Jeffrey A. Sonnenfeld

Bio: Jeffrey A. Sonnenfeld is an academic researcher from Yale University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Career development & Corporate governance. The author has an hindex of 24, co-authored 48 publications receiving 4535 citations. Previous affiliations of Jeffrey A. Sonnenfeld include Academy of Management & Harvard University.

Who Matters to Ceos? An Investigation of Stakeholder Attributes and Salience, Corpate Performance, and Ceo Values

Abstract: Using unique data provided by the CEOs of 80 large U.S. firms, the authors examined relationships among the stakeholder attributes of power, legitimacy, urgency, and salience; CEO values; and corpo...

To Your Heart's Content: A Model of Affective Diversity in Top Management Teams

Abstract: In this study we develop a model of how diversity in positive affect (PA) among group members influences individual attitudes, group processes, and group performance. We test the model on a sample ...

What Makes Great Boards Great

Abstract: In the wake of meltdowns at WorldCom, Tyco, and Enron, enormous attention has been focused on the companies' boards. It seems inconceivable that business disasters of such magnitude could happen without gross or even criminal negligence on the part of board members. And yet a close examination of those boards reveals no broad pattern of incompetence or corruption. In fact, they followed most of the accepted standards for board operations: Members showed up for meetings; they had money invested in the company; audit committees, compensation committees, and codes of ethics were in place; the boards weren't too small or too big, nor were they dominated by insiders. In other words, they passed the tests that would normally be applied to determine whether a board of directors was likely to do a good job. And that's precisely what's so scary, according to corporate governance expert Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, who suggests that it's time for some new thinking about how corporate boards operate and are evaluated. He proposes thinking not only about how to structure the board's work but also about how to manage it as a social system. Good boards are, very simply, high-functioning work groups. They're distinguished by a climate of respect, trust, and candor among board members and between the board and management. Information is shared openly and on time; emergent political factions are quickly eliminated. Members feel free to challenge one another's assumptions and conclusions, and management encourages lively discussion of strategic issues. Directors feel a responsibility to contribute meaningfully to the board's performance. In addition, good boards assess their own performance, both collectively and individually.

Does Ceo Charisma Matter? An Empirical Analysis Of The Relationships Among Organizational Performance, Environmental Uncertainty, And Top Management Team Perceptions Of Ceo Charisma

Abstract: This article reports the results of a study examining the relationships among strategic charismatic leadership, organizational performance, and environmental uncertainty with primary data from a sa...

Staffing Policy as a Strategic Response: A Typology of Career Systems

Abstract: This article proposes a four-cell typology of career systems, reflecting two critical dimensions along which firms choose a staffing strategy, supply flow and assignment flow. We suggest that this typology reflects, in a human resources context, the different choices firms make in managing their overall strategy. The career systems profiles that follow from the typology both describe and predict the composition of a company's work force.

The Benefits of Frequent Positive Affect: Does Happiness Lead to Success?

Abstract: Numerous studies show that happy individuals are successful across multiple life domains, including marriage, friendship, income, work performance, and health. The authors suggest a conceptual model to account for these findings, arguing that the happiness-success link exists not only because success makes people happy, but also because positive affect engenders success. Three classes of evidence--crosssectional, longitudinal, and experimental--are documented to test their model. Relevant studies are described and their effect sizes combined meta-analytically. The results reveal that happiness is associated with and precedes numerous successful outcomes, as well as behaviors paralleling success. Furthermore, the evidence suggests that positive affect--the hallmark of well-being--may be the cause of many of the desirable characteristics, resources, and successes correlated with happiness. Limitations, empirical issues, and important future research questions are discussed.

Consequences of individuals' fit at work: a meta-analysis of person-job, person-organization, person-group, and person-supervisor fit

Abstract: This meta-analysis investigated the relationships between person‐job (PJ), person‐organization (PO), person‐group, and person‐supervisor fit with preentry (applicant attraction, job acceptance, intent to hire, job offer) and postentry individual-level criteria (attitudes, performance, withdrawal behaviors, strain, tenure). A search of published articles, conference presentations, dissertations, and working papers yielded 172 usable studies with 836 effect sizes. Nearly all of the credibility intervals did not include 0, indicating the broad generalizability of the relationships across situations. Various ways in which fit was conceptualized and measured, as well as issues of study design, were examined as moderators to these relationships in studies of PJ and PO fit. Interrelationships between the various types of fit are also meta-analyzed. 25 studies using polynomial regression as an analytic technique are reviewed separately, because of their unique approach to assessing fit. Broad themes emerging from the results are discussed to generate the implications for future research on fit.

Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource management: Tests of universalistic, contingency, and configurational performance predictions

Abstract: The field of strategic human resource management (SHRM) has been criticized for lacking a solid theoretical foundation. This article documents that, contrary to this criticism, the SHRM literature ...

Corporate Social Responsibility Theories: Mapping the Territory

Abstract: The Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) field presents not only a landscape of theories but also a proliferation of approaches, which are controversial, complex and unclear. This article tries to clarify the sit- uation, ''mapping the territory'' by classifying the main CSR theories and related approaches in four groups: (1) instrumental theories, in which the corporation is seen as only an instrument for wealth creation, and its social activities are only a means to achieve economic results; (2) political theories, which concern themselves with the power of corporations in society and a responsible use of this power in the political arena; (3) integrative theories, in which the corporation is focused on the satisfaction of social demands; and (4) ethical theories, based on ethical responsibilities of corporations to society. In practice, each CSR theory presents four dimensions related to profits, political performance, social demands and ethical values. The findings suggest the necessity to develop a new theory on the business and society relationship, which should integrate these four dimensions.