Knowledge that Transforms

This study investigates the relationship between strong firm environmental performance and board characteristics that capture boards’ monitoring and resource provision abilities during an era when the natural environment and the related strategic opportunities have increased in importance. The authors relate the proxy for strong environmental performance to board characteristics that represent boards’ monitoring role (i.e., independence, CEO-chair duality, concentration of directors appointed after the CEO, and director shareholding) and resource provision role (i.e., board size, directors on multiple boards, CEOs of other firms on the board, lawyers on the board, and director tenure). The authors provide evidence consistent with both theories of board roles. Specifically, consistent with their agency theory–driven predictions, the authors find evidence of higher environmental performance in firms with higher board independence and lower concentration of directors appointed after the CEO on the board of directors. Consistent with resource dependence theory, they show that environmental performance is higher in firms that have larger boards, larger representation of active CEOs on the board, and more legal experts on the board. Their findings are generally robust to a number of sensitivity analyses. These findings have implications for managers, firms, shareholders, and regulators who act on behalf of shareholders, if they are interested in influencing environmental performance.

Since the 1991 publication of the first Journal of Management special issue devoted to resource-based inquiry, resource-based theory (RBT) has evolved from a nascent, upstart perspective to one of the most prominent and powerful theories for understanding organizations. Indeed, 20 years after that landmark issue, RBT appears to have reached maturity as a theory. One implication of this maturity is that RBT lies at a critical juncture, one that will be followed either by revitalization of the theory or by its decline. In this introductory article, the authors provide a brief overview of the contributions provided by the commentaries and articles contained in this third Journal of Management special issue on RBT. These contributions center on five themes: interlinkages with other perspectives, processes of resource acquisition and development, the micro-foundations of RBT, RBT and sustainability, and method and measurement issues. Their view is that the commentaries and articles collectively offer a foundation for extending RBT in meaningful new directions and steering clear of decline. They also offer their thoughts about some key opportunities within each of the themes for further revitalizing research involving the RBT.

Signaling theory is useful for describing behavior when two parties (individuals or organizations) have access to different information. Typically, one party, the sender, must choose whether and how to communicate (or signal) that information, and the other party, the receiver, must choose how to interpret the signal. Accordingly, signaling theory holds a prominent position in a variety of management literatures, including strategic management, entrepreneurship, and human resource management. While the use of signaling theory has gained momentum in recent years, its central tenets have become blurred as it has been applied to organizational concerns. The authors, therefore, provide a concise synthesis of the theory and its key concepts, review its use in the management literature, and put forward directions for future research that will encourage scholars to use signaling theory in new ways and to develop more complex formulations and nuanced variations of the theory.

This article reviews the underemployment literature, providing a comprehensive integrative overview of underemployment research. Underemployment, which occurs when a worker is employed in a job that is inferior by some standard, is linked to a broad range of negative outcomes for employees. This article builds on Feldman’s 1996 model of underemployment and identifies relevant theoretical perspectives and dimensions of underemployment, as well as reviewing the empirical research on the relationships between underemployment’s antecedents and outcomes. Suggestions for future research are offered, with particular attention on career implications, the effects of underemployment on an employee’s identity, and the importance of “choice” for underemployed employees. Finally, recommendations for improving the methodological rigor of underemployment research are provided.

In this article, the authors develop and test a theory on the effect of institutional investor heterogeneity on CEO pay. Their theory predicts that institutional investors’ incentives and capabilities to monitor CEO pay are determined by the fiduciary responsibilities, conflicts of interest, and information asymmetry that institutional investors face. Their theory suggests, in contrast to previous literature, that public pension funds and mutual funds exert different effects on CEO pay at their portfolio firms because they do not have the same monitoring incentives and capabilities. Using a longitudinal sample of S&P 1500 firms for the years 1998 to 2002, the authors find that public pension fund ownership is more negatively—indeed, oppositely—associated with both the level of CEO pay and CEO pay-for-performance sensitivity than mutual fund ownership. Their findings suggest that (a) researchers’ use of institutional investor classifications that do not distinguish public pension fund ownership and mutual fund ownership can be misleading and (b) while CEO pay critics have called for pay plans that are in line with the “less pay and more sensitivity” principle, this may be an ineffective goal to pursue.

The authors revisit Hart’s natural-resource-based view (NRBV) of the firm and summarize progress that has been made in testing elements of that theory and reevaluate the NRBV in light of a number of important developments that have emerged in recent years in both the resource-based view literature and in research on sustainable enterprise. First, the authors consider how the NRBV can both benefit from recent work in dynamic capabilities and can itself inform such work. Second, they review recent research in the areas of clean technology and business at the base of the pyramid and suggest how the NRBV can help inform research on the resources and capabilities needed to enter and succeed in these domains.

Servant leadership is positioned as a new field of research for leadership scholars. This review deals with the historical background of servant leadership, its key characteristics, the available measurement tools, and the results of relevant studies that have been conducted so far. An overall conceptual model of servant leadership is presented. It is argued that leaders who combine their motivation to lead with a need to serve display servant leadership. Personal characteristics and culture are positioned alongside the motivational dimension. Servant leadership is demonstrated by empowering and developing people; by expressing humility, authenticity, interpersonal acceptance, and stewardship; and by providing direction. A high-quality dyadic relationship, trust, and fairness are expected to be the most important mediating processes to encourage self-actualization, positive job attitudes, performance, and a stronger organizational focus on sustainability and corporate social responsibility.

Equity theory emphasizes making distinctions between individual contributions to teams and then recognizing these with differentiations in rewards. However, social interdependence theory emphasizes maximizing cooperation in teams by compensating members equally. Several researchers have advocated offsetting the limitations of individually based incentives and group-based incentives by mixing the two. However, the authors contend that this puts team members in a social dilemma, leading them to focus on the individually based component. The authors find that in comparison to group-based only incentives, mixed individual/group incentives lead team members to perform faster but less accurately and focus on their own taskwork to the detriment of backing up behavior.

From the origins of resource-based theory, scholars have emphasized the importance of human capital as a source of sustained competitive advantage, and recently there has been great interest in gaining a better understanding of the micro-foundations of strategic capabilities. Along these lines, there is little doubt that heterogeneous human capital is often a critical underlying mechanism for capabilities. Here, the authors explore how individual-level phenomena underpin isolating mechanisms that sustain human capital–based advantages but also create management dilemmas that must be resolved in order to create value. The solutions to these challenges cannot be found purely in generic human resource policies that reflect best practices. These are not designed to mitigate idiosyncratic dilemmas that arise from the very attributes that hinder imitation (e.g., specificity, social complexity, and causal ambiguity). The authors drill down deeper to identify individual- and firm-level components that interact to grant some firms unique capabilities in attracting, retaining, and motivating human capital. This cospecialization of idiosyncratic individuals and organizational systems may be among the most powerful isolating mechanism. The authors conclude by outlining a research agenda for exploring cross-level components of human capital–based advantages.

One of the important events in the development of resource-based theory (RBT) over the past decade has been the call for establishing micro-foundations for RBT. However, the micro-foundations project is still largely an unfulfilled promise. This article clarifies the nature of the micro-foundations project, discusses what it may add in terms of additional explanatory leverage, and specifically addresses micro-foundations in the context of knowledge-based value creation, a key theme in RBT.