PurposeCorporate activism (CA) refers to public statements or actions by firms, brands or CEOs in support or opposition to sociopolitical issues. This study aims to examine how the literature addresses CA’s potential contribution to grand challenges such as climate change, inequality and threats to democracy. Design/methodology/approachA systematic literature review was conducted following the SPAR-4-SLR protocol. Searches in Scopus and Web of Science yielded 1,316 records; after screening, 30 studies explicitly linking CA to socioenvironmental outcomes were analyzed. Coding captured levels of analysis (micro, meso, macro), theoretical perspectives (psychological, discursive, relational, institutional), mechanisms and outcomes. FindingsResults show that CA influences grand challenges through mechanisms such as shaping individual attitudes and behaviors, reframing organizational fields, mobilizing cross-sector partnerships and driving institutional change. Yet empirical evidence remains limited, often focused on microlevel reactions. Findings underscore both CA’s transformative potential and legitimacy risks. Research limitations/implicationsEvidence remains limited and biased toward the Global North, highlighting the need for longitudinal, cross-country and multi-actor studies. Practical implicationsManagers should embed CA in governance frameworks and coalitions to avoid tokenism and generate systemic impact. Social implicationsThe literature portrays CA as potentially addressing grand challenges, but evidence of lasting societal impact remains limited. Originality/valueThis study bridges CA research with grand challenge scholarship, providing the first synthesis of how CA has been linked to societal and planetary outcomes. It advances a multilevel framework of mechanisms and identifies gaps in connecting firm actions to systemic change.
ABSTRACT Research Question/Issue This survey reviews 35 years of research on family business governance and examines how institutional settings, family involvement, and methodological choices shape our understanding of family controlled firms. Research Insights The review reveals substantial variation in ownership, governance, and succession across and within world regions. Research outcomes depend critically on how family firms are defined: Narrow ownership‐based definitions misclassify firms and distort conclusions on performance, innovation, and continuity. Changes in the family sphere—in family size, structure, or lineage norms—generate exogenous shifts in governance that help address persistent identification challenges. Outcomes across domains reflect institutional context, leadership traits, and the depth of family embeddedness. Emerging opportunities include sustainability, values‐driven leadership, and the societal role of family firms. Theoretical/Academic Implications Institutional variation produces diverse family firm forms across and within regions. Treating them as a homogeneous category hides this diversity and generates inconsistent empirical results. The review calls for multi‐dimensional definitions encompassing ownership, governance roles, succession intent, and family embeddedness. Socioeconomic trends and regulatory shocks alter family structure and, through embeddedness, create exogenous governance variation that supports causal analysis. Practitioner/Policy Implications The findings underscore the importance of clear governance structures, well‐designed succession planning, and attention to how family dynamics shape decision‐making. For policymakers, the evidence shows how legal institutions and cultural norms influence governance risks and long‐term firm behavior, informing policies that support transparency, accountability, and sustainable conduct.
Question/Issue This study examines firm performance under biodiversity regulation. Using a quasi-natural experiment of China's Green Shield Special Program (GNSP), we evaluate the impact of GNSP on firm environmental uncertainty.Research Findings/Insights The GNSP framework, by effectively addressing the traditional central-local principal-agent problem, significantly reduces environmental uncertainty for firms within national nature reserves (NNRs) through its super-hierarchical supervision. This effect, however, is confined to NNRs and is not observed for firms in provincial, municipal, or county nature reserves. We find that the reduction in environmental uncertainty is achieved through three channels: improved environmental information disclosure, enhanced green technological innovation, and optimized resource allocation efficiency. We also find that the uncertainty-reducing effect is most pronounced for firms with a high demand for fair competition, strong response capabilities, or facing urgent transformation pressure.Theoretical/Academic Implications First, we provide empirical support for the Porter Hypothesis in biodiversity regulation, demonstrating that mandatory environmental policies can stimulate innovation and reduce firm-level uncertainty by providing clearer regulatory expectations. Second, by examining GNSP's super-hierarchical supervision and social co-governance framework, we extend environmental federalism theory and offer a new perspective on the microeconomic consequences of campaign-style governance. Third, we integrate biodiversity risks into corporate decision-making, thereby contributing to the emerging field of biodiversity finance and providing microlevel evidence for governing nature-related risks.Practitioner/Policy Implications This study provides empirical evidence to support the implementation of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. We recommend that policymakers strengthen central vertical supervision while simultaneously enhancing the transparency and predictability of enforcement and tailor supporting incentive measures to enterprise heterogeneity to maximize the impact of biodiversity regulations on green transformation.
Purpose Despite the growing importance of green word of mouth (GWOM) for businesses in today’s globally connected world, dedicated literature review efforts in this field appear to remain limited. This study aims to provide a comprehensive literature review on GWOM by integrating bibliometric and content analysis. Design/methodology/approach Based on 270 Scopus-indexed articles from 2009 to 2025, the study employs bibliometric techniques such as keyword cooccurrence and bibliographic coupling, complemented by qualitative content analysis. Findings The findings reveal a surge in GWOM research since 2020. Key themes include (1) greenwashing and brand equity dimensions; (2) social influence and individual green identity; (3) GWOM and green behavioral intentions; (4) green skepticism and moral emotions and (5) digital technology, electronic word of mouth and green advocacy. The field remains largely shaped by quantitative approaches and primary data, while qualitative studies, mixed-method designs, conceptual frameworks, literature reviews and the use of secondary or combined datasets are still considerably underutilized. Importantly, the content analysis revealed critical research gaps, which served as the basis for proposing a future research agenda encompassing five key areas: foundational theories, methodological diversification, data innovation, thematic broadening and contextual analysis. Originality/value The novelty of this study lies in its integration of bibliometric and content analysis to provide a dual analytical perspective on GWOM research. This may also be regarded as one of the early reviews in this area, offering a specific and actionable research agenda in the digital era, thereby aiming to contribute to the ongoing development of the field.
Purpose This study aims to address the fragmentation in research on greenwashing, transparency and digitalization by examining how these elements interact as governance mechanisms within sustainable corporate governance. Design/methodology/approach A PRISMA-based systematic literature review was conducted on 87 peer-reviewed articles published between 2017 and 2024 in Web of Science and Scopus. Explicit inclusion criteria were applied, and a theory-informed thematic synthesis identified governance mechanisms, institutional dynamics and digital accountability tools. Findings Substantive transparency reduces the prevalence and perception of greenwashing by strengthening accountability structures. Digitalization operates as an enabling but ambivalent governance infrastructure: technologies such as blockchain, artificial intelligence and natural language processing enhance traceability and monitoring, yet may also enable more sophisticated symbolic practices when not embedded in robust regulatory and assurance systems. Greenwashing therefore emerges as a systemic governance challenge rather than merely a communication problem. Practical implications The findings provide guidance for boards, regulators and auditors in designing integrated transparency and oversight architecture. Originality/value Existing research treats these constructs in isolation, limiting explanatory integration and governance insight. The study advances theory by integrating transparency and digitalization into a unified governance framework, reconceptualizing greenwashing as a function of institutional design and monitoring capacity.
Research Question Despite the global proliferation of regulatory reforms and formal oversight mechanisms, catastrophic governance failures remain a persistent feature of the corporate landscape. This study investigates why formally robust governance structures fail to prevent systemic breakdowns in practice and how such failures unfold as dynamic processes rather than discrete events.Research Findings Drawing on a theory-synthesizing, case-illustrative analysis, we develop a behavioral-structural drift framework. We identify eight recurrent drift patterns of governance breakdown across eight high-profile corporate failures. Integrating insights from behavioral governance, organizational culture, voice and silence research, and institutional theory, we show how boards' capacity for oversight is progressively eroded. We further demonstrate how governance and contextual conditions can intensify these drift processes, suppress dissent, and weaken escalation and timely intervention.Theoretical Implications This study advances corporate governance research by reconciling structural and behavioral explanations to offer a dynamic behavioral account of board failure. The framework theorizes erosion processes across the following three interrelated levels: individual directors, the board as a collective, and the wider institutional environment. Six propositions are developed to guide future empirical research on the dynamics of governance failure.Practitioner Implications Formal structures, independence, and compliance are necessary but insufficient for effective governance. To mitigate drift, boards should strengthen role clarity, institutionalize routines that legitimize challenge, and reinforce accountability practices that sustain independent judgment and counter managerial capture.
ABSTRACT Research Question/Issue The study examines how the rapidly expanding literature on managerial ability is intellectually structured and how governance mechanisms shape the value‐creating versus discretionary effects of managerial ability. Despite extensive empirical work, managerial ability remains conceptually fragmented across efficiency, discretion, and agency‐based perspectives, limiting cumulative theory development in corporate governance research. Research Findings/Insights Using a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of Web of Science–indexed studies, we identify five dominant research clusters: foundations and measurement, corporate policies, risk and tail outcomes, governance and information environments, and strategic actions, innovation, and stakeholder orientation. The results show that governance‐related research occupies a central bridging position in the literature, connecting performance‐ and risk‐oriented streams. Collectively, the evidence reveals that managerial ability is associated with superior outcomes under strong monitoring and transparency, but with elevated discretion, risk, and opportunism under weak governance conditions. Theoretical/Academic Implications This study advances corporate governance theory by reconceptualizing managerial ability as a contingent, governance‐sensitive resource rather than an unconditionally value‐enhancing attribute. By integrating fragmented streams, the findings reconcile conflicting empirical results and highlight governance and information environments as critical boundary conditions. The study also demonstrates how bibliometric methods can inform theory building by uncovering latent structures and tensions within complex governance literatures. Practitioner/Policy Implications For boards, investors, and regulators, the findings suggest that hiring or retaining high‐ability managers is insufficient without complementary governance mechanisms. Effective monitoring, incentive alignment, and disclosure regimes are essential to channel managerial ability toward long‐term value creation and to mitigate downside risk. Policymakers should therefore consider governance quality and institutional context when evaluating the broader economic and social consequences of managerial talent.
PurposeAs concerns over climate change and social inequality intensify, firms are increasingly transitioning toward sustainable business models. However, the fragmented nature of the literature limits our understanding of how sustainable transition pathways are constructed. This paper aims to examine how managerial cognition, particularly managers’ cognitive frames and their underlying content, influences the construction and efficacy of sustainable transition pathways. Design/methodology/approachAn integrative literature review of 184 studies was conducted using thematic analysis and dialectical interrogation. FindingsSustainable transition pathways emerge through repeated interventions, shaped by the cognitive frames managers use to guide their decision-making. The authors identify four managerial orientations toward sustainability: business-as-usual, instrumental, transition and transformation, each underpinned by distinct assumptions, values and priorities. These orientations influence how managers conceptualize sustainability, set objectives, operationalize interventions and define value. By integrating these insights, the authors theorize how differences in cognitive content explain variations in the construction and efficacy of sustainable transition pathways. Originality/valueThis study uncovers the overlooked role of managerial cognition in shaping sustainable transition pathways by synthesizing the fragmented literature. By identifying differences in cognitive content, the authors develop a conceptual framework of managerial orientations toward sustainability. This framework advances the understanding of how managers construct sustainable transition pathways, explaining why similar interventions can lead to divergent sustainability outcomes. Lastly, this paper offers conceptual insights that can help managers reflect on how to construct more effective sustainable transition pathways.
PurposeThis study aims to provide a bibliometric analysis of research on gender diversity in boards, integrating insights from corporate governance, finance, sustainability and strategic management. Design/methodology/approachA bibliometric analysis of 577 publications from 1993 to 2025 derived from Scopus and Web of Science. This study used Bibliometrix (R Studio), Biblioshiny and VOSviewer to examine thematic clusters, citation networks, influential contributors and publication trends. FindingsThe analysis reveals five key thematic clusters: gender dynamics in socioeconomic and cultural contexts, theoretical pillars of diversity in governance, harnessing board diversity for superior firm performance, driving firm value through board independence and CSR, and sustainability through gender-driven governance. Results indicate that the literature frequently associates gender-diverse boards with improved decision-making, governance quality, ESG performance and firm value. Practical implicationsThe results give policymakers practical advice on how to create gender diversity frameworks that are unique to a given region by fusing market-based incentives with regulatory requirements. Corporate executives can strengthen governance and competitive positioning by using the thematic clusters that have been identified to align board composition with global ESG, sustainability and innovation trends. Originality/valueThis study extends existing bibliometric evidence on board gender diversity by offering an updated thematic mapping of the literature up to 2025.
PurposeThis study aims to present a bibliometric review of the relationship between corporate governance and environmental, social and governance (ESG) controversies in the literature. It maps publication trends, theoretical frameworks and key research clusters and identifies key contributors to this field. This study offers valuable insights into the relationship between governance practices and ESG risks, providing directions for future research to enhance corporate sustainability and manage ESG risks effectively. Design/methodology/approachThis bibliometric analysis is based on 44 articles indexed in Scopus and Web of Science, published between 2020 and May 31, 2025. VOSviewer was used to visualize publication trends, thematic clusters, theoretical frameworks and influential authors, institutions and journals. FindingsThis review identifies five major research clusters: board gender diversity, firm performance, sustainability, ESG and sustainable development. Gender diversity on boards is a key factor in mitigating ESG controversies, with agency, stakeholder and legitimacy theories providing theoretical frameworks. The literature increasingly emphasizes the role of corporate governance in enhancing ESG transparency and mitigating ESG controversies, particularly in the USA and Europe. Research limitations/implicationsThe sample is limited to 44 articles, which may affect the generalizability of the findings across the broader corporate governance literature. Nonetheless, the findings provide actionable insights into corporate governance reforms for managing ESG risks. Practical implicationsThe findings highlight the need for firms to strengthen governance structures, particularly board diversity and leadership oversight, to address ESG controversies effectively. Policymakers can leverage these insights to design governance regulations that foster corporate transparency and sustainable practices. Social implicationsBy demonstrating how effective governance reduces ESG controversies, the study provides insights that can support responsible corporate behavior, enhance stakeholder trust and contribute to more sustainable and equitable development outcomes. Originality/valueThis is the first bibliometric review to synthesize research on the relationship between corporate governance and ESG controversies. It identifies emerging trends, highlights research gaps and suggests future directions for corporate governance mechanisms, digital integration and cross-sectoral research.
Purpose The purpose of this study is to empirically investigate whether firms with promoter share pledging increase their corporate social responsibility (CSR) expenditures, as a strategic response to mitigate the negative perceptions associated with share pledging. Share pledging by controlling shareholders represents a corporate governance concern that intensifies principal-principal conflicts and is viewed unfavorably by the market. The Indian Companies Act mandates companies to allocate a portion of their profits to CSR initiatives. The authors identify “excess CSR”, representing voluntary contributions exceeding the mandated requirement, thereby serving as a meaningful indicator of discretionary CSR efforts. Design/methodology/approach The authors analyzed a panel data of 1,986 National Stock Exchange-listed firms from 2013–2021. They estimate fixed-effects regressions controlling for firm financials, ownership, board characteristics and year and industry effects. Findings The findings reveal that firms with promoter share pledging exhibit higher levels of voluntary CSR spending, potentially signaling a commitment to long-term value creation. This signaling incentive strengthens with greater promoter shareholding and higher business risk but diminishes under conditions of credit constraints. Notably, as the proportion of shares pledged relative to total holdings of the promoter increases, voluntary CSR spending declines, reflecting on short-term earnings management. Originality/value This study provides novel insights into a corporate governance issue, promoter share pledging, in the context of India’s unique mandatory CSR regime. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, it is the first study to examine how widespread share pledging influences excess CSR spending under this mandate.
Research Question/Issue This study investigates the effect of digital transformation on corporate violations, addressing the divergence in the literature.Research Findings/Insights We find that digital transformation is significantly positively correlated with corporate violations, and this finding survives a series of robustness tests, including a natural experiment. Mechanism tests reveal a dual effect of digital transformation on corporate violations. First, digital transformation decreases the likelihood of misconduct by strengthening internal control, demonstrating an inhibitory effect. Second, it increases the exposure of committed violations by enhancing information transparency, manifesting an exposure effect. In the Chinese context, the net outcome of these two opposing forces ultimately results in a positive relationship. However, given the evolving trends of these effects, we theoretically conjecture that a negative association may emerge in the long run, though current empirical evidence remains suggestive rather than conclusive. Heterogeneity analysis further shows that this relationship is more pronounced in firms with higher violation incentives, greater opportunity for misconduct, and stronger rationalization propensity (i.e., firms with inherently higher violation propensities). Finally, evidence indicates that digitalization increases the exposure of minor violations, thereby helping to avert major corporate scandals.Theoretical/Academic Implications This study reconciles discrepancies in prior research and contributes to the literature on digital transformation and corporate governance. By decomposing digitalization's role into inhibitory and exposure effects, it provides a more comprehensive understanding and sheds new light on the "dark side" of corporate digitalization.Practitioner/Policy Implications Practitioners should adopt a patient approach to digital transformation, focusing on its long-term impacts rather than being discouraged by short-term outcomes, and recognize the substitutive or complementary nature of human-technology interactions in governance. Regulators are advised to leverage digital technologies to strengthen misconduct detection, while investors should view digitalization as a value-enhancing governance mechanism.
Research Question/Issue This study examines the impact of customer concentration on corporate digital innovation. It further investigates the underlying mechanisms and the conditions under which this effect varies.Research Findings/Insights Using a panel of Chinese listed firms from 2015 to 2022, we find that higher customer concentration is associated with greater digital innovation. Mechanism analyses reveal three reinforcing channels: enhanced information transparency, stronger supply-chain management capabilities, and improved corporate governance, consistent with synergy effects. The positive association is more pronounced under higher economic policy uncertainty, greater customer switching costs, and stronger relational investments.Theoretical/Academic Implications This study extends the literature on customer concentration by identifying digital innovation as a distinct outcome shaped by buyer-supplier relationships. It further clarifies how relational dependence can be transformed into digital innovation through governance and coordination mechanisms, thereby advancing understanding of the supply chain's role in digital innovation.Practitioner/Policy Implications The findings suggest that firms can leverage concentrated customer relationships to support digital innovation by strengthening data sharing, coordination, and governance practices. For policymakers, improving customer disclosure systems and fostering collaborative supply-chain environments may help promote firm-level digital innovation and broader digital development.
PurposeDrawing on a multi-theoretical framework that integrates stakeholder, resource dependence and gender difference theories, this study aims to investigate the mediating role of board gender diversity in the relationship between corporate governance and environmental disclosure. Design/methodology/approachThis study uses a quantitative research design using a data set of 273 financial statements from 2017–2023, sourced from listed companies in Namibia via the Bloomberg database. The mediation analysis uses the established Baron and Kenny (1986) method, providing deeper insights into the mediating role of board gender diversity in the relationship between corporate governance and environmental disclosure practices. A two-step system generalised method of moments estimator is used to address potential endogeneity, and bootstrapping is used to validate the significance of the mediation effect. FindingsThe mediation analysis reveals that board gender diversity serves as a significant partial mediator in the relationship between corporate governance and environmental disclosure. While the direct effect of governance remains strong and dominant, the presence of women on boards acts as a critical conduit that reinforces the influence of structural governance on environmental disclosure. Originality/valueThis study highlights how board gender diversity mediates the relationship between corporate governance and environmental disclosure, emphasising the interplay among stakeholder theory, resource dependence and gender-difference perspectives under institutional pressures such as the NamCode and the zebra quota system.
Research Question/Issue This study explores the moderating effects of board network centrality on the relationship between CEO overconfidence and acquisition intensity.Research Findings/Insights Using a panel of S&P 1500 firms from 2002 to 2018, we find that CEO overconfidence is positively associated with acquisition intensity. This relationship is weakened when boards occupy more central positions in the interlocking director network. Furthermore, this mitigating effect is stronger when (1) connected firms exhibit greater variability in acquisition intensity, (2) directors maintain stronger internal social connections, and (3) boards have greater female representation.Theoretical/Academic Implications We conceptualize board network centrality as enhancing information access by exposing directors to non-redundant external experiences. However, access alone does not ensure effective oversight. The governance effect of centrality depends on internal processing conditions that facilitate information sharing, elaboration, and critical evaluation. By distinguishing information access from information-processing capacity, we provide a more precise explanation of how board networks shape responses to CEO overconfidence.Practitioner/Policy Implications Our findings indicate that effective oversight by the board of directors over overconfident CEOs requires both access to diverse external information and strong internal deliberation processes. Firms may benefit from constructing boards that combine strategic network positions with internal conditions that facilitate thorough evaluation of strategic decisions.
Research Question/Issue: This study investigates how boards' preferences for CEO risk taking evolve over time. We examine how boards recalibrate CEO equity incentives in response to external shocks, using the recognition of the inevitable disclosure doctrine (IDD) as a natural experiment. Drawing on agency theory and the five-factor model of personality, we argue that compensation adjustments depend on the interaction between CEOs' dispositional risk preferences-proxied by extraversion-and prior firm performance. Research Findings/Insights: Analyzing a panel of US firms from 1992 to 2019, we find that boards are more likely to increase equity-based incentives for extravert CEOs following the recognition of the IDD. This effect is particularly pronounced in underperforming firms, suggesting that boards weigh the risks and rewards of incentivizing strategic risk taking differently based on firm context and CEO personality. These findings indicate that boards re-evaluate the cost-benefit calculus of equity incentives over time. Theoretical/Academic Implications: Our findings challenge the static assumptions of traditional agency theory by demonstrating that boards dynamically update their compensation strategies in response to external shocks and CEO traits. This contributes to research at the intersection of agency theory and upper echelons theory, advancing a more nuanced view of CEO incentive alignment. Practitioner Implications: Boards may improve incentive alignment by tailoring compensation not only to firm performance but also to CEO personality. Equity incentives may be especially effective for extravert CEOs in underperforming firms, where the potential upside of strategic risk taking is greater.
Research Question/Issue: Director reelection pressure strengthens directors' accountability to shareholders, yet its implications for stakeholder-oriented engagement, such as corporate sustainability, remain theoretically ambiguous and empirically underexplored. This study examines how heightened director reelection pressure reshapes firms' sustainability policies and the tension between shareholder and stakeholder interests. Research Findings/Insights: We exploit the enactment of majority voting (MV) legislation across US states as an exogenous shock to directors' reelection pressure and implement a difference-in-differences (DiD) design using a sample of US firms from 2003 to 2019. Firms headquartered in states that adopt MV legislation experience a decline in overall environmental and social (E&S) performance. Importantly, this decline is selective and is concentrated in less value-relevant E&S activities, while shareholder-value-relevant sustainability dimensions are largely preserved. Together with cross-sectional evidence showing that the effects are stronger when shareholders are less sustainability-oriented and have shorter investment horizons, this pattern is consistent with stronger alignment with shareholder preferences. Additional tests support a director-driven transmission channel and indicate that the resulting E&S reduction is disciplined. Overall, stronger shareholder accountability induces a selective retrenchment in sustainability strategy. Theoretical/Academic Implications: This study advances research on board accountability and stakeholder governance by showing that heightened electoral discipline intensifies the shareholder-stakeholder tension. We show that director-election rules matter for sustainability outcomes by shaping how boards prioritize across sustainability policies. More broadly, we contribute to the governance literature by demonstrating that board incentives, rather than board composition alone, are central to how boards influence corporate policies. Practitioner/Policy Implications: Governance reforms that strengthen shareholder voice may inadvertently constrain stakeholder-oriented initiatives. Policymakers and practitioners seeking to promote broader stakeholder engagement may therefore need complementary mechanisms that integrate stakeholder interests into board oversight rather than relying solely on shareholder-centric electoral reforms.
Research Question/Issue Why do directors, despite formal authority and oversight responsibilities, remain silent in the boardroom, and how does such silence shape governance outcomes?Research Findings/Insights Silence in boards is not a passive absence but a routinized governance practice. Drawing on a reflexive, abductive field study of 17 Dutch two-tier boards (113 directors), this study identifies three implicit silence logics-compliance, risk, and impact-which, when enacted in practice, function as theories-in-use guiding directors' decisions to withhold voice. These tacit "if-then" rules coexist and vary in salience depending on context, producing a recurring gap between espoused openness and enacted withholding. Awareness varies in degree, shaping whether silence remains taken for granted, is recognized in hindsight, or becomes reflexive. By comparing observed interaction with retrospective accounts, the study suggests that these theories combine into aligned or fragmented board-level climates.Theoretical/Academic Implications This study advances behavioral governance by theorizing silence as a performative, routinized practice and develops a multi-level account linking individual theories-in-use to collective boardroom climates, conditioned by varying levels of reflexive awareness.Practitioner/Policy Implications Boards can strengthen oversight by surfacing implicit rules, examining how procedural structures shape voice, and embedding reflexive practices that make silence discussable.
Research Question/Issue CEO succession is a pivotal governance event that can entrench existing strategies or catalyze renewal. This study examines how psychological trait divergence between outgoing and incoming CEOs-across conscientiousness, openness, extraversion, agreeableness, and locus of control-shapes strategic change versus continuity in firms' competitive actions. Conceptualizing succession as a relational behavioral-governance process, we analyze how trait alignment and divergence jointly condition postsuccession outcomes.Research Findings/Insights Using dyadic data from 304 Kenyan enterprises, we find that divergence in extraversion, openness, and locus of control is associated with greater postsuccession strategic change, whereas similarity in conscientiousness sustains stability but may constrain flexibility. Curvilinear effects indicate diminishing returns at very high trait levels, whereas agreeableness exhibits context-dependent effects, underscoring the nonlinear nature of trait interactions.Theoretical/Academic Implications The study extends Upper Echelons Theory by advancing a dyadic, trait-divergence framework that conceptualizes succession as a relational cognitive process rather than an individual effect. It also refines imprinting theory by showing how predecessor dispositions embed behavioral norms that condition successor adaptation.Practitioner/Policy Implications Boards and nomination committees can actively manage psychological continuity and selective divergence to balance institutional memory with strategic flexibility and long-term competitiveness.
PurposeThis paper aims to investigate the impact of several governance mechanisms, including board meetings, board independence, board gender diversity, chief executive officer (CEO) duality, sustainability committees and environmental, social and governance (ESG)-based compensation, on corporate carbon emission performance.Design/methodology/approachThis study draws a sample of 414 companies listed in the STOXX Europe 600 index, spanning the period from 2017 to 2023. The main findings were derived using the feasible generalized least squares method. Additionally, a generalized method of moments analysis was conducted to assess the robustness of these results.FindingsThe results show that board meetings, board gender diversity and CEO duality are associated with better carbon performance (i.e. reducing carbon emissions). However, board independence, sustainability committee and ESG-linked compensation were found to increase carbon emissions levels, contrary to expectations.Originality/valueThus, this study first provides new empirical evidence on the relationship between corporate governance mechanisms and carbon performance in the European Union market. Second, it provides useful insights for regulators, investors and corporate executives.
