Call for Papers

Major global challenges such as digital transformation, resource scarcity, geo-political conflicts alongside pollution, climate change, and biodiversity collapse force firms to rethink and revise their strategies and business models (Dasgupta, 2021; IPBES, 2019; IPCC, 2023) amid considerations of alternative economic paradigms (Raworth, 2017). However, strategic adaption is not a straightforward, atomistic, or mechanical process. Instead, it contains a complex and emergent set of interactions involving numerous internal and external agents with often conflicting demands (Calabrò et al., 2017; Danielson & Scott, 2007). A fundamental consideration in this regard relates to the inter-temporal nature of choices and decisions, as firms and managers have to consider how current decisions affect future outcomes and potentially conflicting goal systems over time (Clarke & Boersma, 2017; Hall, 1990; Mouzas & Bauer, 2022). Inter-temporality, however, is associated with a fundamental management problem: decisions that are perceived to be optimal in the short-run may not be necessarily the best in the long-turn and vice versa (Slawinski & Bansal, 2015; DesJardine & Bansal, 2019).
 
Prior research has emphasized – rather consistently – that firms and managers often fall prey to short-term pressure (Bauer & Friesl, 2022). Especially, managers of publicly listed firms seem to have adopted a rather myopic perspective. To this end, prior research has shown that firms prioritize investments that boost short-term results instead of allocating resources for the development of future technologies with the potential to drive long-term business change (Benner & Ranganathan, 2012); firms often undertake significant structural measures that include cost-cutting measures (e.g., layoffs) that harm their reputation and innovative capability in the long-run (Schulz & Johann, 2018); and structural changes following an acquisition can result in status loss and lower morale for key employees which negatively affects the retention of key talent and innovation performance (Puranam et al., 2009; Paruchuri et al., 2006).
 
Various reasons for the observed short-term orientation have been identified and discussed (Marginson & McAulay, 2008; Kleinknecht et al., 2020). While some researchers emphasize individual cognitive traits of decision-makers (Nadkarni & Chen, 2014; Shipp et al., 2009), most research has focused on incentive structures and financial market constituents (Marginson & McAulay, 2008). Performance-based compensation schemes (Thanassoulis, 2012), weak governance systems, earnings pressure by financial analysts (Schulz & Wiersema, 2018; DesJardine & Bansal, 2019), as well as activism by (transitory) institutional shareholders or hedge funds (Bushee, 1998; DesJardine et al., 2022) induce managers to look for options to boost their firm’s stock prices in the short-term at the expense of long-term investments. These contradictory demands are increasingly exacerbated by the tensions between business and society regarding the global challenges mentioned above.
 
In this sub-theme, we aim to investigate how firms and managers balance these conflicting demands. Only recently, scholars have started to re-emphasize the importance of temporality for organizations (Dawson & Sykes, 2019; Hernes et al., 2013; Langley et al., 2013). Firms are set amid short-term performance pressures, while (at best) seeking means to deal with the longer-term consequences of their business for environmental sustainability demands (Bansal & DesJardine, 2014; Hernes et al., 2021; Heuer, 2011). Because of the high relevance of the topic and imminent practical questions that emerge for decision-makers, we aim to discuss the interrelation between strategic decision-making, organizing, and governance in this context. We thus call for research that investigates how firms and managers address and manage different short-term and long-term demands and how these contradictory demands and the associated tensions impact managerial decision-making, organizational routines, processes, and activities as well as the interactions and negotiation processes with external stakeholders. In so doing, this subtheme provides a forum to researchers across the realms of organization theory, strategic management, corporate governance, corporate social responsibility, business and the natural environment, and organizational behavior.
 
While we hope this call for papers sparks scholars’ inspiration broadly speaking, we offer the following questions to guide potential submitters vis-à-vis their contribution. First, as regards questions of temporality, we ask:

• How do firms balance short-term vs. long-term demands? What kinds of temporal horizons are at play?

• How is this balancing conducted and shaped by, be it within or outside the firm? At the micro-level, what impacts board members’, CEOs’, top and middle managers’ temporal focus? How do stakeholders impact a firm’s intertemporal choices?

• What kinds of paradoxes and tensions arise in organizations due to competing temporal demands and how are they addressed?

• How do firms consider and manage inter-temporal trade-offs in radical strategic changes of ownership such as mergers and/or acquisitions, or when engaging in inter-organizational partnerships such as outsourcing, alliancing, networks, or ecosystems?

 
Second, as regards questions of conflicting goals, we ask:

• How do firms (re-)align their (conflicting) goal systems, when faced with adversities (e.g., pandemic, system clashes, political ambiguities, war, climate change)?

• How does firm governance impact the alignment of conflicting goal systems?

• How do firms implement change that is driven by multiple (potentially conflicting) goals and which challenges do they face?

 
We invite and encourage theoretical and empirical submissions addressing (but not limited to) the following topics: strategic leadership and decision-making, managerial myopia, paradox theory, attention-based view, aspiration levels, organizational ambidexterity, organizational resilience, stakeholder theory, financial markets, institutional shareholders, executive compensation, and earning pressure.
 
Contributions may be either theoretical-conceptual or empirical. All kinds of quantitative or qualitative empirical settings (e.g., longitudinal studies, process studies, secondary data analyses, case studies, surveys, experiments, and actor-centered measurements) are appreciated. We also encourage multi-level analyses. Our aim is to create a platform for scholars with various backgrounds to engage in, explore and further develop the field of firms and managers balancing conflicting short-term and long-term demands.
 

References

• Bansal, R., & DesJardine, M. (2014): “Business sustainability: It’s about time.” Strategic Organization, 12 (1), 70–78.
• Bauer, F., & Friesl, M. (2022): “Synergy Evaluation in Mergers and Acquisitions: An Attention‐Based View.” Journal of Management Studies, https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12804.
• Benner, M.J., & Ranganathan, R. (2012): “Offsetting Illegitimacy? How Pressures from Securities Analysts Influence Incumbents in the Face of New Technologies.” Academy of Management Journal, 55 (1), 213–233.
• Bushee, B.J. (1998): “The Influence of Institutional Investors on Myopic R&D Investment Behavior.” Accounting Review, 73 (3), 305–333.
• Calabrò, A., Campopiano, G., & Basco, R. (2017): “Principal-principal conflicts and family firm growth: The moderating role of business family identity.” Journal of Family Business Management, 7 (1), 291–308.
• Clarke, T., & Boersma, M. (2017): “The Governance of Global Value Chains: Unresolved Human Rights, Environmental and Ethical Dilemmas in the Apple Supply Chain.” Journal of Business Ethics, 143 (1), 111–131.
• Danielson, M.G., & Scott, J.A. (2007): “A Note on Agency Conflicts and the Small Firm Investment Decision.” Journal of Small Business Management, 45 (1), 157–175.
• Dasgupta, P. (2021): The Economics of Biodiversity. Independent Review, UK Government.
• Dawson, P., & Sykes, C. (2019): “Concepts of Time and Temporality in the Storytelling and Sensemaking Literatures: A Review and Critique.” International Journal of Management Reviews, 21 (1), 97–114.
• DesJardine, M., & Bansal, P. (2019): “One Step Forward, Two Steps Back: How Negative External Evaluations Can Shorten Organizational Time Horizons.” Organization Science, 30 (4), 647–867.
• DesJardine, M.R., Shi, W., & Sun, Z. (2022): “Different Horizons: The Effects of Hedge Fund Activism Versus Corporate Shareholder Activism on Strategic Actions.” Journal of Management, 48 (7), 1858–1887.
• Hall, R.H. (1980): “Effectiveness Theory and Organizational Effectiveness.” The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 16 (4), 536–545.
• Hernes, T., Simpson, B., & Söderlund, J. (2013): “Managing and temporality.” Scandinavian Journal of Management, 29 (1), 1–6.
• Hernes, T., Feddersen, J., & Schultz, M. (2021): “Material Temporality: How materiality ‘does’ time in food organizing.” Organization Studies, 42 (2), 351–371.
• Heuer, M. (2011): “Ecosystem cross‐sector collaboration: conceptualizing an adaptive approach to sustainability governance.” Business Strategy and the Environment, 20 (4), 211–221.
• IPCC – Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2023): Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability (edited by H.-O. Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E.S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem, & B. Rama). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Kleinknecht, R., Haq, H.U., Muller, A.R., & Kraan, K.O. (2020): “An attention-based view of short-termism: The effects of organizational structure.” European Management Journal, 38 (2), 244–254.
• Langley, A.N.N., Smallman, C., Tsoukas, H., & Van de Ven, A.H. (2013): “Process Studies of Change in Organization and Management: Unveiling Temporality, Activity, and Flow.” Academy of Management Journal, 56 (1), 1–13.
• Marginson, D., & McAulay, L. (2008): “Exploring the debate on short‐termism: A theoretical and empirical analysis.” Strategic Management Journal, 29 (3), 273–292.
• Mouzas, S., & Bauer, F. (2022): “Rethinking business performance in global value chains.” Journal of Business Research, 144 (1), 679–689.
• Paruchuri, S., Nerkar, A., & Hambrick, D.C. (2006): “Acquisition Integration and Productivity Losses in the Technical Core: Disruption of Inventors in Acquired Companies.” Organization Science, 17 (5), 545–562.
• Puranam, P., Singh, H., & Chaudhuri, S. (2009): “Integrating Acquired Capabilities: When Structural Integration Is (Un)necessary.” Organization Science, 20 (2), 313–328.
• Raworth, K. (2017): Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st Century Economist. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing.
• Schulz, A.C., & Johann, S. (2018): “Downsizing and the fragility of corporate reputation: An analysis of the impact of contextual factors.” Scandinavian Journal of Management, 34 (1), 40–50.
• Schulz, A.C., & Wiersema, M.F. (2018): “The impact of earnings expectations on corporate downsizing.” Strategic Management Journal, 39 (10), 2691–2702.
• Slawinski, N., & Bansal, P. (2015): “Short on Time: Intertemporal Tensions in Business Sustainability.” Organization Science, 26 (2), 531–549.
• Thanassoulis, J. (2012): “Industry Structure, Executive Pay, and Short-Termism.” Management Science, 59 (2), 402–419.
•