Give it to us straight (most of the time): Top managers’ use of concrete language and its effect on investor reactions

Research Summary : Building on the communications and linguistics literatures, we explore the language attributes managers use in interactions with investors and the subsequent reactions of investors. Specifically, we hypothesize that top managers’ use of concrete language attributes in communication with investors broadly associates with positive investor reactions. We further posit that this relationship will be moderated by the level of firm risk. Our results support our hypotheses and, thus, offer important insights to the impression management literature. First, subtle elements of managerial communication can have significant impression management consequences. More specifically, language concreteness is a key language attribute that generally induces positive investor responses. Finally, the effectiveness of language concreteness is conditional on the informational environment of the firm. Managerial Summary : How can managers communicate in a way that presents the firm more positively or reduces the negativity associated with perceived firm risks? Our findings indicate that choosing appropriate persuasive language features in interactions with investors can help a firm manage its impressions. Specifically, we find that top managers’ use of concrete language that provides details and specific information in communication with investors, in general, garners positive investor reactions. Further, the effectiveness of top managers’ use of concrete language depends on investor concerns. More specifically, we find that when a firm is seen as having a riskier profile, using concrete language helps induce a more positive investor response; while when a firm is seen as low risk, using abstract language may be more beneficial.     

Exploring firm characteristics that differentiate leaders from followers in industry merger waves: a competitive dynamics perspective

Research in strategic management has shown that the timing of firm participation in a merger wave matters, as early movers have been shown to outperform later ones. However, while the consequences of the timing of action within a merger wave have been assessed, the causes that drive these timing effects remain unknown. We draw on the competitive dynamics perspective to investigate firm‐level factors that influence the large‐scale strategic behavior of leading or following within industry merger waves. We develop hypotheses based on the competitive dynamics argument that the awareness‐motivation‐capability of firms will influence the timing of competitive action. Consistent with this perspective, we show that a firm's strategic orientation, its structure, and its resource base influence the timing of firm entry in merger waves. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A Cognitive Model of CEO Dismissal: Understanding the Influence of Board Perceptions, Attributions and Efficacy Beliefs

abstract    Extant literature that examines the role of boards in the CEO dismissal process has focused on the impact of board composition. However, it has rarely considered the influence of sense making and interpretation on CEO dismissal. This paper draws on the strategic change literature, which demonstrates a link between cognitions and action, to develop a three-stage framework in which we articulate how sense making (stage 1) and interpretation (stage 2) impact the decision to dismiss a CEO (stage 3). More specifically, the board's perception of performance, its attributions of performance and efficacy assessment of the CEO, and the board's composition impact the decision to dismiss the CEO. The resulting model illuminates the domain of board cognitions and board composition within CEO dismissal decisions and facilitates future empirical research.     

High‐Reputation Firms and Their Differential Acquisition Behaviors

Research summary: E merging reputation research suggests that high‐reputation firms will act to maintain their reputations in the face of high expectations. Yet, this research remains unclear on how high‐reputation firms do so. We advance this research by exploring three questions related to high‐reputation firms' differential acquisition behaviors: Do high‐reputation firms make more acquisitions than similar firms without this distinction? What kind of acquisitions do they make? How do investors react to high‐reputation firms' differential acquisition behaviors? We find that high‐reputation firms make more acquisitions and more unrelated acquisitions than other firms. Yet, we also find that investors bid down high‐reputation firms' stock more than other firms' in response to acquisition announcements, suggesting that investors are skeptical of how high‐reputation firms maintain their reputations . Managerial summary: W e know that high‐reputation firms wish to maintain their elite standing in the face of high‐market expectations, but we know little about how they do so. We explore this puzzle by investigating how reputation maintenance influences high‐reputation firms' acquisition behaviors. We classify high‐reputation firms are those firms that make Fortune's M ost A dmired annual list, and we find that high‐reputation firms make more acquisitions and more unrelated ones than other firms. Surprisingly, we also find that the market tends to react negatively to these acquisitions. Thus, managers may want to reconsider their strategy of making acquisitions as a means to maintain their firms' high reputations . Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The effects of board human and social capital on investor reactions to new CEO selection

This study extends work on independent directors to examine the influence of their human capital and social capital on investor reactions to the board's CEO selection decision. We predict that human capital, as represented by the board's CEO experience and industry experience, and social capital, as represented by directors' co‐working experience on the board and external directorship ties to other corporate boards, will influence the stock market reactions to new CEO appointments. In a sample of 208 new CEO appointment events in U.S. manufacturing firms between 1999 and 2003, we found that the stock market reacted favorably to the appointments made by boards with higher levels of human and social capital. We also found that the effect of internal social capital was stronger when the new CEO was an insider rather than an outsider. The implications of the results for director selection and CEO succession are discussed. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.