Quality & Quantity

, Volume 45, Issue 1, pp 59–73 | Cite as

Diversification strategy, CEO management style and firm performance: an application of Heckman’s two-stage method

  • Almudena Martínez-Campillo
  • Roberto Fernández-Gago
Article

Abstract

This paper aims to explore whether CEOs’ management style as agents or as stewards, which depends on their psychological and situational characteristics, moderates the effect of the diversification strategy on firm performance. After applying Heckman’s two-stage method to control econometrically for endogeneity bias in empirical work, results demonstrate that the relationship between diversification and profitability varies significantly depending on the management style of the diversifying CEO.

Keywords

Diversification strategy CEO management style Firm performance Heckman’s two-stage method 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aggarwal R., Samwick A.: Why do managers diversify their firms? Agency reconsidered. J. Financ. 58, 71–118 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Carte T., Russell C.: In pursuit of moderation: nine common errors and their solutions. MIS Q. 27, 1–23 (2003)Google Scholar
  3. Chrisman J., Chua J., Kellermanns F., Chang E.: Are family managers agents or stewards? An exploratory study in privately held family firms. J. Bus. Res. 60, 1030–1038 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Datta D., Rajagopalan N., Rasheed A.: Diversification and performance: critical review and future directions. J. Manag. Stud. 28, 529–558 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Davis J., Schoorman F., Donaldson L.: Toward a Stewardship theory of management. Acad. Manag. Rev. 22, 20–48 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Davis J., Schoorman F., Donaldson L.: Toward a Stewardship theory of management. In: Clarke, T. (eds) Theories of Corporate Governance, pp. 118–134. Routledge, Oxon (2004)Google Scholar
  7. Denis D., Denis D., Sarin A.: Agency problems, equity ownership and corporate diversification. J. Financ. 52, 135–160 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Denis D., Denis D., Sarin A.: Agency theory and the influence of equity ownership structure on corporate diversification strategies. Strateg. Manag. J. 20, 1071–1076 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fox M., Hamilton R.: Ownership and diversification: agency theory or Stewardship theory. J. Manag. Stud. 31, 69–81 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. French J., Raven B.: The bases of social power. In: Cartwright, D. (eds) Studies in Social Power, pp. 150–167. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (1959)Google Scholar
  11. Greene W.H: Análisis Econométrico. Prentice Hall Iberia, Madrid (1999)Google Scholar
  12. Heckman J.: Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econométrica 47, 153–161 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hernández M.: Promoting stewardship behavior in organizations: a leadership model. J. Bus. Ethics 80, 121–128 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hofstede G.: Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in World-Relates Values. Sage, Beverly Hills (1980)Google Scholar
  15. Hoskisson R., Hitt M.: Antecedents and performance. Outcomes of diversification: a review and critique of theoretical perspectives. J. Manag. 16, 461–509 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hoskisson R., Hitt M., Wan W., Yiu D.: Theory and research in strategic management: swings of a pendulum. J. Manag. 25, 417–456 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jacquemin A., Berry C.: Entropy measure of diversification and corporate growth. J. Ind. Econ. 27, 359–370 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jensen M., Meckling W.: Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. J. Financ. Econ. 3, 305–360 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jensen M., Zajac E.: Corporate elites and corporate strategy. Strateg. Manag. J. 25, 507–524 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kim H., Hoskisson R.E., Wan W.P.: Power dependence, diversification and performance in keiretsu member firms. Strateg. Manag. J. 25, 613–636 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lane P.J., Cannella A.A., Lubatkin M.H.: Agency problems as antecedents to unrelated mergers and diversification: Amihud y Lev reconsidered. Strateg. Manag. J. 19, 555–578 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lawler E.: High Involvement Management. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco (1986)Google Scholar
  23. Leontiades M.: Managing the Unmanageable: Strategies for Success Within the Conglomerate. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1986)Google Scholar
  24. Lubatkin M., Lane P., Collin S., Very P.: An embeddedness framing of governance and opportunism: towards a cross-nationally accommodating theory of agency. J. Organ. Behav. 28, 43–58 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Maslow A.: Motivation and Personality. Harper & Row, New York (1954)Google Scholar
  26. Mayer R., Schoorman F.: Predicting participation and production outcomes through a two-dimensional model of organizational commitment. Acad. Manag. J. 35, 671–684 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Miller D.: Firms’ technological resources and the performance effects of diversification: a longitudinal study. Strateg. Manag. J. 25, 1097–1119 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Miller D.J.: Technological diversity, related diversification and firm performance. Strateg. Manag. J. 27, 601–619 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Palepu K.: Diversification strategy, profit performance and the entropy measure. Strateg. Manag. J. 6, 239–255 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Palich L., Cardinal L., Miller C.: Curvilinearity in the diversification–performance linkage: an examination of over three decades of research. Strateg. Manag. J. 21, 155–174 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Papadakis V.M.: Do CEOs shape the process of making strategic decisions? Evidence from Greece. Man. Dec. 44, 367–394 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ramaswamy K., Li M., Veliyath R.: Variations in ownership behavior and propensity to diversify: a study of the Indian corporate context. Strateg. Manag. J. 23, 345–358 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Simanavičienė Z., Dagilienė L.: The benefits of business combinations. Transform. Bus. Econ. 2, 105–120 (2003)Google Scholar
  34. Singh M., Nejadmalayeri A., Mathur I.: Performance impact of business group affiliation: an analysis of the diversification-performance link in a developing economy. J. Bus. Res. 60, 339–347 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Villalonga B.: Diversification discount or premium? New evidence from the business information tracking series. J. Financ. 59, 475–502 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wasserman N.: Stewards, agents and the founder discount: executive compensation in new ventures. Acad. Manag. J. 49, 960–976 (2006)Google Scholar
  37. Wooldridge J.: Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. MIT Press, Cambridge (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Almudena Martínez-Campillo
    • 1
  • Roberto Fernández-Gago
    • 1
  1. 1.Facultad de CC. Económicas y EmpresarialesUniversity of LeónLeónSpain

Personalised recommendations