• norsk
    • English
  • English 
    • norsk
    • English
  • Login
View Item 
  •   Home
  • Handelshøyskolen BI
  • Publikasjoner fra CRIStin - BI
  • View Item
  •   Home
  • Handelshøyskolen BI
  • Publikasjoner fra CRIStin - BI
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Corporate Governance and Paradoxical Tensions: Leadership Dynamics Through Facet Theory

Solomon, Esther; Huse, Morten
Journal article, Peer reviewed
Accepted version
Thumbnail
View/Open
Available from 2020-12-25 (1.202Mb)
URI
https://hdl.handle.net/11250/2657350
Date
2019
Metadata
Show full item record
Collections
  • Publikasjoner fra CRIStin - BI [649]
  • Scientific articles [1334]
Original version
International Studies of Management and Organization. 2019, 49 (3), 320-339.   10.1080/00208825.2019.1623982
Abstract
Relying on a sample of 841 respondents who are board members of Norwegian firms, this study applied Dr. Guttman’s Facet Theory along with nonmetric multidimensional scaling to propose and empirically test structural hypotheses about perceptions of boardroom dynamics. The application of this formal methodology to studying corporate governance processes offers unique insights into leadership dynamics and paradoxical tensions as board members experience them in the boardroom. A facet framework defining the content universe formed the basis for facet profile configurations expressing classes of boardroom dynamics. Results overall confirmed the structural hypotheses and the lawfulness of a radex structure representing boardroom processes. Three facets differentiated among classes of boardroom processes in terms of whether they represent opportunities or threats for cooperation, board asserting or acquiescing roles, and approaching or distancing orientations. These facets represented the qualitative differentiation and jointly played the polarizing role, while a fourth ordered facet on specificity played the modulator role. Director’s perceptions of shared leadership and monitoring comprise enabling orientations and are differentiated from inhibiting orientations that include dominating leadership and biases. The findings have implications for director’s motivation and ability to engage in their monitoring and resource provision roles, or alternatively, contribute to governance inertia.
Publisher
Taylor and Francis
Journal
International Studies of Management and Organization

Contact Us | Send Feedback

Privacy policy
DSpace software copyright © 2002-2019  DuraSpace

Service from  Unit
 

 

Browse

ArchiveCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsDocument TypesJournalsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsDocument TypesJournals

My Account

Login

Statistics

View Usage Statistics

Contact Us | Send Feedback

Privacy policy
DSpace software copyright © 2002-2019  DuraSpace

Service from  Unit