Krista Lewellyn

Income Inequality, Entrepreneurial Activity, and National Business Systems: A Configurational Analysis:

This article explores how and why high levels of income inequality result from configurations of different types of entrepreneurial activities and elements of the institutional context in a multicountry sample. A configurational approach is used to unpack the complexities associated with how income inequality arises from different types of entrepreneurial activities embedded in different institutional contexts associated with Whitley’s national business systems dimensions. The findings from fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis reveal that high levels of both high-growth and necessity entrepreneurial activity are associated with income inequality in certain contexts that are characterized by distinct institutional complementarities.

Pilot, Pivot and Advisory Boards: The Role of Governance Configurations in Innovation Commitment:

This study examines how governance configurations comprised of board capital, CEO power and the presence of large shareholders are associated with innovation commitment in organizations. We take a configurational perspective, proposing that organizational innovation commitment is contingent upon how interdependent governance attributes associated with monitoring and resource provisioning can either enhance or constrain management’s discretion to invest in research and development (R&D). Using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA), we identify complementarities which lead to three board archetypes that foster firm innovation commitment. ‘Pilot boards’ have both board capital breadth and depth allowing for active and close participation in innovation decision-making. ‘Pivot boards’ possess the depth of industry-specific expertise and linkages required for providing resources and oversight of powerful CEOs. And ‘advisory boards’ have less power but have outside directors who have breadth of expertise and relational capital that complements the oversight provided by powerful family owners so as to effectively advise management on innovation decisions. Our findings underscore that governance mechanisms work in tandem, not in isolation, to explain significant organizational outcomes, specifically those associated with innovation commitment.

Effectiveness of CEO Power Bundles and Discretion Context: Unpacking the ‘Fuzziness’ of the CEO Duality Puzzle:

Decades of research on the effectiveness of CEO duality as a governance mechanism have produced inconsistent results, providing support and non-support for agency and stewardship theories. To better understand the duality puzzle, we first conceptualize CEO duality as a governance mechanism conferring structural power and board discretion upon a CEO. We then use the concept of complementarity and open-systems logic to evaluate the effectiveness of CEO duality in conjunction with other, concurrent sources of CEO power and discretion. Using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis and data on 241 U.S. firms, we show that CEO duality combines in a variety of ways with other sources of CEO power into power bundles, and that particular power bundles configure with elements of the organizational and industry discretion context into four effective and four ineffective governance configurations. Consequently, our study suggests that the effectiveness of either a dual or separated leadership structure is reinforced or compensated for by other types of power and discretion arising from the context in which the CEO is embedded. Based on our findings we elaborate theory on plausible mechanisms underlying the complex patterns we observe and thus offer new insights for governance research.