Search

In this article, we develop, and empirically test, a moderated mediation model of the effects of flexible leave on employees' organizational attachment. Drawing on a social exchange framework and signaling theory, we explore how the material and non‐material nature of exchange between the employer and employee shapes their relationship. First, we show that the relationship between the availability of flexible leave and organizational attachment is shaped by two competing mediators, perceived organizational support (POS) and perceived flexibility stigma. Second, we delineate between availability and use of the policy, to show how the effect of POS is enhanced and perceived flexibility stigma reduced, with use. Our findings demonstrate that the relationship between the availability of flexible leave and organizational attachment is complex, but is enhanced through use of flexible leave. We contribute toward HRM scholarship about the relationship between employees' experience of HR practices and their corresponding impact on employees' subsequent behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To authenticate to the full-text of this article, please visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00897.x Byline: Miguel Meuleman (1), Andy Lockett (2), Sophie Manigart (3), Mike Wright (2) Abstract: abstract By combining insights from relational network theory and agency theory we identify the boundary conditions to the embeddedness approach to partner selection decisions in interfirm collaborations. Employing a longitudinal dataset comprising the investment syndicates for the population of UK management buyouts between 1993 and 2003, we find that relational embeddedness is less important for selecting partners when agency risks are low, allowing firms to expand their networks. Furthermore, reputational capital may act as a partial substitute for relational embeddedness, again permitting firms to expand their networks. Our findings enhance understanding of the boundary conditions associated with the relational network approach to partner selections and network behaviour. Author Affiliation: (1)Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School; (2)Nottingham University Business School; (3)Ghent University Article note: Mike Wright, Centre for Management Buy-out Research, Nottingham University Business School, Jubilee Campus, Wollaton Road, Nottingham NG8 1BB, UK (mike.wright@nottingham.ac.uk).

To authenticate to the full-text of this article, please visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5957.2009.02124.x Byline: Miguel Meuleman (1), Mike Wright (1), Sophie Manigart (1), Andy Lockett (1) Keywords: private equity; syndication; agency theory; leveraged buyouts; venture capital Abstract: Abstract: Syndicates are a form of inter-firm alliance in which two or more private equity firms invest together in an investee firm and share a joint pay-off, and are an enduring feature of the leveraged buyout (LBO) and private equity industry. This study examines the relationship between syndication and agency costs at the investor-investee level, and the extent to which the reputation and the network position of the lead investor mediate this relationship. We examine this relationship using a sample of 1,122 buyout investments by 80 private equity companies in the UK between 1993 and 2006. Our findings show that where agency costs are highest, and hence ex-post monitoring by the lead investor is more important, syndication is less likely to occur. The negative relationship between agency costs and syndication, however, is alleviated by the reputation and network position of the lead investor firm. Author Affiliation: (1)The first author is from Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School and Centre for Management Buy-out Research Nottingham University Business School. The second author is from the Centre for Management Buy-out Research Nottingham University Business School and RSM, Erasmus University, Rotterdam. The third author is from Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School and Universiteit Gent, Belgium. The fourth author is from the Centre for Management Buy-out Research Nottingham University Business School. They would like to thank the editor and the anonymous referee for very helpful comments. Thanks to Barclays Private Equity for financial support. Article History: (Paper received April 2007, revised version accepted December 2008) Article note: (*) Address for correspondence: Mike Wright, Centre for Management Buy-out Research, Nottingham University Business School, Jubilee Campus, Wollaton Road, Nottingham NG8 1BB, UK., e-mail: mike.wright@nottingham.ac.uk

A study was conducted to evaluate the development of the resource-based view (RBV) of the firm from Birger Wernerfelt's own perspective. The metamorphosis of RBV in relation to the stage of development of the RBV, the assumptions that underlie the RBV, and the relationship between the RBV and other theories of the firm, is also examined.

Financial theory, access to deal flow, selection, and monitoring skills are used to explain syndication in venture capital firms in six European countries. In contrast with U.S. findings, portfolio management [...]

This article examines the dynamics of entrepreneurial teams as they evolve through the different stages of a spin-out process. Using a unique, hand-collected set of data covering all team members [...]

Introduction For decades, scholars have argued that the nature of exchange relationships between economic actors is important in shaping behaviors and outcomes (Burt, 1992; Coleman, 1990; Granovetter, 1973). One exchange [...]

In this article we strive to reconcile equivocal findings about the effects of top leader succession and prior leadership experience on postsuccession organizational performance. In doing so, we draw on insights from theories of human capital, learning, and asymmetric information to better understand the conditions under which leaders increase or decrease postsuccession performance. Employing a sample of 119 newly appointed leaders in the English Premier League (1996-2010), we find the following results. First, relating to the succession event, outside leaders that directly move between leadership positions are associated with higher postsuccession performance while the departure of a prior leader to a leadership position in another organization has a negative effect on postsuccession performance. Second, relating to prior leadership experience, leaders with domestic top leader experience are associated with lower postsuccession performance, while leaders with foreign top leader experience are associated with higher postsuccession performance. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This exploratory study provides a review of the neglected area of entrepreneurial founder team turnover. A novel distinction is made between entrepreneurial founder team member entry and team member exit. [...]

How does a social actor in a disadvantaged position achieve field level change? Using a longitudinal case of 'Capability' Brown, an individual rising from humble origins to shape and refine the British landscape, we examine how an actor's unfolding efforts to move from a social position at the periphery of a field, to a social position at the centre of a field, may present them with opportunities to influence field level change. In doing so, we employ Bourdieu's Theory of Practice, and unexplored notion of 'position taking'. We argue that an actor's tactics to shape change, and position taking to enhance social position, should be considered in conjunction with one-another, and that position taking strategies may be viewed as a core component of the work undertaken by social actors in trying to influence field level change. Further, we suggest that tensions between an agent's accumulated capital and the social position typically afforded to their role in the field, may lead to efforts to 'take' or 'create' new positions, providing opportunities to influence the developing institution, with symbolic capital playing a pivotal role. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite growing interest in rhetorical analysis by management scholars, the study of enthymemes or arguments‐in‐use, arguably the mainstay of rhetoric, has been scarce. We argue that enthymeme analysis holds promise in enabling researchers to access agents' shared beliefs, in turn shedding light on organizational processes. We draw from two key studies of enthymeme analysis; one interpretivist and one objectivist, to propose a mixed methods approach that combines the situationally‐specific, grounded insights of the former, with the confirmation, population validity aspects of the latter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]