In this article, we build on recent attempts to theorize about the evolution of boards of directors by juxtaposing firms’ strategies to gain, maintain, and repair legitimacy onto their life cycle to examine how board characteristics change – both symbolically and substantively – to reflect their firm’s evolving legitimating strategy. In doing so, we develop insights contributing to our understanding of the mechanisms underpinning the evolving structure and composition of boards of directors. We suggest that boards fulfill an important role ingrained in the firm’s legitimacy in addition to, and intertwined with, their substantive contribution to the firm’s performance at each life cycle stage. We also address firms’ real ability to effect change in their board as a function of the factors that pertain to each stage of life cycle. We conclude by expounding the implications of this novel framework for future research and managerial practice.

We analyze the effects of four different types of firm legitimacy – managerial, technological, local community legitimacy and business press endorsement – on the choice of alliance governance structure in partnerships with newly public biotechnology firms. We expand current research to differentiate between non-equity, minority equity and joint venture alliance structures. We find that initial public offering of stock (IPO) firms with higher levels of managerial legitimacy and local community legitimacy are more likely to enter into joint ventures than minority equity alliances and non-equity alliances. IPO firms with higher technological legitimacy and business press endorsement are more likely to use a less hierarchical governance structure.