Surveying the Corporate Elite: Theoretical and Practical Guidance on Improving Response Rates and Response Quality in Top Management Survey Questionnaires

Survey research of top managers is critical to addressing many contemporary research questions in the field of strategic management. Yet, the threat of low response rates has discouraged many researchers from attempting this type of work, steering the field of strategic management away from issues related to strategic process. This article provides an empirical examination of factors that determine the likelihood and quality of response to top management surveys. More generally, we advance a theoretical perspective on survey response rooted in social influence theory that should help researchers make better choices about the design of their survey questionnaires.

[1]  W. Powell,et al.  The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields , 1983 .

[2]  Linda D. Molm.  POWER, TRUST, AND FAIRNESS: COMPARISONS OF NEGOTIATED AND RECIPROCAL EXCHANGE , 2003 .

[3]  E. Uehara,et al.  Reciprocity Reconsidered: Gouldner's `Moral Norm of Reciprocity' and Social Support , 1995 .

[4]  R. Berk.  An introduction to sample selection bias in sociological data. , 1983 .

[5]  W. Greene.  Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error: Comment , 1981 .

[6]  Richard H. Smith,et al.  The Effect of a Favor on Public and Private Compliance: How Internalized is the Norm of Reciprocity? , 1999 .

[7]  K. Jehn.  A Multimethod Examination of the Benefits and Detriments of Intragroup Conflict , 1995 .

[8]  A. H. Church.  ESTIMATING THE EFFECT OF INCENTIVES ON MAIL SURVEY RESPONSE RATES: A META-ANALYSIS , 1993 .

[9]  James D. Westphal,et al.  Getting by with the Advice of Their Friends: CEOs' Advice Networks and Firms' Strategic Responses to Poor Performance , 2003 .

[10]  Donald C. Hambrick,et al.  The Disintegration of Strategic Management: It's Time to Consolidate Our Gains , 2004 .

[11]  John Saunders,et al.  A note on the applicability of the Bruvold-Comer model of mail survey response rates to commercial populations , 1993 .

[12]  B. Raven,et al.  Kurt Lewin Address: Influence, Power, Religion, and the Mechanisms of Social Control , 1999 .

[13]  A. H. Cole,et al.  Effect of a favor which reduces freedom. , 1966, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[14]  James D. Westphal,et al.  The Other Pathway to the Boardroom: How Interpersonal Influence Behavior Can Substitute for Elite Credentials and Demographic Majority Status in Gaining Access to Board Appointments , 2006 .

[15]  G. Yukl,et al.  Consequences of Influence Tactics Used With Subordinates, Peers, and the Boss , 1992 .

[16]  M. Greenberg.  A Theory of Indebtedness , 1980 .

[17]  Edward J. Zajac,et al.  Ceo selection, succession, compensation and firm performance: A theoretical integration and empirical analysis , 1990 .

[18]  Petra Christmann.  MULTINATIONAL COMPANIES AND THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT: DETERMINANTS OF GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY STANDARDIZATION , 2004 .

[19]  Robert M. Groves,et al.  UNDERSTANDING THE DECISION TO PARTICIPATE IN A SURVEY , 1992 .

[20]  Harumi Befu,et al.  Structural and Motivational Approaches to Social Exchange , 1980 .

[21]  R. Cialdini.  Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion , 1993 .

[22]  S. Milgram.  BEHAVIORAL STUDY OF OBEDIENCE. , 1963, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[23]  B. Latané,et al.  The Unresponsive Bystander: Why Doesn't He Help? , 1972 .

[24]  Kevin G. Corley,et al.  Organizational Context as a Moderator of Theories on Firm Boundaries for Technology Sourcing , 2001 .

[25]  Lynne Andersson,et al.  Doing Unto Others: The Reciprocity of Helping Behavior in Organizations , 2003 .

[26]  J. Brehm.  A theory of psychological reactance. , 1981 .

[27]  E. Johnsen.  Richard M. Cyert & James G. March, A Behavioral Theory of The Firm, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1963, 332 s. , 1964 .

[28]  D. T. Regan,et al.  Effects of a favor and liking on compliance , 1971 .

[29]  Randall P. Settoon,et al.  Social Exchange in Organizations: Perceived Organizational Support, Leader-Member Exchange, and Employee Reciprocity , 1996 .

[30]  S. Milgram,et al.  Note on the drawing power of crowds of different size. , 1969 .

[31]  M. Shubik,et al.  A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. , 1964 .

[32]  Yehuda Baruch,et al.  Response Rate in Academic Studies — A Comparative Analysis , 1999 .

[33]  R. Cialdini.  Influence: Science and Practice , 1984 .

[34]  A. Gouldner.  THE NORM OF RECIPROCITY: A PRELIMINARY STATEMENT * , 1960 .

[35]  H. Rao,et al.  Fool's Gold: Social Proof in the Initiation and Abandonment of Coverage by Wall Street Analysts , 2001 .

[36]  D. Dillman.  The Design and Administration of Mail Surveys , 1991 .

[37]  M. Perugini,et al.  The personal norm of reciprocity , 2003 .

[38]  T. Greer,et al.  Likelihood of Participating in Mail Survey Research Business Respondents' Perspectives , 2000 .

[39]  J. Calder.  Survey research methods , 1998, Medical education.

[40]  Terry L. Childers,et al.  Understanding mail survey response behavior: A meta-analysis. , 1991 .

[41]  A. Pettigrew.  The Character and Significance of Strategy Process Research , 1992 .

[42]  M. Sherif,et al.  The psychology of attitudes. , 1946, Psychological review.

[43]  John C. Mowen,et al.  On Implementing the Door-in-the-Face Compliance Technique in a Business Context , 1980 .

[44]  Judith A. Boser,et al.  Response-Rate Differences and Response-Enhancement Effects by Population Type , 1998 .

[45]  D. Jobber,et al.  Industrial Mail Surveys , 1998 .

[46]  V. Smith,et al.  Behavioral foundations of reciprocity: experimental economics and evolutionary psychology , 1998 .

[47]  R. H. Willis,et al.  Social Exchange: Advances In Theory And Research , 1981 .

[48]  Petra Christmann.  Multinational Companies and the Natural Environment: Determinants of Global Environmental Policy , 2004 .

[49]  E. Fehr,et al.  Fairness and Retaliation: The Economics of Reciprocity , 2000, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[50]  Michael Diehl,et al.  Source Consistency, Distinctiveness, and Consensus: The Three Dimensions of the Kelley ANOVA Model in Persuasion , 2004, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[51]  D. Dillman.  Mail and telephone surveys : the total design method , 1979 .

[52]  L. Berkowitz,et al.  AFFECTING THE SALIENCE OF THE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY NORM: EFFECTS OF PAST HELP ON THE RESPONSE TO DEPENDENCY RELATIONSHIPS. , 1964, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[53]  James D. Westphal.  Collaboration in the Boardroom: Behavioral and Performance Consequences of CEO-Board Social Ties , 1999 .

[54]  L. Festinger.  A Theory of Social Comparison Processes , 1954 .

[55]  James D. Westphal.  Board Games: How CEOs Adapt to Increases in Structural Board Independence from Management , 1998 .