Author:
Geulen Michael,Greven Andrea,Fischer-Kreer Denise,Brettel Malte
Abstract
AbstractAvoiding bankruptcy is a crucial task for any firm’s top management team (TMT), and reasons for the failure to accomplish it have long been studied. While financial metrics can predict near-term bankruptcy, governance characteristics increase precision in the long term. With TMT heterogeneity, we introduce a powerful predictor for the critical time frame in between. Grounded in upper echelons theory, we argue that TMT age heterogeneity increases while heterogeneity in TMT pay and TMT functional backgrounds decreases the bankruptcy probability. We test our hypotheses using a unique dataset of large, public U.S. firms, about half of which filed for bankruptcy between 2001 and 2020. Our results support our research model and show how TMT heterogeneity significantly predicts bankruptcy. We contribute to both bankruptcy and strategic management research by underscoring the importance of TMT heterogeneity as a level of analysis when predicting bankruptcy and add to the ongoing discussion on the impact of TMT pay differences on firm performance. Additionally, we offer valuable insights to practitioners navigating their firms in times of crisis and to regulators shaping the insolvency statutes of the future.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Business, Management and Accounting
Reference97 articles.
1. Aiken LS, West SG (1991) Multiple regression. Testing and interpreting interactions. Sage, Newbury Park
2. Altman EI, Hotchkiss E (2006) Corporate financial distress and bankruptcy: predict and avoid bankruptcy, analyze and invest in distressed debt, 1st edn. Wiley, New Jersey
3. Amason AC, Sapienza HJ (1997) The effects of top management team size and interaction norms on cognitive and affective conflict. J Manag 23(4):495–516
4. Ashford B, Mael F (1989) Social identity theory and organization. Acad Manag Rev 14(1):20–39
5. Bantel KA (1993) Top team, environment, and performance effects on strategic planning formality. Group Org Manag 18(4):436–458