Browse > Article

The Effects of Accounting-Based Performance Feedback and Market-Based Performance Feedback on Technological Search  

Park, Sung-Hee (연세대학교 경영학과)
Park, Kyung-Min (연세대학교 경영학과)
Publication Information
Journal of the Korean Operations Research and Management Science Society / v.36, no.1, 2011 , pp. 57-68 More about this Journal
Abstract
This paper examines how multiple performance feedbacks influence firm's technological search, using two types of indicators : accounting-based performance and market-based performance. Also we investigate how CEO's attention shift depends on firm specific factors such as firm size and outsider ownership. For empirical analysis, we utilized financial data on 675 manufacturing firms in Korea during the period between 1998 and 2009. The results show that technological search based on accounting-based performance feedback is moderated by focal firm's size. However, as outsider ownership increases, technological search increases in response to market-based performance feedback.
Keywords
Performance Feedback; Technological Search; Accounting-Based Performance; Market-Based Performance; Attention-Based View;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Audia, P. and H. Greve, "Less likely to fail: Low performance, firm size, and factory expansion in the shipbuilding industry," Management Science, Vol.52, No.1(2006), p.83.   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Baek, J., J. Kang, and K. Park, "Corporate governance and firm value:evidence from the Korean financial crisis," Journal of Financial Economics, Vol.71, No.2(2004), pp.265- 313.   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Barnhart, S., M. Marr, and S. Rosenstein, "Firm performance and board composition: Some new evidence," Managerial and Decision Economics, Vol.15, No.4(1994), pp.329- 340.   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Baysinger, B., R. Kosnik, and T. Turk, "Effects of board and ownership structure on corporate R&D strategy," Academy of Management Journal, Vol.34, No.1(1991), pp.205- 214.   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Bromiley, P., "Testing a causal model of corporate risk taking and performance," Academy of Management Journal, Vol.34, No.1 (1991), pp.37-59.   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Wiseman, R. and L. Gomez-Mejia, "A behavioral agency model of managerial risk taking," Academy of Management Review, Vol. 23, No.1(1998), pp.133-153.
7 Zhou, K. and F. Wu, "Technological capability, strategic flexibility, and product innovation," Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 31, No.5(2010), pp.547-561.
8 Hannan, M. and J. Freeman, "Structural inertia and organizational change," American sociological review, Vol.49, No.2(1984), pp. 149-164.   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Kahneman, D., Attention and effort, Prentice Hall, NJ, 1973.
10 March, J. and Z. Shapira, "Variable risk preferences and the focus of attention," Psychological Review, Vol.99, No.1(1992), pp.172-183.   DOI
11 Nelson, R. and S. Winter, An evolutionary theory of economic change, Belknap Press, Boston, 1982.
12 Nohria, N. and R. Gulati, "Is slack good or bad for innovation?," Academy of Management Journal, Vol.39, No.5(1996), pp.1245- 1264.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Ocasio, W., "Towards an attention-based view of the firm," Strategic Management Journal, Vol.18, No.S1(1997), pp.187-206.   DOI
14 Shleifer, A. and R. Vishny, "Large shareholders and corporate control," The Journal of Political Economy, Vol.94, No.3(1986), pp. 461-488.   DOI   ScienceOn
15 Park, K.M, "Antecedents of convergence and divergence in strategic positioning:The effects of performance and aspiration on the direction of strategic change," Organization science, Vol.18, No.3(2007), p.386.   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Penrose, E., The theory ofthe growth ofthe firm, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1959.
17 Sorensen, J. and T. Stuart, "Aging, obsolescence, and organizational innovation," Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol.45, No.1 (2000), pp.81-112.   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Simon, H., Models of Bounded Rationality, MIT Press, Cambridge, Vol.I(1982).
19 Vissa, B., H. Greve, and W. Chen, "Business group affiliation and firm search behavior in India:Responsiveness and focus of attention," Organization science, Vol.21, No.3(2010), pp.696-712.   DOI   ScienceOn
20 Bushee, B., "The influence of institutional investors on myopic R&D investment behavior," Accounting Review, Vol.73, No.3(1998), pp.305-333.
21 Chandy, R. and G. Tellis, "Organizing for radical product innovation:the overlooked role of willingness to cannibalize," Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.35, No.4(1998), pp.474-487.   DOI   ScienceOn
22 Chen, W., "Determinants of firms' backward- and forward-looking R&D search behavior," Organization science, Vol.19, No.4 (2008), p.609.   DOI   ScienceOn
23 Chen, W. and K. Miller, "Situational and institutional determinants of firms' R&D search intensity," Strategic management journal, Vol.28, No.4(2007), pp.369-381.   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Greve, H., "A behavioral theory of R&D expenditures and innovations:Evidence from shipbuilding," The Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 46, No.6(2003), pp.685-702.   DOI   ScienceOn
25 Christensen, C., The innovator's dilemma: when new technologies cause great firms to fail, Harvard Business Press, Boston, 1997.
26 Cyert, R. and J. March, A behavioral theory of the firm, Prentice-Hall Inc., New Jersey, 1963.
27 Dahlquist, M. and G. Robertsson, "Direct foreign ownership, institutional investors, and firm characteristics," Journal of Financial Economics, Vol.59, No.3(2001), pp.413-440.   DOI   ScienceOn
28 Greve, H., "A behavioral theory of firm growth: Sequential attention to size and performance goals," The Academy of Management Journal(AMJ), Vol.51, No.3(2008), pp.476- 494.   DOI   ScienceOn
29 Greve, H., "Positional rigidity:low performance and resource acquisition in large and small firms," Strategic Management Journal, in press, 2010.