Suchergebnisse

CEO duality describes the governance structure when a firm's chief executive officer also holds the position of chairman of the board. Duality is central to theoretical perspectives on corporate governance and top management, yet duality's relationship with numerous outcomes is characterized by nonsignificant coefficients and bivariate correlations hovering near zero. We argue and present evidence that CEO duality represents a "dummy construct"—an intentionally pejorative assessment on the widespread use of binomial categorical "dummy" variables to represent complex constructs. While we highlight CEO duality, the use of dummy variables as constructs is common in research. We review CEO duality as a construct and assess typical approaches to its measurement. When compared to actual patterns of duality within organizations, we find that current operationalizations are lacking due to a lack of attention to temporal considerations. This raises questions about the construct validity of current conceptualizations of CEO duality. Actual patterns suggest constructs and theoretical perspectives not previously considered. We present a taxonomy of CEO duality archetypes and offer suggestions on the incorporation of time for studies using dummy variables.

AbstractManuscript TypeEmpiricalResearch Question/IssueWhile corporate governance research is the beneficiary of advances in research methodologies and statistical techniques, less attention has been placed on variable measurement. This paper draws into question the conceptualization and measurement of CEO duality by highlighting its largely unrecognized instability and the challenges instability imposes on measuring dichotomous variables. CEO duality is widely used in corporate governance research and frequently operationalized dichotomously as a dummy variable. We present examples of the frequent changes in duality within organizations which challenge our current view of CEO duality.Research Findings/InsightsWe find that the instability of CEO duality in practice varies considerably at both the national and within‐firm levels. We find that a mismatch exists between the current conceptualization of CEO duality, actual patterns of data, and the measures used by governance researchers. The paper draws attention to the limits of conceptualizing and measuring what is seemingly dichotomous data, reviews these in research and in practice, and provides examples, recommendations and assessments of alternate ways existing data can be used.Theoretical/Academic ImplicationsOur results draw into question the reliance on a simple dichotomous conceptualization and operationalization of CEO duality in governance research. Data limitations of corporate governance research may be alleviated by directly assessing stability of duality within firms and reimagining concepts in ways that can be measured using existing data.Practitioner/Policy ImplicationsCEO duality, a legal but discouraged governance structure, may be changed intentionally or result from a variety of temporary firm‐level factors. Assessing the longitudinal patterns in duality and underlying causes for temporary changes in duality should be incorporated into evaluations of firm governance structures.