SGM Seminar Series

Uncertainty, Capability Creation, and Market Entry in Nascent Industries: Diversifying versus New Firms

Charlotte Jacobs, Temple University
October 9, 2020
Extant research analyzing the determinants of firms’ market entry in nascent industries found that the match between a firm’s capability portfolio and the capabilities needed within the new business environment is an important predictor of entry. This research does not recognize however, that new and diversifying firms may pursue a different approach when building a capability portfolio for this new market. Moreover, extant literature abstracted away from the technological uncertainty that new and diversifying firms face when building this capability portfolio. In this study, I examine the different strategic approaches pursued by new and diversifying firms when building a capability portfolio in the light of uncertainty inherently present in nascent industries, and how these different approaches may determine their entry into a nascent industry. The results based on a novel longitudinal database of technology development and market entry in the photovoltaic cell industry show that among firms investing in the development of new capabilities, new firms are more likely to enter the market than diversifying firms. In addition, for diversifying firms the accumulated number of technical capabilities created predicts market entry, whereas for new firms the relevance of the new capability portfolio is a key predictor. These findings demonstrate that in pre-market entry studies, both the presence of diversifying and new firms, and their different strategic approach to capability building under uncertainty as well as the impact of these approaches on market entry should be recognized.
Research


First-Mover Advantages Versus First-Mover Benefits: What’s the Difference and Why Does It Matter?

Dr. Richard Makadok, Purdue University
October 23, 2020
We present a theoretical framework to address the inherent endogeneity problem in entry-timing research by distinguishing the concept of first-mover benefits (FMB) from first-mover advantages (FMA), the former being a counterfactual and (usually) unobserved pure treatment effect, and the latter being an actual observed combination of treatment and selection effects. They differ in the baseline to which the first mover’s performance is compared – either to the follower’s actual performance (for FMA) or to the first mover’s hypothetical performance if it had been a follower (for FMB). Our formal economic model analyzes this distinction, making predictions about biases arising from using FMA as a proxy to estimate FMB, and also about how FMA, FMB, and their difference are affected by inter-firm asymmetries in resources and information.


The Role of Social Identity and National Conflicts in International Joint Venture Failures

Dr. Ilgaz Arikan, Kent State University
October 30, 2020
There have been inconclusive findings pertinent to the causes of high failure rates of international joint ventures (IJVs). Even if IJV partners have had repeatedly satisfactory contractual relationships, the chances of safeguarding transactions with IJVs are slim. Our study sheds new light on the impacts of organizational members’ social identities on the longevity and success of IJVs. We utilize an embedded case study of one Western German and one Israeli company between which interfirm relationship evolves from market contracts to establishing an IJV in Eastern German. The unique context of this study is a natural experiment in which organizational members with clear ingroup and outgroup boundaries (e.g., national and subnational groups) are embedded in the developmental process of cooperative interfirm relationships shifting from formal contract to IJV. We argue that national groups confer distinctive value connotation on ingroup members whose ethnocentric attitudes and behaviors undermine hierarchical coordination. Therefore, within firm frictions inherent in individuals’ ethnocentrism yield adverse selection, moral hazard, cheating, and hold-up that generate coordination costs. Our observations also suggest that competition for power, group relative deprivation, symbolic threat, and historical animosity among national groups give rise to intergroup conflicts that impede relational cooperation. Positive intergroup contacts lacking optimal conditions can hardly resolve such conflicts. Our study extends our understanding of how social identities of IJV partners impact coordination and cooperation costs.


The pressure to go long: Analyst coverage and out-licensing decisions in the biopharmaceutical industry

Dr. Solon Moreira, Temple University
November 20, 2020
A central finding from research on analysts is that increased analyst scrutiny creates greater pressure on firms to deliver short-term earnings, often at the expense of longer-term innovative R&D projects. However, we have not yet considered that analysts in some industries might prefer growth strategies over choices to maximize short-term earnings. This paper fills this gap by examining the role of analyst scrutiny on firms’ strategic choices in a setting where firms are pressurized to focus on long-term growth opportunities. We study the bio-pharmaceutical industry where firms engage in highly uncertain and costly internal R&D to develop and commercialize the next “blockbuster” drug. We relate analyst pressures to a key strategic choice firms face: whether or not to depart from the internal “blockbuster” model and license out their technologies to other firms. We argue that greater analyst scrutiny decreases the likelihood that a firm demonstrates an intent to out-license, because it sends a negative signal to external stakeholders who are entrenched towards the internal blockbuster model. To explicate the mechanism underlying this argument, we undertake an inductive qualitative analysis of analyst reports covering, which reveals several strong reservations by analysts against the out-licensing model. Using a robust research design that accounts for the endogeneity of analyst coverage, we show that analyst pressures may lead to choices that are more aligned towards long-term and future earnings by pursuing inherently risky R&D projects in-house. These findings have important implications to the literature examining how financial analysts shape firm strategy and behavior.

Do Shareholders Acquiesce or Resist Female Board Nominees?

Dr. Corinne Post, Lehigh University
February 7, 2020
Research | Google Scholar


Dr. Neil Thompson, MIT
February 21, 2020
Research | Google Scholar | Web


Headquarters Economy: Managers, Mobility, and Migration

Dr. Myles Shaver, University of Minnesota
February 28, 2020
When people think of corporate headquarters two images generally come to mind. They picture engines of economic power and impressive infrastructure such as skyscrapers or glass-clad corporate campuses. Having immersed myself in the study of corporate headquarters, I see them as engines of corporate success and contributors to regional economic and social vitality. However, I no longer picture the physical infrastructure when I think about corporate headquarters.

When I look at corporate headquarters, my focus extends beyond the buildings, the offices, and the employee amenities. I am drawn to the essence of a corporate headquarters—the talent that utilizes this physical infrastructure. In particular, my focus turns to a company’s skilled, professional managerial and administrative workforce. When I view headquarters in this manner, I better comprehend how headquarters influence the companies that they guide and impact the regions in which they reside.

Take, for example, the senior management of a company headquartered in the region where I live—the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area. This group of men and women possess an impressive set of credentials. They are business professionals. They have all made investments in their human capital—many with graduate degrees from prestigious universities. Their prior work experience spans a diverse set of vibrant industries including pharmaceuticals, consumer packaged goods, medical devices, chemicals, publishing, industrial controls, animal nutrition, and agribusiness. And it is clear that they have been effective in guiding and managing their company. A look at the company’s performance shows that it doubled sales and tripled profits between 2006 and 2016. This is especially impressive in light of the economic climate over that time period.

What company is this? It is not a start-up or a mid-sized company. Many would not consider it to be “high-tech” or in an “industry of tomorrow”— although I am sure many within the company would rightly disagree. It is not even a publicly traded company. In fact, it is a cooperative.

Research | Google Scholar

Dr. Jeffrey Furman, Boston University
November 18, 2019
Research | Google Scholar


Dr. Prithwiraj Choudhari, Harvard
November 15, 2019
Research | Google Scholar


Dr. Arzi Adbi, INSEAD
December 6, 2019
ResearchGoogle Scholar

Dr. Phanish Puranam, INSEAD
March 12, 2019
Research | Google Scholar


Dr. Xavier Martin, Tilburg
March 15, 2019
Research | Google Scholar


Dr. Bernie Yeung, National University of Singapore
March 28, 2019
Research | Google Scholar


Dr. Carliss Baldwin, Harvard
April 12, 2019
Research | Google Scholar


Dr. Nick Argyres, Washington University in St. Louis
April 26, 2019
Research | Google 

Dr. Rudolf Sinkovics, University of Manchester
September 27, 2018
Research | Google Scholar | Web


Dr. Sarath Balachadndran, London Business School
September 28, 2018
Research | Google Scholar


Dr. Sali Li, University of South Carolina
October 4, 2018
Research | Google Scholar


Dr. Andrea Contigiani, Wharton
October 12, 2018
Google Scholar | Web


Dr. Solon Moreira, IESE
October 19, 2018
Google Scholar


Dr. Alvaro Cuevro-Cazurra, Northeastern
October 26, 2018
Research | Google Scholar | Web


Dr. Elena Vidal, CUNY
November 2, 2018
Research | Google Scholar


Dr. Minyuan Zhao, Wharton
November 9, 2018
Research | Google Scholar


Dr. Michael Leiblein, Ohio State
November 16, 2018
Research | Google Scholar


Dr. Wendy Smith, University of Delaware
November 30, 2018
Research | Google Scholar

Discontinuities, Competition, and Cooperation: Coopetitive Dynamics between Incumbents and Entrants

Dr. Frank T. Rothaermel, Georgia Institute of Technology
April 5, 2018

We advance an integrative model in which distinct types of technological discontinuities (core knowledge vs. complementary-asset) are combined with different appropriability regimes (strong vs. weak) to predict competitive and cooperative dynamics between incumbents and entrants. We posit that incumbents ally with entrants following a core-knowledge discontinuity when the appropriability regime is strong. When the appropriability regime is weak, incumbents are more likely to acquire entrants. We submit that the additional consideration of complementary-asset discontinuities reveals a more integrated theoretical model of competition and cooperation between incumbents and entrants. In particular, incumbents tend to cooperate among themselves following complementary-asset discontinuities, although we highlight theoretical nuances due to different appropriability regimes. We provide falsifiable propositions and introduce contingencies such as firm-level heterogeneity and time dynamics.

Speaker: Dr. Frank T. Rothaermel
The Russell and Nancy McDonough Chair
Professor & Sloan Industry Studies Fellow
Scheller College of Business
Georgia Institute of Technology
Research | Google Scholar | Web


The Influence of CEO Core Self-Evaluations on Firm Performance

Zeki Simsek, Clemson University
March 9, 2018

Despite growing interest in the role of executive confidence in firm outcomes, the question of whether and under what conditions a CEO’s level of core self-evaluations has an influence on firm performance remains unanswered. We argue that firms should benefit from having CEOs with high core self-evaluation (CSE), but only to the extent to which they have both the opportunity and the means to enact the behavioral manifestations of their level of CSE. We then test the model using a longitudinal, mixed-methods design and dataset. Following a survey of CEOs in 2005, we tracked the performance of 172 firms across macroeconomic shifts in the Irish economy from 2006 through 2010. The findings show that CEO CSE is positively associated with firm performance under conditions of macroeconomic buoyancy and abundant slack, but not under conditions of the opportunity and resource scarcity.

Speaker: Zeki Simsek
Professor, Gressette Chair of Business Strategy and Planning
Associate Editor, Academy of Management Journal
College of Business
Clemson University
Website: https://www.clemson.edu/business/about/profiles/ZSIMSEK
Email: ZSIMSEK@clemson.edu


You Worked at Google Too? The Influence of Centrality in Founder Affiliation Networks on the Attention and Financing of New Ventures

Laura Gasiorowski, Temple University
January 19, 2018

We extend the knowledge-based view to consider how centrality in founder affiliation networks impacts new venture knowledge acquisition and, subsequently, the attraction of external financing. Prior research has highlighted the importance of the structure and strength of entrepreneurs’ existing social ties for gaining access to resources and affecting venture outcomes. This research has largely excluded the networks of potential interorganizational ties that arise from founders’ prior affiliations. Affiliations consist of the languages, knowledge and social identity of those institutions. How can entrepreneurs use these shared understandings and tap into this resource to acquire knowledge? We address these gaps by building theory on the role of centrality in affiliation networks on the acquisition of knowledge and venture financing outcomes. To test our predictions, we use a novel dataset that exploits the random sorting of founding teams into cohorts, supplemented by qualitative interviews. We show how shared prior affiliations create network structures and how position in the network affects knowledge acquisition and outcomes. Our interviews shed light on the mechanisms and processes behind this relationship. Overall, this paper extends our understanding of entrepreneurial resource acquisition and how differences in knowledge access from affiliation ties affect venture outcomes.

Speaker: Laura Gasiorowski
6th year PhD student in Strategy
Fox School of Business
Temple University


International Organizations and Political Risk:
The case of multilateral development banks in infrastructure projects

Srividya Jandhyala, ESSEC Business School, Singapore
February 19, 2018

Firms in regulated industries face challenges of capturing value from an investment when subject to contentious ex-post renegotiation with governments. I examine how international intermediaries can offer operational and political assistance to lower the likelihood of project distress. In the context of private investment in infrastructure projects, I focus on the role played by Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs). Using a sample of 2406 private infrastructure projects in 49 developing countries from 1989 to 2009, I find that projects with MDB participation are less likely to be distressed. Empirical analyses suggest that MDB effectiveness may be driven by factors related to operational assistance rather than political assistance.

Speaker: Srividya Jandhyala
Associate Professor, Management Department, ESSEC Business School (Singapore)
Currently visiting at Princeton University
Website: http://www.essec.edu/en/staff/faculty/srividya-jandhyala/
Email: srividya.jandhyala@essec.edu


Can Reputation-based Platform Design Deter the Entry of New Complementors?

Tedi Skiti, Temple University
February 23, 2018

In this paper, we study the relationship between platform design and new complementor entry, an important factor of product innovation and indirect network effects for two-sided platforms. We hypothesize that a widely-used reputation-based platform design has two main effects. On the one hand, the platform design increases new complementor entry because it reduces search costs and uncertainty about consumer preferences. On the other hand, higher visibility for higher quality incumbent complementors functions as an entry barrier for new complementors. Our hypotheses are supported by an extensive proprietary dataset from a major sharing economy platform and an exogenous platform design change. We provide the first causal evidence that platform design and complementor heterogeneity may deter new complementor entry.

Speaker: Tedi Skiti
Assistant Professor of Strategic Management
Fox School of Business
Temple University

Framing Effects of CEO Compensation Reference Point and Board Equity Pay on Product Diversification

Elizabeth Lim, George State University
September 15, 2017

Agency research demonstrates that CEO pay influences product diversification, but the literature has generated mixed findings. These inconsistent results may be attributable to an emphasis on CEP absolute pay level. However, relative pay may be more important as CEOs frequently compare their own pay with industry peers. Yet it remains unclear whether the framing of CEO pay during social comparisons exerts a significant impact. We build an integrated conceptual framework based on social comparison theory and behavioral agency model that empirically tests product diversification in response to how CEOs frame their pay relative to compensation reference point. We also assess boundary conditions of the relationships by investigating the moderating influences of outside director options and stock grants. The empirical analysis largely supports our hypotheses.

Speaker: Elizabeth Lim
Associate Professor of Management
J. Mack Robinson College of Business
Georgia State University
Website: http://robinson.gsu.edu/profile/elizabeth-lim/
Email: elim@gsu.edu


Complementary Technologies and Returns to Disclosure During Standard Setting

PK Toh, University of Texas, Austin
September 29, 2017

In industries or system with many technological components that need to be interoperable, coordination is increasingly achieved via firms’ disclosure to Standard Setting Organizations (SSOs). We study whether and how such disclosure generates returns to the disclosing firm during standard setting. Departing from the convention of focusing on disclosed standard essential patents (SEPs), we examine the role of the firm’s non-disclosed complementary technologies in generating returns during standard setting. Main results show that firms with more non-disclosed complementary technologies experience greater returns to stock prices over disclosure events, and these technologies gain more in value (indicated by patent citations) over disclosure events, at rates higher than even that of the disclosed SEPs. Our findings suggest that, in these systems, a firm is using its larger technological portfolio to appropriate value from coordinating a smaller part of it with others via standard setting, and that a systemic view of the firm’s portfolio is important in understanding firm strategy within these systems.

Speaker: PK Toh
Associate Professor of Management
Department of Management
McCombs School of Business
University of Texas, Austin
Email: pk.toh@mccombs.utexas.edu


When your problem becomes my problem: The Impact of Airline IT Disruptions on On-Time Performance of Competing Airlines

Jennifer Tae, Temple University
October 13, 2017

We study the effect of firm disruptions on competitor performance in the presence of shared resources, and conditions under which competitors experience performance degradation. We propose that the impact of disruption is moderated by the routine complexity of both a disrupted firm and a competitor. We examine these questions in the context of the U.S. airline industry, leveraging four large IT outages from 2011-2016. Competitors’ flights which originated from, or were inbound to, a disrupted hub experienced significant changes in on-time performance, depending on the routine complexity of the disrupted airline. Performance deteriorated during the disruption of full-service carriers, but improved during that of a low-cost carrier. We also find that this effect is strongly moderated by the competitors’ routine complexity.

Speaker: Jennifer Tae
Assistant Professor of Strategic Management
Fox School of Business
Temple University


The Fundamental Endogeneity of Survey Based Cultural Dimensions: The Case of the Societal Mood

Amir Shoham, Temple University
November 10, 2017

The seminal Works of Hofstede (1980), Schwartz (1994), House et al (2004) have advanced our cumulative understanding of culture, culture outcomes, and the ability to capture culture in a qualitative way. However, their work has relied on the survey based measure to gauge the different dimensions of culture by asking individuals directly. This causes a severe endogeneity problem as non-cultural effects are also embedded in the answer that are supposed to capture just culture. It is thus time to move the extra mile and start dealing with endogeneity problems, so we can capture real causal effects. I propose using language-based measures to overcome such issues in the extant, survey-based measures.

Speaker: Amir Shoham
Associate Professor of Finance
Fox School of Business
Temple University


Platform organizations: Formal Structure and Control in an Organizational Dilemma

Hongryol Cha, Temple University
December 1, 2017

We develop a model to explain how platform organizations control the value-creating process of their platform participants without ownership-based authority. We challenge the underlying assumption of existing theories. The aim of our assumption-challenging research is to propose not a negative knowledge about what is misleading with existing literature but an advanced knowledge about thinking differently what is already known in response to changes in context like platform-mediated markets. Existing theories of modern organizations (i.e., Coase’s firms) do not seem to be able to account for coexistence between autonomy and control in the platform-mediated markets. We argue that platform organizations have a unique structural feature to generate externality pulling the other economic agents nearer to a common platform. In contrast to traditional views of organizational control, which emphasize the power structure within hierarchical relationships, market relationships, and social relationships, our framework brings knowledge utilization as a new dimension to understand the dynamic aspect of organizational control that is analogous to pulling and hauling effects.

Speaker: Hongryol Cha
5th year PhD student in International Business
Fox School of Business
Temple University