This paper provides a systematic review of 165 empirical studies on the antecedents of performance in international strategic alliances. It provides the most detailed display of definitions, rationales, measures and findings currently available. Hence, this stateof-the art literature review creates an accessible pool of knowledge that is highly relevant for future research on international strategic alliances. Further, it draws on this knowledge pool to build a model which highlights the quite different rationales advanced by researchers to explain associations between the antecedents and performance. The model makes the different rationales explicit and will aid researchers in identifying tests that can be performed to examine the links between antecedents and performance as well as the mechanisms through which such associations operate. Finally, the synthesized evidence is used to suggest that researchers should give increased attention to achieving congruence between measures of antecedents and performance.

No abstract

Previous research has only minimally examined the association between the behaviour and performance evaluations of individual auditors beyond the use of efficiency-focused evaluations. We examine the association between dysfunctional auditor behaviour and three evaluation foci: an efficiency focus, a client focus and a quality focus. Our results, which are based on questionnaire responses from 196 auditors, demonstrate that an efficiency focus is not associated with dysfunctional behaviour. A client focus is found to be associated with dysfunctional behaviour. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, our results show that it seems possible to limit dysfunctional behaviours through a quality focus in performance evaluations. Our results provide insights of use to practitioners and regulators on how performance evaluations may not only induce but also reduce dysfunctional auditor behaviours.

Financial analysts tend to demonstrate herding behavior, which sometimes compromises accuracy. A number of explanations spanning rational economic logic, cognitive biases, and social forces have been suggested. Relying on an experimental setting where participants forecast future earnings from a rich information set, we posit and obtain support for individual risk tolerance (or lack thereof) as an explanatory variable for herding behaviors. Specifically, less risk‐tolerant individuals forecast with less boldness and instead issue forecasts in agreement with the consensus forecast. The results are argued to be at least partially a product of cognitive biases and an intuitive reaction to uncertainty.

No abstract