Many studies have examined the relationships between board attributes (board independence, CEO duality, board size, and women on boards) and corporate social responsibility disclosure (CSRD) as a means to improve a firm’s reputation. This research was performed in various international settings and uneven outcomes were obtained. We therefore meta-analyzed 88 studies to summarize scattered evidence and found that CEO duality had a significantly negative relationship with CSRD, while board independence, board size and women representation had a significantly positive relationship with CSRD. These relationships were more significant in countries with low levels of commitment to sustainable goals. Thus, our study revealed differences in the relationship between board attributes and CSRD, and that these differences were conditioned by the institutional contexts in which firms operate. Our research has practical implications for practitioners and policy makers alike as we offer guidelines on the most suitable corporate governance mechanisms to achieve lower capital costs and better access to finance.

Based on the resource-based view (RBV) and the dynamic capabilities (DC) approach, in this work we carry out a thorough literature review in order to identify which organizational actions and resources act as the main antecedents of exploration and exploitation. Also, by using the cognitive maps technique, we analyse to what extent these antecedents are present in managers' cognitive maps when they develop exploration or exploitation strategies, as well as when they try to develop radical and incremental innovations. Our results show that, firstly, managers develop cognitive maps that match our theoretical proposals about the organizational resources and capabilities that can lead to exploitation and exploration. Secondly, regarding innovation, although the antecedents of exploitation are used by managers as the way towards incremental innovation, some antecedents of exploration are expected to facilitate not only radical but also incremental innovations. These results provide interesting points for reflection on the topics addressed and lead us to conclude that the antecedents of exploration and exploitation should not be seen as separate ways towards different types of innovation, but as sets of resources on which to build configurations that facilitate radical or incremental innovation.

From a contingency view, we aim to contribute to a better understanding of how exploitation and exploration influence performance. By conducting a meta-analysis, we aim to answer the following research question: How do substantive moderators (slack resources, organizational structure, inter-organizational relationships, competitive intensity, and environmental dynamism), extrinsic moderators (region, size, and sector) and methodological moderators (data sources and performance measurement) affect the impact of exploitation and exploration on performance? The results of the meta-analysis, including 328 correlations, 102 studies, and a sample of 41,298 cases, suggest that the influence of exploitation and exploration on performance depends on the presence of the moderating factors included in our analysis. Furthermore, some of these factors are relevant for explaining a better performance of exploitation versus exploration, while other moderators do not determine a different effect of exploitation and exploration on performance. JEL CLASSIFICATION M10; M19; O3

No abstract

Purpose Using a contingency approach, the purpose of this paper is to study how organizational factors (such as the organizational life cycle, firm size, firm ownership concentration and firm technology) determine the relative importance of the monitoring and provision of resources roles provided by board members. Design/methodology/approach This paper highlights the importance of contingency factors in carrying out board’s roles using a sample of 579 European firms registered in the STOXX Europe 600 index. The authors used a longitudinal analysis for the period from 2002 through to 2011. Findings The results show that the monitoring role is more relevant for companies that are large, are operating at the mature and stagnant stages, have a dispersed ownership and are low-technology. However, the provision of resources role is more relevant for companies that are in the growth and stagnant stages, and have a concentrated ownership. Originality/value The traditional analysis that relates the board’s structure and composition to the board’s roles focuses on determining what board should be the best. It plays little attention to analyzing which organizational factors affect the importance and presence of monitoring or resource dependence roles. In this regard, this work adds significant insights to agency theory and resource dependence theory as, with a contingency framework, the research aims to find what functions the board needs to develop in order to get better firm performance.