All risk-taking is not the same: examining the competing effects of firm risk-taking with meta-analysis

Mathias Arrfelt, Michael Mannor, Jennifer Craig, Amanda L. Christensen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Scopus citations

Abstract

Although researchers have vigorously studied organizational risk-taking for over 35 years, relatively little emphasis has been placed on theoretically differentiating the unique relationships between the many risk-taking choices organizations make and firm risk or firm performance. In this research, we propose a new framework that builds from March’s exploration–exploitation model to argue that different risk-taking choices can have substantially different influences on firm outcomes. We use meta-analysis to examine the unique and at times competing effects of four of the most commonly studied risk-taking choices on firm risk and firm performance. Results from a meta-analysis of 257 unique studies (N = 499,808) demonstrate support for our proposed framework and cast significant doubt on the idea that commonly studied firm risk-taking choices theoretically aggregate into one overarching risk-taking construct.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)621-660
Number of pages40
JournalReview of Managerial Science
Volume12
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2018

Keywords

  • Firm risk
  • Meta-analysis
  • Risk-taking

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Business, Management and Accounting(all)

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'All risk-taking is not the same: examining the competing effects of firm risk-taking with meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this