Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 726

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Executive Job Demands: New Insights for Explaining Strategic Decisions and Leader Behaviors

Hambrick, Donald C., Finkelstein, Sydney, Mooney, Ann C.·2005·Academy of Management Review

Abstract

Executive jobs vary widely in the difficulty they pose for their incumbents, yet research on top executives and strategic decision making has largely ignored this reality. We build on work in industrial/organizational psychology to develop the construct of executive job demands; discuss its major determinants; propose some of its key implications for strategic choices and leadership behaviors; and propose the usefulness of this construct in advancing research on numerous fronts, including agency theory, executive compensation, and upper echelons.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5465/amr.2005.17293355

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 726

Metadata

Authors
Hambrick, D. C., Finkelstein, S., & Mooney, A. C.
Venue
Academy of Management Review
Published
2005-07
Volume
30
Issue
3
Pages
472-491
ISSN
  • 0363-7425 (ISSN-L)
  • 1930-3807
OpenAlex
W2047816853
Cited by
726
References
5
FWCI
32.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.