CEO compensation and firm performance: The mediating effects of CEO risk taking behaviour

References

• Aaker, D. A., & Jacobson, R. (1987). The role of risk in explaining differences in profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 30(2), 277–19. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5465/256274
   Google Scholar
• Agarwal, A., & Mandelker, G. (1987). Managerial incentives and corporate investment and financing decisions. Journal of Finance, 42(4), 823–837. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1987.tb03914.x
   Google Scholar
• Al-Shammari, H. (2018). CEO Incentive Compensation and Risk-Taking Behavior: The Moderating Role of CEO Characteristics. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 17(3), 1–15.
   Google Scholar
• Amihud, Y., & Lev, B. (1981). Risk reduction as a management motive for conglomerate mergers. Bell Journal of Economics, 12(2), 605–617. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/3003575
   Google Scholar
• Baiman, S. (1990). Agency research in managerial accounting: A second look. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 15(4), 341–371. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(90)90023-N
   Google Scholar
• Balkin, D. B., Markman, G. D., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2000). Is CEO pay in high-technology firms related to innovation? Academy of Management Journal, 43(6), 1118–1129. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5465/1556340
   Google Scholar
• Barkema, G. G., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (1998). Managerial compensation and firm performance: A general research framework. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 135–145. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5465/257098
   Google Scholar
• Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
   Google Scholar
• Bartol, K. M., & Locke, E. A. (2000). Incentives and motivation. In S. L. Rynes & B. Gerhart (Eds.), Compensation in organizations: Current research and practice (pp. 104–147). Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Bhagat, S., Brickley, J. A., & Lease, R. C. (1985). Incentive effects of stock purchase plans. Journal of Financial Economics, 14(2), 195–215. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(85)90014-5
   Google Scholar
• Black, F., & Scholes, M. (1973). The pricing of options and corporate liabilities. Journal of Political Economy, 81(3), 637–659. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1086/260062
   Google Scholar
• Bloom, M., & Milkovich, G. T. (1998). Relationships among risk, incentive pay, and organizational performance. Academy of Management Journal, 41(3), 283–297. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/256908     
   Google Scholar
• Bowman, E. (1980). A risk/return paradox for strategic management. Sloan Management Review, 21, 17–31.
   Google Scholar
• Bowman, E. (1982). Risk seeking by troubled firms. Sloan Management Review, 23(4), 33–42.
   Google Scholar
• Bowman, E. (1984). Content analysis of annual reports for corporate strategy and risk. Interfaces, 14(1), 61–71. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1287/inte.14.1.61
   Google Scholar
• Bromiley, P. (1991). Testing a casual model of corporate risk taking and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 34(1), 37–59. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/256301     
   Google Scholar
• Chakravarthy, B. S. (1986). Measuring strategic performance. Strategic Management Journal, 7(5), 437–458. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250070505
   Google Scholar
• Datta, D. K., Guthrie, J. P., & Wright, P. M. (2005). Human resource management and labor productivity: Does industry matter? Academy of Management Journal, 48(1), 135–145. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2005.15993158
   Google Scholar
• DeFusco, R. A., Johnson, R. R., & Zorn, T. S. (1990). The effect of executive stock option plans on stockholders and bondholders. The Journal of Finance, 45(2), 617–627. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1990.tb03707.x
   Google Scholar
• DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101
   Google Scholar
• Donaldson, G., & Lorsch, J. W. (1983). Decision making at the top. Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Donaldson, L., & Davis, J. (1991). Stewardship theory or agency theory: CEO governance and shareholder returns. Australian Journal of Management, 16(1), 49–64. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/031289629101600103
   Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57–74. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4279003
   Google Scholar
• Fiegenbaum, A., & Thomas, H. (1985). An examination of the structural stability of Bowman’s risk-return paradox. In Academy of Management Proceedings (pp. 7–10).
   Google Scholar
• Fiegenbaum, A., & Thomas, H. (1986). Dynamic and risk measurement perspectives on Bowman’s risk-return paradox for strategic management: An empirical study. Strategic Management Journal, 7(5), 395–407. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250070502
   Google Scholar
• Finkelstein, S., & Boyd, B. K. (1998). How much does the CEO matter: The role of managerial discretion in the setting of CEO compensation. Academy of Management Journal, 41(2), 179–199. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/257101 
   Google Scholar
• Finkelstein, S., & Hambrick, D. C. (1989). Chief executive compensation: A study of the intersection of markets and political processes. Strategic Management Journal, 10(2), 121–134. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250100203
   Google Scholar
• Finkelstein, S., & Hambrick, D. C. (1996). Strategic leadership: Top executives and their effects on organizations. West Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Gerhart, B., & Milkovich, G. T. (1990). Organizational differences in managerial compensation and financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 663–691. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/256286     
   Google Scholar
• Gibbons, R., & Murphy, K. J. (1992). Optimal incentive contracts in the presence of career concerns: Theory and evidence. Journal of Political Economy, 100(3), 468–505. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1086/261826
   Google Scholar
• Gilley, K. M., Coombs, J. E., Parayitam, S., & Summers, E. L. 2004. “CEO Stock Options and Subsequent Stock Risk.” Presented at the 2004 meeting of the Academy of Management. New Orleans, Louisiana.
   Google Scholar
• Gomez-Mejia, L. R., & Wiseman, R. M. (1997). Reframing executive compensation: An assessment and outlook. Journal of Management, 23(3), 291–374.
   Google Scholar
• Gray, S. R., & Cannella, A. A. (1997). The role of risk in executive compensation. Journal of Management, 23(4), 517–540. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639702300402
   Google Scholar
• Hambrick, D. C., & Schecter, S. M. (1983). Turnaround strategies for mature industrial-product business units. Academy of Management Journal, 26(2), 231–248. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5465/255972
   Google Scholar
• Harvey, K. D., & Shrieves, R. E. (2001). Executive compensation structure and corporate governance choices. Journal of Financial Research, 24(4), 495–512. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6803.2001.tb00827.x
   Google Scholar
• Haubrich, J. G. (1994). Risk aversion, performance pay, and the principal-agent problem. Journal of Political Economy, 102(2), 258–276. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1086/261931
   Google Scholar
• Heneman, H. G., III, & Judge, T. A. (2000). Compensation attitudes. In S. L. Rynes & B. Gerhart (Eds.), Compensation in organizations: Current research and practice (pp. 61–103). Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Hill, C. W., & Hansen, G. S. (1991). A Longitudinal Study of the Cause and Consequences of Changes in Diversification in the U.S. Pharmaceutical Industry 1977-1986. Strategic Management Journal, 12(3), 187–199. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250120303
   Google Scholar
• Hirsch, P. M., Friedman, R., & Koza, M. P. (1990). Collaboration or paradigm shift?: Caveat emptor and the risk of romance with economic models for strategy and policy research. Organization Science, 1(1), 87–97. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1.1.87
   Google Scholar
• Ho, Y. K., Tjahjapranata, M., & Yap, C. M. (2006). Size, Leverage, Concentration, and R&D Investment in Generating Growth Opportunities. The Journal of Business, 79(2), 851–876. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1086/499140
   Google Scholar
• Hoskisson, R. E., Hitt, M. A., & Hill, C. W. (1993). Managerial Incentives and Investment in R&D in Large Multiproduct Firms. Organization Science, 4(2), 325–341. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.4.2.325
   Google Scholar
• Jemison, D. B. (1987). Risk and the relationship among strategy, organizational process and performance. Management Science, 33(9), 1087–1101. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.33.9.1087
   Google Scholar
• Jenkins, G. D., Mitra, A., Gupta, N., & Shaw, J. (1998). Are financial incentives related to performance? A meta-analytic review of empirical research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(5), 777–787. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.5.777
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, M., & Meckling, W. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, M. C. (1983). Organization theory and methodology. Accounting Review, 56(2), 319–338.
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, M. C., & Murphy, K. J. (1990). Performances pay and top management incentives. Journal of Political Economy, 98(2), 225–264. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1086/261677
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D., & Tversky, D. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decisions under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 262–291. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/1914185
   Google Scholar
• Kaplan, S. N., & Zingales, L. (1997). Do Investment-Cash Flow Sensitivities Provide Useful Measures of Financing Constraints? The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(1), 169–215. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1162/003355397555163
   Google Scholar
• Larcker, D. F. (1983). The association between performances plan adoption and corporate capital investment. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 5, 3–30. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-4101(83)90003-4
   Google Scholar
• Leonard, J. S. (1990). Executive pay and firm performance. Industrial & Labor Relations Review, 43(3), 13–29. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/001979399004300302
   Google Scholar
• Levinthal, D. (1988). A survey of agency models of organizations. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organizations, 9(2), 153–185. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2681(88)90071-6
   Google Scholar
• Lewellen, W. G., Loderer, C., & Martin, K. (1987). Executive compensation and executive incentive problems: An empirical analysis. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 9(3), 287–310. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-4101(87)90009-7
   Google Scholar
• Loomis, C. J. (1982). The madness of executive compensation. Fortune, 12, 42–52.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, K., & Bromiley, P. (1990). Strategic risk and corporate performance: An analysis of alternative risk measures. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 759–779. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/256289     
   Google Scholar
• Morgeson, F. P., & Hofmann, D. A. (1999). The Structure and Function of Collective Constructs: Implications for Multilevel Research and Theory Development. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 249–465. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1999.1893935
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, K. (1985). Corporate performance and managerial remuneration: An empirical analysis. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 7(1–3), 11–42. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-4101(85)90026-6
   Google Scholar
• Ocasio, W. (1994). Political Dynamics and the Circulation of Power: CEO Succession in U.S. Industrial Corporations, 1960-1990. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(2), 285–312. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/2393237
   Google Scholar
• Pass, C. (2003). Long-term incentive schemes, executive remuneration and corporate performance: An empirical study. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 3, 18–27. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/14720700310497087
   Google Scholar
• Pfeffer, J. (1981). Power in organizations. Pitman.
   Google Scholar
• Ruefli, T., Collins, J., & Lacugna, J. (1999). Risk measures in strategic management research: Auld lang syne? Strategic Management Journal, 20(2), 167–194. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199902)20:2<167::AID-SMJ9>3.0.CO;2-Q
   Google Scholar
• Sanders, W. G. (2001). Behavioral responses of CEOs to stock ownership and stock option pay. Academy of Management Journal, 44(3), 477–492. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/3069365     
   Google Scholar
• Simsek, Z. (2007). CEO tenure and organizational performance: An intervening model. Strategic Management Journal, 28(6), 653–662. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.599
   Google Scholar
• Stroh, L. K., Brett, J. M., Bauman, J. P., & Reilly, A. H. (1996). Agency theory and variable compensation strategies. Academy of Management Journal, 39(3), 751–767. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/256663   
   Google Scholar
• Taussig, F. W., & Braker, W. S. (1925). American corporations and their executives: A statistical inquiry. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 3(1), 1–51. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/1885814
   Google Scholar
• Tosi, H. L., Werner, S., Katz, J. P., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2000). How much does performance matter? A meta-analysis of CEO pay studies. Journal of Management, 26(2), 301–339. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/014920630002600207
   Google Scholar
• Tsui, A. S., Ashford, S. J., Clair, L. S., & Xin, K. R. (1995). Dealing with discrepant expectations: Response strategies and managerial effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 38(6), 1515–1543. http://www.jstor.org/stable/256842?origin=JSTOR-pdf
   Google Scholar
• Tushman, M., & Romanelli, E. (1985). Organizational evolution: A metamorphosis model of convergence and reorientation. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 7, pp. 171–222). JAI Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tushman, M. L., Virany, B., & Romanelli, E. 1989. Effects of CEO and executive team succession on subsequent organization performance. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Meeting, Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Vroom, V. (1964). Work and motivation. Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Warner, J. B. (1985). Stock market reaction to management incentive plan adoption: An overview. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 7(1–3), 145–149. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-4101(85)90033-3
   Google Scholar
• Westphal, J. D., & Zajac, E. J. (1995). Who shall govern? CEO/board power, demographic similarity, and new director selection. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(1), 60–83. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/2393700
   Google Scholar
• Wiseman, R. M., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (1998). A behavioral agency model of managerial risk taking. Academy of Management Review, 23(1), 133–153. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1998.192967
   Google Scholar
• Wright, P., Ferris, S. P., Sarin, A., & Awasthi, V. (1996). Impact of corporate insider, blockholder, and institutional equity ownership on firm risk talking. Academy of Management Journal, 39(2), 441–463. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/256787     
   Google Scholar
• Wright, P., Kroll, M., Krug, J. A., & Pettus, M. (2007). Influences of top management team incentives on firm risk taking. Strategic Management Journal, 28(1), 81–89. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.548
   Google Scholar
• Wright, P., Kroll, M., Lado, A., & VanNess, B. (2002). The structure of ownership and corporate acquisition strategies. Strategic Management Journal, 23(1), 41–53. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.208
   Google Scholar