Weitere Artikel dieser Ausgabe durch Wischen aufrufen
Environmental research has usually highlighted that the existence of slack resources in an organization helps allocate investment to innovative initiatives. However, the existing literature has paid very limited attention to how slack resources can influence the effects of focused and diversified innovations in different ways. Agency theory scholars claim that a manager’s first preference when confronted with discretionary resources will not generate positive investments for the firm, but their own opportunistic preferences. The differences between focused and diversified environmental innovations allow us to gain a better understanding of the financial impact of being focused and how slack resources matter in this context. We analyze a longitudinal sample of 5845 environmental patents from the 75 largest companies in the electrical components and equipment industry worldwide. Our results show that high levels of slack resources reduce the existing positive relationship between focused environmental innovations and a firm’s financial performance. These results contribute to delineating the theoretical and empirical implications of focused versus diversified environmental innovations and extend the literature on ethical dilemmas concerning managers’ use of slack resources in the firm.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Aggarwal, R. K., & Samwick, A. A. (2003). Why do managers diversify their firms? Agency reconsidered. Journal of Finance, 58, 71–118. CrossRef
Ahuja, G., & Katila, R. (2001). Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: A longitudinal study. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 197–220. CrossRef
Alessandri, T. M., & Pattit, J. M. (2014). Drivers of R&D investment: The interaction of behavioral theory and managerial incentives. Journal of Business Research, 67, 151–158. CrossRef
Amihud, Y., & Lev, B. (1981). Risk reduction as a managerial motive for conglomerate mergers. The Bell Journal of Economics, 12(2), 605–617. CrossRef
Anastas, P., & Warner, J. (1998). Green chemistry: Theory and practice. New York: Oxford University Press.
Antolin-Lopez, R., York, J., & Martinez-del-Rio, J. (2013). Renewable energy emergence in the European Union: The role of entrepreneurs, social norms and policy. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 33(14), 1.
Arora, P., & Dharwadkar, R. (2011). Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility (CSR): The moderating roles of attainment discrepancy and organization slack. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 19(2), 136–152. CrossRef
Balkin, D. B., Markman, G., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2000). Is CEO pay in high-technology firms related to innovation? Academy of Management Journal, 43, 1118–1130. CrossRef
Bennett, J. (2010). Are we headed toward a green bubble? Entrepreneur. https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/205494.
Berrone, P., Fosfuri, A., Gelabert, L., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2013). Necessity as the mother of “green” inventions: Institutional pressures and environmental innovations. Strategic Management Journal, 34, 891–909. CrossRef
Bertrand, M., & Mullainathan, S. (2003). Enjoying the quiet life? Corporate governance and managerial preferences. Journal of Political Economy, 111(5), 1043–1075. CrossRef
Bowman, E. (1982). Risk seeking by troubled firms (pp. 33–42). Summer: Sloan Management Review.
Brunnermeier, S. B., & Cohen, M. A. (2003). Determinants of environmental innovations in US manufacturing industries. Journal of Environmental Economics & Management, 45, 278–293. CrossRef
Burgeois, L. and Singh, J. V. (1983). Organizational slack and political behavior within top management groups.In Academy of management proceedings, pp. 43–49.
Cainelli, G., De Marchi, V., & Grandinetti, R. (2015). Does the development of environmental innovation require different resources? Evidence from Spanish manufacturing firms. Journal of Cleaner Production, 94(1), 211–220. CrossRef
Calza, F., Parmentola, A., & Tutore, I. (2017). Types of green innovations: Ways of implementation in a non-green industry. Sustainability, 9(1301), 1–16.
Carnabuci, G., & Bruggeman, J. (2009). Knowledge specialization, knowledge brokerage and the uneven growth of technology domains. Social Forces, 88(2), 607–641. CrossRef
Chen, Y. (2008). The driver of green innovation and green image—Green core competence. Journal of Business Ethics, 81(3), 531–543. CrossRef
Chen, Y. S., Lai, S. B., & Wen, C. T. (2006). The influence of green innovation performance on corporate advantage in Taiwan. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(4), 331–339. CrossRef
Chung, K. H., & Pruitt, S. W. (1994). A simple approximation of Tobin’s q. Financial Management, 23(3), 70–74. CrossRef
Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128–152. CrossRef
Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R., and Walsh, J. (2000). Protecting their intellectual assets: Appropriability conditions and why US manufacturing firms patent (or not). NBER working paper 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.
Commission, European. (2012). Recast of the waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) directive. Brussels: European Commission.
Daim, T. U. (2013). Are formal technology integration processes needed for successful product innovations? International Journal of Innovation Management, 17(04), 1350016. CrossRef
Davis, G. F., & Stout, S. K. (1992). Organization theory and the market for corporate control: A dynamic analysis of the characteristics of large takeover targets, 1980–1990. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(4), 605–633. CrossRef
Denis, D. J., Denis, D. K., & Sarin, A. (1997). Agency problems, equity ownership, and corporate diversification. Journal of Finance, 52(1), 135–160. CrossRef
Denis, D. J., Denis, D. K., & Yost, K. (2002). Global diversification, industrial diversification, and firm value. Journal of Finance, 57, 1951–1979. CrossRef
Doidge, C., Karolyi, G. A., & Stulz, R. M. (2004). Why are foreign firms listed in the U.S. worth more? Journal of Financial Economics, 71, 205–238. CrossRef
Douglas, P. C., & Wier, B. (2000). Integrating ethical dimensions into a model of budgetary slack creation. Journal of Business Ethics, 28(3), 267–277. CrossRef
Douglas, P. C., & Wier, B. (2005). Cultural and ethical effects in budgeting systems: A comparison of US and Chinese managers. Journal of Business Ethics, 60(2), 159–174. CrossRef
EIO. (2011). The eco-innovation challenge: Pathways to a resource-efficient Europe. Brussels: Eco-Innovation Observatory.
EPO (2010). Patents and clean energy: Bridging the gap between evidence and policy. Final report. European Patent Office, Munich.
Ernst, H. (2001). Patent applications and subsequent changes of performance: Evidence from time-series cross-section analyses on the firm level. Research Policy, 30, 143–157. CrossRef
Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26, 301–324. CrossRef
Figge, F., & Hahn, T. (2002). Environmental shareholder value matrix. Anwendung: Konzeption.
Fontrodona, J., & Sison, A. J. G. (2006). The nature of the firm, agency theory and shareholder theory: A critique from philosophical anthropology. Journal of Business Ethics, 66(1), 33–42. CrossRef
George, G. (2005). Slack resources and the performance of privately held firms. Academy of Management Journal, 48(4), 661–676. CrossRef
Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Campbell, J. T., Martin, G., Hoskisson, R. E., Makri, M., & Sirmon, D. G. (2014). Socioemotional wealth as a mixed gamble: Revisiting family firm R&D investments with the behavioral agency model. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(6), 1351–1374.
Gómez-Mejia, L. R., & Wiseman, R. M. (2007). Does agency theory have universal relevance? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28, 81–88. CrossRef
GPI (2009). Global patent index user manual. European Patent Office. EPO—Dept.5411. European Patent Office, Munich.
Greenley, G. E., & Oktemgil, M. (1998). A comparison of slack resources in high and low performing British companies. Journal of Management Studies, 35(3), 377–398. CrossRef
Hagedoorn, J., & Cloodt, M. (2003). Measuring innovative performance: Is there an advantage in using multiple indicators? Research Policy, 32, 1365–1379. CrossRef
Hahn, T., Figge, F., & Barkemeyer, R. (2007). Sustainable value creation among companies in the manufacturing sector. International Journal of Environmental Technology and Management, 7(5–6), 496–512. CrossRef
Hall, B. H., & Ziedonis, R. H. (2001). The patent paradox revisited: An empirical study of patenting in the U.S. semiconductor industry, 1979–1995. RAND Journal of Economics, 32(1), 101–128. CrossRef
Harrison, J. S., & Coombs, J. E. (2012). The moderating effects from corporate governance characteristics on the relationship between available slack and community-based firm performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 107(4), 409–422. CrossRef
Hart, S. L. (1995). A natural-resource-based view of the firm. Academy of Management Review, 20, 874–907.
Hausman, J. (1978). Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica, Econometric Society, 46(6), 1251–1271. CrossRef
Hegde, D., Mowery, D. C., & Graham, S. J. H. (2009). Pioneering inventors or thicket builders: Which U.S. firms use continuations in patenting? Management Science, 55(7), 1214–1226. CrossRef
Hoskisson, R. E., Hitt, M. A., Johnson, R. A., & Grossman, W. (2002). Conflicting voices: The effects of institutional ownership heterogeneity and internal governance on corporate innovation strategies. Academy of Management Journal, 45(4), 697–716. CrossRef
Huang, J. W., & Li, Y. H. (2017). Green innovation and performance: The view of organizational capability and social reciprocity. Journal of Business Ethics, 145(2), 309–324. CrossRef
Hull, C. E., & Rothenberg, S. (2008). Firm performance: The interactions of corporate social performance with innovation and industry differentiation. Strategic Management Journal, 29(7), 781–789. CrossRef
Jensen, M. C. (1996). Agency costs of free cash flow, corporate finance, and takeovers. American Economic Review, 76, 323–329.
Jensen, M. C., & Murphy, K. J. (1990). Performance pay and top-management incentives. Journal of Political Economy, 98(2), 225–264. CrossRef
Jiraporn, P., Kim, Y. S., & Mathur, I. (2008). Does corporate diversification exacerbate or mitigate earnings management? An empirical analysis. International Review of Financial Analysis, 17, 1087–1109. CrossRef
Joshi, A. M., & Nerkar, A. (2011). When do strategic alliances inhibit innovation by firms? Evidence from patent pools in the global optical disc industry. Strategic Management Journal, 32, 1139–1160. CrossRef
Kaul, A. (2012). Technology and corporate scope: Firm and rival innovation as antecedents of corporate transactions. Strategic Management Journal, 33(4), 347–367. CrossRef
Lee, J., Veloso, F. M., & Hounshell, D. A. (2011). Linking induced technological change, and environmental regulation: Evidence from patenting in the US auto industry. Research Policy, 40, 1240–1252. CrossRef
Lu, Z., & Jinghua, H. (2012). The moderating factors in the relationship between ERP investments and firm performance. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 53(2), 75–84.
Marcus, A. (2015). Innovations in sustainability: Fuel and food. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139680820.
Marcus, A., Aragon-Correa, J. A., & Pinkse, J. (2011). Firms, regulatory uncertainty, and the natural environment. California Management Review, 54(1), 5–16. CrossRef
Meyer, A. D. (1982). Adapting to environmental jolts. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27(4), 515. CrossRef
Miller, D., Fern, M., & Cardinal, L. (2007). The use of knowledge for technological innovation within diversified firms. Academy of Management Journal, 50(2), 308–326. CrossRef
Miller, D., & Leiblein, M. (1996). Corporate risk-return relations: Returns variability versus downside risk. Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 91–122. CrossRef
Moorman, C., & Slotegraaf, R. J. (1999). The contingency value of complementary capabilities in product development. Journal of Marketing Research, 36(2), 239–257. CrossRef
Nameroff, T. J., Garant, R. J., & Albert, M. B. (2004). Adoption of green chemistry: An analysis based on US patents. Research Policy, 33, 959–974. CrossRef
Nohria, N., & Gulati, R. (1996). Is slack good or bad for innovation? Academy of Management Journal, 39(5), 1245–1264. CrossRef
Nooteboom, B., Van Haverbeke, W., Duysters, G., Gilsing, V., & van den Oord, A. (2007). Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity. Research Policy, 36, 1016–1034. CrossRef
Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24(3), 403–441. CrossRef
Pakes, A., & Griliches, Z. (1984). Patents and R&D at the firm level: A first look. In Z. Griliches (Ed.), R&D, patents and productivity (pp. 55–72). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Peeters, C., & de la Potterie, B. V. P. (2006). Innovation strategy and the patenting behavior of firms. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 16(1–2), 109–135. CrossRef
Porter, M. E., & van der Linde, C. (1995). Green and competitive. Harvard Business Review, 73(5), 120–134.
Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of the organization. Harvard Business Review, 90(3), 79–93.
Rajagopalan, N. (1997). Strategic orientations, incentive plan adoptions, and firm performance: Evidence from electric utility firms. Strategic Management Joumal, 18(10), 761–785. CrossRef
Rennings, K. (2000). Redefining innovation—Eco-innovation research and the contribution from ecological economics. Ecological Economics, 32, 319–332. CrossRef
Robeson, D., & O’Connor, G. C. (2013). Boards of directors, innovation, and performance: An exploration at multiple levels. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(4), 608–625. CrossRef
Rong, Z., & Xiao, S. (2017). Innovation-related diversification and firm value. European Financial Management, 23(3), 475–518. CrossRef
Rosenkopf, L., & Nerkar, A. (2001). Beyond local search: Boundary-spanning, exploration and impact in the optical disc industry. Strategic Management Journal, 22(4), 287–306. CrossRef
Russo, M. V., & Fouts, P. A. (1997). A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental performance and profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 534–559. CrossRef
Scharfstein, D. S. (1998). The dark side of internal capital markets II: Evidence from diversified conglomerates. NBER working paper. no. 6352.
Shahzad, A. M., Mousa, F. T., & Sharfman, M. P. (2016). The implications of slack heterogeneity for the slack-resources and corporate social performance relationship. Journal of Business Research, 69(12), 5964–5971. CrossRef
Shankman, N. A. (1999). Reframing the debate between agency and stakeholder theories of the firm. Journal of Business Ethics, 19(4), 319–334. CrossRef
Sharma, S. (2000). Managerial interpretations and organizational context as predictors of corporate choice of environmental strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 681–697. CrossRef
Shin, J., & Jalajas, D. (2010). Technological relatedness, boundary-spanning combination of knowledge and the impact of innovation: Evidence of an inverted-U relationship. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 21(2), 87–96. CrossRef
Shrivastava, P. (1995). Environmental technologies and competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 16(Special issue), 183–200. CrossRef
Spencer, J. W. (2003). Firms’ knowledge-sharing strategies in the global innovation system: Empirical evidence from the flat panel display industry. Strategic Management Journal, 24(3), 217–233. CrossRef
Tan, J. (2003). Curvilinear relationship between organizational slack and firm performance: Evidence from Chinese state enterprises. European Management Journal, 21(6), 740–749. CrossRef
Tatikonda, M. V., & Rosenthal, S. R. (2000). Technology novelty, project complexity, and product development project execution success: A deeper look at task uncertainty in production innovation. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 47(1), 74–87. CrossRef
Toh, P. K. (2014). Chicken, or the egg, or both? The interrelationship between a firm’s inventor specialization and scope of technologies. Strategic Management Journal, 35(5), 723–738. CrossRef
USTPO (2009). Pilot program for green technologies including greenhouse gas reduction. Federal Register, 74(234), 64666–64669.
Varaiya, N., Kerin, R. A., & Weeks, D. (1987). The relationship between growth, profitability, and firm value. Strategic Management Journal, 8, 487–497. CrossRef
Veefkind, V., Hurtado-Albir, J., Angelucci, S., Karachalios, K., & Thumm, N. (2012). A new EPO classification scheme for climate change mitigation technologies. World Patent Information, 34(2), 106–111. CrossRef
Venkatraman, N. (1989). The concept of fit in strategy research: Toward verbal and statistical correspondence. Academy of Management Review, 14(3), 423–444.
Voegtlin, C., & Scherer, A. G. (2017). Responsible innovation and the innovation of responsibility: Governing sustainable development in a globalized world. Journal of Business Ethics, 143(2), 227–243. CrossRef
Wagner, M. (2007). On the relationship between environmental management, environmental innovation and patenting: Evidence from German manufacturing firms. Research Policy, 36, 1587–1602. CrossRef
Wang, T., & Bansal, P. (2012). Social responsibility in new ventures: Profiting from a long-term orientation. Strategic Management Journal, 33(10), 1135–1153. CrossRef
Wu, J., & Tu, R. (2007). CEO stock option pay and R&D spending: A behavioral agency explanation. Journal of Business Research, 60, 482–492. CrossRef
- Do Firms’ Slack Resources Influence the Relationship Between Focused Environmental Innovations and Financial Performance? More is Not Always Better
Dante I. Leyva-de la Hiz
J. Alberto Aragon-Correa
- Springer Netherlands
Journal of Business Ethics
Print ISSN: 0167-4544
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-0697
Neuer Inhalt/© Stellmach, Neuer Inhalt/© BBL, Neuer Inhalt/© Maturus, Pluta Logo/© Pluta, Neuer Inhalt/© hww, Voraussetzungen für wirtschaftliche additive Fertigung/© Marco2811 | Fotolia