Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The impact of management power on digital transformation

  • Published:
Asia Pacific Journal of Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Digital transformation is crucial for companies to stay competitive in the modern business landscape. However, many organizations face obstacles such as organizational inertia, lack of unified transformation cognition, and weak top leadership. In this context, this study explores the impact of management power on digital transformation, based on the approach-inhibition theory of power. The study focuses on Chinese listed companies in Shanghai and Shenzhen A-share manufacturing industries from 2010 to 2020. The study reveals that concentrated equity weakens management’s power stability, constrains their residual control, suppresses power, and undermines the effect of management’s power level on driving corporate digital transformation. Furthermore, the study finds that supervision mechanisms have a positive impact on management power. Specifically, the external audit system proves to be an effective regulatory mechanism, while the independent director system appears somewhat formalistic and lacks effectiveness in promoting digital transformation. This study contributes to the micro-foundations of corporate-level behavior, deepening our understanding of management power and providing guidance for digital transformation practices in corporations. By shedding light on the role of management power in digital transformation, this study highlights the need for companies to cultivate strong and stable leadership, ensure equity distribution, and establish effective supervision mechanisms to facilitate successful digital transformation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abell, P., Felin, T., & Foss, N. (2008). Building micro-foundations for the routines, capabilities, and performance links. Managerial and Decision Economics, 29(6), 489–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abou-El-Sood, H. (2021). Board gender diversity, power, and bank risk taking. International Review of Financial Analysis, 75, 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amihud, Y., & Lev, B. (1981). Risk reduction as a managerial motive for conglomerate mergers. The Bell Journal of Economics, 12(2), 605–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amit, R., & Han, X. (2017). Value creation through novel resource configurations in a digitally enabled world. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 11(3), 228–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2006). Power, optimism, and risk-taking. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36(4), 511–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bidwell, M. J., & Keller, J. (2012). With great power comes great risk taking: A model of CEO power and risk taking. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, 1, 12302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blagoeva, R. R., Mom, T. J., Jansen, J. J., & George, G. (2020). Problem-solving or self-enhancement? A power perspective on how CEOs affect R&D search in the face of inconsistent feedback. Academy of Management Journal, 63(2), 332–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, B. K., Haynes, K. T., & Zona, F. (2010). Dimensions of CEO-board relations. Journal of Management Studies, 48(8), 1892–1923.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradbury, M., Jia, J., & Li, Z. T. (2022). Corporate social responsibility committees and the use of corporate social responsibility assurance services. Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics, 18(2), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, M. A., Pollock, T. G., & Leary, M. M. (2003). Testing a model of reasoned risk-taking: Governance, the experience of principals and agents, and global strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 24(9), 803–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cetindamar, D., Abedin, B., & Shirahada, K. (2021). The role of employees in digital transformation: A preliminary study on how employees’ digital literacy impacts use of digital technologies. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2021.3087724

  • Chen, H.-L. (2014). Board capital, CEO power and R&D investment in electronics firms. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 22, 422–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y. T., Li, J., & Zhang, J. W. (2022). Digitalisation, data-driven dynamic capabilities and responsible innovation: An empirical study of SMEs in China. Asia Pacific Journal of Management. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-022-09845-6

  • Child, J. (1997). Strategic choice in the analysis of action, structure, organizations and environment: Retrospect and Prospect. Organization Studies, 18(1), 43–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cucculelli, M., & Ermini, B. (2013). Risk attitude, product innovation, and firm growth. Evidence from Italian manufacturing firms. Economics Letters, 118(2), 275–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cvetkovich, G. (1978). Cognitive accommodation, language, and social responsibility. Social Psychology, 41(2), 149–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Massis, A., Frattini, F., & Lichtenthaler, U. (2012). Research on technological innovation in family firms. Family Business Review, 26(1), 10–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demb, A., & Neubauer, F.-F. (1992). The corporate board: Confronting the paradoxes. Long Range Planning, 25(3), 9–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deng, M., Zheng, M., & Guinote, A. (2018). When does power trigger approach motivation? Threats and the role of perceived control in the power domain. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 12, 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M., Furr, N. R., & Bingham, C. B. (2010). CROSSROADS—Microfoundations of performance: Balancing efficiency and flexibility in dynamic environments. Organization Science, 21(6), 1263–1273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fang, H., Wang, Y. M., & Sun, C. (2021). CEO power and international speed of Chinese firms - the mediating effect of TMT risk attention. Management Review, 9, 260–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez-Feijoo, B., Romero, S., & Ruiz, S. (2017). Financial auditor and sustainability reporting: Does it matter? Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 25(3), 209–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkelstein, S. (1992). Power in top management teams: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 35(3), 505–538.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Firk, S., Gehrke, Y., Hanelt, A., & Wolff, M. (2022). Top management team characteristics and digital innovation: Exploring digital knowledge and TMT interfaces. Long Range Planning, 55(3), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisch, J. E. (2018). Governance by contract: The implications for corporate bylaws. California Law Review, 106(2), 373–409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guo, F. Q. (2022). The institusional paradox, defect and solution of independent director in China: Reflections on the wave of resignation of independent directors caused by the "Kangmei pharmaceutical case". Academic Forum, 1, 61–73.

  • Guo, H., Xu, E., & Jacobs, M. (2014). Managerial political ties and firm performance during institutional transitions: An analysis of mediating mechanisms. Journal of Business Research, 67(2), 116–127.

  • Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. The Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 193–206.

  • Hanelt, A., Bohnsack, R., Marz, D., & Antunes, C. (2020). A systematic review of the literature on digital transformation: Insights and implications for strategy and organizational change. Journal of Management Studies., 58(5), 1159–1197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, M., & Raviv, A. (1990). Capital structure and the information role of debt. The Journal of Finance, 45(2), 321–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hess, T., Matt, C., Benlian, A., & Wiesböck, F. (2016). Options for formulating a digital transformation strategy. MIS Quarterly Executive, 15, 123–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiemer, J., & Abele, A. E. (2012). High power=motivation? Low power=situation? The impact of power, power stability and power motivation on risk-taking. Personality and Individual Differences, 53(4), 486–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, A. J., Cannella, A. A., & Paetzold, R. L. (2000). The resource dependence role of corporate directors: Strategic adaptation of board composition in response to environmental change. Journal of Management Studies, 37, 235–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, J. L. Y., Wu, A., & Xu, S. X. (2011). Corporate governance and returns on information technology investment: Evidence from an emerging market. Strategic Management Journal, 32(6), 595–623.

  • Hrebiniak, L. G., & Joyce, W. F. (1985). Organizational adaptation: Strategic choice and environmental determinism. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30(3), 336–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jafari-Sadeghi, V., Garcia-Perez, A., Candelo, E., & Couturier, J. (2021). Exploring the impact of digital transformation on technology entrepreneurship and technological market expansion: The role of technology readiness, exploration and exploitation. Journal of Business Research, 124, 100–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ju, X. S., Lo, D., & Yu, Y. H. (2013). Financing constraints, working capital management, and the persistence of firm innovation. Economic Research Journal, 1, 4–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karahanna, E., & Preston, D. S. (2013). The effect of social capital of the relationship between the CIO and top management team on firm performance. Journal of Management Information Systems, 30(1), 15–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karimi, J., & Walter, Z. (2015). The role of dynamic capabilities in responding to digital disruption: A factor-based study of the newspaper industry. Journal of Management Information Systems, 32(1), 39–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keltner, D. J., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Anderson, C. (2003). Power, approach, and inhibition. Psychological Review, 110(2), 265–284.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, J. S., & Tetlock, P. E. (1999). Accounting for the effects of accountability. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 255–275.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lewellyn, K. B., & Judge, W. Q. (2016). Focusing on upsides and downplaying downsides: CEO power, stock options, and strategic risk taking. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, 1, 10829.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewellyn, K. B., & Muller-Kahle, M. I. (2012). CEO power and risk taking: Evidence from the subprime lending industry. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 20(3), 289–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, J., Chen, L., Yi, J., Mao, J., & Liao, J. (2019). Ecosystem-specific advantages in international digital commerce. Journal of International Business Studies., 50(9), 1448–1463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Z., & Lin, S. (2019). Determinants and consequences of voluntary switches to Chinese auditors in Hong Kong. Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics, 15(3), 1–19.

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Y., Wang, W., Lu, H., & Yuan, P. (2021). The divergent effects of employees’ sense of power on constructive and defensive voice behavior: A cross-level moderated mediation model. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 39, 1341–1366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, S. (2022). Digital finance development and the digital transformation of enterprises: Based on the perspective of financing constraint and innovation drive. Journal of Mathematics., 2022, 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magee, J. C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2008). Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 351–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maner, J. K. (2017). Dominance and prestige: A tale of two hierarchies. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(6), 526–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nuryaman. (2015). The influence of intellectual capital on the Firm’s value with the financial performance as intervening variable. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 211, 292–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pan, Y., Xie, Y. X., & Pan, J. P. (2020). The study of initial coin offerings: From the perspective of firm lifespan. Journal of Financial Research, 6, 133–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quan, S. F., Wu, S. N., & Wen, F. (2010). Management power, private income and compensation rigging. Economic Research Journal, 45(11), 73–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rippa, P., & Secundo, G. (2018). Digital academic entrepreneurship: The potential of digital technologies on academic entrepreneurship. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 146: 900–911.

  • Sarwar, Z., Gao, J. M., & Khan, A. (2023). Nexus of digital platforms, innovation capability, and strategic alignment to enhance innovation performance in the Asia Pacific region: A dynamic capability perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Management. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-023-09879-4

  • Schaerer, M., Kern, M., Berger, G., Medvec, V., & Swaab, R. I. (2018). The illusion of transparency in performance appraisals: When and why accuracy motivation explains unintentional feedback inflation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 144, 171–186.

  • Siegel, D. S. (2014). Responsible leadership. Academy of Management Perspectives, 28, 221–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh, A., Klarner, P., & Hess, T. (2020). How do chief digital officers pursue digital transformation activities? The role of organization design parameters. Long Range Planning, 53(3), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sligte, D. J., de Dreu, C. K. W., & Nijstad, B. A. (2011). Power, stability of power, and creativity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(5), 891–897.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soto Setzke, D., Riasanow, T., Böhm, M., & Krcmar, H. (2021). Pathways to digital service innovation: The role of digital transformation strategies in established organizations. Information Systems Frontiers. 25(3): 1017–1037. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-021-10112-0

  • Stulz, R. (1988). Managerial control of voting rights. Journal of Financial Economics, 20, 25–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabrizi, B., Lam, E., Girard, K., & Irvin, V. (2019). Digital transformation is not about technology. Harvard Business Review, 13, 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tetlock, P. E., & Mitchell, G. (2009). Implicit Bias and accountability systems: What must organizations do to prevent discrimination? Research in Organizational Behavior, 29, 3–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verhoef, P. C., Broekhuizen, T., Bart, Y., Bhattacharya, A., Qi Dong, J., Fabian, N., & Haenlein, M. (2019). Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda. Journal of Business Research., 122, 889–901.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(2), 118–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warner, K. S. R., & Wäger, M. (2018). Building dynamic capabilities for digital transformation: An ongoing process of strategic renewal. Long Range Planning., 52(3), 326–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wessel, L., Baiyere, A., Ologeanu-Taddei, R., Cha, J., & Blegind Jensen, T. (2021). Unpacking the difference between digital transformation and IT-enabled organizational transformation. Journal of the Association for Information System, 22(1), 102–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, F., Hu, H. Z., Lin, H. Y., & Ren, X. Y. 2021. Enterpride digital transformation and capital market performance: Empirical evidence from stock liquidity. Journal of Management World, 7: 130–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xie, Z. M., & Yi, X. (2014). Ownership nature of ultimate controller and effect analysis of former government officials directors. Accounting Research, 9, 60–67+97.

  • Xu, L. P., Xin, Y., & Chen, G. M. (2006). Ownership concentration, outside blockholders, and operating performance: Evidence from China’s listed companies. Economic Research Journal, 1, 90–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ye, K. T., Zhu, J. G., Lu, Z. F., & Zhang, R. (2011). The independence of independent directors: Evidence from board voting behavior. Economic Research Journal, 1, 126–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeow, A., Soh, C., & Hansen, R. (2018). Aligning with new digital strategy: A dynamic capabilities approach. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 27(1), 43–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuan, C., Xiao, T. S., Geng, C. X., & Sheng, Y. (2021). Digital transformation and the division of labor between enterprises: Vertical specialization or vertical integration. China Industrial Economics, 9, 137–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Y. L., Wang, L., Xie, K., & Zhang, D. P. (2020). Integrating information technology and the real economy: A bricolage perspective in the Chinese context. China Industrial Economics, 11, 80–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zheng, G. J., Lin, D. J., & Zhang, F. D. (2013). Large shareholder financial distress, shelling out and the effectiveness of corporate governance - evidence from large shareholder financial data. Journal of Management World, 5, 157–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, Z. S., & Chen, H. W. (2008). Are useful of external auditing? -An empirical research based on view of resources allocation. Auditing Research, 6, 49–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, Z.J., Song, T.B., Huang, J.B., & Zhong, X. (2022). Executive cognitive structure, digital policy, and firms' digital transformation. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management,  71, 2579–2592. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2022.3190889

Download references

Funding

Major project of National Social Science Foundation of China (Granted: no. 18ZDA062).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Business Administration, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China

    Zhengang Zhang, Yushu Lu & Haojun Wang

  2. Guangzhou Digital Innovation Research Center, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China

    Zhengang Zhang

Authors
  1. Zhengang Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yushu Lu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Haojun Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Zhang Zhengang: Funding acquisition.

Lu Yushu: Methodology, writing and editing.

Wang Haojun: Data manipulation and review.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yushu Lu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, Z., Lu, Y. & Wang, H. The impact of management power on digital transformation. Asia Pac J Manag (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-024-09954-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-024-09954-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation