Research Overview
My research agenda focuses on the relationship between corporate governance and human resource management (HRM). Specifically, I examine the impact of corporate governance (i.e., boards of directors, family governance, large shareholders) on the use and effectiveness of HRM activities. Thus far, I have focused on a variety of strategic and socially responsible HRM activities including broad-based employee stock ownership, commitment HR practices, defined-benefits plan funding, diversity management, high performance work practices, and work-family benefits.
Selected Awards, Fellowships and Grants
2025 - Summer Research Grant - University of Alabama in Huntsville, College of Business
2022 - Summer Research Grant - University of Alabama in Huntsville, College of Business
2022 - Mark McDaniel, Henri McDaniel, & Robert (Bud) Cramer Faculty Fellowship - University of Alabama in Huntsville, College of Business
2021 - Summer Research Grant - University of Alabama in Huntsville, College of Business
2019 - Corey Rosen Fellowship - Rutgers University, Institute for the Study of Employee Ownership and Profit Sharing
2019 - Best Research Paper Award - University of Alabama in Huntsville, College of Business
2019 - C. David Billings Fellowship - University of Alabama in Huntsville, College of Business
2016 - Academic Affairs Faculty Fellowship - University of North Carolina System, Division of Academic Affairs
2015 - Summer Research Mini-Grant - North Carolina A&T State University, Willie A. Deese College of Business and Economics
2014 - Louis O. Kelso Fellowship - Rutgers University, School of Management and Labor Relations and The Employee Ownership Foundation
2012 - Bill Nobles Fellowship - Rutgers University, School of Management and Labor Relations
2011 - Summer Research Funding - North Carolina A&T State University, Willie A. Deese College of Business and Economics
2010 - Dissertation Research Award - Syracuse University, Whitman School of Management
2009 - Elon Pre-Doctoral Fellowship - Elon University, Martha and Spencer Love School of Business
Published and Accepted Research (reverse chronological order - click title of each article to read it.)
Cash Profit Sharing and Labor Productivity in Family Firms: Exploring the Effects of R&D and Capital Intensities (with Esra Memili)
International Review of Applied Economics, pp. 459-483, April 2025. [.pdf]
Included here in the Curriculum Library for Employee Ownership (CLEO) at Rutgers University, School of Management & Labor Relations
Abstract: While equity-based employee incentives can positively affect labor productivity in family firms, our understanding of the effect of nonequity-based employee incentives remains limited. Integrating expectancy theory with the socioemotional wealth preservation literature, our study investigates the impact of cash profit sharing (CPS) on family firms’ labor productivity. Specifically, CPS is viewed as a motivational device for enhancing labor productivity in family firms, as family firm employees will have high expectancies, instrumentalities, and valences towards CPS. Moreover, R&D and capital intensities are explored as strategic contexts for further determining CPS effects on labor productivity in family firms. The findings lend support for CPS having a significant, positive impact on family firms’ labor productivity, and demonstrate a three-way interaction indicating that the strongest, positive effects of CPS on family firms’ labor productivity occurs when R&D intensity is high (versus low). However, our prediction of a three-way interaction involving capital intensity was not supported.
High Performance Work Practices and Labour Productivity: The Contingent Effect of Family Governance (with Pankaj Patel, Esra Memili and Veland Ramadani)
International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, Vol. 50(4), pp. 433-458, November 2023. [.pdf]
Abstract: The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of the family governance context on the relationship between high performance work practices (HPWPs) and labour productivity. This study uses cross-sectional data from the 2011 Workplace Employment Relations Survey on 193 UK establishments. Our findings demonstrate that firms with family governance have a stronger, positive HPWPs-labour productivity relationship compared to other firms. Furthermore, firm size matters as the effect of family governance strengthens this relationship as firm size increases. This paper contributes to the research on the contextual factors that determine the effectiveness of HPWPs by highlighting the role of the family governance context including its boundary conditions on the basis of firm size.
High Performance Work Practices, Socioemotional Wealth Preservation, and Family Firm Labor Productivity (with Remedios Hernández-Linares, María Concepción López-Fernández , Esra Memili, and Pankaj Patel)
BRQ Business Research Quarterly, Vol. 26(3), pp. 237-255, July 2023. [.pdf]
Abstract: Despite growing research on the effect of high-performance work practices (HPWPs) on family firm performance, the implications of socioemotional wealth (SEW) preservation remain ambiguous. This stems from SEW preservation being used primarily as an explanatory construct and assessed indirectly rather than directly in empirical studies. To address this research gap, we draw upon organizational control and signaling theories to determine the “true” interaction between HPWPs and SEW preservation for labor productivity. Specifically, competing hypotheses are presented to determine if this interaction supports complementarity or substitutability. Using a sample of 124 Spanish family firms and a direct measurement of SEW preservation, our results provide support for substitutability, suggesting that family firms can realize higher labor productivity when HPWPs are fully implemented and commitment to SEW preservation is low, and vice versa. These findings have important implications for family firms, given HPWPs’ inverse relationship with SEW preservation regarding labor productivity.
Beyond the Short-Term: The Effects of Broad-Based Employee Ownership on Labor Productivity in Family and Nonfamily Firms
International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, Vol. 29(1), pp. 195-217, January 2023.
Included here in the Curriculum Library for Employee Ownership (CLEO) at Rutgers University, School of Management & Labor Relations
Abstract: This study investigates whether broad-based employee ownership (BBEO), in isolation and in conjunction with cash profit sharing (CPS), can enhance labor productivity in family firms over nonfamily firms. Hypothesis testing was conducted using cross-sectional time-series regression with a matched sample of 393 family and nonfamily firms listed on the U.S. S&P 500 over a five-year timeframe. Overall, the findings indicate that BBEO does not increase labor productivity more in family firms compared to nonfamily firms in the short-term; however, BBEO does enable family firms to experience greater labor productivity relative to nonfamily firms beyond the short-term. Moreover, when BBEO is combined with CPS, labor productivity improves more for family firms than nonfamily firms both in the short-term and beyond. While prior studies have relied largely on agency theory, this study contributes to the literature on family firms and employee incentives by being amongst the first to draw upon temporal motivation theory to distinguish between family and nonfamily firms regarding the incentive effect of BBEO on labor productivity.
Broad-based Employee Stock Ownership: What Makes It Effective in the Management of Human Resources? (with Dan Weltmann, Doug Kruse and Joseph Blasi)
Human Resource Management, Vol. 58(6), pp. 567-570, November 2019. [.pdf]
Included here in the Curriculum Library for Employee Ownership (CLEO) at Rutgers University, School of Management & Labor Relations
Abstract: Research linking broad‐based employee stock ownership (BESO) with firm performance continues to receive considerable attention both in and outside the field of management. Despite the evidence being generally positive regarding the BESO–firm performance relationship, there has been a relative dearth of research providing insights into the circumstances surrounding the effectiveness of BESO. With this research gap in mind, we formulated and launched this special issue. This guest editor introduction begins with a look at the research on this topic, followed by a brief discussion of each article accepted for publication. We conclude by highlighting the major themes from the collective contributions of the articles and share insights regarding future research in this growing research domain.
The Impact of CEO and Board HR Expertise: Results of the 2018 HR@MOORE CHRO Survey (with Patrick Wright, Donald Schepker, Anthony Nyberg, and Spencer Essman)
Center for Executive Succession, Darla Moore School of Business - Technical Report, 2019. [.pdf]
Abstract: Based on the 2018 HR@Moore Survey of Chief HR Officers, this report examines the CEO’s and the board’s expertise in, experience in, and attitude toward HR. Results indicate that experience in HR is rare among directors and CEOs; however, CHROs reported CEOs often have good expertise of the organization’s HR policies and practices. Further, both board members and CEOs have at least some appreciation for what HR can do to help the organization. This report delves into CEO and board HR experience, and their relationship to a number of employer reputation ranking lists such as “Best Companies to Work For.”
Human Resource Management, Vol. 57(5), pp. 1127-1144, September 2018. [.pdf]
Cited here in a Fortune Magazine article entitled, "CHROs are rising stars of the C-suite. So why aren't they on more boards?" by Lila Maclellan (2023)
Cited here in a Fortune Magazine article entitled, "CEOs say talent is their most valuable asset, yet HR leaders hold just 8% of Fortune 500 board seats" by Lila Maclellan and Joseph Abrams (2023)
Mentioned here in a KPMG Directors Quarterly: Insights from the Board Leadership Center article entitled, “Should your board include a CHRO?” by Annalisa Barrett (2019)
Mentioned here in a HR Magazine (UK) article entitled, “HR expertise at the very top: Does it matter?” by Patrick Wright (2019)
Selected as a “Research Brief” by the Center for Executive Succession, Univ. of South Carolina (2018)
Abstract: While prior board of director studies have considered the role of director occupational expertise in areas such as law and finance on the strategic actions of the firm, little consideration has been given to understanding the value that human resource expertise on boards of directors, or board HR expertise, can provide. Drawing upon agency and resource dependence theories, this study investigates the relationship between board HR expertise and the extent to which firms engage in diversity management. Furthermore, the moderating role of two organizational context factors—capital intensity and firm age—are considered, as these can highlight the degree to which firms strategically depend upon human capital. With a sample of 423 U.S. firms listed on the S&P 500 from 2002 to 2006, the findings indicate that firms with board HR expertise have stronger diversity management in comparison to firms lacking board HR expertise. Moreover, the positive effects of board HR expertise on diversity management decreases when firms’ capital intensity or age rises. This highlights the value that HR practitioners can provide in serving on boards of directors, and suggests that the magnitude of board HR experts’ influence hinges upon the firm's level of strategic dependence on human capital.
Human Resource Management, Vol. 57(5), pp. 979-992, September 2018. [.pdf]
Cited here in a policy document for the IZA Institute of Labor Economics entitled "Do Employee Share Owners Face Too Much Financial Risk?" (2019).
Included here in the Curriculum Library for Employee Ownership (CLEO) at Rutgers University, School of Management & Labor Relations
Abstract: While family firms tend to be highly committed to their employees, scholars contend that founding family owners are likely hesitant when it comes to sharing ownership broadly with nonfamily employees. Taking a heterogeneous view of family firms, this study investigates the implications of different familial control-enhancing mechanisms on the use of broad-based employee ownership programs (BEOPs) among publicly-traded family firms. Based on a five-year panel data set of S&P 500 family firms, the findings indicate that certain control-enhancing mechanisms can cause family owners to frame their decision to use BEOPs differently. Essentially, family firms with family CEOs, regardless of whether the CEO is a founder or descendant, have a decreased likelihood of using BEOPs in spite of the direct control that family owners have over the firm's operations. Conversely, when family owners hold dual-class shares, which enhance shareholder voting power, family firms are more likely to use BEOPs. Furthermore, the likelihood of family firms with family CEOs using BEOPs increases when the family holds dual-class shares. Moreover, there is no significant difference between founder and descendant CEOs, as both are less resistant to using BEOPs when a dual-class share structure is in place. These findings have implications for HR practitioners working in family firms given the influence that family owners can have on the firm's HR activities, namely BEOPs.
Balancing Board? The Effects of Board Independence and Capital on Firms Offering Work-Family Benefits (with Jeanne Holmes)
Human Resource Management, Vol. 57(2): pp. 457-469, March 2018. [.pdf]
Cited here in a policy document for the Government Equalities Office of the United Kingdom on "Family-friendly Working Policies and Practices".
Abstract: While prior research demonstrates the strategic human resource (HR) advantages associated with offering work–family benefits (WFBs), firms continue to be reluctant in providing their employees with these benefits. Drawing on the corporate governance and stakeholder orientation literatures, this study examines the role of board independence and capital for WFBs being offered in publicly-traded firms. Our results demonstrate that various director independence and capital attributes are related to the firm offering WFBs. Specifically, board directors who are outsiders, women, and holders of additional directorships, with their broad stakeholder orientation, increase the likelihood of WFBs being offered by the firm. These findings are of importance to HR practitioners considering the influence that corporate boards can have on the firm's use of HR practices, such as WFBs, that affect all employees, not just the executives.
To Thine Shareholders Be True? Linking Large Corporate Ownership to the Firm’s Use of Commitment Human Resource Practices (with Pamela Brandes and Ravi Dharwadkar)
Human Resource Management, Vol. 55(4), pp. 567-589 , July 2016. [.pdf]
Abstract: Human resource practitioners and academics have increasingly realized the importance of corporate governance for firm human resource activities. This study investigates how one important form of corporate governance, namely, ownership within large, publicly traded firms, is associated with a firm's use of commitment human resource practices (CHRPs), specifically, the use of incentive compensation, profit sharing, and participative decision making. Our findings indicate that the types of large investor, namely, family and institutional, are differentially associated with the likelihood of the firm using these CHRPs. Specifically, family owners with their long-term investment horizon, as well as their stakeholder orientation, increase the likelihood of the firm using these practices. In contrast, large institutional owners with their shorter-term investment horizon, as well as their investor orientation, decrease the likelihood of the firm using these practices. Furthermore, among institutional investors, transient institutional investors are negatively associated with these practices, while dedicated institutional investors are not associated with these practices. Taken together, our results regarding the positive association of family ownership and this subset of CHRPs and the negative association of transient institutional investors and this set of practices, have important implications for human resource professionals who not only need to understand how ownership affects HR practices but also how to articulate the value of these investments in order to attract investors.
Board Independence and Changes in Defined-Benefit Plan Funding
Advances in Industrial and Labor Relations, Vol. 21: pp. 119-141, February 2015. [.pdf]
Abstract: The funding of defined-benefit plans has garnered the attention of academicians, practitioners, and policymakers. Drawing upon agency and organizational control theories, this study investigates the implications of board independence on changes in defined-benefit funding. Using a panel dataset of S&P 500 companies sponsoring defined-benefit plans, the author finds that corporate boards matter. Specifically, CEO duality and outside director representation are associated with year-to-year decreases in defined-benefit funding. Conversely, outside director ownership is related to year-to-year increases in defined-benefit funding. Furthermore, outside director ownership moderated the relationship between outside director representation and defined-benefit funding such that outside director representation is associated with year-to-year increases in defined-benefit plan funding when the percentage of outside director ownership is high.