text:
Assessing the State of Top Management Teams Research
Summary and Keywords
Since the earliest days of strategic management research, scholars have sought to measure and model the effects of top managers on organizational performance. A watershed moment in this effort came with the 1984 introduction of Hambrick and Mason's upper echelon view and their contention that firms are a reflection of their top management teams (TMT). An explosion of research followed and hundreds, if not thousands, of manuscripts have since been published on the subject. While a number of excellent reviews of this extensive literature exist, a relative few have asked questions about the overall state and future of the field. We undertook this assessment in an effort to answer some key questions. Are we still making progress on the big questions that gave rise to the upper echelon view, or have we reached a point of diminishing returns with this stream of research? If we are at an inflection point, what are the issues that should drive future inquiry about top management teams?
Keywords: inflection point, faultline, assessment, teams, research, top management teams, upper echelons, strategic choice, strategic decision making, strategic management
Since Hambrick and Mason's seminal work in 1984, the upper echelon view of top management teams (TMTs) has spawned an ever-growing body of research and has evolved to be one of the more influential theories in strategic management. Top management team research has investigated a range of topics related to the composition and processes of TMTs, executive compensation, selection and tenure, leadership, conflict and decision making, and a host of other related outcomes. Hundreds of studies involving TMTs (at the writing of this paper, over 7,200 works have cited Hambrick & Mason, 1984) have yielded a variety of interesting findings. Nevertheless, there have been many inconsistencies among these findings, and a variety of concerns and problems remain.
Despite these issues, TMT research has generated a wealth of valuable discoveries and conclusions, while at the same time fostering numerous opportunities for new research. As such, it is no surprise that TMTs continue to stoke scholarly curiosity. One issue about which there is growing curiosity is the marginal value of future research. To phrase the issue bluntly, is there new value in this stream, or have we reached a point of diminishing returns? Are there important and new questions that we have yet to answer, or is it time to consolidate our gains and turn our attentions elsewhere? While many have hinted at these questions, in discussing the limitations of specific studies or in offering suggestions about future opportunities, few have addressed the issue quite so directly. Are we at an inflection point in the evolution of the upper echelon view and, if so, is the research stream ripe for new growth or is it ready to taper off?
These are the sorts of questions that prompt our musings about TMT research, about the upper echelon perspective, and about the prospects for new learning going forward. What follows then is a brief discussion of the origins and evolution of the upper echelon view, along with the stream of TMT studies that have followed. The basic tenets of the model and the general findings of TMT research are discussed. We conclude by considering the state of the field, along with the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead.
Origins and Basic Tenets
The recognition and study of a group of individuals at the apex of strategic decision making in organizations began in the 1960s, with references to the groups of top managers, identified as dominant coalitions (Cyert & March, 1963), or inner circles (Thompson, 1967). While, arguably, the chief executive (CEO) of an organization wields the majority of influence as both a strategist and a figurehead, it has been recognized for decades that including the "elite" top managers who drive strategy throughout the structure and operation of an organization has more predictive value over organizational outcomes than that of the CEO alone (Hage & Dewar, 1973). What is more, the study of groups of top managers draws upon the related behavioral theories of the Carnegie School (Cyert & March, 1963; March & Simon, 1958), that complex decision making is the outcome of idiosyncratic behavioral factors, rather than mere economic maximization.
Central to the examination of TMTs are two general observations. First, while the CEO of an organization is usually the most visible and influential executive, the CEO alone is limited in time and cognitive ability and therefore must rely upon a dominant coalition of executives for a more complete strategic analysis of the environment and organization. Second, the formulation and implementation of strategic decisions, which determine how the organization acts, reacts, and deploys resources, is determined by that dominant coalition of individuals, who are then also responsible for the further integration of their decisions throughout the organization's structure.
The upper echelon (UE) view of the firm (Hambrick & Mason, 1984) introduced the basic idea that an organization's strategy, structure, and performance are a reflection of its top team of managers; that the cognitions and values of a TMT link directly to observable characteristics such as individual demography, experience and education; and that these, in turn, influence the strategy, structure, and performance (Carpenter, Geletkanycz, & Sanders, 2004). Therefore, one source of variance in determining the performance outcomes of the organization is the unique combination of abilities on an organization's TMT. This is the basic theory that has given rise to so much research regarding the composition, structure, conflict, and behavior of top management teams. While the body of TMT research is deep and wide, and while a number of thorough reviews exist already, some of the general findings are highlighted in the section that follows.
General Findings
Two broadly accepted assumptions underlie the whole of TMT research: first, that top managers make strategic decisions based upon their perceptions and interpretations of events and information; and second, that their cognitive schema are a function of individual characteristics such as their values, backgrounds, and experiences (Hambrick, 2007; Hambrick & Mason, 1984). It is generally understood that these observable TMT characteristics do not influence organizational performance directly. Rather, the idea is that these characteristics interact among the members of the TMT to create a collective cognitive schema that drives strategic choice, and those choices influence organizational performance. This perspective is supported theoretically by the behavioral theory of the firm (Cyert & March, 1963). Plenty of findings have bolstered the basic model, albeit with mixed consistency. Further refinements have attempted to enhance the predictive strength of the model by including (a) the discretion afforded to the TMT, either as a function of CEO dominance or from environmental constraints; and (b) the amount of social and behavioral integration within the TMT. Intuitively, these make sense. The more control afforded the TMT, and the more they interact, the more their collective cognitive schema will be reflected in their choices and in the performance of the firm. A number of works have provided excellent and comprehensive reviews (Bromiley & Rau, 2016; Carpenter et al., 2004; Finkelstein & Hambrick, 1996; Finkelstein, Hambrick, & Cannella, 2009).
Building from these basic assumptions, the bulk of TMT research has focused on three interrelated constructs: the composition of the TMT, the interactional processes of the TMT, and the organizational outcomes that reflect the TMT. Generally speaking, the relationship between TMT characteristics and firm performance has been established. As mentioned though, the results have been inconsistent and highly contextual (Haleblian & Finkelstein, 1993). The cognitive diversity engendered by heterogeneous teams results in a broader awareness of strategic questions, a larger selection of strategic options, and the ability to manage more complex decision making. On the other hand, larger and heterogeneous TMTs also struggle with socio-cognitive conflict, which can deter from consensus building and strategy implementation (Amason, 1996; Amason & Sapienza, 1997). Findings establishing the relationships between job-related and functional diversity and outcomes have been less contradictory (Horwitz & Horwitz, 2007; Joshi & Roh, 2009; Marcel, 2009). In spite of recent calls for further examination of the determinants of the heterogeneity of TMT characteristics (Finkelstein, Hambrick, & Cannella, 2009), little research has been conducted in this area.
Much of the research into the heterogeneity of TMT characteristics has found diversity in TMTs to be beneficial. For example, heterogeneous teams have been associated with firms that implement more competitive actions (Ferrier, 2001; Marcel, Barr, & Duhaime, 2011), enhanced creativity (Wiersema & Bantel, 1992), more effective and efficient search and scanning (Amason, Shrader, & Tompson, 2006; Haleblian & Finkelstein, 1993), international and globalization strategies (Carpenter & Fredrickson, 2001; Carpenter, Pollock, & Leary, 2003; Tihanyi, Ellstrand, Daily, & Dalton, 2000), and financial firm performance (e.g., Carpenter & Fredrickson, 2001; Nielsen & Nielsen, 2013).
However, research has also supported the opposite blade of the double-edged sword of findings associated with TMT heterogeneity. Several studies have established that TMT tenure heterogeneity is associated with greater TMT turnover (Jackson et al., 1991; Wagner, Pfeffer, & O'Reilly, 1984). Geletkanycz and Hambrick (1997) demonstrated that diversity of extra-industry ties among TMT members is associated with boundary spanning, information gathering, and enhanced firm performance. Yet, Bermiss and Murmann (2014) found that firms that experience the departure of TMT members whose functional role is externally focused fare better than firms that lose TMT members whose functional roles are internally focused, results that seem to contradict the importance of heterogeneity based upon external relationships. Similarly, Amason et al. (2006) found that TMT heterogeneity was negatively related to performance in more novel new ventures. Adding further to the inconsistency of findings, a meta-analysis conducted by Homberg and Bui (2013) showed no effect at all between TMT diversity and performance outcomes, and raised the question of publication bias in TMT research.
An interesting body of work in recent years has examined the gender composition of the TMT. These studies have found that the proportion of females comprising the TMT is positively related to entrepreneurial outcomes and firm innovativeness (Dezsö & Ross, 2012; Lyngsie & Foss, 2016). Considering the opposite edge of the sword, research also indicates that TMT gender diversity is related to merger-and-acquisition pre-integration performance, but negatively related to post-integration performance (Parola, Ellis, & Golden, 2015).
A number of processes within TMTs have been examined, such as conflict, information seeking, social and behavioral integration, consensus forming, and advice seeking. In the two decades since their publication, the findings from Amason (1996) and Amason and Sapienza (1997) continue to find support in various contexts. These studies established that TMTs benefit in a number of ways from cognitive conflict, such as decision quality and affective acceptance, while affective conflict erodes those benefits (Amason, 1996). Larger and more heterogeneous TMTs are characterized by greater levels of conflict (Amason & Sapienza, 1997). Relatedly, teams that interact more together (behavioral integration) experience better decision making and less organizational decline (Carmeli & Schaubroeck, 2006). Consistent with these findings, Cannella, Park, and Lee (2008) found that TMTs that are located near one another, in collocated offices, experienced an enhanced relationship between TMT heterogeneity and performance outcomes. Alexiev, Jansen, Van den Bosch, and Volberda (2010) found that heterogeneous TMTs were better able to leverage internal advice seeking in pursuing innovation than more homogeneous TMTs.
Power dynamics within teams has been among the more recent emphases of TMT research. Finkelstein (1992) was the first to empirically demonstrate that power is not equal among all team members. Since then, a number of studies have supported power distribution as a substantial determinant in the relationship between TMT characteristics and outcomes. Pitcher and Smith (2001) suggested that power distribution among the TMT was dependent upon the discretion of the CEO. When the CEO welcomed TMT strategic input, TMT heterogeneity influenced outcomes. When the CEO did not welcome input, TMT characteristics were not influential. Mooney and Amason (2011) found that the CEO's "inner circle" of executives with whom they integrated the most was smaller than the formal group of top managers listed in public filings. Similarly, Roberto (2003) found that a small number of executives formed a "stable core" who were consistently involved in strategic decision making. In an interesting study of the interface between CEOs and TMTs, Cao, Simsek, and Zhang (2010) found that small-to-medium sized enterprises pursued a more ambidextrous orientation when CEOs with more extensive networks communicated richly with their TMTs and when the CEO-TMT relationship was characterized by power decentralization.
One interesting development in the last decade has been the increasing consideration of TMT research in the context of new ventures (Amason et al., 2006; Ensley & Hmieleski, 2005; Hmieleski & Ensley, 2007; Kroll, Walters, & Le, 2007; Souitaris & Maestro, 2010; Zimmerman, 2008). Previously, much of the TMT research had taken place in older, more established, and publicly traded firms, for which objective and accessible data is readily available. In such organizations, which are typically larger and more bureaucratically complex, the linkage between the TMT and organizational outcomes is much more confounded. In younger, smaller firms, the effect of the TMT on organizational outcomes is more readily identified. For example, Amason et al. (2006) found that TMT heterogeneity in more novel new ventures (those ventures that introduce a new product or service category to the market) was negatively related to firm performance. This suggests that, while more diverse teams may be better at environmental scanning, more homogenous teams in these types of new ventures were possibly better able to integrate and communicate, which are necessary capacities for novel and innovative firms. Likewise, Hmieleski and Ensley (2007) found interactive effects between leadership type, environmental dynamism, and TMT heterogeneity in fast growing startups.
Similarly, research in small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) also allows processes and outcomes to be more easily identified. For example, Lubatkin, Simsek, Ling, and Veiga (2006) found in SMEs that organizational dexterity—the ability of a firm to explore opportunities and exploit them—was a function of TMT behavioral integration. Likewise, Cao et al. (2010) found that this was enhanced when the CEO decentralizes power among TMT members.
In consideration of more contextual research on TMTs, as well as examining processes within TMTs, Menz (2012) offers a thorough review of the more recently developing stream of research on functional members of the TMT. This research often focuses upon individual members of the TMT representing various functional areas (e.g., CFO, CIO, CTO, etc.), but also examines the processes of those individuals' involvement in TMT strategy formulation and implementation, and generally supports the upper echelon perspective that TMT characteristics affect firm strategy.
Persistent Challenges
Despite the depth and breadth of TMT research, along with the general support of the model, a number of persistent problems remain. Far more research "lists" these limitations rather than addresses them. Research projects designed to investigate the black box of TMT processes require access not easily gained, along with more time and money than most academic researchers can afford to invest. In addition, the sort of personal involvement by TMT members that could provide rich data and insight into actual TMT processes is difficult, if not impossible, to acquire. Indeed, few researchers have direct access to large numbers of TMTs, as necessary to build representative samples and produce widely generalizable findings. So, there are some practical limitations on the ability of researchers to view, manipulate and measure key elements in the model. There are also areas though where the theory is simply underdeveloped or where the momentum of the research stream has outpaced the agreement of the researchers. We list three of those areas below.
Among one of the most enduring challenges of TMT research is the conceptual definition of the TMT. While research indicates that the examination of the top group of managers provides more predictive value than that of the CEO alone, determining how one actually defines the top team of managers has been inconsistent and problematic. Among the most prevalent reasons for this persistent problem is the difficulty of collecting TMT data. Because response rates by executives for primary research, such as surveys and interviews, is low for obvious reasons, such as busy schedules and their saturation with requests for responses to questions, obtaining primary data about actual cognitive and value characteristics is highly difficult (Cycyota & Harrison, 2006; Hambrick, 2007). So, researchers are forced to rely on proxy data about educational and industry background and experience, as well as demographic and socioeconomic variables, from publicly available company reports. As such, TMTs are often defined based on the availability of this data for publicly traded firms. This data becomes even more challenging to acquire for private firms and other organizations not required to publicly report this information.
Contributing to persistent challenges in TMT research, often brought about by the accessibility of publicly available data, is the troublesome assumption that demographic variables can appropriately serve as proxies for the underlying cognitive processes among the TMT. Priem, Lyon, and Dess (1999) called attention to the shortcomings of relying too heavily upon publicly available demographic data variables as proxies, pointing out that demographic proxies cannot reliably indicate which, or how, cognitive processes affect outcomes. Further, they warned that reliance upon demographic proxies reinforces the observation distance between researchers and actual TMT phenomena. A later study by Kilduff, Angelmar, and Mehra (2000) supported these contentions. More recent TMT research has begun to examine the underlying psychological constructs once proxied by demographic measures.
The most prevalent definitions of the TMT in published studies are: the highest paid three or five executives, the entire executive team published in company reports, the CEO and all internal board members, all executives with a title higher than or equal to a given title (for example, executive vice president), those defined by the CEO as the top or most influential decision makers, or all founding team members when TMT research is applied to entrepreneurship contexts. It becomes obvious that using more than one of these definitions applied to the same company could yield multiple configurations for sampling TMTs. A few studies have applied multiple definitions in the same study, reporting results for various configurations (Carpenter & Fredrickson, 2001; Jensen & Zajac, 2004).
While it seems most appropriate to examine TMTs in whatever definitional configuration is best suited to the research question, very few studies offer a theoretical rationale explaining the suitability of the selected definition for the study. The assumption that the individuals for which information is readily or publicly available are actually those most responsible for strategic analysis and choice within the organization is dubious at best. Additionally, varying definitional configurations of the TMT, combined with a plethora of constructs of interest and dependent variables, have contributed to highly contextualized and inconsistent findings, further confounding the establishment of a robust understanding of TMTs. Research studies could be strengthened not only by offering a justification for why certain executives were chosen to be included on the TMT, but also by examining further robustness checks for varying definitional configurations of the TMT.
Power of the Team
As TMT research developed, it became increasingly clear that one assumption to be suspended or clarified was the nature of the "team" itself. Are TMTs teams, in the truest sense of the word, as a cohesive group of individuals pursuing a common vision, or are they coalitions pursuing their fragmented functional expertise in a balance of organizational goals dictated by boards and CEOs, and their own self-interests? Do they communicate on a regular basis about common themes, as a team? Or do they meet infrequently, or in varying spheres of membership, as task-forces, to be realigned differently for the next strategic decision? These distinctions are important with regard to the generalization of findings of TMT research.
Hambrick (1994) suggested that perhaps the best description of the upper echelon, or dominant coalition, should be top management groups rather than teams. Indeed, this term better accommodates the uncertainty that publicly available proxy variables, such as age, tenure, educational background, and others, actually describe the inner processes of a cohesive, singularly minded team. Additionally, our own exposure to top managers informs us that power and influence among TMT members is differentially distributed. All TMT members are not alike, and, further, each strategic decision may bring a different sub-group of top managers into focus. This exposes another challenge of TMT research: the actual distribution of power and influence among those defined as TMT members.
The scope of responsibility, power, and influence can vary widely across various TMT members due to a variety of external and internal influences. For example, the Sarbanes-Oxley act of 2002 requires that CEOs and CFOs assume personal responsibility for the accuracy of accounting reports in publicly traded firms. This level of responsibility no doubt changes the scope of the power and influence those two executives have over certain accounting functions within a firm. At the same time, it is intuitive to think that the CFO might have relatively less power or influence over decisions of new product innovation or market positioning strategies than the vice presidents of R & D or the brand divisions. Finkelstein (1992) asserted that TMT research should better consider the differences in the distribution of power and influence. This argument is further validated by a study conducted by Mooney and Amason (2011), which found that the group of top executives identified by the CEO as being the ones most involved in actual strategic decisions was a different, and significantly smaller group (on average 4.6 individuals), than those listed in public documents as the top managers (on average 9.4 individuals). This suggests that the number of executives who actually have the attention of the CEO with regard to the assessment and choice of strategic alternatives differs from those who may be the top earners or listed in public filings with a certain title. These effects may differ across contexts (e.g., Cao et al., 2010), and in different cultures outside the United States. For example, one study conducted with TMTs in hospitals found that performance was more positively influenced when there was a power differentiation among TMT members, with the more powerful group being the CEO and one other TMT member with different functional and industry backgrounds (Smith, Houghton, Hood, & Ryman, 2006).
With this in mind, future research should explore further the black box of processes by which power among TMT members is distributed and whether or not power is distributed consistently across different decisions. Is the inner core of powerful TMT members relatively stable across all decisions, or is it distributed differently based upon certain episodic needs of the organization? Further, it would be worthwhile to explore how power is distributed differently in public, private, and family firms, and how CEOs signal to internal and external stakeholders how power is being distributed. In considering two examples from popular business media, Steve Jobs, the former CEO of Apple, publicly lauded his Chief Design Officer, Jony Ive. Similarly, Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO of Facebook, has publicly credited his COO, Sheryl Sandberg, with the refinement of the organization's revenue model. Neither of these top executives is the CEO of their firms, and yet both have become celebrity executives, in their own right, a rare feat for non-CEO TMT members.
Direction of Causality and Endogeneity
The last of these persistent issues that we will mention is the causality assumed by the model and implied in our research. Most of the studies are cross sectional examinations of the relationships between TMT characteristics and organizational outcomes. Unfortunately, cross sectional methodologies, while they offer snapshots of relationships between TMT constructs of interest, do not explain well the nature of the causality. While it is certainly conceivable that configurations of TMT characteristics, such as functional backgrounds in finance, can explain a greater prevalence of acquisition behavior, it is also likely that a firm with a broad directive and CEO vision for growth through acquisitions could configure a TMT with an expertise in financing those endeavors, and likewise attract executives with that expertise (Hambrick, 2007). A study of TMT characteristics and M&A (mergers and acquisitions) behavior could provide evidence of such a relationship without providing a deep understanding of the actual causal order, or the actual reason behind the relationship. However, longitudinal studies of TMTs are rare, and endogeneity checks are still infrequently noted in TMT research.
Are We Any Better Off?
So, having reviewed the basic elements of the perspective, some of the strongest and most consistent findings, along with some of the most persistent problems, we come again to the question. Have we come to an inflection point? With the benefit of some 30 years of retrospect, can we now assess the progress made on the issues that spawned the upper echelon perspective and the long stream of literature that followed? Have the results been worth the effort? After hundreds of articles, books, and chapters have been published; perhaps thousands of individual manuscripts written, reviewed, and revised; and many thousands of hours spent by authors, reviewers, editors, and readers, is the payback still worth the investment?
Looking backwards and assessing where we are today, in relation to where we were before, the answer would have to be yes, and many times over. As discussed previously, the original premise of the upper echelon perspective (Hambrick & Mason, 1984) was that natural limits on the ability of people to consider and choose in complex situations would lead to decisions that reflected the backgrounds, experiences and values of the decision makers. Moreover, in considering the relationship between strategists and strategic decisions, the proper unit of analysis was that group of the most influential executives in the organization, referred to as the TMT. These basic assumptions gave rise to three sets of relationships. The first is the relationship between the characteristics of the TMT and the team's strategic decisions. For example, teams that are more risk averse will make decisions that are generally less risky. The second is the relationship between the decisions of the TMT and the organizational outcomes that result. For example, decisions that are less risky will yield organizational outcomes that are less variable. Finally, because these two relationships are sequential and interconnected, we can ascribe a connection between the characteristics of the TMT and organizational level outcomes. Again for example, a TMT that is more risk averse should produce organizational outcomes that are less variable.
Over many years and across a great many studies, these relationships have been generally supported. In fairness though, all three sets of relationships have not received equal attention. Indeed, very few, if any, studies have sought to test the entire model, and a relative few have tested any relationships involving specific TMT decisions. Instead, the majority of studies have linked an increasingly granular combination of TMT characteristics to various performance measures in very large organizations. Unfortunately, these relationships, the ones ascribed between measurable TMT characteristics and aggregate performance, are perhaps the least interesting in terms of understanding strategic choice. We say the least interesting for two reasons. First, they offer the least nuanced view of how TMTs actually affect organizations. Second, they are the ones most likely to be influenced by other forces, outside of the upper echelon perspective or strategic choice theory.
So, as we reflect upon the upper echelon literature, we come away with two observations. First, we certainly understand a great deal about TMTs, about the behavior of teams under various conditions, about the TMT characteristics that have the strongest connections to various organizational outcomes, and about how various configurations of TMT characteristics affect the teams themselves. What is more, if this is all we ever learn from this stream of literature, then that will have been enough. All of that aside though, we cannot help but read this literature and come away with a growing sense of opportunity missed. To apply an old metaphor, we run the risk of missing the proverbial forest for the trees.
What exactly might we be missing? We are missing the opportunity outlined by Hambrick and Mason (1984) more than 30 years ago. The upper echelon perspective was offered as a lens through which we could view the how and why of top management influence on organizations. Indeed, Child (1972) offered strategic choice as the missing link amidst various explanations of organizational variation. As Child described it, "the theoretical models we reviewed attempt to explain organizational structure at one remove" (1972, p. 16). The models of the day were missing the essential and irreplaceable element of managerial interpretation, valuation, action, and choice. The upper echelon perspective offered a framework by which that essential element could be modeled, understood, and incorporated into explanations of organizational outcomes. What seems to be happening, though, is that history is repeating itself, and the bulk of research in the upper echelon tradition is now operating "at one remove." And so, while we have a learned a great deal from the work that has been done, there is the risk of losing sight of the big questions and falling short of the original challenge. What can be done about this and what can be done to invigorate this research again? We offer four suggestions.
Remember That All Top Managers Are Not Equal
Drawing into focus the issues mentioned earlier regarding power dynamics and the definition and configuration of the TMT, research has established that not all members of the TMT are equal with regard to their power or role in strategic choice determination. Some recent work has brought new light to our understanding of this, while also pointing the way to potential future areas for valuable research. For example, Roberto (2003) conducted both qualitative and quantitative analyses of TMTs, including multiple interviews with chief executives, and a large sample quantitative survey. Roberto's findings suggest that a small group of executives, a "stable core," are involved in nearly all strategic decisions, but that multiple groups convene around this stable core to formulate strategy. Inclusion into this outer group and so into the strategic decision process was based largely upon functional expertise and personal relationships. Often comprising individuals from a variety of levels throughout the organization, this second group is a "dynamic periphery" that, together with the stable core, comprises the TMT.
Further work in this area has been done with regard to "faultlines" within the TMT (for example, see Hutzschenreuter & Horstkotte, 2013; Ndofor, Sirmon, & He, 2015; Van Knippenberg, Dawson, West, & Homan, 2011). Consistent with the conflict literature (Amason, 1996; Amason & Sapienza, 1997), this line of inquiry suggests that varying configurations of constellations of characteristics of TMT members, usually demographic, can produce lines of subgroup distinction strong enough to influence TMT performance or outcomes, often negatively.
While this line of research has established that not all TMT members aligned by title or compensation or listing in company reports has an equal amount of power or decision making influence, it has opened up an interesting area of inquiry into the actual group and team processes that take place in the executive suite. Another potential view of the differences in power and influence in strategic execution among TMT members could be a return glance to the social network literature regarding brokerage and closure strategies (Burt, 2001). Several studies have examined brokerage and closure strategies employed by middle managers (for example, see Balkundi, Kilduff, Barsness, & Michael, 2007; Shi, Markoczy, & Dess, 2009). However, this perspective has not been examined for TMTs and may be helpful to explain the processes of some TMT members. For example, TMT members playing broker roles may participate more in boundary spanning with middle managers in the dissemination of strategy, and with outsiders in the gathering of market information, while TMT members playing closure roles may maintain communication within the TMT as strategy is formulated, or they may form what Roberto (2003) referred to as the stable core.
Further investigation of how TMTs actually engage in the strategic choice and implementation process, and with whom, will refine our understanding of how the TMT actually influences strategic processes and outcomes in firms. These studies also demonstrate that further elucidation is most likely dependent upon rigorous, more difficult, and more time consuming qualitative and mixed-methods research designs.
Focus More on the Process Connecting TMTs to Action
Despite three decades of research on TMTs, little is still known about the actual processes by which TMTs influence actions and performance in firms. A prevalence of cross-sectional studies, studies examining relationships between variables for which data are publicly available in company reports, and studies examining configurations of TMTs that may or may not actually wield influence over strategy, have offered some insight into relationships, but little understanding of actual TMT decision making or strategic integration processes that explain why and how TMTs influence some firms to perform better than others. Much of the TMT research has been focused upon internal interactions within the TMT (for example, the TMT conflict literature) and far less upon integrative processes of strategy implementation, which more directly influences firm performance. Another observation, echoed by Raes, Heijltjes, Glunk, and Roe (2011), is that strategy research has kept executive managers and middle managers, who are often more responsible for integrative implementation processes, distinct from one another in research domains (for exceptions, see Balkundi et al., 2007; Shi et al., 2009). These issues are well understood by TMT researchers, and are often reflected in reviews and "opportunities for future research" sections of journal articles. Similarly, Menz (2012) noted that research on functional members of the TMT and their influence on TMT processes, often finds its way into journals specific to those functional domains (e.g., CFO research often appears in finance journals), unfortunately preventing its integration into general strategic management research on TMTs. One suggestion could be to look beyond TMT behaviors for variance, and into the interaction of the TMT with other dimensions of strategic control besides behaviors, such as political and systemic barriers (Lorange & Murphy, 1984). While TMT research more often examines behavioral aspects of strategic control, more research should investigate political aspects of strategic control (TMT interactions between multiple levels of management and external stakeholders), and systemic issues (TMT interactions with the controls themselves).
Fortunately, recent work has begun to take strides to better examine processes related to TMTs. For example, Carmeli and Schaubroeck (2006) conducted a mixed methods study in which they conducted a quantitative survey of 116 TMTs, followed by a qualitative explanatory study of four of those firms, examining the influence of the behavioral integration of the TMT with the quality of strategic decisions in both growing and declining firms. Their study allowed them to better causally link the mechanisms of TMT behavioral integration, the quality of their strategic decision making, and organizational decline. Ou, Tsui, Kinicki, Waldman, Zhixing, and Jiwen Song (2014) serves as an example of empirical research examining the interaction between TMTs and middle managers. Using both a quantitative study and an exploratory qualitative study, their results suggest that CEO humility relates positively to TMT integration, which also positively influences middle manager commitment and job performance. Studies like these demonstrate the value of mixed methods research designs in examining the deeper processes, which have traditionally remained within the "black box" of the TMT.
Additionally, recent work has begun to examine psychological constructs without heavily relying on demographic variables, instead examining the constructs themselves, and in a variety of contexts. Examples of these studies include research in organizational identity (Clark, Gioia, Ketchen, & Thomas, 2010), information exchange and collaboration (Boone & Hendriks, 2009), and cognitive perceptions (de Luque, Washburn, Waldman, & House, 2008; Nadkarni & Barr, 2008). Clark and colleagues (Clark et al., 2010) conducted a qualitative examination of the organizational identity negotiation processes between TMT members of two firms during a merger. Their research found that a transitional identity allowed more flexibility in creating a new organizational identity as a result of the merger. Boone and Hendriks (2009) conducted interviews with CEOs and surveyed TMTs (with three or more members) of 33 Belgian and Dutch technology companies with regard to collaborative behavior, information exchange, and decentralized decision making. Their findings suggest that collaboration and higher quality information exchange contribute to exploiting the benefits of TMT functional diversity for firm performance. In the study by deLuque and colleagues (deLuque et al., 2008), the CEO-TMT interface was examined through direct surveys in 520 firms in 17 countries, finding that TMT members perceived CEOs to be visionary leaders when CEOs considered stakeholder values more importantly, which led to greater TMT effort and superior performance. These studies offer encouraging evidence that in recent years research has begun to investigate actual TMT processes, rather than proxies, across various cultures and contexts.
Keep an Open Mind About Sample Selection
Most TMT studies draw convenience samples from readily available sources, such as 10-Ks and publicly available company reports and databases. From this data, inferences are drawn about relationships between TMTs and other various constructs. As difficult as it is to draw conclusions about actual linkages between TMTs and organizational outcomes from secondary data collected from public information, it is equally difficult to capture primary data from large numbers of complete TMTs to develop generalizable theory. Few researchers have access to entire executive suites for the purpose of capturing richer data over longer periods of time, pertaining to TMT processes and TMT interaction with middle managers in order to implement strategic decisions. Whenever researchers are fortunate enough to capture longitudinal data or qualitative data from executives (especially beyond the CEO), the samples are often small, and many are limited to single firm, multi-business unit case studies. One notable example is the study by Barkema and Shvyrkov (2007), in which they analyzed three decades of data of TMT interactions in 25 Dutch firms. Using such a long time period of data, and a sample context in which there are strict reporting definitions of the composition of the TMT across firms, allowed them to examine tenure overlaps among TMT members and along potential faultlines. Their results suggested that positive effects of TMT tenure diversity decompose over time as TMT tenures overlap, and also that the negative effects of faultlines break down as TMT tenures overlap.
A helpful start would be more studies capturing and reporting data and findings related to multiple definitional configurations of TMTs. Having this information would allow for greater numbers of meta-analyses to be conducted given various TMT configurations, shedding light on how various coalitions within TMTs influence various kinds of organizational outcomes. A greater number of longitudinal studies, multiple case studies, or studies involving ethnographic methods, would benefit the explanation of causal relationships between TMTs and outcomes.
Keep an Eye on the Big Picture
To paraphrase an old adage, the surest way to lose sight of the big picture is to focus intently on the details, close up. As we have argued, TMT research has, over the past three decades, focused increasingly on the details, close up. And so it makes sense to simply step back and consider the larger picture. As Godfrey and Hill note, "many view the raison d'etre of strategic management research as the generation of normative heuristics" (2000, p. 228). In other words, it is commonly expected that strategic management research should connect back to and offer guidance for organizational performance. If this is somewhat true for all of strategic management research, then it is especially true for work that builds upon the upper echelon perspective. If a firm and its performance is a reflection of its TMT (Hambrick & Mason, 1984), then a better understanding of that TMT should yield better insights into organizational performance.
Unfortunately, such direct, normative implications have been lacking across the balance of upper echelon research. And, while simply calling for greater connection to practice will not suddenly give rise to new and high quality, practical insights, remembering to consider the implications for practice may change the way we view our questions and do our research. So, scholars are encouraged to keep an eye on the big picture. What are we saying to practice when we identify particular effects associated with specific demographic patterns? Are we suggesting, by implication, that TMTs be constructed around the personality characteristics of the CEO, so as to enable better team dynamics? Even if it were a good idea to construct teams in ways that reflect the findings or our research, doing so would be hopelessly impractical, as most individuals and TMTs are already in place, along with the assets, experiences, and commitments connected to them. So, meaningful implications for practice must be more nuanced and subtle. For example, different types of firms and different types of strategies might require different amounts of actual team interaction. Changing the structure of the decision process, as necessary to suit the nature of the context, might be one way to reduce dysfunctional conflict while still enabling a team with a diverse membership. Similarly, developing routines to counter dysfunctional tendencies within a TMT might serve to mitigate dysfunctional processes, such as the constriction of information that often accompanies perceptions of threat (Dutton & Duncan, 1987; Julian & Ofori-Dankwa, 2008).
Implications such as these are potentially valuable to the world of practice and to understanding the value of our research. Certainly TMT researchers would do well to look for opportunities to apply the things they are learning. Doing so would add value to the work itself, but it should also add value to the process overall, by expanding the view of the researcher and by helping to protect against a dysfunctional narrowing of focus.
Where to Go Next?
The upper echelon perspective, and the stream of TMT research that flowed from it, arose in response to a deterministic view of organizational performance that excluded the choices of top management. Population ecology, industrial economics, and institutional theory all offered valuable insights and reliable explanations for firm outcomes. However, they were never able to fully explain the differences between firms. Hence, the field of strategic management evolved from the need to explain, in science and in pedagogy, the variations in performance, structure, and longevity that were so apparent in the marketplace. Strategic choice and the upper echelon view effectively filled the gap by attributing variance to the characteristics of the top managers of the organization.
Paradoxically though, the very phenomenon that TMT research intended to explain was itself a confounding influence in the investigation. The findings of TMT research have proven to be highly contextual, as organizations, their top managers, and the processes by which they implement strategy, are highly idiosyncratic. A number of contextual moderators have been considered in an attempt to improve the explanatory power of TMT research, such as managerial discretion, behavioral integration, environmental munificence, and environmental dynamism, among others. Nevertheless, few relationships between TMTs and their firms have been found to be robust across settings. As a result, we are in danger of ending up right back where we started, with no solid theory of how strategic choice operates and no clear picture of how managerial action contributes to or accounts for firm performance.
So, we return to our original question. Is there new value in this stream or have we reached a point of diminishing returns? The answer really depends upon us. As strategy researchers, we should be interested in the relationships between managerial actions and firm performance. The TMT is a lens through which we can examine, not just how teams operate, but rather how team operations influence firm outcomes. How many TMT studies conclude with a disclaimer about inconsistent findings and the challenges of opening the black box? At its essence, that black box is human choice, worked out through the interpretations and interactions of the dominant coalition. How many TMT studies focus on central tendencies and variations within the team? Perhaps it is time to consider the substance underlying those tendencies and variations. Are some experiences simply better than others? Are some personalities sufficiently strong to overcome the weight of disagreement among the team? Is the TMT itself more or less relevant in the presence of certain types of CEOs (Hambrick & Finkelstein, 1987)? Finally, should we relax the constraints on sample size and purity, in the interest of gaining important new insights? While the quest for efficiency and generalizability in research is understandable, adherence to this orthodoxy limits our ability to view and analyze the important nuances of the model. Hence, we are left again interpreting cause, one step removed from its origins.
Alexiev, A. S., Jansen, J. J., Van den Bosch, F. A., & Volberda, H. W. (2010). Top management team advice seeking and exploratory innovation: The moderating role of TMT heterogeneity. Journal of Management Studies, 47(7), 1343–1364.Find this resource:
Amason, A. C. (1996). Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams. Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 123–148.Find this resource:
Amason, A. C., & Sapienza, H. J. (1997). The effects of top management team size and interaction norms on cognitive and affective conflict. Journal of Management, 23(4), 495–516.Find this resource:
Amason, A. C., Shrader, R. C., & Tompson, G. H. (2006). Newness and novelty: Relating top management team composition to new venture performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(1), 125–148.Find this resource:
Balkundi, P., Kilduff, M., Barsness, Z. I., & Michael, J. H. (2007). Demographic antecedents and performance consequences of structural holes in work teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28(2), 241–260.Find this resource:
Barkema, H. G., & Shvyrkov, O. (2007). Does top management team diversity promote or hamper foreign expansion? Strategic Management Journal, 28(7), 663–680.Find this resource:
Bermiss, Y. S., & Murmann, J. P. (2014). Who matters more? The impact of functional background and top executive mobility on firm survival. Strategic Management Journal, 36(11), 1697–1716.Find this resource:
Boone, C., & Hendriks, W. (2009). Top management team diversity and firm performance: Moderators of functional-background and locus-of-control diversity. Management Science, 55(2), 165–180.Find this resource:
Bromiley, P., & Rau, D. (2016). Social, behavioral, and cognitive influences on upper echelons during strategy process: A literature review. Journal of Management, 42(1), 174–202.Find this resource:
Burt, R. S. (2001). Structural holes versus network closure as social capital. In N. Lin, K. Cook, & R. S. Burt (Eds.), Social capital: Theory and research (pp. 31–55). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Find this resource:
Cannella, A. A., Park, J.-H., & Lee, H.-U. (2008). Top management team functional background diversity and firm performance: Examining the roles of team member colocation and environmental uncertainty. Academy of Management Journal, 51(4), 768–784.Find this resource:
Cao, Q., Simsek, Z., & Zhang, H. (2010). Modelling the joint impact of the CEO and the TMT on organizational ambidexterity. Journal of Management Studies, 47(7), 1272–1296.Find this resource:
Carmeli, A., & Schaubroeck, J. (2006). Top management team behavioral integration, decision quality, and organizational decline. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(5), 441–453.Find this resource:
Carpenter, M., Pollock, T., & Leary, M. (2003). Governance, the experience of principals and agents, and global strategic intent: Testing a model of reasoned risk-taking. Strategic Management Journal, 24(9), 803–820.Find this resource:
Carpenter, M. A., & Fredrickson, J. W. (2001). Top management teams, global strategic posture, and the moderating role of uncertainty. Academy of Management Journal, 44(3), 533–545.Find this resource:
Carpenter, M. A., Geletkanycz, M. A., & Sanders, W. G. (2004). Upper echelons research revisited: Antecedents, elements, and consequences of top management team composition. Journal of Management, 30(6), 749–778.Find this resource:
Child, J. (1972). Organizational structure, environment and performance: The role of strategic choice. Sociology, 6(1), 1–22.Find this resource:
Clark, S. M., Gioia, D. A., Ketchen, D. J., & Thomas, J. B. (2010). Transitional identity as a facilitator of organizational identity change during a merger. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(3), 397–438.Find this resource:
Cycyota, C. S., & Harrison, D. A. (2006). What (not) to expect when surveying executives: A meta-analysis of top manager response rates and techniques over time. Organizational Research Methods, 9(2), 133–160.Find this resource:
Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Find this resource:
de Luque, M. S., Washburn, N. T., Waldman, D. A., & House, R. J. (2008). Unrequited profit: How stakeholder and economic values relate to subordinates' perceptions of leadership and firm performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53(4), 626–654.Find this resource:
Dezsö, C. L., & Ross, D. G. (2012). Does female representation in top management improve firm performance? A panel data investigation. Strategic Management Journal, 33(9), 1072–1089.Find this resource:
Dutton, J. E., & Duncan, R. B. (1987). The creation of momentum for change through the process of strategic issue diagnosis. Strategic Management Journal, 8(3), 279–295.Find this resource:
Ensley, M. D., & Hmieleski, K. M. (2005). A comparative study of new venture top management team composition, dynamics and performance between university-based and independent start-ups. Research Policy, 34(7), 1091–1105.Find this resource:
Ensley, M. D., Pearson, A. W., & Amason, A. C. (2002). Understanding the dynamics of new venture top management teams: Cohesion, conflict, and new venture performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 17(4), 365–386.Find this resource:
Ferrier, W. J. (2001). Navigating the competitive landscape: The drivers and consequences of competitive aggressiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 44(4), 858–877.Find this resource:
Finkelstein, S. (1992). Power in top management teams: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 35(3), 505–538.Find this resource:
Finkelstein, S., & Hambrick, D. C. (1996). Strategic leadership: Top executives and their effects on organizations. St. Paul, MN: West.Find this resource:
Finkelstein, S., Hambrick, D. C., & Cannella, A. A. (2009). Strategic leadership: Theory and research on executives, top management teams, and boards: New York: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:
Geletkanycz, M. A., & Hambrick, D. C. (1997). The external ties of top executives: Implications for strategic choice and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(4), 654–681.Find this resource:
Gerstner, W.-C., König, A., Enders, A., & Hambrick, D. C. (2013). CEO narcissism, audience engagement, and organizational adoption of technological discontinuities. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58(2), 257–291.Find this resource:
Godfrey, P. C., & Hill, C. W. L. (2000). The philosophy of science and the problem of unobservables in strategic management research. In J. Rabin, G. J. Miller, & W. B. Hildreth, (Eds.), Handbook of strategic management (2d ed., pp. 247–248). New York: Marcel Dekker.Find this resource:
Hage, J., & Dewar, R. (1973). Elite values versus organizational structure in predicting innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 18(3), 279–290.Find this resource:
Haleblian, J., & Finkelstein, S. (1993). Top management team size, CEO dominance, and firm performance: The moderating roles of environmental turbulence and discretion. Academy of Management Journal, 36(4), 844–863.Find this resource:
Hambrick, D. C. (1994). Top management groups: A conceptual integration and reconsideration of the "team" label. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (pp. 171–214). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Find this resource:
Hambrick, D. C. (2007). Upper echelons theory: An update. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 334–343.Find this resource:
Hambrick, D. C., & Finkelstein, S. (1987). Managerial discretion: A bridge between polar views of organizational outcomes. Research in organizational behavior, 9, 369–406.Find this resource:
Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 193–206.Find this resource:
Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1977). The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 82(5), 929–964.Find this resource:
Hmieleski, K. M., & Ensley, M. D. (2007). A contextual examination of new venture performance: Entrepreneur leadership behavior, top management team heterogeneity, and environmental dynamism. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28(7), 865–889.Find this resource:
Homberg, F., & Bui, H. T. M. (2013). Top management team diversity: A systematic review. Group & Organization Management, 38(4), 455–479.Find this resource:
Horwitz, S. K., & Horwitz, I. B. (2007). The effects of team diversity on team outcomes: A meta-analytic review of team demography. Journal of Management, 33(6), 987–1015.Find this resource:
Hutzschenreuter, T., & Horstkotte, J. (2013). Performance effects of top management team demographic faultlines in the process of product diversification. Strategic Management Journal, 34(6), 704–726.Find this resource:
Jackson, S. E., Brett, J. F., Sessa, V. I., Cooper, D. M., Julin, J. A., & Peyronnin, K. (1991). Some differences make a difference: Individual dissimilarity and group heterogeneity as correlates of recruitment, promotions, and turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(5), 675.Find this resource:
Jensen, M., & Zajac, E. J. (2004). Corporate elites and corporate strategy: How demographic preferences and structural position shape the scope of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 25(6), 507–524.Find this resource:
Joshi, A., & Roh, H. (2009). The role of context in work team diversity research: A meta-analytic review. Academy of Management Journal, 52(3), 599–627.Find this resource:
Julian, S. C., & Ofori-Dankwa, J. C. (2008). Toward an integrative cartography of two strategic issue diagnosis frameworks. Strategic Management Journal, 29(1), 93–114.Find this resource:
Kilduff, M., Angelmar, R., & Mehra, A. (2000). Top management-team diversity and firm performance: Examining the role of cognitions. Organization Science, 11(1), 21–34.Find this resource:
Kroll, M., Walters, B. A., & Le, S. A. (2007). The impact of board composition and top management team ownership structure on post-IPO performance in young entrepreneurial firms. Academy of Management Journal, 50(5), 1198–1216.Find this resource:
Li, Q., Maggitti, P. G., Smith, K. G., Tesluk, P. E., & Katila, R. (2013). Top management attention to innovation: The role of search selection and intensity in new product introductions. Academy of Management Journal, 56(3), 893–916.Find this resource:
Lorange, P., & Murphy, D. (1984). Considerations in implementing strategic control. The Journal of Business Strategy, 4(4), 27.Find this resource:
Lubatkin, M. H., Simsek, Z., Ling, Y., & Veiga, J. F. (2006). Ambidexterity and performance in small-to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. Journal of Management, 32(5), 646–672.Find this resource:
Lyngsie, J., & Foss, N. J. (2016). The more, the merrier? Women in top-management teams and entrepreneurship in established firms. Strategic Management Journal.Find this resource:
Marcel, J. J. (2009). Why top management team characteristics matter when employing a chief operating officer: A strategic contingency perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 30(6), 647–658.Find this resource:
Marcel, J. J., Barr, P. S., & Duhaime, I. M. (2011). The influence of executive cognition on competitive dynamics. Strategic Management Journal, 32(2), 115–138.Find this resource:
March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. New York: Wiley.Find this resource:
Menz, M. (2012). Functional top management team members: A review, synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of Management, 38(1), 45–80.Find this resource:
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.Find this resource:
Mooney, A. C., & Amason, A. C. (2011). In search of the CEO's inner circle and how it is formed. In M. A. Carpenter & M. K. Weikel (Eds.), The handbook of research on top management teams (pp. 35–48). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Find this resource:
Nadkarni, S., & Barr, P. S. (2008). Environmental context, managerial cognition, and strategic action: An integrated view. Strategic Management Journal, 29(13), 1395–1427.Find this resource:
Ndofor, H. A., Sirmon, D. G., & He, X. (2015). Utilizing the firm's resources: How TMT heterogeneity and resulting faultlines affect TMT tasks. Strategic Management Journal, 36(11), 1656–1674.Find this resource:
Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Belknap.Find this resource:
Nielsen, B. B., & Nielsen, S. (2013). Top management team nationality diversity and firm performance: A multilevel study. Strategic Management Journal, 34(3), 373–382.Find this resource:
Ou, A. Y., Tsui, A. S., Kinicki, A. J., Waldman, D. A., Zhixing, X., & Jiwen Song, L. (2014). Humble chief executive officers' connections to top management team integration and middle managers' responses. Administrative Science Quarterly, 59(1), 34–72.Find this resource:
Parola, H. R., Ellis, K. M., & Golden, P. (2015). Performance effects of top management team gender diversity during the merger and acquisition process. Management Decision, 53(1), 57–74.Find this resource:
Pitcher, P., & Smith, A. D. (2001). Top management team heterogeneity: Personality, power, and proxies. Organization Science, 12(1), 1–18.Find this resource:
Priem, R. L., Lyon, D. W., & Dess, G. G. (1999). Inherent limitations of demographic proxies in top management team heterogeneity research. Journal of Management, 25(6), 935–953.Find this resource:
Raes, A. M. L., Heijltjes, M. G., Glunk, U., & Roe, R. A. (2011). The interface of the top management team and middle managers: A process model. Academy of Management Review, 36(1), 102–126.Find this resource:
Roberto, M. A. (2003). The stable core and dynamic periphery in top management teams. Management Decision, 41(2), 120–131.Find this resource:
Shi, W., Markoczy, L., & Dess, G. G. (2009). The role of middle management in the strategy process: Group affiliation, structural holes, and tertius iungens. Journal of Management, 35(6), 1453–1480.Find this resource:
Smith, A., Houghton, S. M., Hood, J. N., & Ryman, J. A. (2006). Power relationships among top managers: Does top management team power distribution matter for organizational performance? Journal of Business Research, 59(5), 622–629.Find this resource:
Souitaris, V., & Maestro, B. M. M. (2010). Polychronicity in top management teams: The impact on strategic decision processes and performance of new technology ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 31(6), 652–678.Find this resource:
Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in Action. New York: McGraw-Hill.Find this resource:
Tihanyi, L., Ellstrand, A. E., Daily, C. M., & Dalton, D. R. (2000). Composition of the top management team and firm international diversification. Journal of Management, 26(6), 1157–1177.Find this resource:
van Knippenberg, D., Dawson, J. F., West, M. A., & Homan, A. C. (2011). Diversity faultlines, shared objectives, and top management team performance. Human Relations, 64(3), 307–336.Find this resource:
Wagner, W. G., Pfeffer, J., & O'Reilly, C. A. (1984). Organizational demography and turnover in top-management group. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(1), 74–92.Find this resource:
Wiersema, M. F., & Bantel, K. A. (1992). Top management team demography and corporate strategic change. Academy of Management Journal, 35(1), 91–121.Find this resource:
Zimmerman, M. A. (2008). The influence of top management team heterogeneity on the capital raised through an initial public offering. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(3), 391–414.Find this resource:


text:
Gold flows east as bars recast for Chinese defy slump
By Nicholas Larkin, Chanyaporn Chanjaroen, and Glenys Sim
Bloomberg News
Monday, January 27, 2014
Gold's biggest slump in three decades has been a boon for MKS (Switzerland) SA's PAMP refinery near the Italian border in Castel San Pietro, whose bullion sales to China surged to a record as demand rose for coins, bars and jewelry.
As prices plunged 28 percent in 2013, investors dumped a record 869.1 metric tons from gold-backed funds traded mostly in the U.S. and Europe. Much of that metal is ending up in Asia, where companies such as The Brink's Co., UBS AG, and Deutsche Bank AG are opening new vaults. China's expanding wealth has made the country the world's largest buyer, surpassing India, as imports reached an all-time high.
PAMP Managing Director Mehdi Barkhordar, who credited China's "insatiable" appetite for a sales boost of as much as 20 percent last year, remains optimistic even as growth in the world's second-largest economy slows. "The demand in China is off its peak, but still respectable," he said last week.
... Dispatch continues below ...
How to profit with silver --
and which stocks to buy now
Future Money Trends is offering a special 16-page silver report with our forecast for 2013 that includes profiles of nine companies and technical analysis of their stock performance. Six of the companies have market capitalizations of less than $800 million and one company has a market cap of only $30 million. The most exciting of these companies will begin production in a few weeks and has a market cap of just $150 million.
Half of all proceeds from the sale of this report will be donated to the Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee to support its efforts exposing manipulation and fraud in the gold and silver markets.
To learn about this report, please visit:
To keep up with orders, MKS added shifts at the PAMP refinery, located about 4 miles (6.4 kilometers) from the Italian border, Barkhordar said in November as he showed off a 1-gram gold piece the size of a fingernail. Furnaces that can process more than 450 tons a year were at full capacity from April to June, melting mined metal, scrap jewelry and ingots at 1,000 degrees Celsius (1,832 degrees Fahrenheit) into the higher purities and smaller sizes favored by Asian buyers.
Brink's, the largest provider of precious-metals logistics and storage, is adding room on top of a vault the company opened in 2012 at the Singapore Freeport building next to Changi International Airport, with a sleek, modernist lobby and a twisting, polished-steel sculpture by Ron Arad that stands 5 meters high. Inside, the gold bars are protected by prison-like barriers, two body scanners and 8-ton, fireproof gates.
"We need additional capacity, so we have to take further space," said Baskaran Narayanan, the 45-year-old Singapore general manager for Richmond, Virginia-based Brink's. "There's a surge in demand for precious metals in Asia, and one can see the focus and movement from the west to the east."
A new Brink's vault in Singapore set to open by March will be the company's fifth in the city state, said Narayanan, who spent two decades in the security industry. The 154-year-old company also is adding space in Hong Kong and mainland China to meet growing storage demand, said Guy Bullen, the firm's senior vice president for the Asia-Pacific region.
Brink's said Asia-Pacific revenue grew 12 percent to $128.9 million in the first nine months of 2013, more than any other region. Deutsche Bank said in June it started a storage facility in Singapore that can hold as much as 200 tons, its largest outside London. UBS, Switzerland's biggest bank, opened one to keep bars for its wealth-management clients in Asia. In Shanghai, Malca-Amit Global Ltd. opened a vault in November that can store 2,000 tons, or a pile valued at $80 billion.
Buyers in the region are snapping up jewelry, coins and gold bars after the price of the metal fell last year for the first time since 2000 and by the most since 1981. Bullion entered a bear market in April and touched a 34-month low of $1,180.50 an ounce in London on June 28, down 39 percent from a record reached in September 2011 of $1,921.15. It traded yesterday at $1,256.80.
Gold rallied for 12 straight years, with gains accelerating from 2008 on bets that measures by the world's central banks to stimulate growth after the global recession would devalue currencies and accelerate inflation. The 70 percent price gain from December 2008 to June 2011 beat global equities and the Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index as the Fed pumped $2 trillion into the financial system. Investors had accumulated 2,632.5 tons, equal to almost a year of mine production, through exchange-traded products by December 2012.
Last year, the sentiment shifted as the Federal Reserve signaled plans to slow bond purchases, while gains in U.S. consumer prices remained in check. The central bank in December said it would cut the pace of bond buying to $75 billion a month from $85 billion.
As debt buying and record-low interest rates from the U.S. to Europe pushed global stocks last month to the highest since December 2007, U.S. consumer-price gains averaged 1.5 percent in 2013, down from 2.1 percent in 2012 and 3.2 percent in 2011. The Bloomberg dollar gauge, a measure against 10 major currencies, rose 12 percent from a three-year low in July 2011.
"Gold got way ahead of itself on the perception that this flooding of the system with money would lead to runaway inflation and a weaker dollar, and that really hasn't happened," said Donald Selkin, who helps manage $3 billion as chief market strategist at National Securities Corp. in New York. "Gold doesn't pay any kind of dividend. There are storage costs if you take delivery, and as a result, it's been in a downtrend."
Investor sales through gold ETPs wiped $73.4 billion from the value of the funds last year and holdings reached the lowest since October 2009 this month, data compiled by Bloomberg show. The SPDR Gold Trust, the largest gold ETP and which is listed in New York, accounted for 64 percent of global sales last year.
Billionaire John Paulson, the biggest SPDR holder, told clients in November he personally won't invest more money into his gold fund because it's not clear when inflation will quicken. The hedge-fund manager, who held his SPDR position in the third quarter after cutting holdings by 53 percent in the previous three months, lost 63 percent last year as of October in his PFR Gold Fund, a person familiar with the matter said.
The slump in bullion forced the world's gold-mining companies to write down at least $26 billion of assets.
Most of the 174,100 tons of gold ever mined is still in circulation. Producers raised annual output 21 percent since 2008 after gold rallied, and more will be mined through 2016, Morgan Stanley estimates. The bank forecasts rising output even as Barrick Gold Corp., the biggest producer, said last year it may curb, close or sell its least-profitable operations to boost returns as the price rout deepens.
Goldman Sachs Group Inc. expects prices at $1,050 by the end of 2014, while Societe Generale SA sees an average of $1,135 this year and $1,100 in 2015. Both banks correctly predicted the decline in 2013. Charles Morris, who oversees about $1.8 billion at HSBC Global Asset Management in London, cut his physical-gold holding to 1 percent, from as much as 15 percent in early 2012.
"In the Western world, we've enjoyed a popular bull market in gold, mainly via the gold ETFs, and it appears to be over," Morris said. "In China, there are a large number of new outlets, including many banks in the provinces, that are selling gold bars. Many Chinese people, who've had limited access to gold in the past, think it's a good idea to have a bar or two as a long-term investment."
The U.K. shipped 1,291 tons to the refining hub of Switzerland last year through November, more than the previous seven years combined and equal to more than five months of mine output, according to data from European Union statistics service Eurostat and Barclays Plc. Macquarie Group Ltd. says that's a sign of the movement from west to east.
Hong Kong exported a record 1,108.8 tons to China in 2013, almost double the total in 2012, according to data from the Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department. Mainland China doesn't publish the data.
Consumer purchases of gold in China surged 30 percent in the 12 months through September to 996.3 tons, overtaking demand in India, where usage gained 24 percent to 977.6 tons, the World Gold Council estimates. In the first nine months of 2013, China was at 797.8 tons, already eclipsing its full-year record of 778.6 tons, set in 2011, and full-year usage may exceed India's all-time high 1,006.5 tons in 2010.
Chinese demand may rise by at least the pace of economic growth, Albert Cheng, Far East managing director at the producer-funded group, said in Rome on Oct. 1. The world's second-biggest economy will expand 7.5 percent this year, data compiled by Bloomberg show.
That's weaker than the average of 8.85 percent growth for the past five years, and the least since 1990. That will help slow the expansion of jewelry demand in China to 5 percent this year after a 19 percent gain in 2013, Barclays estimates.
India's government choked off inbound shipments by raising import taxes on gold three times last year to help pare a trade imbalance that has weighed on the national currency, the rupee. The 24 percent rise in Indian jewelry, bar and coin purchases to 977.6 tons in the 12 months through September lagged the 30 percent gain to 996.3 tons in China, the gold council said.
Premiums in India reached a record $160 above the London price in December. Higher surcharges reflected reduced supply rather than rising demand, Credit Suisse Group AG said in November. The country is seeking to cut imports to 800 tons in the 12 months ending March 31, from 845 tons a year earlier.
Gold demand is increasing as the world's two most-populous nations get wealthier. Per-capita gross domestic product, which indicates living standards, will jump 50 percent to $9,865 in China by 2018 and 32 percent to $1,869 in India, according to the Washington-based International Monetary Fund. That's faster than the 23 percent increase in the U.S.
"India will consume gold for a long, long time because, for the Indian farmer, gold is one of his best assets," said Barkhordar, who runs the PAMP refinery in Switzerland. "He will keep this gold for his daughter's dowry, but he can also use it in case he's short of cash for the next crop."
The surge in orders meant some parts of the refinery worked three shifts instead of the usual two, Barkhordar said. It takes five to six working days to turn mined or scrap gold into a bar, he said. The 200 or so employees at the 110,000-square-foot PAMP facility, located about 3 miles from the Argor-Heraeus SA and Valcambi SA refineries, make bars ranging from 0.3 gram to 12.5 kilograms.
While China overtook South Africa as the world's largest gold producer in 2007, domestic output failed to keep up with the nation's consumption, said Duan Shihua, a partner at Shanghai Leading Investment Management Co. Mines produced 403 tons in 2012, while demand was 776 tons, according to the China Gold Association. Output last year through November was at 392.14 tons, up 7 percent from a year earlier, data show.
The government lifted a ban on bullion trading and opened the Shanghai Gold Exchange in 2002, making buying easier for investors in the most-populous nation. Huaan Asset Management Co. and Guotai Asset Management Co. won state approval in June to list the country's first gold-backed ETPs, and the Shanghai Futures Exchange extended trading hours in July.
Trade also has expanded in Dubai. The emirate accounts for about 25 percent of global physical gold trading, and bullion demand grew eightfold in the past six to 10 years, said Dubai Gold & Commodities Exchange Chief Executive Officer Gary Anderson. The DGCX plans to list a spot gold contact this year to add to its futures offering.
"Many of the positive drivers for gold prices in the past five years have started to disappear," said Jeremy East, who moved to Hong Kong from London in June and is head of metals trading at Standard Chartered Plc. "At the same time, we have seen a significant increase in physical demand for gold in Asia, especially China. The expectation is that Asia is going to play a much bigger role for setting the international prices for gold and also for the whole metals complex."
* * *
Join GATA here:
Mines and Money Hong Kong
Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Centre
Monday-Friday, March 24-28, 2014
Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China
* * *
Support GATA by purchasing DVDs of our London conference in August 2011 or our Dawson City conference in August 2006:
Or by purchasing a colorful GATA T-shirt:
Or a colorful poster of GATA's full-page ad in The Wall Street Journal on January 31, 2009:
Help keep GATA going
GATA is a civil rights and educational organization based in the United States and tax-exempt under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. Its e-mail dispatches are free, and you can subscribe at:
To contribute to GATA, please visit:
Buy metals at GoldMoney and enjoy international storage
GoldMoney was established in 2001 by James and Geoff Turk and safeguards more than $1.7 billion in metals and currencies. Buy gold, silver, platinum, and palladium from GoldMoney over the Internet and store them in vaults in Canada, Hong Kong, Singapore, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom, taking advantage of GoldMoney's low storage rates, among the most competitive in the industry. GoldMoney also offers delivery of 100-gram and 1-kilogram gold bars and 1-kilogram silver bars. To learn more, please visit:
|Previous Article
|Next Article
|Richard Russell: A gold-backed yuan or a de...
|James Turk and Michael Pento at King World ...

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Login Required
You need to have a Pokémon Trainer Club account to save your Favorite Pokémon!Log In Sign Up No Thanks
When it swims close to the surface of the ocean, people aboard ships are able to observe the pattern on its back.
The pattern on its back varies by region. It often swims in a school of Remoraid.
Restores HP if hit by a Water-type move.
Boosts the Pokémon's Speed stat in rain.
The Pokémon Company International is not responsible for the content of any linked website that is not operated by The Pokémon Company International. Please note that these websites' privacy policies and security practices may differ from The Pokémon Company International's standards.
Pokemon.com administrators have been notified and will review the screen name for compliance with the Terms of Use.
Your request could not be completed. Please try again. If the problem persists, please contact Customer Support.


text: The Hall just announced that McCarver is the winner of the 2012 Ford C. Frick Award, which has previously gone to such notable voices as Mel Allen, Ernie Harwell, Vin Scully, Bob Prince, Jack Buck, Harry Caray, and Harry Kalas. McCarver is likely the only one in that club who thinks "strike" is a five-letter word. [Baseball Hall of Fame]


text:
These games teach valuable skills and have a high fun and educational rating.
Your child will watch a video where George gives a report on global warming to Mr. Ratburn's class.
Your child improves social development by choosing proper face to the emotion.
Your child improves nutrition by making healthy and balanced food trays while learning the nutrients provided by various foods.
Your child will watch a video where Jack Prelutsky reads a poem about a boring day, that is not very boring.
Your child will watch a video where Francine's family discusses water conservation.
Your child develops social skills by understanding that different faces convey different emotions.
Your child improves fine motor skills and health by learning the harm of tobacco smoke and other substances. Then, traveling into the lungs as a ship while ridding the harmful substance from the system.
Your child develops matching and sorting skills by finding objects in the grocery store that have certain characteristics.
Your child will watch a video where Astronaut Mike Fincke drops by the Sugar Bowl and encourages Arthur and friends to work together on building their model rocket.
Your child improves creative development and character education by answering questions on how to be more green and designing a garden using various seeds.
Zoodles 11.5.9 Copyright (c) 2014 Inquisitive Minds, Inc. All rights reserved.


text:
How Little We Know
(1) Talk to the receptionist in Gomorrah about Omerta activities. (2) Talk to Cachino about suspicious Omerta activities, perhaps someone else in Gomorrah knows how to find him. (3) Check Cachino's room or his person for some proof of his behavior. Perhaps someone has a key to his room. (4) Cachino's Journal should have enough proof to get him talking. (5) The door guard suggested talking to Big Sal or Nero about Cachino's journal. (6) Attend Cachino's business meeting with Big Sal. (7) Cachino is dead, speak to the boss about what to do next. (8) Talk to Troike to see what kind of help you can give him. (9) Check with Clanden to see what kind of help he needs. (10) Recover a stolen shipment of weapon parts from the Fiends. (11) Bring chlorine to Clanden. Check near the pool at the Ultra-Luxe, or find out who supplies them. (12) Let the bosses know that Clanden and Troike both have everything they need.
Important Items...[edit]
Cachino's Journal, Zoara Club Key, Disassembled Weapons Shipment, Container of Chlorine.
This side quest can begin in any number of ways. It takes place almost entirely in the Gomorrah Casino, which is located on the outskirts of the New Vegas Strip, immediately to your right upon entering through the robot-protected front gates. Once inside, the surest way to start this side quest (if you haven't already) is to simply speak with the woman at the front entrance. Known only as the Receptionist, she will be able to give you all sorts of information, and you can pry even more out of her if you use your powers of persuasion. Meanwhile, expect to get your weapons taken from the guard at the front door before entering the casino itself. Worry not about losing your gear, though. As long as you play things cool like we did in this particular walkthrough, you won't need them anyway. If anything, not having your weapons will keep you cool, calm and collected throughout.
Ultimately, by speaking to the Receptionist (or via another conduit you used to undertake this side quest), you'll learn about a man named Cachino. Cachino works for the family that controls the Gomorrah Casino, a group known simply as the Omerta. Finding Cachino can be a bit laborious, but you should ultimately run into him on the floor of the casino, or in one of the ancillary rooms around it. If you took the time to speak with some of the NPCs on the floor that work for the Omerta, then Cachino will actually speak to you first if he runs into you, which makes finding him all the easier. Either way, once you've spoken to him and let him know that you know he's up to no good, the real fun starts. You'll need to find evidence that he's up to no good, but how? The idea here is to gain access to his room up in the Gomorrah's suites. Unless you have a good lockpicking skill, the only realistic way you'll be able to do this is to purchase the key from the Receptionist you spoke with earlier (or use other powers of persuasion, should you not want to part with precious Caps).
Either way, with or without a purchased key, you're going to need to head up to the suites in the casino to access Cachino's private room. Use an elevator at the back end of the main floor to head up to the Suites Level. Once there, move forward and head left down the pathway you encounter. Here's where things may get a little tricky. There's likely a guard protecting that door. You need not worry about the guard if you procured a key from the Receptionist. If you plan on picking the lock, however, you'll need to coerce the guard away from his post, or wait for him to walk away. Once he's nowhere to be found, you can then pick the lock. As long as he doesn't see you picking the lock itself, it doesn't otherwise matter if he sees you go in or out of the room, so don't worry about that. This is a risky situation, however, so it wouldn't hurt to save your game before you try to pick the lock, just to err on the side of caution.
Once inside his bedroom, head up the stairs to the upper part of the suite and work your way into his vacant room. You'll notice all sorts of empty furniture in the corners of the room, but it's the proper desk shoved in one corner of the room, adjacent to the front door, that's of importance. Examine this desk and you'll find precisely what you're looking for. Cachino's Journal will be the proof you need to frame Cachino to the higher-ups with the Omerta. Now, keep in mind that you don't have to use this journal against Cachino. In fact, you can even offer to sell it to him, thus removing any possibility of being able to convince his bosses that he's working behind their backs. Feel free to do that if you'd like, but keep in mind that this particular route isn't covered here in this walkthrough. Rather, we decided to use the evidence against Cachino, which brings us into the Omertas' good graces.
Now, it may seem a little unusual to use this evidence against Cachino. After all, while he was gruff and hostile towards you, the fact remains that he hasn't done anything to you personally. But then again, you're really going to need the Omerta later on in the game, if you want their assistance during the endgame that is. And if that's the case, then your act of weeding out a rat in their midst is really going to go a long way towards impressing them. With the journal in hand, head over to Cachino somewhere on the ground floor, and let him know you have the evidence needed. Now, his tune changes. He'll offer to buy the book from you, but instead, opt to tell him that you're going to tell his bosses about the situation instead. He can't do anything to you while in the casino, so his hands are tied. Too bad.
Your next task is to let Cachino's bosses know of his disloyalty. But how? You've yet to be formally introduced to the Omerta's leadership, and you're not going to find them roaming around the casino anytime soon. What you need to do here is visit with the Receptionist again. Talk to her about where you could possibly find the bosses. She'll tell you that they're posted around the upper floors overlooking the casino, but that not just anyone can get up there. That's all you need to know. Head to the back end of the casino one more time and look for a locked door that's guarded by an Omerta thug. If you talk to this thug in particular, you can speak to him and let him know that you have some evidence of improprieties that they should know about. He'll agree with you once you show him the evidence. He'll hand over the Zoara Club Key thereafter, which will allow you to open the door right next to him.
Once upstairs, seek out a man you've yet to meet, an older gentleman known as Big Sal. Speak to Big Sal and immediately cut to the chase. Show him Cachino's Journal, and he'll be taken aback. After navigating the rest of the conversation with him, you'll learn that Big Sal has immediate plans to deal with Cachino. Follow Big Sal as he walks towards his office and takes a seat. Cachino will come in and take a seat on the other side of the door. After some conversation between Cachino and Big Sal, one of Big Sal's henchmen will do Cachino in. You can then speak with Big Sal about helping out a few of his lieutenants, which will begin this side quest's endgame. Feel free to scour Cachino's corpse for goods before heading out, if you'd like, though doing so isn't at all necessary.
Now, Big Sal has given you two tasks. You are to help out two of his henchmen. Once you do, the side quest will have effectively concluded. The first person you're tasked with helping is a shady-looking character you may or may not have already run into here named Troike. Chances are, you're going to find Troike roaming around in the bowels of the casino, but if you're having trouble locating him, simply mark this quest as active on your Pip-Boy, and then follow your on-screen compass. When you run into Troike, you'll be able to chat him up a bit. Eventually, you'll learn that he has a bit of a problem. He's responsible for running weapons in and out of the Strip, using some NCR connections he has. But some Fiends have taken the most recent shipment for their own, and he needs your help procuring the stolen goods.
Agree to help Troike out. Once you do, you'll then have to head back outside of the casino. Once out in the open air, you should be able to quick-travel to a location extremely near where the Fiends that stole the goods are currently stationed. If you're able to, quick-travel to the Sunset Sarsaparilla Headquarters located west of New Vegas. The Fiends should be right next to the building. If you can't quick-travel there, quick-travel to a location nearby, or simply approach the designated location on foot. One way or the other, you'll eventually run into the trio of Fiends that stole the goods. Kill them easily and quickly, and then claim the Disassembled Weapons Shipment from a bin nearby. With the goods in hand, you can then quick-travel back to Freeside, and enter the New Vegas Strip once more.
Return to Troike to let him know that the deed is done. He'll thank you, but he'll be short with you too, so don't expect too much of a conversation. Once that's done, it's time to move on to the other character you're supposed to help. His name is Clanden, and you'll be able to find him up in the suites section of the casino. We found him sleeping in a bed; you may find him roaming around elsewhere. Once you run into him, speak with him, and you'll learn that he's an explosives nut. But he's missing some valuable items that he'll need to get things going. Use your Science skill to convince him that what he could really use is some chlorine (if you can't use a Science skill, you'll need to navigate this conversation some other way). With that done, he'll dispatch you to finish the job for him.
While there are multiple ways to do this, the easiest way to go about things here is to simply steal the chlorine. To do so, head over to the Ultra-Luxe Casino, a stately building at the center of the Strip with a gigantic fountain out in front of it. Once you head inside, shoot straight to the back of the first floor, and keep things as inconspicuous as possible (worry not about losing your weapons to the guard when you enter; you'll receive them back automatically when you leave, just like at the Gomorrah). Pass by the area where you exchange money for gambling chips, and keep on going until you run into the back wall. Here, head to the right and seek out a lone locked door in the corner. When you're sure no one's watching you (save before doing this, just to be safe), pick this lock. Within this supply closet, you'll find a Container of Chlorine. With that in hand, you have exactly what Clanden was looking for.
Return to the Gomorrah with the Container of Chlorine in hand. Head back to Clanden and hand over the goods. He'll thank you for your hard work and send you on your way. Now, all you have to do is return to Big Sal and let him know everything's done. This will wrap up the side quest succinctly, and you'll now be able to request the help of the Omertas, if you so choose to do so, for the main quest known as Wild Card: Side Bets . Do be aware, however, that this quest's conclusion will directly interfere with finishing the Side Quest known as Bye Bye Love . The good news is that you can go through this entire side quest with the exception of speaking to Big Sal at the end and still not interfere with that side quest whatsoever. Most excellent.


text:
Our team
Contact us
Find the good dentist in Quebec
Dentist access
Search with key words
Dentist access
Dentistry 101
How to find the right dentist?
Appointment steps (dental examination)
Your First Visit
Numbering of teeth and quadrants
Tooth Anatomy
Abnormalities of permanent teeth
Primary dentition
Mixed dentition
Permanent Dentition (Adult Teeth)
Dental eruption
Timeline of the dental eruption
Dental professions and auxiliary personnel
Specialized dental professions
Dental tourism
Mercury and its toxicity
Asepsis, the fight against germs at the dentist's
Finance and insurance
Cost of treatments
Dental insurance
Dental insurance coverage
Dental emergencies
Educational videos – Emergencies
Accident: saving a dislocated tooth
Visit the dentist or wait?
Broken tooth
Knocked out (avulsed) tooth
Swelling of the cheeks
Broken orthodontic appliance
Pain preventing you from sleeping
Following a dental trauma
Mouth injury that does not heal
Dental Trauma
Oral hygiene
Oral hygiene
Annual or biennial examination and cleaning (prophylaxis)
Bad breath (halitosis)
Treatment of halitosis (bad breath)
Dental plaque
How to choose a toothbrush?
How to choose your toothpaste?
Mouthwash and dental floss
Oral Hygiene and Prevention
Dental Cleaning
Dental Examination
Halitosis (bad breath)
Dental aesthetics
Stain on teeth, yellow teeth and greyish teeth
Teeth whitening
Whitening of a single tooth (internal)
Porcelain veneers
Composite veneers
Dental jewellery and ornaments
Crown on single implant
E4D type inlays and crowns
CEREC inlays and crowns
Laboratory inlays and crowns
Dental aesthetics
Educational videos
Three unit bridges
Dental veneers
Teeth Whitening 101
Teeth whitening techniques
Stains on teeth
Dental Crowns
Dental Veneers
Dental aesthetics
Dental jewellery and ornaments: health risks?
Surgical dentistry
Surgical dentistry
Ceramic restoration
Amalgam restoration (grey filling)
Composite restoration (white filling)
Deterioration of fillings, crowns and other restorations
Fallen filling
Surgical dentistry – Definition
Educational videos
Filling of a cavity made of dental composite
Filling a dental cavity
Progression of cavities
Alveolar preservation
Grey filling, white filling and ceramic restoration
Dental Amalgam Fillings
Composite Resin Restoration (White Filling)
CEREC or E4D ceramic crowns, inlays and onlays
Implantology (dental implants)
Implantology (dental implants)
Ceramic implants
Titanium implants
All-on-4 implant
Bridge on implant
Tartar around the edges of implants
Implantology – Definition
Educational videos
Bridge vs. implant
6 implants on the upper jaw
All-on-four implants
Instant dental implant placement
Consequences of the loss of posterior teeth
What is implantology?
Unitary implant
Types of Dental Implants
Metal-free dental implants
Mini Dental Implants
Zygomatic implants
All-on-4®, prostheses on dental implants
3D X-rays
The complete oral health check-up
Contraindications to Implantology
Steps to install dental implants
Prosthodontics (dental prostheses)
Prosthodontics (dental prostheses)
Fixed bridge
Removable complete prosthesis
Fixed complete prosthesis on implants
Partial acrylic prosthesis
Partial prosthesis with metal structure
Immediate partial or complete prosthesis
Dental prosthesis problems
Replenishing and relining
Prosthodontics – definition
Dental Prostheses
Partial dental prostheses
Implant-Supported Dentures
Fixed dental bridge
Care instructions for the fixed prosthesis
Replenishing and relining of prostheses
Denture Repairs
Adaptation to New Dentures
Hygiene and Cleaning of Your Dentures
Simple extraction
Complex extraction
Crown elongation
Sinus elevation
Educational videos
Problems associated with wisdom teeth
Atrophy after extraction
Pain after a tooth extraction
Pages and comments
1 888-961-3909
1 888-961-3909
Terms and conditions for promo 25$
Terms and conditions for promo 25$
Get 25$ discount on your first complete dental exam with a Bücco member dentist.
The terms and conditions are the following:
You must make an appointment online from the website.
You must be within the first 10 patients of the month to take an appointment.
You cannot be a current patient or have been a patient at the dental clinic you want to visit.
You must take an appointment for a first complete dental exam.
You cannot have benefited from a 25$ discount in the past.
You must attend your appointment and pay the fees.
You must complete the following form after your appointment and wait 30 days before receiving the 25$.
Search Bücco
Pages and comments
Mise à jour pour
Get 75$
Make an appointment with a Bücco dentist and receive 75$
in cash!
Find a dentist
Please enter a place, city or postal code
List of dentists members Bücco
* IMPORTANT: Certain conditions apply