Search results

The study empirically investigates whether the board of directors' expertise in the focal firm's industry has implications for innovation input. Additionally, it explores how this relationship is shaped by the CEO's educational level and background in the technology area.

The article tests the hypothesized relationships through the Arellano–Bond generalized method of moment estimators, proxying innovation input by R&D to total sales. Moreover, it analyses a sample of privately-held Italian medium and large high-tech companies observed over four years by relying on a unique hand-collected dataset.

The research documents an inverted U-shaped relationship between board industry expertise and innovation input and shows that such curvilinear effect is moderated by the CEO's educational level and technology background. Specifically, while the curvilinear slope is less steep for highly educated CEO, it becomes steeper in the presence of technology trained CEO.

The paper recommends how to shape the board human capital as a meaningful driver of board effectiveness and innovation. Additionally, it calls the managerial attention towards the interaction and the interplay between board industry expertise and CEO education as able to influence the above-mentioned outcome.

While previous studies have focused on the linear and positive effect of board industry expertise on innovation, this research advances current knowledge in innovation management literature by testing the presence of a curvilinear relationship. Moreover, by exploring the moderating effect of CEO education, the paper provides a comprehensive picture on the interplay among board industry expertise, CEO educational training and innovation input.

The current study aims to investigate the impacts of two behavioral biases, namely, loss aversion and overconfidence on the performance of US companies. First, the impact of loss aversion on the economic performance of companies was assessed. Second, the impact of overconfidence on market performance was discussed.

This study used around 6,777 quarterly observations on the population of US-insured industrial and services companies over the 2006-2016 period. Ordinary least squares (OLS) regression in two panel data models were used to test the hypotheses formulated for the study.

It was documented that the loss-aversion bias negatively affects the economic performance of companies and this is achieved for both sectors. In contrast, the findings suggest that overconfidence positively affects market performance of industrial firms but negatively affects market performance in service firms. Further robust evidence was found that overconfidence bias seems to be dominant, and hence, investors may tend to be more overconfident rather than more loss-averse.

This research can be extended by focusing on the following question: What is the impact of the contradictory (positive and negative) effects of an investor's loss aversion and overconfidence on the US company performance in case of realization of a stock market crisis or stock market crash?

The purpose of this paper is to develop a holistic understanding of extant studies addressing the impact of commercialization on fans of elite sports.

In doing this, the authors performed a structured review of 42 academic articles published between 1992 and 2020 that all focus on how fans respond and are affected by the commercialization of elite sports.

The structured review shows that the impacts of commercialization on fans relate to four different themes. These are (1) fan identity, (2) fan attitudes, (3) fan emotions and (4) fan behaviours. However, the analysis also shows that research within each category is largely scattered, and more research within each category is needed.

The paper highlights the complex and dynamic nature of commercialization. It presents a research agenda for future research and emphasizes a need to integrate the interests of several stakeholders when managing the impacts of elite sport commercialization.