When companies plan to restructure, it makes a difference if the new CEO is hired from inside or outside. Pexels

Star Co. is a hot mess. The business is bloated and sprawling. Its stock is tanking. Profits are down. It's clearly time for a new CEO.

But where to look — inside the company or outside? It's a decision every restructuring company faces.

Cenovus Energy tapped an outsider in 2017. General Electric, the same year, went with a longtime insider. Though it's too soon to know yet for sure, which one likely made the right choice?

Rice Business emeritus professor Robert E. Hoskisson, with coauthors Shih-chi Chiu, then at Nanyang Technological University (now at the University of Houston), Richard A. Johnson of University of Missouri, Columbia and Seemantini Pathak of University of Missouri-St. Louis, set out for an answer: Where is the best place for a restructuring company to get its next CEO?

According to conventional wisdom and some past research, change is more likely under an outside CEO. He or she can start fresh, armed with a greater mandate to shake things up.

Recent evidence, though, suggests that outsiders may actually have more trouble succeeding. That's because they lack the institutional knowledge to make the most informed choices, and the existing relationships needed to ease change with minimal pain. Insiders, this research shows, have the advantage of key "firm-specific" knowledge on everything from customers to suppliers to workforce composition.

To pin down an answer on whether it's better to stay inside or go outside, Hoskisson's team decided to look at corporate divestiture — asset sales, spinoffs, equity carve-outs — as a proxy for overall strategic change. (It's already well documented that a new CEO makes organizational changes such as personnel changes and culture shifts.)

Next, they distinguished between scale and scope. The scale of a divestiture reflects magnitude: How many units were sold? The scope reflects diversification portfolio adjustment: Does the company have fewer business lines?

Focusing on 234 divestitures at U.S. firms that voluntarily restructured between 1986 and 2009, the authors defined a new inside CEO as having been in that role two or fewer years, and with the company previously for more than two years. They defined a new outside CEO as someone who had been at the company for a maximum of two years in any role.

Heading into the analysis, the researchers expected they would reach different conclusions for scale vs. scope. And the results were just that.

New inside CEOs, they found, did carry out more divesture activities than new outside CEOs. Not having as much inside knowledge, the outside CEO was more likely to prefer a simpler divesture plan, one that didn't require evaluating each unit or asset. Instead, the professors hypothesized, an outsider was more likely to follow investors' general preferences about firm strategy.

"When a higher magnitude of corporate divestures is required, internal successors are more astute than external successors in accomplishing this objective," the researchers write. On the other hand, when a company wants to shrink the diversified scope of a business portfolio, "external successors are more likely to bring their firms to a more focused position."

The researchers also suggested future lines of study about new CEOs and strategic change. What happens when firms want to buy and sell at the same time? Does the CEO selection process itself affect restructuring scale and scope? And does an inside chief executive who won a power struggle against a predecessor perform differently than an inside CEO named in orderly succession planning?

In the meantime, the findings are clear. If your corporate board is hunting for a new CEO, it may pay to go for the fresh face. But depending on your goals, your best option may also be a top executive sitting at a desk a few steps away.

------

This story originally ran on Rice Business Wisdom.

Robert E. Hoskisson is the George R. Brown Emeritus Professor of Management at Jones Graduate School of Business at Rice University.

Does your brain have the right components to be an entrepreneur? Getty Images

Rice University research finds certain cognitive factors appear in the minds of entrepreneurs

Houston Voices

The entrepreneur strides into a room of potential backers. Swathed in understated grey, she walks with assurance and chats in the cool, easy-going cadences of the leaders she plans to woo. But will an approach like this really affect the fate of her startup? And if not, what will?

A literature review by Rice Business professor Robert E. Hoskisson and colleagues Jeffry Covin of Indiana University, Henk W. Volberda of Erasmus University and Richard A. Johnson of Arnold & Porter offers clues to a vast range of questions about the entrepreneurs' trade. It also outlines where research still falls short. What, for example, most influences a startup founder's success? Is entrepreneurial triumph driven by innate ability or acquired skill? What's the role of factors such as regulatory structures or an entrepreneur's own work environment?

Traditional research, Hoskisson and his associates note, makes it clear that certain cognitive factors really do differentiate people who start new ventures from their more staid counterparts. And recent scholarship has traced how individual entrepreneurs decide to launch their startups and how they spot entrepreneurial opportunities. Still unclear, though, is whether entrepreneurs think differently overall, possess innate qualities that lend themselves to entrepreneurship or somehow become catalyzed by the entrepreneurial role itself.

More research could help answer those questions. Research is also needed to pinpoint exactly how the best entrepreneurs express their plans in order to sound legitimate enough to earn funding and support, Hoskisson's group says. What the scholarship does show is that that the grey-clad entrepreneur with the easygoing patter knows what she's doing: symbolic language, gestures and visual symbols all help create professional identity, emphasize control and regulate the emotions of a viewer. Setting, props, style of dress and expressiveness all count, and the more experienced the entrepreneur the more props she uses.

At the same time, no unified model fully explains how successful entrepreneurs gain their funding. Models range from the hyper-rational analysis offered by game theory to a stimulus-response model in which people react as if they're marionettes. Other mysteries include how the entrepreneurship impulse arises, how it shapes innovation and competitive advantage and how it is translated in individual actions and interactions. More research in these areas, says Hoskisson, would help not only entrepreneurs in the eternal quest for funding, but also the understanding of how to nurture human potential.

Examining institutional differences among countries and how that affects entrepreneurship is also ripe for study. So far, entrepreneurship research has focused on individual attributes. But there's a need, Hoskisson and his colleagues say, for scholars to connect the dots between startup success and political environments, rule of law, regulation and entrepreneurship.

The same goes for work on diverse contexts in emerging economies. In transition economies, China being one example, networks create political and social capital that allows special access and legitimacy. On the other hand, in those same countries ponderous bureaucracies and basic resource limitations can hamper entrepreneurial projects. Detailed understanding of such cultures will only get more urgent as ventures in emerging economies increase and companies that are "born global" proliferate.

Also on the research to-do list about entrepreneurs: the chances of securing funding in given emerging economies and the power — or frailty — of their intellectual property laws. Regulation, especially, plays a pivotal role in these countries, Hoskisson writes. The lighter the regulation, the more entrepreneurship flourishes, according to one study of 54 countries. On the other hand, countries blessed with a strong rule of law offer entrepreneurs more opportunities for strategic entry.

Understanding the entrepreneurial mind, and its interaction with the material world, isn't simple. Consider the late Texas billionaire H. Ross Perot's plan to send gifts to all POWs in Vietnam during the height of the Vietnam War. Unsurprisingly, the Vietnamese government announced that a gift delivery was impossible while Americans were bombing the country. Undeterred, Perot offered to rebuild anything the Americans had bombed. Rebuffed again, Perot chartered a plane to Moscow, instructing aides to deposit the Christmas presents, one by one, at Moscow post offices, addressed to Hanoi.

Amusing as it can be to hear about such entrepreneurial gumption, it may be even more useful to study entrepreneurship systematically. Not everyone can have an entrepreneur's brain, Hoskisson's review of research suggests, but good scholarship might be able to teach people how to walk the walk.

------

This story originally ran on Rice Business Wisdom.

Robert E. Hoskisson is the George R. Brown Emeritus Professor of Management at Jones Graduate School of Business at Rice University.

Family firms aren't investing in research and development — but why? Getty Images

Rice University research sheds light on what family office investors are looking for

Houston Voices

Family firms are publicly traded companies in which family members own at least 20 percent of the voting stock, and at least two board members belong to the family. For obvious reasons, the central principals in these firms tend to have a longer view than principals in non-family firms. Yet family firms invest less in research and development (R&D) in technology firms than their non-family counterparts. Since investments in R&D are stakes in the future, why this disparity?

Robert E. Hoskisson, a management professor at Rice Business, joined several colleagues to answer this question. Refining a sociological theory called the behavioral agency model (BAM), the researchers defined family-firm decisions as "mixed gambles" — that is, decisions that could result in either gains or losses.

Because success in high technology relies so much on innovation, it's especially puzzling when such a family owned business underinvests in R&D. So Hoskisson and his colleagues focused on the paradox of family firms in high tech.

According to previous research, family owners weigh both economic and non-economic factors when making business decisions. Hoskisson and his team labeled these non-economic factors socioemotional wealth (SEW). SEW can include family prestige through identifying with and controlling a business, emotional attachment to the firm or the legacy of a multigenerational link to the firm.

That intangible wealth (SEW) explained some of the families' R&D choices. While investment in R&D may lower future financial risk, it can threaten other resources the family holds dear. Expanded R&D spending, for instance, is linked with competitiveness. At the same time, it is associated with less family control. That's because to invest more in R&D, businesses typically need more external capital and expertise. So when a family firm underinvests in R&D, it may in fact be protecting its socioemotional wealth.

To further understand these dynamics, the researchers looked at three factors that they expected would raise families' R&D spending to levels more like non-family counterparts.

The first factor was corporate governance. As predicted, the researchers found that family firms with a higher percentage of institutional investors invested in R&D at levels more like those of non-family firms. The institutional investors naturally prioritized economic benefits far more than the founding family's legacy wealth (SEW).

The researchers also analyzed corporate strategy. Family firms, they found, invested more in R&D when it might be applied to related products or markets. Even families bent on preserving non-economic wealth could be lured by a big economic payoff, and related business are easier to control because they are closer to the family legacy business expertise.

Finally, Hoskisson and his colleagues looked at performance. When a family firm's performance lagged behind that of competitors, they reasoned, the owners would spend more on R&D. A higher percentage of institutional investors, the team theorized, would magnify this effect. Interestingly, the primary data (from 2004 to 2009) failed to support this hypothesis, while an alternative data set (from 1994 to 2002) confirmed it.

Further research, the investigators wrote, could shed useful light on this puzzle. They also encouraged study of how family firms conduct mergers and acquisitions. After all, while families can seem inscrutable from the outside, most run on some kind of economic system. The currency just includes more than money.

------

This story originally ran on Rice Business Wisdom.

Robert E. Hoskisson is the George R. Brown Emeritus Professor of Management at Jones Graduate School of Business at Rice University.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Houston space companies take off with new tech, deals and contracts

space update

Space City has had a busy month.

Houston-based aerospace institutions Venus Aerospace, Axiom Space, and Aegis Aerospace have each recently announced advancements in their respective fields that include expansions and new contracts from U.S. and international government agencies.

Here’s the latest:

Venus launches new test stand

Earlier this month, Venus Aerospace added infrastructure to support the ongoing progress of its Rotating Detonation Rocket Engine (RDRE) with the opening of its new propulsion test stand at the Houston Spaceport.

The Texas Space Commission's Space Exploration and Aeronautics Research Fund is funding the test stand, which is part of a larger effort from the state to increase investments in the aerospace economy. The ribbon-cutting event on Sept. 10 welcomed officials from Venus Aerospace, the Texas Space Commission, the Houston Spaceport, Houston business and local community leaders.

With the new stand, Venus will be able to test at higher thrust and for longer durations, which will allow the company to better replicate real-life conditions.

"Building and testing propulsion systems at this pace requires the right infrastructure around the technology," Sassie Duggleby, CEO and co-founder of Venus Aerospace, said in a news release. "We're grateful to the Texas Space Commission and the State of Texas for investing alongside companies like Venus. Public investment like this helps companies move faster and keeps critical aerospace capability growing here in Texas."

Venus closed a $91 million Series B in July and expanded its leadership team.

Axiom partners in Europe

Axiom Space has signed a memorandum of understanding with the European Space Agency for “sustained European access to low-Earth orbit (LEO)” following the retirement of the International Space Station, according to a news release from the company.

Under the agreement, Axiom and the ESA agreed to explore future astronaut missions on the ISS and Axiom Station, research, transportation and spacesuit partnerships. The organizations will explore using the ESA’s European Cargo Return service and potentially a future European crew vehicle to support operations at Axiom Station, the company's forthcoming commercial space station. The partnership could also involve Axiom's AxEMU spacesuit for orbital and lunar applications, according to the release.

“With the upcoming de-orbitation of the ISS, it is our duty to anticipate and prepare future solutions to ensure our access to low-Earth orbit,” Daniel Neuenschwander, director of human and robotic exploration at ESA, said in the release. “The two documents signed today underline both our commitment to safeguard our ability to pursue in-orbit science and to keep offering flight opportunities to our European astronaut corps, as well as the growing interest of international partners for our ongoing project to develop an autonomous European cargo vehicle.”

The announcement comes as Axiom has made several international moves this year. The company shared plans to establish Axiom Space Switzerland this summer and launched Axiom Space Japan in July.

"The path to a sustainable human presence in space runs through international collaboration — reliable supply chains, shared innovation, and partners who bring real capability," Jonathan Cirtain, CEO and President of Axiom Space, said in the release. "Europe's contributions to microgravity science and deep space technology make ESA exactly that kind of partner. This MoU strengthens our work together, and we look forward to ESA and its member states joining us as customers for future astronaut missions."

Aegis expands DoW deal

Webster, Texas-based Aegis Aerospace announced that it has won a new task order to continue supporting the U.S. Space Force’s Space Test Program.

The contract starts in October and covers designing, building, testing and operating Department of War payloads or equipment on NASA, government, and commercial launch vehicles and platforms. The contract was issued by the USSF Space Systems Command, Space Test Program under NASA Johnson Space Center’s Research, Engineering, and Mission Integration Services 2 (REMIS 2).

Currently, the company is working on three payload facilities on the ISS and has plans for two more in development.

“Aegis Aerospace is grateful to continue our exceptional payload integration support to the USSF and the STP to meet their critical mission objectives,” President Matt Ondler added in the release. “This work is more important than ever to maintain U.S. superiority in space. This new contract will take us beyond the current life of the ISS and see us integrate and test payloads on commercial space stations, free-flyers, and cislunar missions.”

10 Houston billionaires land on Forbes' 2026 list of richest Americans

America's Richest

The richest billionaires in America have a collective worth of $8 trillion in 2026, a staggering $1.4 trillion increase since last year, says Forbes. American billionaires are so wealthy that it now takes an unprecedented $4.4 billion net worth to be considered one of the richest people in the country. And one local billionaire has regained the title as Houston's wealthiest resident.

Oil tycoon Jeffery Hildebrand, 67, now reigns as the No. 1 richest Houstonian, the 9th richest Texan, and the 88th richest person in America for 2026.

The annual Forbes 400 list is a definitive ranking of the wealthiest Americans, using interviews, financial data, and documentation provided by billionaires and their companies. In all, 43 billionaires across Texas made it on the 2026 list, and 10 are based in Houston.

Hildebrand's net worth has surged $4.7 billion since last year, bringing his current net worth to $14.7 billion. He cofounded Hilcorp, one of the largest privately owned oil and natural gas producers in the U.S., in 1990 and served as its CEO until 2018. He still serves as the chairman of the company.

Hildebrand skyrocketed past several other Houston billionaires to claim the top spot citywide: Kinder Morgan chairman Richard Kinder, Toyota mega-dealer Dan Friedkin, and hospitality honcho Tilman Fertitta.

Kinder, 81, was dubbed Houston's richest billionaire in the 2025 Forbes 400 list, whose net worth has increased from $11.1 billion to $12.9 billion in just one year. He is the 11th richest Texan and the 100th richest person in America.

Friedkin, 61, is the third-richest Houstonian and the 102nd richest American with an estimated net worth of $12.9 billion, up from $9.7 billion last year. He most notably owns Gulf States Toyota, which sold $14.5 billion worth of Toyotas in 2025, per Forbes.

The Friedkin family is also in talks to launch a new NHL team in Texas, with Houston and Austin being eyed as potential home bases, CultureMap reports. Bringing a professional hockey team to Houston would be a major boon for the city, which has been without one since the Houston Aeros folded in 2013.

Fertitta, 69, has a net worth of $12.3 billion and is the fourth richest Houstonian and the 110th richest American. Fertitta owns hospitality corporation Fertitta Entertainment and the NBA team Houston Rockets. He most recently purchased the WNBA's Connecticut Sun and plans to relocate them to Houston under the Houston Comets name in 2027. He also keeps himself busy as President Trump's ambassador to Italy.

There's also one new Houston-based billionaire making his debut on the Forbes 400: Houston Texans owner and CEO Cal McNair.

McNair, 64, took over as the principal owner of the NFL team after his late mother, Janice McNair, transferred her principal stake to him in 2024. Janice, who cofounded the Texans with her late husband Bob McNair, passed away in July 2026. She previously had an estimated net worth of $7.3 billion.

Cal McNair ranks as the 218th richest person in America with an estimated net worth of $7.7 billion.

Here's how the rest of Houston's billionaires fared on this year's list:

  • Houston pipeline heir Randa Duncan Williams ranks 124th with an estimated net worth of $11.7 billion. Fellow pipeline heirs Dannine Avara and Milane Frantz tie for 128th nationally. Each has an estimated net worth of $11.6 billion. Scott Duncan ties for No. 137 with an $11.3 billion estimated net worth.
  • Energy exploration chief exec George Bishop of The Woodlands ranks No. 380 with an estimated net worth of $4.5 billion. Last year: $4.7 billion.

Texas' richest billionaires
Walmart heiress Alice Walton, 76, who currently leads as the richest woman globally, is also the richest woman in America, the third-wealthiest person in Texas, and the richest Fort Worth resident for 2026.

Walton's net worth has grown by $12 billion since last year, bringing her current net worth to $118 billion. She is the only daughter of late Walmart cofounder Sam Walton, though she focuses her attention on other endeavors like the Crystal Bridges Museum of American Art and the Alice L. Walton School of Medicine in Bentonville, Arkansas. Forbes still lists her residence as Fort Worth. Walton is one of only 62 women billionaires on the Forbes 400 list, making up just 16 percent of the total list.

---

This article first appeared on CultureMap.com.

3 Houston children's hospitals ranked best in the nation by U.S. News

Hospital Honor Roll

Houston has many renowned hospitals providing exceptional care, and now three local medical centers have earned national acclaim for their top-notch healthcare for children and adolescents.

Texas Children's Hospital, Children's Memorial Hermann Hospital, and Children's Cancer Hospital-MD Anderson Cancer Center are the three local pediatric care centers named in U.S. News and World Report's 2026-2027 Best Children's Hospitals.

Each year, U.S. News surveys over 100 children's hospitals and thousands of pediatric specialists to determine it's Best Children's Hospitals rankings. The winning hospitals excel at various factors such as "clinical outcomes, compliance with established best practices, and level and quality of hospital resources directly related to patient care."

Out of the 90 total children's hospitals selected across 34 states and Washington, D.C., only six were based in Texas.

"For two decades, U.S. News has helped guide families to top-tier pediatric care," said Ben Harder, chief of health analysis and managing editor at U.S. News, in a release. “Finding the right medical team for a rare diagnosis or complex surgery can be overwhelming, and U.S. News’ annual evaluation of the Best Children’s Hospitals provides a clear starting point for parents and referring pediatricians alike."

Texas Children's Hospital reigns as the No. 1 pediatric hospital in the Lone Star State and in the Southwest, and it was the only Texas hospital to be named in U.S. News' national Best Children's Hospitals Honor Roll list for 2026-2027.

Texas Children's also leads as the No. 1 best hospital in the U.S. in two pediatric specialties — Cardiology and Heart Surgery; Diabetes and Endocrinology. It earned top-five acclaim in seven more nationally ranked specialties: Nephrology (No. 2); Pulmonology and Lung Surgery (No. 2); Urology (No. 2); Neurology and Neurosurgery (No. 3); Gastroenterology and GI Surgery (No. 5); Neonatology (No. 5); and Orthopedics (No. 5).

The hospital also ranked as the country's 12th best pediatric cancer hospital, and it's one of the top 50 Best Children's Hospitals for Behavioral Health in the U.S.

Children's Memorial Hermann Hospital is the No. 3 best pediatric hospital in Texas for 2026-2027, and it earned top-50 ranks in seven specialties:

  • No. 12 – Cardiology and Heart Surgery
  • No. 26 – Neonatology
  • No. 28 – Gastroenterology & GI Surgery
  • No. 34 – Neurology and Neurosurgery
  • No. 40 – Orthopedics
  • No. 50 – Nephrology
  • "Top 50" Best Children's Hospitals for Behavioral Health

MD Anderson's Children's Cancer Hospital was unranked in the statewide list of the best pediatric care centers. It ranked as the No. 33 best pediatric cancer hospital in the U.S.

Other high-performing Texas pediatric hospital include Children's Health Dallas, Dell Children's Medical Center in Austin, and Cook Children's Medical Center in Fort Worth.

---

This article first appeared on CultureMap.com.