In this study, we propose hierarchical inconsistency among family-member top leaders as a novel structural reason for nonfamily executives' high compensation in family firms. Hierarchical inconsistency among family-member top leaders is observed when the head in the formal business hierarchy is not ranked the highest among family-member executives and directors in the informal family hierarchy. We argue that this structure triggers contestations between the heads of the two hierarchies, adding complexity and challenges to nonfamily executives' jobs. Family firms with hierarchical inconsistency among family-member top leaders need to offer higher compensation to make up for the demanding features of these professional managers' work. The positive relationship between hierarchical inconsistency and nonfamily executives' compensation is weaker when the proportion of female family-member executives and directors is high and when the formal head's tenure is long. We use data from publicly listed family firms in China to test our arguments. Our study contributes to family business research by suggesting how the interplay between family relationships and formal organizational structures influences job features and compensation decisions.

Prior research on status has focused primarily on the cognitive perspective, exploring the effects of status and offering a limited understanding of the impact of positive status change and its emotional mechanisms. This study draws upon the two-facet model of pride to examine how positive status change influences the behaviors of new status holders. Specifically, we propose that when status differentiation is low, positive status change enhances new status holders' prosocial behavior through their authentic pride, while in cases of high status differentiation, it increases their self-interested behavior through their hubristic pride. To test our hypotheses, we conducted a series of studies, including a laboratory experiment, a scenario experiment, and a time-lagged multilevel and multisource field study. Our multilevel analyses of the data provided strong support for our hypotheses. Our findings shed light on when and why positive status change triggers different behaviors among new status holders, offering important insights into the emotional mechanisms that underlie the effects of status change.

The early months of the COVID pandemic prompted a flood of research aimed at illuminating all facets of the disease and its spread. Scholars sought to create and assess practical interventions that ranged from vaccines to government lockdown policies to workplace practices. To date, there are nearly a half-million publications on the pandemic, and more are in process.

As I read Zhang and Chen's (2024) perspective paper, I was impressed with the authors' flexibility moving into the medical field and the impact of their research. Moreover, I agreed wholeheartedly with their call to learn by working across fields and with their assessment of how differently management and healthcare scholarship is created, disseminated, and used. Yet I was quite stumped by the editor's request that I suggest some ‘urgent and pressing’ issues that might help management scholars achieve the kind of practical relevance of medical researchers.

Previous studies have found that media coverage of a firm's corporate social irresponsibility (CSiR) often delays or blocks the completion of a cross-border acquisition when the acquiror is a multinational enterprise (MNE) from an emerging market. Drawing from the attention-based view, we argue that the effects of Chinese MNEs’ CSiR on deal completion vary depending on several contextual factors, as these factors garner more attention by making the deals more salient to stakeholders. Using a sample of cross-border acquisitions by Chinese MNEs from 2013 to 2020, we find that CSiR media coverage per se does not decrease the likelihood of a deal's completion. However, consistent with attention-based arguments, we find that CSiR media coverage negatively affects the deal's completion when the acquirors are state-owned enterprises and when the target country has high institutional quality. Our findings enhance our understanding of the effects of CSiR on cross-border acquisitions by highlighting the moderating roles of contextual factors related to stakeholder attention. Thus, it is important for MNEs to recognize the boundary conditions that may influence the potential sanctions from local stakeholders. Based on these findings, this study contributes to the literature on CSiR, cross-border acquisitions, and stakeholder attention.

This article investigates the internationalization process of incubating, parenting, and eventually spinning-off overseas entrepreneurial ventures originating from emerging markets. In a comparative case study of Chinese high-tech firms, we leveraged multiple sources of data to reveal (1) how the exploitation of parent firms’ technological and platform resources enables them to initiate, support, and eventually profit from the international growth of foreign ventures that autonomously engage in the exploration of product and market innovations, and (2) how ambidextrous synergy was created through the continuous exchange, combination, and reconfiguration of knowledge and resources between parent firms and foreign ventures. These findings extend our understanding of how Chinese high-tech firms manage the learning process in overseas venturing. We draw implications of these findings for research and practice.

We examine how the central government's management of subnational governments' agency influences the smartness of the latter's industrial specialization choices. Based on smart industrial specialization theory and agency theory, we hypothesize how two central government tools governing subnational governments' agency – facilitating their organizational efficacy and promoting their officials to higher ranks – explain recent industrial specialization choices by China's 31 provincial governments. We find that provincial governments with greater organizational efficacy, measured by access to better-resourced local state-owned enterprises in focal industries, make smarter specialization policies. In addition, we show that provincial governments with greater numbers of officials previously promoted to the central government make, contrary to conventional wisdom, potentially less smart specialization policies. Our research extends smart specialization theory by explaining that central government tools governing subnational agency problems can have knock-on effects making subnational governments' industrial specialization choices smart or unsmart.

Although some organizations encourage employees to generate radical ideas by implementing stretch goals, the relationship between stretch goals and radical creativity is complicated. Unfortunately, existing research has not adequately addressed this issue. Therefore, we integrate signaling theory with creativity-related research and propose that the interaction between stretch goals and cognitive flexibility predicts employees' willingness to take risks, thereby influencing their engagement in radical creative activities and ultimately affecting their radical creativity. To test our hypotheses, we conduct two empirical studies. The results suggest that, for employees with high cognitive flexibility, stretch goals increase their willingness to assume risks, thus leading to improved engagement in radical creative activities and enhancing their radical creativity. Conversely, for employees with low cognitive flexibility, stretch goals decrease their willingness to take risks, which hampers their engagement in radical creative activities and their radical creativity. The theoretical contributions and practical implications of this study are also discussed.