Search results

This study investigates the relationship between child gender and a CEO’s top management hiring decisions.

Hypotheses were tested using secondary data on 121 S&P 500 male CEOs, their children, and their top management teams.

Results indicate that child gender is associated with a male CEO’s TMT hiring decisions. Specifically, we find that male CEOs with only daughters were significantly more likely to hire women to their TMTs than male CEOs with only sons and those with both sons and daughters.

This study provides evidence for the roles of familiarity, learning, and empathy in reducing gender biases in selection decisions. Top management hiring decisions have wide implications for organizational settings in general and for the breaking of the glass ceiling in particular.

Reducing gender bias in top manager hiring decisions directly relates to the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goal 5 of achieving gender equality as women are consistently under-represented at the top of organizations across the world.

By focusing on the hiring of top managers, this study includes hiring decisions that directly impact firm operations. To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine the relationship between child gender and executive hiring decisions with a US S&P 500 sample.

Early research on overqualification suggested that overqualification is primarily associated with negative attitudes and behavior. As a consequence, hiring practitioners were advised against hiring overqualified job applicants. However, recent studies have revealed that there are several potential positive consequences of overqualification. Given this change in perspective on overqualification, we examine how hiring practitioners nowadays look at overqualified job applicants, and what their considerations are for hiring an overqualified job applicant or not.

We have interviewed 33 hiring practitioners to examine their attitudes and considerations toward hiring overqualified job applicants.

Results show that hiring practitioners are aware of potential positive as well as negative consequences of overqualification and consider a variety of factors to assess how beneficial hiring an overqualified candidate will be. These factors fall under three categories: Individual considerations, interpersonal considerations and contextual considerations.

We show that overqualification is not a stigma anymore and that the decision to hire an overqualified job applicant or not depends on a mixture of factors that are carefully considered. Two of these three considerations transcend the individual level (i.e. the overqualified person), whereas most research and theories on the consequences of overqualification do not go beyond the individual level. As such, our findings call for more theory and research on interpersonal and contextual factors shaping the consequences of overqualification.

High performance of new hires is of imminent interest to organizations in the hospitality sector. Yet, limited studies have focused on the relevant traits of new hires that improve on-job performance. This study aims to identify and understand a few critical traits that predict high performance across multilevel roles within the hospitality sector.

Drawing on the human capital theory, through a time-lagged field study spanning 16 months, this study used multisource data for 540 active job opportunities and 205 new hires within the hospitality industry. This study used partial least squares-based structural equation modeling and analyzed the various traits that predict high on-job performance.

This study finds that humility is a significant predictor of job performance and wholly mediates the effect of interpersonal understanding, self-confidence and flexibility on new hires’ performance.

This study enhances talent management research for the hospitality sector by determining the critical traits of new hires that can predict superior on-job performance.

This study aims to develop a model of learning-by-hiring in which knowledge gains may occur at the time of recruitment but also after recruitment when other incumbent organizational members assimilate a recruit’s knowledge. The author’s model predicts that experienced recruits are more likely to catalyze change to their organization’s core technological capabilities.

The continuous-time parametric hazard rate regressions predict core technological change in a long panel (1970–2017) of US biotechnology industry patent data. The author uses over 140,000 patents to model the evolution of knowledge of over 52,000 scientists and over 4,450 firms. To address endogeneity concerns, the author uses the Heckman selection method and does robustness tests using a difference-in-difference analysis.

The author finds that a hire’s prior research and development (R&D) experience helps overcome inertia arising from her or his new-to-an-organization “distant” knowledge to increase the likelihood of core technological change. In addition, while the author finds that incumbent organizational members resist technological change, experienced hires may effectively induce them to adopt new ways of doing things. This is particularly the case when hires collaborate with incumbents in R&D projects. Understanding the effects of hiring on core technological change, therefore, benefits from an assessment of hire R&D experience and its effects on incumbent inertia in an organization.

First, the author does not recommend managers to hire scientists with considerable distant knowledge only as this may be detrimental to core technological change. Second, the author recommends organizations striving to effectuate technological change to hire people with considerable prior R&D experience as this confers them with the ability to influence other members and socialize incumbent members. Third, the author recommends that managers hire people with both significant levels of prior experience and distant knowledge as they are complements. Finally, the author recommends managers to encourage collaboration between highly experienced hired scientists and long-tenured incumbent organizational members to facilitate incumbent learning, socialization and adoption of new ways of doing things.

This study develops a model of learning-by-hiring, which, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, is the first to propose, test and advance KM literature by showing the effectiveness of experienced hires to stimulate knowledge diffusion and core technological change over time after being hired. This study contributes to innovation, organizational learning and strategy literatures.

Integrating the resource-based view (RBV) with pay dispersion research, the authors examine how the allocation of resources between hiring new employees and compensating current employees, as well as the allocation of resources among new employees, affects organizational performance.

The authors use panel data on Major League Baseball teams. The authors also use system generalized method of moments (GMM) estimations to control for the impact of past performance on current performance, unobserved individual heterogeneity and omitted variable bias.

The authors find that the larger the portion of the human resources (HR) budget allocated to hiring new employees, the poorer organizational performance becomes unless the focal organization has already significantly underperformed. The authors also find that pay concentration among new employees has a positive impact on organizational performance unless the focal organization has already significantly overperformed.

This study extends RBV research by examining how resource allocation patterns affect organizational performance, which has rarely been studied. Moreover, by showing the organizational context's significant effect on the outcome of financial allocation for resource acquisition, this study extends both the RBV research and the pay dispersion research.

Historically, most CEOs were promoted from within the organization. The internal candidates offer continuity, are well known to the Board, and have deep institutional knowledge. However, if the Board is seeking changes to the firm’s strategy, operations, or culture, they turn to outside candidates with proven track records. Shareholders react positively to the announcement of an external successor but the longer-term evidence on the performance front is mixed. Most empirical studies have tended to focus on a narrow aspect of the hiring choice, whereas we undertake a more holistic examination involving various elements.

We consider the salience of the CEO hiring choice from several perspectives: educational background, gender, compensation, and firm performance. We use a propensity score matching approach to ensure comparability between internally promoted and externally hired CEOs. The observed covariates for the matching algorithm include firm size, CEO tenure, and industry sector.

We find that external CEOs are significantly more likely to have received their undergraduate degree from an elite institution, majored in a STEM discipline, and earned an MBA credential. They earn higher total compensation (with a higher proportion of equity-linked performance pay) but do not outperform in terms of the ROA or Tobin’s Q metrics. Gender does not appear to play a distinguishing role in the internal versus external hiring choice. We also do not detect significant differences in firm performance outcomes associated with educational pedigree, a STEM education, or an MBA credential, whether the CEO is internally promoted or hired externally.

Our paper contributes by providing novel evidence on the impact of educational background on external CEO hiring decisions. Our findings carry implications for testing hypotheses stemming from signaling theory and exploring the significant role of social networks associated with elite educational institutions. Also, the finding that externally appointed CEOs do not outperform their internally promoted counterparts may be noteworthy for corporate boards' hiring committees, especially when reviewing candidates who are edge cases.

This study aims to investigate some individual factors that may positively/negatively impact upon the willingness to use AI-assisted hiring procedures (AI-WtU). Specifically, the authors contribute to the ongoing discussion by testing the specific role of individuals’ personality traits and their attitude toward technology acceptance.

Data have been collected from a cohort of workers (n = 157) to explore their individual level of AI-WtU, their personality traits and level of technology acceptance, along with a series of control variables including age, gender, education, employment status, knowledge and previous experience of AI-assisted hiring.

The results obtained show the significant role played by a specific personality trait –conscientiousness – and technology acceptance in shaping the level of AI-WtU. Importantly, technology acceptance also mediates the relationship between AI-WtU and conscientiousness, thus suggesting that conscientious people may be more willing to engage in AI-assisted practices, as they see technologies as means of improving reliability and efficiency. Further, the study also shows that previous experience with AI-assisted hiring in the role of job applicants has a negative effect on AI-WtU, suggesting a prevailing negative experience with such tools, and the consequent urge for their improvement.

This study, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, is the first to test the potential role of personality traits in shaping employees AI-WtU and to provide a comprehensive understanding of the issue by additionally testing the joint effect of technology acceptance, age, gender, education, employment status and knowledge and previous experience of AI-assisted hiring in shaping individual AI-WtU.

The purposes of this paper are to delve into the “liability of foreignness” among immigrants and to explore factors that may enhance or moderate such liability while obtaining jobs in host countries. We explore the competition for jobs in a host country among foreign-born individuals from various backgrounds and local residents, by examining such factors as their human capital, as well as, for the foreign-born, their duration of residence in the host country.

Applying configurational theorizing, we propose that the presence of specific human capital can help reduce the challenges associated with the “liability of foreignness” for migrants who have shorter durations of stay in the host country, and, to a lesser extent, for female migrants. Our study draws upon extensive career data spanning several decades and involving 249 employees within a Danish multinational enterprise.

We find that specific human capital helps established immigrants in general, although female immigrants are more vulnerable. We furthermore find a strong “gender liability” in the industry even for local females, including returnees in the host countries. Our findings suggest that for immigrants, including returnees, career building requires a mix of right human capital and tenure in the host country, and that career building is especially challenging for female immigrants.

While the concept of “liability of foreignness” – focussing on discrimination faced by immigrants in the labour market – has been brought to the fore, a notable gap exists in empirical research pertaining to studies aiming at disentangling potential means to overcome such liability, as well as in studies seeking to explore this issue from a stance of gendered experience.

The French higher education system has experienced reforms since the 2000s that gradually emphasized the executive power of universities and the centralization of decision-making. This culminated with the excellence initiatives (Idex) that concentrated 7.7 billion euros on only nine institutions to create “world-class” universities and made their leaders responsible for the local allocation of this substantial endowment. The universities’ executives had four years to complete changes in governance in order to see their institution permanently awarded the title and the funding of Idex. The hiring process is one of the elements that this policy impacted the most within these universities, enabling leaders to create new kinds of positions and control the hiring process. However, by looking at the hiring practices within three different Idex, we will show that collegiality did not disappear but rather it evolved: in the three cases, the closest colleagues have been marginalized but decision-making remained collective and in the hands of academics chosen by the university executives. Variations in the intensity of this evolution could be observed according to two dimensions. First, the scientific reputation of the university: the higher it is, the less collegiality is transformed. Second, the level of external pressures: the less collegial universities have relaxed their hiring practices after the evaluation that permanently granted them the label of Idex.

Research indicates that inconsistent gender norm presentations are met with backlash, which is particularly damaging to women. With social media use in selection rising, it is important to understand if this remains consistent for job applicants on social media.

In two experiments, this study investigates hiring managers' reactions to job applicant (in)consistent gender norm-based communication on Facebook (n = 197) and YouTube (n = 203). Participants located in the United States were asked to review social media materials, reported perceptions of task and social attraction, and make hiring recommendations.

Inconsistent with work on backlash in face-to-face settings, results demonstrated that masculine communication styles on social media may be detrimental to job seekers, and this was more pronounced for male job seekers. Feminine presentation styles had more favorable results.

The findings challenge the long-held understanding that men have more leeway to behave in agentic ways in job seeking contexts. While this may remain true in face-to-face settings, these findings suggest that social media, lacking media richness, may be a context in which males experience backlash for agentic behavior.

The research offers a novel perspective investigating traditional gender expectations in the digital realm, paving the way for a more comprehensive understanding of gender in employment contexts. This study contributes to the growing body of research on online behavior and expands understanding of how hiring managers react to gender norms in the era of social media.