Thanks to the Strategic Management Society (SMS) for hosting another successful planning meeting in Frankfurt, Germany–this time for the SMS conference in Minneapolis in the Fall! It was a pleasure working with you for the last time as Chair of the Strategy Process IG!
Happy to share that I have been awarded a one-year Ave Tucker Fellowship at George Washington University’s School of Business.
Named after George Washington University’s Board of Trustee member Avram S. Tucker, this fellowship recognizes faculty members who “displayed good teaching performance, as well as recent scholarly productivity, prospects for continued publications in top outlets, and records of research leadership and mentoring of junior scholars.”
Just started listening to Adam Grants’ latest podcast series called WorkLife. Excellent and highly entertaining insights on how to, in Adam’s own words, make work not suck.
Greetings from Strategic Management Society’s 38th Annual Conference in Paris, where I served as the Program Chair for the Strategy Process Interest Group as well as the co-chair of the Executive Discoveries Series.
Another big milestone to celebrate after becoming U.S. citizen a few weeks ago: I was just promoted to Full Professor at the George Washington University School of Business. It has been quite a journey from getting my PhD in 2005, becoming an Assistant Professor in 2006, moving from the West Coast back to the East Coast in 2010, and getting tenure in 2014.
Looking forward to the freedom but also the responsibilities that this new chapter in my career will bring with it…
A new article “Before they were ties: Predicting the value of brand-new connections,” co-authored with Daniel Levin (Rutgers University), has just been accepted for publication in the Journal of Management.
Complementing and extending prior studies on the value of existing work relationships, this study examines whether we can predict the value of brand-new ties before people ever meet. We examine this question by developing three sets of hypotheses reflecting the three main perspectives in the social networks literature: the resource (actor), dyadic (tie), and structural (network) perspective. To test our hypotheses, we asked executives to reach out for advice from someone they had never met and to complete a survey of their various thoughts about the other person both before and after making a connection. We find support for all three perspectives after a connection has been made; however, before tie formation, we find evidence only for the structural perspective. Our results suggest that the lack of reliable information about strangers obscures which brand-new ties will turn out to be more valuable but that surrounding network structures remain a reliable predictor of value, even for brand-new ties.
I’m honored and thankful to our PhD students for nominating me again for this year’s Peter B. Vaill Outstanding Doctoral Educator Award!
My co-author Daniel Levin (Rutgers) and I just published a commentary titled “Is tie maintenance necessary?” in the Academy of Management Discoveries.
In this commentary, we build on our research on dormant ties to contrast what we would call the activity-based perspective of tie maintenance—i.e., the premise underlying the vast majority of social networks research that ties to individuals who are associated with one’s past are important to maintain—with we would call the memory-based perspective on tie maintenance, i.e., that the memory of a prior relationship is often sufficient and that past relationships can retain considerable value, without the need for active maintenance.
Happy to see that the research I have published over the last few years have made an impact–so far, it has been cited over 1,000 times on Google Scholar!
Congratulations to to the organizers Laura Cardinal, Chet Miller, and Anthea Zhang for a great Strategic Management Society conference in Houston, TX!
As Associate Program Chair for the Strategy Process IG, I co-organized two workshops:
- “New frontiers in strategy process & practice research,” with Rich Bettis (UNC Chapel Hill), Cynthia Devers (Texas A&M University), Steven Floyd (University of Massachusetts Amherst), Tomi Laamanen (University of St. Gallen), Phil Bromiley (University of California, Irvine), Paula Jarzabkowski (Cass Business School, City University of London), Shenghui Ma (University of Zurich), & Libby Weber (University of California, Irvine); co-chaired with Krsto Pandza (Leeds University Business School).
- “The process of publishing process research: Journeying along the (sometimes bumpy but ultimately successful) paths to publication,” with Steven Floyd (University of Massachusetts, Amherst), Tomi Laamanen (University of St. Gallen), Henry Mintzberg (McGill University), and Sotirios Paroutis (University of Warwick); co-chaired with John Joseph (University of California, Irvine).
Thanks to all panelists and participants for making this happen!
Just came back from the SMS Special Conference in Banff where I represented the Strategy Process Interest Group. It was a great experience to meet the other IG leaders and the SMS Board and jointly plan the SMS International Conference later this year in Houston.
Just accepted the invitation of the Business Policy & Strategy (BPS) Division of the Academy of Management (AOM) to join the BPS Research Committee. This two-year appointment entails reviewing and nominating the papers for the various BPS Best Paper Awards at the Annual Meeting each year and selecting the winner of the Annual Dissertation Award.
I look forward to serving the BPS in this capacity!
Our article “Relational enhancement: How the relational dimension of social capital unlocks the value of network-bridging ties” co-authored with Daniel Levin (Rutgers University), Melissa Appleyard (Portland State University), & Rob Cross (University of Virginia) has been recognized as a 2016 Outstanding Group & Organization Management (GOM) Paper and nominated for a “Best GOM Paper” Award by the GOM Editorial Team.
According to the editor, our paper “exemplifies high quality research that is both informative and engaging and hence makes important contributions to the study and practice of management.”
Just accepted the incoming Editor David Allen’s invitation to join his team as an Associate Editor of the Journal of Management!
Coming full circle more than a decade after having my very first paper published in that journal…
New article forthcoming in Journal of Management:
Theodore A. Khoury*, Erin G. Pleggenkuhle-Miles**, Jorge Walter***
* Portland State University, **University of Nebraska Omaha, ***The George Washington University
Licensing has become the central form of interfirm technology transfer and commercialization in the market for inventions. However, despite the large representation and growth of this business model, the resolution of key contractual provisions is still regarded as idiosyncratic, and little is known about how experience with prior relationships or bargaining power position affects contract outcomes. In an attempt to further understand how these transactions unfold, we present and test a
theoretical framework disentangling experience benefits and transaction costs associated with licensors’ prior involvement in out- versus in-licensing deals and how they affect the important, yet contentious, contractual provision of nonexclusivity. Drawing on transaction cost, experiential learning, and bargaining power theories, we develop new insights explaining when licensors are likely to realize nonexclusive contracts as a function of their prior licensing deals, and when bargaining power moderates the relationships between prior deals and nonexclusivity. Leveraging a
27-year sample of bioscience licensing transactions, this study reveals the dynamic tension between the benefits and transaction costs arising from prior interfirm collaborations, and how a firm’s history of collaborations, alongside its bargaining power position, influences contractual outcomes.
Keywords: transaction costs; bargaining power; technology licensing; interfirm alliances; experiential learning; nonexclusivity; bioscience industry; perspective-taking
Thanks to the members of the Strategy Process Interest Group (IG) of the Strategic Management Society (SMS) for electing me as the incoming Associate Program Chair! This is a three-year rotation leading to Program Chair (in 2018) and IG Chair (in 2019). I look forward to working in this capacity with Nacho & Dries and the other SMS Officers.
For more information on the Strategy Process IG, click here.
I gladly accepted an invitation by the editor of the Journal of Management Studies, Prof. Dries Faems, to join the editorial board of the journal.
Please check JOM‘s website for more information.
This year’s Academy of Management Annual Meeting took place from August 5-9 in Anaheim, CA, where we presented our paper:
- “Before they were ties: Predicting the value of brand–new connections,” co-authored with Daniel Levin (Rutgers University) & J. Keith Murnighan (Northwestern University),
which was also included in the MOC Best Paper Proceedings.
I further received the Above and Beyond the Call of Duty (ABCD) Award of the Organization and Management Theory Division.
For more information, check the AOM Website.
New article conditionally accepted in Strategy Science:
Markus Kreutzer*, Laura B. Cardinal**, Jorge Walter***, & Christoph Lechner****
* European Business School, **University of South Carolina, ***The George Washington University, **** University of St. Gallen
The traditional view of control in organizations largely implies an “either-or” substitution logic, as opposed to the complementarity logic implied in the more recent view of control. This study examines whether formal and informal controls complement or substitute each other in their influence on performance outcomes, and whether such an interaction differs for more or less exploratory tasks. Our findings from an analysis of 184 strategic initiative teams in a cross-industry multi-country sample of firms support the complementary view. More specifically, we find support for our hypotheses that the combined use of formal and informal control has a positive impact on the performance of initiative teams, and that this complementary effect is more pronounced when the degree of exploration is lower. Accordingly, our study contributes to the organizational control literature both theoretically—by providing an explicit theoretical rationale for the complementary view—and empirically—by virtue of providing an empirical test of the interactive effects of formal and informal control.
Keywords: Control theory, informal organizational control, complementarity, strategic initiative teams, degree of exploration
Just attended the Strategic Management Society Meeting in Rome to plan the upcoming conference in Berlin as an Executive Discoveries Series Coordinator. Thanks to Niko Pelka from SMS for this great opportunity to be involved in putting together the program for an SMS Annual International Conference!
A new research project I’m involved in will be included in the Best Paper Proceedings of the Academy of Management Meeting, this time for the 2016 Meeting in Anaheim, CA:
Daniel Z. Levin*, Jorge Walter**, & J. Keith Murnighan***
* Rutgers University, ** The George Washington University, *** Northwestern University
The vast majority of research on the value of social or professional relationships has focused on ties that already exist. We ask if it is possible to predict in advance—before people ever meet—which brand-new ties will yield more value in the form of useful work-related knowledge. We examine this question using three perspectives: the resource (actor) perspective, the relational (tie) perspective, and the network (structure) perspective. To test our predictions, we asked 150 executives to reach out for work-related advice from someone they had never met, and to complete a survey of their thoughts and judgments of the other person both before and after making a connection. Controlling for the effects of homophily, we find support for all three perspectives after a connection has been made, i.e., once there is already an existing tie. However, before tie formation—our focus in this paper—we find evidence only for the network perspective, in the form of either bonding or bridging. Our results suggest that the lack of reliable information about strangers—especially their likely relational or resource qualities—makes it difficult to predict which ties will turn out to be more valuable, but that an existing network structure remains a reliable predictor of value, even for brand-new ties.
Keywords: Social networks, social capital, new ties, tie formation, knowledge transfer, advice seeking
I have just received notice from the GWSB Doctoral Student Association that I have been nominated for this year’s Peter B. Vaill Outstanding Doctoral Educator Award!
This represents my fourth nomination in the six years I’ve been here at GW (including winning this award in 2014). Thanks to our doctoral students for nominating me again!