds light on the necessity to reexamine the components in financial flexibility based on the eastern context, and provides avenue to further understand the managerial behavior of Chinese listed firms when considering firm life cycles.

Although it is difficult for this current study to offer the precise weights on each factor in calculating financial flexibility, the judgment matrix method is adopted to at least provide reliable estimates in accordance with Chinese business contexts with less than 10 percent errors in contrast to the actual weights.

This modified FFI is particularly suitable for Chinese-listed firms under certain unique financial reporting regulations by adjusting a number of weights and factors. This study may help practitioners understand the managerial conduct of publicly listed firms in China.

The paper constructs a modified FFI with Chinese stock market characteristics embedded, and provides insightful evidence to explain the new pecking order theory by considering the life cycle stage of Chinese-listed companies.