Should I Stay or Should I Go? Founder Power and Exit via Initial Public Offering

Souitaris, Vangelis; Zerbinati, Stefania; Peng, Bo; Shepherd, Dean A.

doi:10.5465/amj.2017.0420

Cited by 39 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 180 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, a founder may exit the venture to avoid further losses (despite a reluctance to do so; DeTienne, Shepherd, & De Castro, 2008; Gimeno, Folta, Cooper, & Woo, 1997; Huang et al, 2019). In a recent study, Souitaris, Zerbinati, Peng, and Shepherd (2020) found that founders voluntarily exited their ventures, in full or in part (exited management or ownership), when they became frustrated by a loss in power over the direction of the venture. Managers may also voluntarily exit their ventures as a positive harvest strategy (DeTienne & Cardon, 2012).…”

Section: Methods For Systematic Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Creating New Ventures: A Review and Research Agenda

Shepherd

Souitaris

Gruber

2020

Journal of Management

Self Cite

108

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Creating new ventures is one of the most central topics to entrepreneurship and is a critical step from which many theories of management, organizational behavior, and strategic management build. Therefore, this review and proposed research agenda are relevant to not only entrepreneurship scholars but also other management scholars who wish to challenge some of the implicit assumptions of their current streams of research and extend the boundaries of their current theories to earlier in the organization’s life. Given that the last systematic review of the topic was published 16 years ago, and that the topic has evolved rapidly over this time, an overview and research outlook are long overdue. From our review, we inductively generated 10 subtopics: (a) lead founder, (b) founding team, (c) social relationships, (d) cognitions, (e) emergent organizing, (f) new-venture strategy, (g) organizational emergence, (h) new-venture legitimacy, (i) founder exit, and (j) entrepreneurial environment. These subtopics are then organized into three major stages of the entrepreneurial process: co-creating, organizing, and performing. Together, the framework provides a cohesive story of the past and a road map for future research on creating new ventures, focusing on the links connecting these subtopics.

show abstract

Section: Methods For Systematic Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Creating New Ventures: A Review and Research Agenda

Shepherd

Souitaris

Gruber

2020

Journal of Management

Self Cite

108

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additionally, the power of the founder CEO matters. Souitaris et al (2020), for instance, found a negative relationship between founder CEO power and his or her post‐IPO exit of the firm, and interestingly, they also noted that this relationship is mediated by the extent of frustration experienced by the founder CEO.…”

Section: Founder‐ceo Research Themesmentioning

confidence: 97%

The founder chief executive officer: A review of current insights and directions for future research

Abebe

Acharya

et al. 2020

Corporate Governance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research Question/Issue: From its inception in the late 1980s and early 1990s, founder-chief executive officer (CEO) research has garnered significant scholarly attention in the strategy and entrepreneurship disciplines, although other fields-such as economics, finance, and family business-have also generated substantial research insight on this topic. Despite this progress, a limited consensus exists on the influence of the founder CEO owing to the fragmented nature of extant research. In this review, we address this fragmentation by reviewing current literature, synthesizing the discipline-specific findings into an integrated framework, and highlighting promising directions for future founder-CEO research. Research Findings/Insights: Using a cross-disciplinary review of founder-CEO research based on 221 articles from 24 academic journals, we synthesize current research and provide directions for future research. Our framework organizes current research on the founder CEO into three broad themes. First, we review and synthesize scholarly work on factors related to the founder CEO during the nascent years of the firm. In the second theme, we review research that explores the impact of the founder CEO on strategic choices and firm configurations. In the third theme, we review the performance consequences of the founder CEO. Theoretical/Academic Implications: This review advances research on the founder CEO by taking stock of insights from various disciplines, highlighting advancements made, and suggesting promising directions for future research on founder CEOs. Additionally, a critical evaluation of current methodological approaches provides opportunities for strengthening the rigor of scholarly inquiry in this area.

show abstract

“…Such experiments could be conducted with more readily accessible samples of managers, such as executive education participants or MBA students. There are a handful of recent UET studies that have utilized mixed-methods approaches (e.g., Jung & Shin, 2018; Souitaris, Zerbinati, Peng, & Shepherd, 2020) to leverage the benefits of different research designs. This approach could be an effective way for scholars to respond to endogeneity concerns while also making progress in teasing out important mediators (e.g., Aguinis & Solarino, 2019; Tunarosa & Glynn, 2017).…”

Section: Evaluating Progress Made On Uet Metacritiquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Metacritiques of Upper Echelons Theory: Verdicts and Recommendations for Future Research

Neely

Lovelace²,

Cowen

et al. 2020

Journal of Management

181

174

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After more than 35 years, Hambrick and Mason’s upper echelons theory (UET) stands as one of the most influential perspectives in management research. However, as the literature and its attendant reviews have become more numerous and specialized, discussion of the fundamental conceptual and methodological critiques leveled against research utilizing the UET perspective has grown fragmented. As such, the first aim of the present review is to identify and synthesize a set of common critiques levied against UET research. In doing so, we unpack important nuance within each critique while establishing a common vocabulary to facilitate greater consistency in how these critiques are discussed by scholars, editors, and reviewers. Next, we analyze the past decade of UET research (i.e., empirical and conceptual articles) to provide a progress report on the state of the literature as it pertains to each critique. Based on this analysis, we issue a “verdict,” providing clear guidance on what issues still need to be resolved and offering clear recommendations for UET scholars moving forward. Finally, we close by taking stock of how our recommendations position UET scholars to embrace the task of providing impactful insights on emerging challenges facing top executives.

show abstract

Should I Stay or Should I Go? Founder Power and Exit via Initial Public Offering

Abstract: This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version.Permanent repository link: https://openaccess.city.ac.uk/id/eprint/21358/ Link to published version: http://dx.

Cited by 39 publications

References 180 publications

Creating New Ventures: A Review and Research Agenda

Creating New Ventures: A Review and Research Agenda

The founder chief executive officer: A review of current insights and directions for future research

Metacritiques of Upper Echelons Theory: Verdicts and Recommendations for Future Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About