No abstract

Empirical studies examining firm performance following CEO succession in family firms predominantly document inferior performance of family successors. This evidence is at odds with general theoretical literature that attests a positive effect of family involvement inside the firm. To explore this enigma, we theoretically and empirically disentangle the influence of the CEO attribute family member (i.e., the CEO is affiliated to the family) on post-succession firm performance, from other, distinct CEO attributes (e.g., CEO-related human capital). Our analysis on the individual CEO level shows that after respective controls, the family member attribute is significantly positively related to post-succession firm performance.

No abstract

No abstract

As a well‐studied executive bias, CEO overconfidence usually has negative connotations – although empirical evidence of its performance effects remains inconclusive. By theorizing on CEO overconfidence in a turnaround situation, we propose that CEO overconfidence can either help or hinder turnaround performance, depending on whether the overconfident CEO is the incumbent who steered the firm into dire straits, or a successor hired during decline. Our empirical findings suggest that overconfidence in an incumbent CEO damages turnaround performance; replacing overconfident incumbents improves turnaround performance and overconfident successors hired during decline enhance turnaround performance. Exploratory post‐hoc analyses further suggest that these effects are driven by the divergent ways in which overconfidence biases incumbent and successor CEOs’ assessment of organizational decline. Comprehensive implications for research and practice on CEO overconfidence are discussed.