李长娥¹;谢永珍²

• 1:山东建筑大学 商学院，山东 济南 250101
• 2:山东大学 管理学院，山东 济南 250100

摘要(Abstract)：

层级以多种形态普遍存在于各种团体和组织中，然而现有研究却很少关注董事会团队的层级结构。在我国“关系本位”与“权威服从”的社会文化背景下，权力层级导致的个体互动差异对团队的影响尤为突出。本研究基于组织层级理论和高层梯队理论，采用非线性中介检验方法，以2011—2015年我国民营上市公司的数据为样本，探索董事会权力层级通过创新战略对民营企业成长的影响。结果发现，董事会正式权力层级会促进民营企业创新战略，而非正式权力层级会阻碍创新战略，正式权力层级与非正式权力层级之间存在替代作用；创新战略对民营企业成长产生先抑制后促进的影响；创新战略在董事会权力层级与企业成长之间存在非线性中介作用。研究结论对于民营企业优化董事会权力层级结构、实现可持续发展与高质量成长具有较为重要的实践价值。

关键词(KeyWords)： 董事会权力层级;创新战略;企业成长;非线性中介

Abstract:

Keywords:

基金项目(Foundation): 国家自然科学基金项目（71772094）；国家社会科学基金重点项目（16AGL008）；山东省社会科学规划重点项目（14BGLJ01）

作者(Authors): 李长娥¹;谢永珍²

参考文献(References)：

• [1] 丁宇, 王卫江, 李文胜, 等. 创新型企业文化对企业成长的影响: 战略能力的中介作用——以新疆科技型中小企业为例[J]. 科技与经济, 2015,(2): 31-35.
  [2] 李长娥, 谢永珍. 区域经济发展水平、女性董事对公司技术创新战略的影响[J]. 经济社会体制比较, 2016a,(4): 120-131.
  [3] 李长娥, 谢永珍. 产品市场竞争、董事会异质性对技术创新的影响——来自民营上市公司的经验证据[J]. 华东经济管理, 2016b,(8): 115-123.
  [4] 李洪亚. R&D、企业规模与成长关系研究——基于中国制造业企业数据: 2005—2007[J]. 世界经济文汇, 2014,(3): 98-120.
  [5] 李小青. 董事会认知异质性对企业价值影响研究——基于创新战略中介作用的视角[J]. 经济与管理研究, 2012,(8): 14-22.
  [6] 毛新述. 高管团队及其权力分布研究: 文献回顾与未来展望[J]. 财务研究, 2016,(2): 52-60.
  [7] 邵毅平, 王引晟. 董事会资本与企业绩效的实证研究——基于R&D投资的中介效应视角[J]. 财经论丛, 2015,(6): 66-74.
  [8] 卫旭华, 刘咏梅, 岳柳青. 高管团队权力不平等对企业创新强度的影响——有调节的中介效应[J]. 南开管理评论, 2015,(3): 24-33.
  [9] 武立东, 江津, 王凯. 董事会成员地位差异、环境不确定性与企业投资行为[J]. 管理科学, 2016,(2): 52-65.
  [10] 谢永珍, 张雅萌, 张慧, 等. 董事会正式、非正式结构对董事会会议频率的影响——非正式沟通对董事会行为强度的调节作用[J]. 外国经济与管理, 2015,(4): 15-28.
  [11] 谢永珍. 公司治理2.0时代: 董事会的挑战与创新[J]. 董事会, 2015,(11): 40-44.
  [12] 谢永珍. 性别助长、董事会行为强度与财务绩效——非线性中介效应的检验[J]. 兰州学刊, 2016,(4): 171-181.
  [13] 张会荣, 张玉明. 技术创新、股权结构与中小企业成长[J]. 山东社会科学, 2014,(2): 114-119.
  [14] 张耀伟, 陈世山, 李维安. 董事会非正式层级的绩效效应及其影响机制研究[J]. 管理科学, 2015,(1): 1-17.
  [15] Anderson C, Brown C E. The functions and dysfunctions of hierarchy[J]. Research in Organizational Behavior, 2010, 30: 55-89.
  [16] Birkinshaw J, Nobel R, Ridderstråle J. Knowledge as acontingency variable: Do the characteristics of knowledge predict organization structure?[J]. Organization Science, 2002, 13(3): 274-289.
  [17] Diefenbach T, Sillince J A A. Formal and Informal hierarchy in different types of organization[J]. Organization Studies, 2011, 32(11): 1515-1537.
  [18] Finkelstein S, Hambrick D C, CannellaJrA A. Strategic leadership: Theory and research on executives, top management teams, and boards[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009: 227-254.
  [19] Finkelstein S, Mooney A C. Not the usual suspects: How to use board process to make boards better[J]. Academy of Management Executive, 2003, 17(2): 101-113.
  [20] Forbes D P, Milliken F J. Cognition and corporate governance: Understanding boards of directors as strategic decision-making groups[J]. Academy of Management Review, 1999, 24(3): 489-505.
  [21] Groysberg B, Lee L E. Hiring stars and their colleagues: Exploration and exploitation in professional service firms[J]. Organization Science, 2009, 20(4): 740-758.
  [22] Hambrick D C. Environment, strategy, and power within top management teams[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1981, 26(2): 253-275.
  [23] Hambrick D C, Mason P A. Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers[J]. Academy of Management Review, 1984, 9(2): 193-206.
  [24] Hambrick D C. Upper echelons theory: An update[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2007, 32(2): 334-343.
  [25] Harrison D A, Klein K J. What's the difference?Diversity constructs as separation, variety, or disparity in organizations[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2007, 32(4): 1199-1228.
  [26] Hayes A F, Preacher K J. Quantifying and testing indirect effects in simple mediation models when the constituent paths are nonlinear[J]. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 2010, 45(4): 627-660.
  [27] He J Y, Huang Z. Board informal hierarchy and firm financial performance: Exploring a tacit structure guiding boardroom interactions[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2011, 54(6): 1119-1139.
  [28] Hendry K, Kiel G C. The role of the board in firm strategy: Integrating agency and organisational control perspectives[J]. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 2004, 12(4): 500-520.
  [29] Huse M, Hoskisson R, Zattoni A, et al. New perspectives on board research: Changing the research agenda[J]. Journal of Management & Governance, 2011, 15(1): 5-28.
  [30] Magee J C, Galinsky A D. Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status[J]. The Academy of Management Annals, 2008, 2(1): 351-398.
  [31] Miller T, Del Carmen Triana M. Demographic diversity in the boardroom: Mediators of the board diversity-firm performance relationship[J]. Journal of Management Studies, 2009, 46(5): 755-784.
  [32] Neuberg S L, Newsom J T. Personal need for structure: Individual differences in the desire for simple structure[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1993, 65(1): 113-131.
  [33] Pettigrew A M. On studying managerial elites[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 1992, 13(S2): 163-182.
  [34] Post C, Byron K. Women on boards and firm financial performance: A meta-analysis[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2015, 58(5): 1546-1571.
  [35] Smith A, Houghton S M, Hood J N, et al. Power relationships among top managers: Does top management team power distribution matter for organizational performance?[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2006, 59(5): 622-629.
  [36] Smith K G, Smith K A, Olian J D, et al. Top management team demography and process: The role of social integration and communication[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1994, 39(3): 412-438.