SpringerLink
Log in

Managerial ability and strategic orientation

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Review of Managerial Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

I examine the relation between managerial ability and the strategic orientation of the firm. The strategic orientation of the firm is characterized in terms of the firm’s investment in exploration and exploitation activities. Managerial ability is characterized in terms of strategic ability and operational ability. I find the strategic ability positively influences exploration and exploitation activities, while the operational ability positively influences exploitation activities but negatively influences exploration activities unless the managers are provided high risk incentive. My results suggest that managerial ability influences the firm’s choice of strategic orientation. Further, the bi-directional relationship I find suggests that the strategic orientation of the firm influences the managerial ability. My results are consistent with the emerging behavioral theory of the firm in that high strategic ability managers can sense, seize, and shape innovative opportunities. My results are consistent with the resource-based view in that there is a bi-directional positive relation between operational ability and exploitation activities. The growth opportunities and managerial risk incentive drive the tradeoff between the managerial ability and the strategic orientation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (France)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson BS, Kreiser PM, Kuratko DF, Hornsby JS, Eshima Y (2015) Reconceptualizing strategic orientation. Strateg Manag J 36:1579–1596

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bellemare MF, Masaki T, Pepinsky TB (2017) Lagged explanatory variables and the estimation of causal effect. J Politics 79:949–963

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharya J, Goldman D, McCaffrey D (2006) Estimating probit models with self-selected instruments. Stat Med 25:389–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brick I, Palmon O, Wald J (2012) Too much pay-performance sensitivity? Rev Econ Stat 94:287–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen Y, Podolski E, Veeraraghavan M (2014) Local gambling preferences and corporate innovative success. J Financ Quant Anal 49:77–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiburis RC, Das J, Lokshin M (2011) A practical comparison of the bivariate probity and linear IV estimators. Working paper. Development Research Group. The World Bank.

  • Coles JL, Daniel ND, Naveen L (2006) Managerial incentives and risk-taking. J Financ Econ 79:431–468

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coles JL, Daniel ND, Naveen L (2013) Calculation of compensation incentives and firm-related wealth using execucomp: data, program, and explanation. Working Paper, Arizona State University.

  • Conant JS, Mokwa MP, Varadarajan PR (1990) Strategic types, distinctive marketing competencies and organizational performance: a multiple measure-based study. Strateg Manag J 11:365–383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Core J, Guay WR (1999) The use of equity grants to manage optimal equity incentive levels. J Account Econ 28:151–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Covin JG, Slevin DP (1989) Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments. Strateg Manag J 10:75–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Covin JG, Wales WJ (2019) Crafting high-impact strategic orientation research: some suggested guidelines. Entrep Theory Pract 43:3–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Covin JG, Green KM, Slevin DP (2006) Strategic process effects on the strategic orientation-sales growth rate relationship. Entrep Theory Pract 30:57–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cyert RM, March JG (1963) A behavioral theory of the firm. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Demerjerian P, Lev B, McVay S (2012) Quantifying managerial productivity: a new measure and validity tests. Manage Sci 58:1229–1248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dess G, Lumpkin GT (2005) The role of strategic orientation in stimulating effective corporate entrepreneurship. Acad Manag Exec 19:147–156

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker P (1970) Entrepreneurship in business enterprise. J Bus Policy 1:3–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker P (1985a) Innovation and entrepreneurship. Harper Collins, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker P (1985b) Entrepreneurial strategies. Calif Manage Rev 27:9–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gavetti G (2012) Toward a behavioral theory of strategy. Organ Sci 23:267–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gavetti G, Levinthal D (2000) Looking forward and looking backward: cognitive and experiential search. Adm Sci Q 45:113–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gifford S (1992) Allocation of entrepreneurial attention. J Econ Behav Organ 19:265–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene W, Hensher D (2009) Modeling ordered choices: a primer and recent developments. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Hambrick DC (1983) Some tests of the effectiveness and functional attributes of Miles and Snow’s strategic types. Acad Manag J 26:5–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heckman JJ (1978) Dummy endogenous variables in a simultaneous equation system. Econometrica 46:931–959

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirshleifer D, Low A, Teoh S (2012) Are overconfident CEOs better innovators. Journal of Finance 67:1457–1498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kickul J, Gundry LK (2002) Prospecting for strategic advantage: the proactive entrepreneurial personality and small firm innovation. J Small Bus Manage 40:85–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kline RB (2010) Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence PR, Lorsch JW (1967) Organization and environment. Harvard University, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Leszczensky L, Wolbring T (2019) How to deal with reverse causality using panel data? Recommendations for researchers based on a simulation study. Sociol Methods Res (Forthcoming)

  • Ling Y, Simsek Z, Lubakin, H, Veiga JF (2008) Transformational leadership's role in promoting corporate entrepreneurship: examining the CEO-TMT interface. Acad Manag J 51:557–576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lumpkin GT, Dess G (1996) Clarifying the strategic orientation construct and linking it to performance. Acad Manag Rev 21:135–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maddala GS, Wu S (1999) A comparative study of unit root tests with panel data and a new simple test. Oxford Bull Econ Stat 61:631–652

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mai R, Niemand T, Kraus S (2021) A tailed-fit model evaluation strategy for bettwe decisions about structural equation models. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 173:1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malmendier U, Tate G (2005) CEO overconfidence and corporate investment. J Finance 60:2661–2700

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manso G (2011) Motivating innovation. Journal of Finance 66:1823–1860

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March J (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ Sci 2:71–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles RE, Snow CC (1978) Organizational strategy, structure, and process. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller D (1983) The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms. Manag Sci 29:770–791

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishra C (2017) Creating and sustaining competitive advantage: management logics, business models, and entrepreneurial rent. Palgrave Macmillan, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mishra C (2020) Are frequent acquirers more entrenched? Int Rev Financ Anal 70:1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ocasio W (1997) Towards an attention-based view of the firm. Strateg Manag J 18:187–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oldham GR, Cummings A (1996) Employee creativity: personal and contextual factors at work. Acad Manag J 39:607–634

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penrose E (1959) The theory of the growth of the firm. New York

  • Peters RH, Taylor LA (2016) Intangible capital and the investment-q relation. J Financ Econ 123:251–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter ME(1992) Capital choices: changing the way America invests in industry. J Appl Corpor Finan 5:4–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rumelt R (1984) Towards a strategic theory of the firm. Compet Strat Manag 26:556–570

    Google Scholar 

  • Shane S, Venkataraman S (2000) The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Acad Manag Rev 25:217–226

    Google Scholar 

  • Snow CC, Hrebiniak LG (1980) Strategy, distinctive competence, and organizational performance. Adm Sci Q 25:317–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tian X, Wang T (2014) Tolerance for failure and corporate innovation. Rev Financ Stud 27:211–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wales WJ, Kraus S, Filser M, Stockman C, Covin JG (2021) The status quo of research on entrepreneurial orientation: Conventional landmarks and theoretical scaffolding. J Bus Res 128:564–577

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiklund J (1999) The sustainability of strategic orientation-performance relationship. Entrep Theory Pract 24:37–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wooldridge JM (2002) Inverse probability weighted M-estimators for sample selection, attrition, and stratification. Port Econ J 1:117–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wooldridge JM (2007) Inverse probability weighted estimation for general missing data problems. J Econom 141:1281–1301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wooldridge JM (2010) Econometric analysis of cross-section and panel data. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra SA (2008) Being entrepreneurial and market driven: Implications for company performance. J Strateg Manag 1:125–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra SA, Covin JG (1995) Contextual influences on the corporate entrepreneurship-performance relationship: a longitudinal analysis. J Bus Ventur 10:43–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra SA, Pierce JA II (1990) Research-evidence on the miles-snow typology. J Manag 16:751–768

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhaou J, George JM (2001) When job satisfaction leads to creativity: encouraging the expression of voice. Acad Manag J 44(682):696

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL, 33431, USA

    Chandra S. Mishra

Authors
  1. Chandra S. Mishra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chandra S. Mishra.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mishra, C.S. Managerial ability and strategic orientation. Rev Manag Sci 17, 1333–1363 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-022-00561-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-022-00561-5

Keywords

Mathematics Subject Classification

Search

Navigation