picture from Internet
解析文章首发于唧唧堂网站www.jijitang.com
解析作者 | 唧唧堂心理学小组：
Anunnaki
；审校编辑 |
悠悠 糖糖
1、生态系统中互补者的参与：亚马逊Kindle出版商电子书供应的一项研究
摘要
研究小结：
在生态系统中，当互补者与受益于网络效应的伙伴形成关系时，价值创造和占有之间的紧张关系就会出现。在共同创造价值的同时，这些关系加强了网络效应，由此增加了合作伙伴获取价值的能力。我们认为，互补性企业的产品供应战略可以从与合作伙伴的关系处受益；同时，其通过与其他合作伙伴保持作为外部选择的关系来保证互补性企业的议价能力。我们研究了图书出版商在亚马逊Kindle电子书和印刷图书生态系统中的产品组合。我们的研究结果阐明了大型出版商具体产品的供应决策，这些决策更多地保护了纸质书的生态系统，而对Kindle的成功影响较小。本项研究增进了关于组织间关系、平台生态系统以及数字管理创新的理论贡献。
管理（实践）综述：
出版商是如何应对亚马逊的？本文比较了图书出版商在亚马逊Kindle数字平台和实体印刷渠道上提供的产品。我们发现，出版商提供高需求的产品，如Kindle上的电子书，从而节省物流成本。然而，相对于小型出版商，大型出版商在产品决策上对Kindle的支持较少，比如拒绝提供一些最能产生收入的书籍。这样的决定既能限制Kindle对消费者的吸引力，又能保持纸质渠道作为外部选择的经济可行性。这些研究发现提高了我们对企业如何利用其产品组合从数字技术效率中获益，并保持其相对与数字平台的议价能力的理解。
Abstract
Research Summary: In ecosystems, tensions between value creation and appropriation can arise when complementors form relationships with a partner that benefits from network effects. While creating value collectively, these relationships strengthen the network effects, which increase the partner's ability to appropriate value. We posit that complementors strategize their product offerings to benefit from the relationship with the partner while preserving bargaining power by keeping relationships with other partners as outside options. We examine book publishers' product portfolios in the Amazon Kindle e-book and the printed book ecosystems. Our results illuminate specific product offering decisions by large publishers that are more protective of the printed book ecosystem and less conducive to Kindle's success. This research adds to the literature on interorganizational relationships, platform ecosystems, and managing digital innovations.
Managerial Summary: How do book publishers deal with Amazon? This paper compares book publishers' product offerings on Amazon's Kindle digital platform and in the physical print channel. We find that publishers offer high demand products as e-books on Kindle to benefit from logistics savings. Yet, relative to small publishers, large publishers product decisions that support Kindle less, such as withholding some of their greatest revenue generating books. Such decisions could both limit Kindle's attractiveness to the consumers and preserve the economic viability of the print channel as an outside option. These findings improve our understanding of how companies can leverage their product portfolios to both benefit from digital technology efficiencies and maintain their bargaining power vis-à-vis digital platforms.
论文原文：Wang Richard D, Miller C D, 2020, “Complementors’ engagement in an ecosystem: A study of publishers’ e-book offerings on Amazon Kindle”, Strategy Management Journal, 2020, 41(1):3-26. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3076
2、改变的种子：
当前结构如何决定重组的类型和时间
摘要
研究小结：
本文发展了组织结构如果影响未来重组的理论。作者强调，一家公司的结构不仅塑造了（组织）决策权的轨迹（即，中央集权和分权），而且还决定了组织内部员工之间的互动结构。作者发展了微观层面的理论，将公司的结构与员工之间的互动联系起来——例如，企业重组后对员工调整其行为所耗费时间的影响。该理论预测，某些结构比其他结构更有可能促使组织重组提前发生。本文手工收集了关于手机制造业独有的重组数据来检验并寻找本文提出的理论的方向性支持。
管理（实践）综述：
本文研究了公司当前的结构对其重组决策的影响，公司重组决策被定义为增加和/或减少组织业务部门。本文认为，将公司员工分组到这些业务单元的方式可能会影响后续重组的类型和时间；原因是相似的（相对的是不同）的员工背景应该需要更少（相对的更多）的时间去实现有效协作。本文使用1983-2008年期间手机制造公司的重组数据，文章为提出的理论找到了方向性支持。这一结果意味着经理们可能需要密切关注任何将公司转向异质交互结构的重组——因为它的实施可能需要额外的时间。
Abstract
Research Summary: This article develops theory on how an organization's structure affects future reorganizations. I highlight that a firm's structure shapes not only the locus of decision-making power (i.e., centralization and decentralization) but also the employees' interaction structure. I develop microlevel theory that connects the firm's structure to the interactions among its employees—for instance, its influence on the time employees spend adjusting their behavior after a reorganization. This theory predicts that some structures are more likely than others to promote a reorganization to occur sooner. I use a unique, hand-collected data set of reorganizations in the cell-phone manufacturing industry to test and find directional support for this theory.
Managerial Summary: I examine the effect of a firm's current structure on its corporate reorganization decisions, which are defined as the addition and/or removal of business units. I posit that the way employees are grouped into those business units may affect both the type and timing of subsequent reorganizations; the reason is that employees of similar (resp. different) backgrounds should need less (resp. more) time to achieve effective collaboration. Using data on the reorganizations of cell-phone manufacturing firms during 1983–2008, I find directional support for the theory. This result implies that managers may need to watch closely any reorganization that shifts the firm toward more heterogeneous interaction structures—because its implementation may well require additional time.
论文原文：Raveendran M, 2020, “Seeds of change: How current structure shapes the type and timing of reorganizations”, Strategy Management Journal, 41(1):27-54.
https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3084
Picture from internet
3、样样通，样样精通：
新远程知识集成（new distant knowledge integration）下多元化的角色
摘要
研究小结：
我们认为，个体层次多样化的作用是一种机制，通过这种机制，熟练的研究人员可以进行成功的探索——识别和探索外部领域的新知识。为了接近一个理想的实验，本文采取了（a）一个匹配的过程和（b）作为运动传感技术的Microsoft Kinect进行研究。本文评估了Kinect及其新知识对一组没有运动传感经验的能力匹配、多样性的研究人员的影响，发现多样化的研究人员比专业化的研究人员更能成功地进行探索。本文还研究了个人偏好和职业激励作为多样化的前提的作用，研究发现文化、年龄和知识自由与成功多样化的倾向呈正相关关系。
管理（实践）综述：
那些以研发为核心以获得竞争优势的组织在雇佣研究人员时面临着重大的权衡。具体而言，知识的不同组合产生最有影响力的发现。然而，随着知识积累导致研究人员专攻更为（狭）窄的领域，协调这种组合越来越需要更大的团队。组织应该如何达到最佳的平衡？本文的研究论证并证实，多样化的研究人员、经常被批评缺乏深度的个人，比具有类似能力的专业研究人员更有可能整合其专业领域之外的新知识，从而创造有影响力的创新（成果）。因此，在制定雇佣最佳类型专家的战略时，那些希望通过拓展知识边界来创造竞争优势的组织应该仔细考虑专业人员和多样化研究人员之间的微妙权衡。
Abstract
Research Summary: We consider the role of individual-level diversification as a mechanism through which skilled researchers engage in successful exploration—recognizing and integrating new knowledge external to one's domains of expertise. To approach an ideal experiment, we (a) employ a matching procedure and (b) exploit the unexpected adoption of Microsoft Kinect as a motion-sensing technology in research. We evaluate the impact of Kinect and its embodiment of new knowledge on a set of ability-matched, diversity-varying researchers without prior experience in motion-sensing and find that diversified researchers explore more successfully than their more specialized peers. We also examine the role of personal preferences and professional incentives as antecedents of diversification and find that culture, age and intellectual freedom are positively associated with the propensity to diversify successfully.
Managerial Summary: Organizations where R&D is core to driving competitive advantage face important tradeoffs when hiring researchers. Specifically, diverse combinations of knowledge generate the most impactful discoveries. Yet, coordinating such combinations increasingly requires larger teams as knowledge accumulation causes researchers to specialize in narrower areas. How should organizations achieve the best balance? We argue and show evidence that diversified researchers, individuals routinely criticized for their lack of knowledge depth, are more likely than specialized researchers of similar ability to integrate new knowledge from beyond their domains of expertise to create impactful innovations. Therefore, organizations aiming to create competitive advantage by pushing the boundaries of knowledge should carefully consider the nuanced tradeoffs between specialized and diversified researchers when strategizing about hiring the optimal types of expertise.
论文原文：Nagle F, Teodoridis F., 2020, “Jack of all trades and master of knowledge: The role of diversification in new distant knowledge integration”, Strategic Management Journal, 41(1):55-85.
https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3091
4、影响投资决策中的范畴认知（categorical cognition）和结果效率
摘要
研究小结：
新兴的“影响投资”实践优化了财务和社会结果，因此其承诺支持同时追求财务和社会目标的混合型组织的发展。然而，我们认为，影响投资决策的行为因素可能会限制其结果效率（outcome efficiency）。在投资组织分配任务中，为了反映影响投资决策的基本特征，我们发现，在一系列情景中，个人系统性地未能有效实现财务和社会结果的投资组合，从而浪费了价值创造的机会。本文的研究进一步表明，在互联网和人的实验中，结果低效率与“范畴认知”相关；取消投资选项的类别标签可以提高效率。
管理（实践）综述：
“影响投资”方法承诺鼓励对追求财务和社会目标相互结合的混合型组织进行更多的财务投资。我们通过实验证明了这种方法的一个挑战：人们很难识别同时优化财务和社会结果的投资组合。这在一定程度上是由于“范畴认知”（categorical cognition）：一种以已知类别而非实际产出来看待投资的自然倾向。文章的实验表明，从投资选项中去掉“营利性公司”、“慈善机构”和“社会企业”的标签——因此，增加结果效率的分配就变得更加难以明确地考虑它们。由此，本文表明，要充分发挥影响力投资的潜力，投资者必须超越将商业和慈善视为两个独立领域的传统思维。
Abstract
Research Summary: The emerging practice of “impact investing” optimizes both financial and social outcomes, and thus promises to support hybrid organizations that simultaneously pursue financial and social goals. We argue, however, that impact investing decisions may be prone to behavioral factors that limit their outcome efficiency. In a portfolio allocation task designed to reflect the essential features of an impact investing decision, we find across a range of scenarios that individuals systematically fail to choose investment portfolios that achieve financial and social outcomes efficiently and thereby waste opportunities for value creation. We further show in online and in person experiments that outcome inefficiency is related to “categorical cognition”: suppression of categorical labels on investment options increases efficiency.
Managerial Summary: The “impact investing” approach promises to encourage greater financial investments in hybrid organizations that pursue a combination of financial and social goals. We experimentally demonstrate a challenge of this approach: People struggle to identify portfolios of investments that simultaneously optimize across financial and social outcomes. This is partly due to “categorical cognition”: a natural tendency to view investments in terms of known categories rather than the actual outcomes they produce. Our experiments show that removing the labels “for-profit company,” “charity,” and “social enterprise” from investment options—thus making it more difficult to think about them categorically—increases outcome-efficient allocations. We therefore show that realizing the full potential of impact investing will require that investors transcend conventional thinking about business and charity as separate domains.
论文原文：Lee M, Adbi A, Singh J, 2020, “Categorical cognition and outcome efficiency in impact investing decisions”, Strategy Management Journal, 41(1):86-107.https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3096
Picture from internet
5、董事会的政治意识形态和财务违规下的CEO解雇
摘要
研究小结：
为什么一些董事会拒绝对那些有财务不当行为的CEO采取严肃的行动？过去的研究将人们的注意力引向了不当行为的前因，而在很大程度上忽略了这个问题。对该问题的调查研究相对较少，通常都围绕代理观点而展开。相反，本文的这项研究调查了董事会成员秉持的信念和价值观如何影响他们在财务不当行为后的行为。聚焦于政治意识形态，本文认为出于意识形态归因和威胁管理倾向，政治上保守的董事会比自由派董事会更有可能解雇CEO。利用S&P1500家涉及财务不当行为的公司数据，本文的实证研究支持了我们的观点，并且用额外的稳健性检验，分析解决了样本选择下的内生性问题和替代性解释。
管理（实践）综述：
尽管有利益相关者、公众、媒体和政策制定者的批评，许多公司没有对那些有财务不当行为的CEO采取严肃的行动。过去的研究表明，这是由于董事会结构（例如缺乏董事会独立性）或围绕不当行为的情况（例如不当行为的严重程度）。本文认为，由董事会成员持有的政治意识形态，一套信仰和价值观，影响公司是否因财务不当行为而解雇首席执行官。通过对涉及财务不当行为的标准普尔1500家公司的调查研究发现，政治上保守的董事会更容易解雇他们的CEO，这为董事会成员的意识形态如何影响他们采取的关键行动提供了现实的启示。
Abstract
Research Summary: Why do some boards refuse to take serious action against CEOs who have committed financial misconduct? Past work has directed attention to the antecedents of misconduct while largely overlooking this question. The relatively few studies that examined it have typically revolved around agency arguments. This study instead examines how the beliefs and values held by board members can influence their actions following financial misconduct. Focusing on political ideology, we argue that politically conservative boards are more likely to respond by dismissing the CEO than are liberal boards as the result of ideo-attribution and threat management tendencies. Using data from S&P 1500 firms that were involved with financial misconduct, we find support for our arguments while addressing sample-induced endogeneity and alternative explanations with additional analyses.
Managerial Summary: Despite criticism from stakeholders, the public, media, and policy makers, many firms do not take serious action against CEOs who have committed financial misconduct. Past studies have suggested that this is due to board structures (e.g., lack of board independence) or situations surrounding misconduct (e.g., severity of misconduct). We propose that political ideology, a set of beliefs and values, held by board members, influences whether firms dismiss their CEOs following financial misconduct. Examining S&P 1500 firms that were involved in financial misconduct, we find that politically conservative boards tend to dismiss their CEOs more often than do liberal boards, offering practical implications for how the ideology of board members can influence critical actions that they take.
picture from the paper
论文原文：Park UD, Boeker W, Gomulya D, 2020, “Political ideology of the board and CEO dismissal following financial misconduct”, Strategy Management Journal, 41(1):108-123. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3088
6、投资者经验和创新绩效：
外部合作的中介效应
摘要
研究小结：
通过研究两种主要投资者类型：公司投资者和家族投资者，本文增进了关于所有权-创新关系的文献。我们采用了组织环境扫描作为一个新的视角，从而来理解这些投资者的能力如何影响企业的外部合作和创新绩效。研究发现，具有广泛投资经验的企业投资者通过增加企业参与的外部合作活动数量，加强了企业的环境扫描，提高了创新绩效。相反，家族投资者广泛的投资经验往往与外部合作的数量和企业创新负相关。我们的结果表明，一旦我们考虑投资者的类型和他们的能力，投资者不仅通过监督作用，而且通过影响公司的创新能力来影响公司的创新。
管理（实践）综述：
我们调查了两种不同类型的投资者，公司和家族如何影响台湾上市高科技企业的创新绩效。研究发现，拥有广泛投资经验的主要企业投资者的存在，通过增加企业参与的外部合作活动，提高了企业的创新绩效。企业投资者似乎增强了组织的环境扫描能力，进而提高了它们的创新绩效。相反，家族投资者广泛的投资经验与创新绩效呈负相关，因为家族投资者参与的外部合作活动较少。当家族投资者拥有广泛的投资经验时，家族企业对控制和社会凝聚力的关注似乎减少了对外部知识获取的重视。综上所述，本文的结果表明，投资者的投资经验的广度影响了企业的创新能力。
Abstract
Research Summary: We add to the literature examining the ownership-innovation relationship by examining two major investor types: corporate investors and family investors. We use organizational environmental scanning as a new perspective to understand how these investors' capabilities influence firms' external cooperation and innovation performance. We found that corporate investors with broad investment experience strengthen a firm's environmental scanning, enhancing innovation performance by increasing the number of external cooperation activities the firm engages in. Conversely, family investors' broad investment experience tend to be negatively associated with the number of external cooperation and with firm innovation. Our results show that investors influence firm innovation not simply through a monitoring role but also by affecting firms' abilities to innovate, once we factor in the types of investors and their capabilities.
Managerial Summary: We investigate how two different types of investors, corporate and family, influence the innovation performance of publicly-traded high-tech firms in Taiwan. We found that the presence of major corporate investors with broad investment experience enhances firms' innovation performance by increasing external cooperation activities firms engage in. Corporate investors appear to enhance organizations' environmental scanning abilities and, in turn, their innovation performance. Conversely, family investors' broad investment experience is negatively associated with firm innovation because such firms engage in fewer external cooperation activities. A focus on control and social cohesion in family firms appears to decrease the emphasis on external knowledge acquisition when family investors have broad investment experience. In summary, our results show that investors' breadth of investment experience influences firms' ability to innovate.
论文原文：Boh WF, Huang C-J, WU A, 2020, “Investor experience and innovation performance: The mediating role of external cooperation”, Strategy Management Journal, 41(1):124-151. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3089
Picture from internet
7、成为跨国公司有好处吗？跨国性与绩效关系评估的大样本跨国复制研究
摘要
研究小结：
成为跨国公司有好处吗？尽管已经有几十年的实证研究，我们目前仍然无法清楚明白。我们对Lu和Beamish(2004)以及Berry和Kaul(2016)的研究进行了大样本的跨国复制，利用2009-2016年889,865个公司年度面板数据来检验多国性与绩效之间的关系是否呈S形分布。进一步，本文采用了两阶段最小二乘固定效应模型，该模型了考虑了样本的内生性问题。利用64个国家的32,835家跨国公司的样本，本文没有发现S型关系的证据；我们也没有在单一国家的情况下发现上述情形。我们的研究结果表明，没有证据表明多国性对公司绩效产生任何影响。因此，我们有必要对多国性与绩效之间的关系进行更深入的研究，以便从理论和实证的角度进一步理解这种跨国多样性与绩效之间的关系。
管理（实践）综述：
我们重复了两项研究，考察了公司跨国多样性与其绩效之间的关系。Lu和Beamish(2004)在一组日本公司样本中发现了S型关系的证据——随着公司的海外扩张，业绩先下降，然后上升，随后再次下降；而Berry和Kaul(2016)在美国的一组跨国公司样本中，并没有发现上述现象。我们基于100个国家，2009年至2016年的来自加州近25万家企业的样本数据，进行了同样的测试，研究结果发现并没有存在上述的S型关系或者任何跨国多样性的影响的证据。由此，本文的研究为Berry和Kaul(2016)所证明的观点增加了实质性的证据，并且进一步强调有必要关注背景差异对多国性绩效关系的影响。
