Mollick (2012), Strategic Management Journal

People and process, suits and innovators: the role of individuals in firm performance

Differences among individual people mattered more to firm performance than usually assumed, and variation among middle managers explained far more of the gaps between firms than variation among people in innovative roles.

Parts of the Loop it informs

Start it close to the workSupports

Read the original paper

Summary written by Unfrozen from the published abstract, then checked twice by independent reviewers against the source. Loop coding is exploratory and AI-assisted, pending human verification. Spot an error? Email info@unfreeze.us and it gets fixed.

Questions this study helps answer

What the research saysShould you cut layers of middle management?What the research saysDo middle managers affect performance?

Related studies

Huy (2011)In a three-year case at a large tech firm, executives treating strategy as a purely task-focused job unintentionally stirred middle managers' group identities around tenure and language; the resulting emotions saw managers, even ones executives promoted, back or quietly brush off an initiative.Huy et al. (2014)Over three years of a radical change, middle managers went from supporting their top leaders to mutiny as they reassessed whether those leaders were legitimate, and their emotional reactions fed rising resistance.Logan & Ganster (2007)At a large trucking company, a randomized empowerment program raised unit managers' sense of control only where they felt their own bosses backed them, and it also lifted their units' measured performance.Halme et al. (2012)In two multinationals, middle managers trying to build business models for poor markets worked around short-term profit pressure and unit-based incentives by creatively bundling scarce resources from inside and outside, which the authors call intrapreneurial bricolage.