Organizational experience of social media: impacts on competitive intelligence

Purpose The paper aims to clarify the potential impact of data gathered from social media (SM) in the competitive intelligence (CI) process of organizations. As use of SM expands, analysis of this data becomes a critical business need providing essential support for decision makers. This paper seeks to examine how SM be used to enhance CI in an organizational context. Design/methodology/approach This paper adopted an exploratory mixed-method approach followed by a sequential and equal status design, with qualitative semi-structured interviews, accounting for the qualitative study and serving as precursor to a quantitative structured survey. Interviewees included a university professor and CI consultant, an SM analyst and a subject in a management position – all in the field of CI. A survey was sent to Fortune 1000 companies. Some 227 companies replied. Findings The findings were that the majority of respondents produce CI reports at least monthly, and that information transmitted mainly by presentation within organizations. Over 70% of companies outsource CI activities to specialized firms, while 80.9% of organizations felt CI improved their relationship with their customers. Not surprisingly, as the number of people dedicated to CI activities increased, the likelihood of an organization hiring outside companies specializing in CI diminished. Research limitations/implications All organizations sampled were large US companies; thus, small- and medium-sized enterprises were excluded, as were non-US viewpoints. As survey respondents were anonymous, the source of data at the level of the individual is missing. Finally, only three interviewees provided the qualitative data. Practical implications This investigation determined organizations should have an established and well-structured CI department. Furthermore, such a department should have between five and ten employees to maximize the potential. Outsourcing depends on the company’s specific needs. Nevertheless, regardless of whether it outsources CI activities or not, each firm should monitor SM to enhance the CI process. Originality/value Much SM-based CI is either non-existent or in “embryotic” stages in most companies, and therefore still a work in progress. Furthermore, as SM is a relatively new phenomenon, studies supporting its implementation are scarce. Companies stand to gain significant improvements to CI if SM is effectively used.

The decade of innovation: from benchmarking to execution

Purpose This article aims to highlight the results of a Global Innovation Survey from 407 organizations representing 33 countries. This was the third of three surveys conducted by the researchers since 2011. Ten key insights were formulated to gauge the progress of innovation in organizations as well as the practice and success of nine innovation methods (data analytics, design thinking, innovation metrics, etc.) used to support innovation execution. Design/methodology/approach The survey data was bifurcated into two groups, high and low innovators, by analyzing their innovation scores using a K-means cluster analysis. This was followed by correlational analysis with the innovation practices by these groups. Qualitative survey data was also collected and used to interpret the results. Findings Overall innovation scores have improved over the decade. Organizations are still struggling with process drivers such as idea management and innovation measures. High innovators are pervasively using innovative methods to advance innovation execution much more than low innovators. The two methods that showed the highest correlation to an innovative culture were design thinking and open innovation. Originality/value Comparing the Global Innovation Survey to two other surveys, 2011 Canadian Executives (n = 605) and 2013 US Fortune 1000 (n = 1,203) that use the same innovation measurement scale, provides a unique longitudinal perspective. The nine innovation methods investigated in the Global Innovation Survey provide original insight into how high and low innovative organizations are using methods to advance innovation execution.

Organizational Conflict Resolution and Strategic Choice: Evidence from a Survey of Fortune 1000 Firms

This article examines the strategic underpinnings of firms’ use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) practices. The authors argue that a firm’s strategic orientation and commitment to ADR shape its adoption of dispute resolution techniques—such as mediation and arbitration. Firms vary in the benefits they seek to gain from adopting ADR practices, and firm-level use is affected by these anticipated benefits. The authors also propose a link between a firm’s commitment to the diffusion, access, and their use of ADR, on the one hand, and employee usage on the other. They test their theory using survey data from Fortune 1000 corporations and identify four distinct strategic orientations toward ADR, which in turn help to explain use of ADR within firms. Finally, they also find that a firm’s commitment to ADR is also shown to affect the firm’s use of mediation and arbitration.

Cultures of Genius at Work: Organizational Mindsets Predict Cultural Norms, Trust, and Commitment

Three studies examine how organizational mindset —whether a company is perceived to view talent as fixed or malleable—functions as a core belief that predicts organizational culture and employees’ trust and commitment. In Study 1, Fortune 500 company mission statements were coded for mindset language and paired with Glassdoor culture data. Workers perceived a more negative culture at fixed (vs. growth) mindset companies. Study 2 experimentally manipulated organizational mindset and found that people evaluated fixed (vs. growth) mindset companies as having more negative culture norms and forecasted that employees would experience less trust and commitment. Study 3 confirmed these findings from more than 500 employees of seven Fortune 1000 companies. Employees who perceived their organization to endorse a fixed (vs. growth) mindset reported that their company’s culture was characterized by less collaboration, innovation, and integrity, and they reported less organizational trust and commitment. These findings suggest that organizational mindset shapes organizational culture.

Is there still a gender effect on CEO compensation?

Purpose Do female CEOs face a compensation gap? The purpose of this paper is to examine whether gender affects the total compensation of today’s CEOs, and whether it moderates ten factors influencing their total compensation. Design/methodology/approach Taking the 54 female CEOs cited in the US 2014 Fortune’s 1000 report, a matched sample of male CEOs was selected, matched according to the crosstab of age by education and by the sizes of the companies directed by these female CEOs. Findings Using four years’ worth of Fortune reports, between 2013 and 2016, this matched sample indicates that female CEOs are not discriminated against in terms of total compensation. However, eight factors do show a significant effect on total compensation. Using moderation analysis, the present study reveals how gender interacts with company size, sector, membership of outside boards and nature of previous experience. Research limitations/implications This paper addresses an important and under-researched gap, with contradictory findings in the existing literature, by compiling and testing the characteristics of male and female CEOs which are not cited in Fortune 1000 reports. Originality/value Arguably, this is therefore one of the first papers to study gender differences in total compensation among Fortune 1000 CEOs using a matched sample technique, based on a larger number of female CEOs and a larger number of years than any previous research.

Strategic Recruitment Across Borders: An Investigation of Multinational Enterprises

As a result of globalization, large-scale modern-day businesses extend across borders as they engage in multinational enterprises. Such enterprises must conduct operations in disparate, culturally diverse contexts, which present challenges for implementing human resource management activities, such as whether to standardize or localize activities across borders. The current study focuses on recruitment activities, as they represent firms’ initial efforts to attract highly qualified talent. However, the extant recruitment literature has primarily been conducted in a single context or in Westernized societies; thus, it is unclear how organizations recruit across borders. Drawing on signaling theory, we explore how Fortune 1000 firms use recruiting signals in their domestic and international operations. In general, we find that firms standardize the recruiting signals across their domestic and international operations. Yet, the amount that each signal is emphasized differs in domestic and international operations and is contingent upon language. Furthermore, cultural distance between the home and host country largely does not explain the standardization of the recruiting signals. We summarize the findings and provide direction intended to guide future research.

Top Management Team Structure and Resource Reallocation Within the Multibusiness Firm

Drawing on the classic concepts of integration and differentiation from contingency theory, we analyze the impact of influential business unit (BU) executives on the capital resource allocation decisions of the multibusiness firm. Capital resource allocation is one of the most important tasks of the top management team (TMT), yet management scholars have yet to explore the fundamental link between TMT structure and resource reallocation decisions. We hypothesize that greater BU influence within the firm’s TMT drives greater reallocation because BU executives are positioned to focus on organizational elements related to differentiation. We also hypothesize contextual factors, based on the multidimensional nature of managerial influence, which act to limit the effect of BU influence. To support this analysis, we develop two unique measures: The first captures the degree of capital reallocation from year to year within the multibusiness firm, and the second measures the relative influence of BU executives. An empirical analysis on the sample of Fortune 1000 firms confirms that BU influence is associated with capital reallocation and that BU influence is moderated by research and development (R&D) intensity and unrelated diversification.