Journal of Management Research

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

The Influence of Cognitive Simplification Processes on the Ceo Succession Decision


Affiliations
1 Department of Management Andreas School of Business Barry University, Miami Shores, FL 33341
2 Department of Education Florida International University Miami, Florida 33181
3 Marist College Poughkeepsie, NY 12601
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


This paper addresses the inconsistencies in the outsider/insider CEO succession literature by conceptualizing the CEO succession decision as a complex strategic process. Our model integrates a set of variables which have not been previously considered in CEO succession literature but which, due to their demonstrated prevalence in strategic decision making may be important. Our propositions are predicated on the fact that selecting a new CEO is a complex and ambiguous process where decision makers, in order to navigate uncertainty, draw upon simplification processes, and thereby construct a simplified model of reality. Our paper identifies the influence of organizational memory, organization culture, media framing, recency effects, and operational reach on decision makers, and specifically their role in constructing simplification heuristics within the CEO selection process.

Keywords

CEO Succession, Heuristics, Scripts, Decision-making
User
Notifications

  • Allen, M. P., Panian, S. K. and Lotz, R. E. (1979), Managerial Succession and Organizational Performance: A Recalcitrant Problem Revisited, Administrative Science Quarterly, 24: 167-180.

  • Anderson, J. R. and Schooler, L. J. (1991), Reflections of the Environment in Memory, Psychological Science, 2: 396–408.

  • Anderson, P. A. (1983), Decision Making by Objection and the Cuban Missile Crisis, Administrative Science Quarterly, 28: 201-222.

  • Beatty, R. P. and Zajac, E. J. (1987), CEO Change and Firm Performance in Large Corporations, Succession Effects and Manager Shifts, Strategic Management Journal, 8: 305-317.

  • Bebechuk, L. and Roe, M. (1999), A Theory of Path Dependence in Corporate Ownership and Governance, Stanford Law Review, 52(1).

  • Beyer, J. M., Chattopadhyay, P., George, E., Glick, W. H., Ogilvie, D. T. and Pugliese, D. (1997), The Selective Perception of Managers Revisited, Academy of Management Journal, 40: 716-737.

  • Boeker, W. and Goodstein, J. (1993), Performance and Successor Choice: The Moderating Effects of Governance and Ownership, Academy of Management Journal, 36: 172-186.

  • Bommer, W. H. and Ellstrand, A. E. (1996), CEO Successor Choice, Its Antecedents and Influence on Subsequent Firm Performance, Group and Organization Management, 21: 105-123.

  • Borokhovich, K. A., Parrino, R. and Trapani, T. (1996), Outside Directors and CEO Selection, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 31: 337-355.

  • Brady, G. and Helmich, D. (1984), Executive Succession, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

  • Burson-Marsteller, (2006), 2005 CEO Tracking Survey, NY, NY.

  • Cannella, A. A., Jr and Lubatkin, M. (1993), Succession as a Socio-Political Process: Internal Impediments to Outsider Selection, Academy of Management Journal, 36: 763-793.

  • Carlson, R. (1961), Succession and Performance Among School Superintendents, Administrative Science Quarterly, 6: 210-227. Chung, K. H., Rogers, R. C., Lubatkin, M. and Owers, J. E. (1987), Do Insiders Make Better CEOs than Outsiders? The Academy of Management Executive, 1: 325-329.

  • Cohen, M. D. and Bacdayan, P. (1994), Organizational Routines are Stored as Procedural Memory: Evidence from a Laboratory Study, Organization Science, 5: 554-568.

  • Dalton, D. R. and Kesner, I. F. (1985), Organizational Performance as an Antecedent of Inside/Outside Chief Executive Succession: An Empirical Assessment, Academy of Management Journal, 28: 749-762.

  • Das, T. and Teng, K. (1999), Cognitive Biases and Strategic Decision Processes, An Integrative Perspective, Journal of Management Studies, 36(6): 757-779.

  • Datta, D. K. and Guthrie, J. P. (1994), Executive Succession: Organizational Antecedents of CEO Characteristics, Strategic Management Journal, 15: 569-577.

  • Dietrich, M. (1997), Strategic Lock-in as a Human Issue: The Role of Professional Orientation, in Magnusson, L., Ottosson, J. (Eds.), Evolutionary Economics and Path Dependence, pp. 79-97, Elgar, Cheltenham.

  • Dierickx, I., Cool, K. and Barney, J. B. (1989), Asset Stock Accumulation and Sustainability of Competitive, Management Science, 35: 1504.

  • Dixon, N. (1992), Organizational Learning: A Review of the Literature with Implications for HRD Professionals, Human Resource Development Quarterly, 3: 29-49.

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. and Zbaracki, M. J. (1992), Strategic Decision Making, Strategic Management Journal, 13: 17-37.

  • Entman, R. M. (1993), Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm, Journal of Communication, 43: 51-8.

  • Estes, W. K. (1957), Theory of Learning with Constant, Variable, or Contingent Probabilities of Reinforcement, Psychometrika, 22: 113–132.

  • Fellows, L. (2004), The Cognitive Neuroscience of Human Decision Making, A Review and Conceptual Framework, Behavioral and Cognitive Neuroscience Reviews, 3(3): 159-172.

  • Finkelstein, S. D. and D'Aveni, R. A. (1994), CEO Duality as a Double-edged Sword: How Boards of Directors Balance Entrenchment Avoidance and Unity of Command, Academy of Management Journal, 37: 1079-1108.

  • Finkelstein, S. and Hambrick, D. C. (1996), Strategic Leadership: Top Executives and their Effects on Organizations, New York, West.

  • Fredrickson, J. W. (1984), The Comprehensiveness of Strategic Decision Processes: Extension, Observations, Future Directions, Academy of Management Journal, 27: 445-466.

  • Friedman, S. D. and Saul, K. (1991), A Leader’s Wake: Organization Member Reactions to CEO Succession, Journal of Management, 17: 619-642.

  • Friedman, S. D. and Singh, H. (1989), CEO Succession and Stockholder Reaction: The Influence of O, Academy of Management Journal, 32: 718-744.

  • Garner, W. R. (1953), An Informational Analysis of Absolute Judgments of Loudness, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46: 373- 380.

  • Gouldner, A. W. (1954), The Problem of Succession in Bureaucracy, in Merton, R. (Ed.), Reader in Bureaucracy, pp. 339-351, Free Press, Glencoe, IL.

  • Granovetter, M. (1985), Economic Action and Social Structure: A Theory of Embeddedness, American Journal of Sociology, 91: 481-510.

  • Grusky, O. (1959), Role Conflict in Organizations: A Study of Prison Officials, Administrative Science Quarterly, 3: 463-467.

  • Gulati, R. (1995), Social Structure and Alliance Formation Patterns: A Longitudinal Analysis, Administrative Science Quarterly, 40: 619-652.

  • Hambrick, D., Geletkanycz, M. and Fredrickson, J. (1993), Top Executive Commitment to the Status Quo, Some Tests of its Determinants, Strategic Management Journal, 14: 401-418.

  • Harrison, J. R., Torres, D. L. and Kukalis, S. (1988), The Changing of the Guard: Turnover and Structural Change in the Top Management Positions, Administrative Science Quarterly, 33: 211-232.

  • Helmich, D. L. and Brown, W. B. (1972), Successor Type and Organizational Change in the Corporate Enterprise, Administrative Science Quarterly, 17: 371-381.

  • Helmich, D. L. (1975), Corporate Succession: An Examination, Academy of Management Journal, 3: 429-441.

  • Hickson, D. J. (1987), Decision-making at the Top of Organizations, Annual Review of Sociology, 13: 165-192.

  • Holland, M. K. and Lockhead, G. R. (1968), Sequential Effects in Absolute Judgments of Loudness, Perception and Psychophysics, 3: 409-414.

  • Hofer, C. W. (1980), Turnaround Strategies, The Journal of Business Strategy, 1(1): 19-31.

  • Huson, M., Malatesta, P. and Parrino, R. (2004), Managerial Succession and Firm Performance, Journal of Financial Economic, 74: 237–275.

  • Isenberg, D. J. (1986), Thinking and Managing: A Verbal Protocol Analysis of Managerial Problem Solving, Academy of Management Journal, 29(4): 775-789.

  • Iyengar, S. and Kinder, D. (1987), News that Matters, Television and American Opinion, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. James, D. and Soref, M. (1980), Profit Constraints on Managerial Autonomy: Managerial Theory and the Unmaking of the Corporate President, American Sociological Review, 46: l-18.

  • Jesteadt, W., Luce, R. D. and Green, D. M. (1977), Sequential Effects in Judgments of Loudness, Journal of Experimental Psychology, Human Perception and Performance, 3: 92–104.

  • Jones, M., Love, B. and Maddox, W. (2006), Recency Effects as a Eindow to Generalization, Separating Decisional and Perceptual Sequential Effects in Category Learning, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32(3): 316–332.

  • Kahneman, D., Slovic, P. and Tversky, A. (Eds.) (1982), Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases, Cambridge University Press, New York.

  • Karim, S. and Mitchell, W. (2000), Path-dependent and Path-breaking Change: Reconfiguring Business Resources Following Acquisitions in the US Medical Sector: 1978-1995, Strategic Management Journal, 21: 1061-1081.

  • Kesner, I. F. and Sebora, T. C. (1994), Executive Succession: Past, Present and Future, Journal of Management, 20(2): 327-372. Khanna, N. and Poulsen, A. B. (1995), Managers of Financially Distressed Firms: Villains or Scapegoats? The Journal of Finance, 50: 919-940.

  • Kilmann, R. H. (1984), Beyond the Quick Fix for Organizational Success, Managing, (2): 10.

  • Kim, S., Scheufele, D. and Shanahan, J. (2002), Think About it This Way: Attribute Agenda-setting Function of the Press and Public's Evaluation of a Local Issue, Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 79(1): 7.

  • Korte, R. (2003), Biases in Decision Making and Implications for Human Resource Development Advances, Developing Human Resources, 5(4): 440-457.

  • Kozielecki, J. (1981), Psychological Decision Theory, D. Reidel Co., Dordrecht, Holland.

  • Levine, M. (1971), Hypothesis Theory and Nonlearning Despite Ideal S-R-reinforcement Contingencies, Psychological Review, 78: 130-140.

  • Levitt, B. and March, J. G. (1996), Organizational Learning, in Cohen, M. D. and Sproull, L. S. (Eds.), Organizational Learning, pp. 516-540, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

  • Lewin, A. and Wolf, C. (1974), When the CEO Must Go, Advanced Management Journal, 39: 59-62.

  • Lorsch, J. and MacIver, E. (1989), Pawns or Potentiates: The Reality of America’s Corporate Boards, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.

  • Louis, M. R. (1980), Surprise and Sense Making: What Newcomers Experience in Entering Unfamiliar Organizational Settings, Administrative Science Quarterly, 25: 226-251.

  • Lucier, C., Schuyt, R. and Spiegel, E. (2002), CEO Succession 2002: Deliver or Depart, Strategy+Business. Downloaded on January 2, 2007, from http//www.strategy-business.com/press/16635507/21700.

  • Lyles, M. A. and Thomas, H. (1988), Strategic Problem Formulation: Biases and Assumptions Embedded in Alternative Decisionmaking Models, The Journal of Management Studies, 25: 131-145.

  • March, J. G. (1994), A Primer on Decision Making: How Decisions Happen, New York.

  • March, J. G. and Simon, H.A. (1958), Organizations, Wiley, New York.

  • March, J. G. and Shapira, Z. (1987), Managerial Perspectives on Risk and Risk-taking, Management Science, 33: 1404-1418.

  • McCombs, M. and Shaw, D. (1972), The Agenda Setting Function of Mass Media, Public Opinion Quarterly, 36: 176-187.

  • Medin, D. L. and Schaffer, M. M. (1978), Context Theory of Classification Learning, Psychological Review, 85: 207–238.

  • Miller, D. (1991), Stale in the Saddle: CEO Tenure and the Match between Organization and Environment, Management Science, 37: 34-52.

  • Miller, D. (1993), Some Organizational Consequences of CEO Succession, Academy of Management Journal, 36: 644-659.

  • Mintzberg, H., Raisinghani, D. and Theoret, A. (1976), The Structure of Unstructured Decision Processes, Administrative Science Quarterly, 21: 246-75.

  • Morgan, S. and Dennehy, R. F. (1997), The Power of Organizational Storytelling: A Management Development Perspective, The Journal of Management Development, 16: 494-501.

  • Nutt, P. C. (1984), Types of Organizational Decision Processes, Administrative Science Quarterly, 29: 414-450.

  • Nystrom, P. C. and Starbuck, W. H. (1984), To Avoid Organizational Crises, Unlearn, Organizational Dynamics, 12(4): 53-66.

  • Ocasio, W. (1994), Political Dynamics and the Circulation of Power: CEO Succession in US Industrial Corporations: 1960-1990. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(2): 285-312.

  • Osborn, R. N., Jauch, L. R., Martin, T. N. and Glueck, W. F. (1981), The Event of CEO Succession Performance and Environmental Conditions, Academy of Management Journal, 24: 183-191.

  • Ott, J. S. (1989), The Organizational Culture Perspective, The Dorsey Press, Chicago IL.

  • Pitcher, P., Chreim, S. and Kisfalvi, V. (2000), CEO Succession Research: Methodological Bridges Over Troubled Waters, Strategic Management Journal, 21: 625-648.

  • Pruitt, D. (1961), Informational Requirements in Making Decisions, American Journal of Psychology, 74: 433.

  • Reese, S. D. (2001), Prologue – Framing Public Life, A Bridging Model for Media Research, in Reese, Stephen D., Gandy, Oscar H. and Grant, August E. (Eds.), Framing Public Life, Perspectives on Media and our Understanding of the Social World, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.

  • Salancik, G. R. and Pfeffer, J. (1980), Effects of Ownership and Performance on Executive Tenure in US Corporations, Academy of Management Journal, 23: 653-664.

  • Sathe, V. (1985), Culture and Related Corporate Realities, Irwin, Homewood, IL.

  • Sathe, V. and Davidson, J. (2000), Toward a New Conceptualization of Culture Change, in Ashkanasy, N., Wilderom, C. and Peterson's, M. (Eds.), Handbook of Organizational Culture and Climate, pp. 37-54, Sage, Thousands Oaks, CA.

  • Schwartz, K. B. and Menon, K. (1985), Executive Succession in Failing Firms, Academy of Management Journal, 28: 680-686.

  • Schwenk, C. (1984), Simplification Processes in Strategic Decision-making, Strategic Management Journal, 5(2): 111-129.

  • Shen, W. and Cannella, A. (2003), Will Succession Planning Increase Shareholder Wealth? Evidence from Investor Reactions to Relay CEO Successions, Strategic Management Journal, 24(2): 191-198.

  • Shetty, Y. K. and Perry, N. S., Jr. (1976), Are Top Managers Transferable Across Companies? Business Horizons, 19: 23-28.

  • Simon, H. A. (1955), A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69: 99-118.

  • Starbuck, W. and Hedberg, B. (1977), Saving an Organization from a Stagnating Environment, in Thorelli, H. (Ed.), Strategy + Structure = Performance, pp. 249-258, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, Ind.

  • Sutcliffe, K. M. (1994), What Executives Notice: Accurate Perceptions in Top Management Teams, Academy of Management Journal, 37: 1360-1378.

  • Thomas, J. B. and McDaniel, R. R. Jr. (1990), Interpreting Strategic Issues, Effects of Strategy and the Information-processing Structure of Top Management Teams, Academy of Management Journal, 33: 286-306.

  • Tushman, M. L. and Romanelli, E. (1985), Organizational Evolution: A Metamorphosis Model of Convergence and Reorientation, in Staw, B. M. and Cummings, L. (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, pp. 171-222, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.

  • Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1974), Judgment Under Uncertainty, Heuristics and Biases, Science, 185: 1124-1131. Vancil, R. (1987), Passing the Baton, Harvard University Press, Boston, MA.

  • Warner, J. B., Watts, R. L. and Wruck, K. H. (1988), Stock Prices and Top Management Changes, Journal of Financial Economics, 20: 461-492.

  • Weick, K. (1985), Sources of Order in Underorganized Systems, Themes in Recent Organizational Theory, in Lincoln, Y. S. (Ed.), Organizational Theory and Inquiry, The Paradigm Revolution, Sage, Beverly Hills.

  • Wiersema, M. F. (1992), Strategic Consequences of Executive Succession within Diversified Firms, The Journal of Management Studies, 29: 73-94.

  • Yates, J. F., Jagacinski, C. M. and Faber, M. D. (1978), Evaluation of Partially Described Multiattribute Options, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 21: 240-251.

  • Zajac, E. J. (1990), CEO Selection, Succession, Compensation and Firm Performance: A Theoretical Integration and Empirical Analysis, Strategic Management Journal, 2: 217-230.

  • Zajac, E. J. and Bazerman, M. H. (1991), Blind Spots in Industry and Competitor Analysis: Implications of Interfirm (Mis)perceptions for Strategic Decisions, Academy of Management Review, 16: 37-56.

  • Zajac, F. J. and Westphal, J. D. (1996), Who Shall Succeed? How CEO/Board Preferences and Power Affect the Choice of New CEOs, Academy of Management Journal, 39: 64–90.

  • Zald, M. (1965), The Power and Functions of Boards of Directors: A Theoretical Synthesis, American Journal of Sociology, 75: 97- 111.


Abstract Views: 466

PDF Views: 1




  • The Influence of Cognitive Simplification Processes on the Ceo Succession Decision

Abstract Views: 466  |  PDF Views: 1

Authors

Seema Pissaris
Department of Management Andreas School of Business Barry University, Miami Shores, FL 33341
Marc Weinstein
Department of Education Florida International University Miami, Florida 33181
John Stephan
Marist College Poughkeepsie, NY 12601

Abstract


This paper addresses the inconsistencies in the outsider/insider CEO succession literature by conceptualizing the CEO succession decision as a complex strategic process. Our model integrates a set of variables which have not been previously considered in CEO succession literature but which, due to their demonstrated prevalence in strategic decision making may be important. Our propositions are predicated on the fact that selecting a new CEO is a complex and ambiguous process where decision makers, in order to navigate uncertainty, draw upon simplification processes, and thereby construct a simplified model of reality. Our paper identifies the influence of organizational memory, organization culture, media framing, recency effects, and operational reach on decision makers, and specifically their role in constructing simplification heuristics within the CEO selection process.

Keywords


CEO Succession, Heuristics, Scripts, Decision-making

References