arbiter
JournalsAccount

Corrective Governance in the Boardroom: A Negotiated Order Perspective

Dana Bement et al.

Academy of Management Review2026https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2023.0238article
FT50UTD24AJG 4*ABDC A*
Weight
0.50

Abstract

We leverage negotiated order theory to develop a model of board corrective governance concerning CEO leadership. We extend research on corporate governance to theorize that a board’s response to concerns about CEO leadership is a dynamic process of social order disruption and negotiation. When a disruption of an existing social order occurs, the CEO–board relationship is renegotiated by the board and, potentially, the CEO. We identify two critical relational dimensions—board affiliation with the CEO and board dependence on the CEO—that create four distinct negotiation conditions. Our model delineates the manner in which these negotiation conditions, in conjunction with the negotiation approach (cooperative or competitive) of the board and the CEO, give rise to a spectrum of first-order (i.e., retention, discipline, empowerment, dismissal) and second-order (i.e., changes to board dependence and affiliation) outcomes that influence the CEO–board relationship and subsequent corrective governance episodes. Our theoretical framework has important implications for governance research and practice, underscoring the need to view corrective governance decisions as interrelated negotiated outcomes shaped by evolving relational dynamics.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2023.0238

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{dana2026,
  title        = {{Corrective Governance in the Boardroom: A Negotiated Order Perspective}},
  author       = {Dana Bement et al.},
  journal      = {Academy of Management Review},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2023.0238},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Corrective Governance in the Boardroom: A Negotiated Order Perspective

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.