Houston companies looking for a new CEO must decide where exactly to look

Houston voices

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

Property Showcase

10+ can't-miss Houston business and innovation events for October

where to be

Editor's note: Healthcare and energy conferences headline this month's slate of innovation events in Houston. But there's also time for family-friendly gatherings and pickleball socials. Here’s what not to miss in October and how to register. Please note: this article may be updated to add more events.

Oct. 2 — Joy in Medicine Initiative Symposium

The Houston Methodist Joy in Medicine Initiative Symposium will explore the power of connection in enhancing professional fulfillment for clinicians and healthcare teams, this year with the theme of "Forging New Paths: Leadership, Connection & Innovation to Sustain Joy in Medicine." Hear from Dr. Shlomit Schall, Houston Methodist Physician Organization president and CEO and chief physician executive; Houston Methodist CEO Marc Boom; and Dr. Albert Wu, from Johns Hopkins, author of Therefore, Let us Rejoice: Sustaining Joy in Medicine. Stick around for a networking happy hour.

This event is Friday, Oct. 2, from 8:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m. at Thompson Houston on Allen Parkway. Find more information here.

Oct. 6-7 — Hydrogen Americas Summit and Exhibition

Hydrogen Americas delivers an unparalleled opportunity to explore how hydrogen integrates with CCUS and other energy solutions under the new U.S. and Americas energy paradigm. This event moves to Houston in 2026, providing unmatched access to industry leaders and opportunities. The summit will include CCUS-dedicated sessions integrated directly into the conference programming, providing deeper insights into carbon capture, utilization and storage. Look forward to networking opportunities to connect with global suppliers, regional developers and key policymakers.

This event begins Oct. 6 at George R. Brown Convention Center. Register here.

Oct. 6-7 — Annual Energy Summit — Energy, Risk, and Geopolitics

The 10th annual energy summit is co-hosted by Baker Botts and the Center for Energy Studies at Rice University's Baker Institute. This year's summit, “Energy, Risk, and Geopolitics,” will explore how a changing geopolitical landscape and shifts in supply chain risks are impacting investment, innovation and market dynamics. The two-day program will include discussions spanning petroleum and LNG markets, critical minerals, electricity reliability, AI and power demand.

This event begins Oct. 6 at 7:30 am at James A Baker III Hall. The event will also be livestreamed. Register here.

Oct. 7 – Rockets Get You to Orbit. Culture Gets You to Stay

The Ion will host a morning discussion exploring humanity’s future in space. The event will feature Rick Tumlinson, author of Why Space? The Purpose of People; Scott Solomon, author of Becoming Martian; and David Alexander and Alexander Regier of Rice University’s new Space Humanities Initiative. The conversations will be moderated by EarthLight Foundation Director Junaid Mian.

This event is Wednesday, Oct. 7, from 8:30-11 a.m. at the Ion. Register here.

Oct. 8 — Greentown Labs’ Fall Pickleball Social

Greentown Labs hosts its fall social at Pickle Lab HTX this month. Enjoy friendly matches, networking and light bites. All skill sets are welcome.

This event is Thursday, Oct. 8, from 5:30-7:30 p.m. at Pickle Lab HTX. Register here.

Oct. 10 – Ion Family Tech Festival

Bring the whole family out to the second Ion Family Tech Festival. Kids will get to participate in hands-on STEAM workshops and learn more about STEAM-related careers.

This event is Saturday, Oct. 10, from 9 a.m.-12 p.m. at the Ion. Register here.

Oct. 13 – Mercury Fund Day at the Ion

Don’t miss the latest installment of Mercury Fund Day at the Ion, previously known as Software Day. The recurring monthly event features office hours (by application), a keynote and networking opportunities.

This event is Tuesday, Oct. 13, from 3:30-7 p.m. at the Ion. Register here.

Oct. 14 — Future of Global Energy Conference

This October, the sixth annual Future of Global Energy Conference kicks off, convening influential leaders from across energy, technology, finance and public policy who will come together to explore the forces defining the next era of global energy and Houston’s role in shaping it. Ryan Lance, Executive Chairman of ConocoPhillips and 2027 Chair of the Greater Houston Partnership’s Board of Directors, is the keynote speaker for this year’s conference, bringing a global perspective on rising demand, market volatility and Houston’s role in the next era of energy growth.

This event takes place Oct. 14 at the Marriott Marquis. Register here.

Oct. 17 — Energy Day 2026

Energy Day Houston is the nation’s largest free, family-friendly STEM festival. It features over 50 interactive exhibits and live demonstrations focused on traditional and emerging energy career paths to power up your curiosity.

This event begins at 11 a.m. on Oct. 17 at Sam Houston Park. Get details here.

Oct. 22 — Rice360 Innovation for Healthcare Access Conference

Researchers and innovators from Rice University, the Texas Medical Center, non-profit organizations, healthcare providers and others will come together to explore gaps in healthcare at the Innovation for Healthcare Access Conference. The event will feature speakers, workshops and case study presentations and will focus on innovations for the health of women and children in underserved rural and urban communities across Texas.

This event is Thursday, Oct. 22, from 8 a.m.-5 p.m. at the Rice University BioScience Research Collaborative (BRC). Register here.

Oct. 28-29 – TiECon 2026

TiE Houston, TiE Dallas and TiE Austin are joining forces to host TiEcon Texas 2026 at the Ion this month. The event will focus on how automation, artificial intelligence and emerging technologies are reshaping Texas industries, the economy and daily life. The conference will feature keynotes, panels, fireside chats and the TiE Hatch Pitch Competition.

This event starts Thursday, Oct. 29, at the Ion. Register here.

UH secures $5M in philanthropic gifts to bolster engineering, nursing

major gifts

The University of Houston has received two significant philanthropic gifts to advance innovation and healthcare, the college announced this month.

Manmohan Singh Kalsi and Marie-Luise Schubert Kalsi granted $4 million to UH’s Cullen College of Engineering to support endowed and current funds for graduate fellowships and industry interest in the mechanical and aerospace fields.

The gift is the Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering’s largest donation in years, according to UH, and will establish two endowed professorships to attract and retain leading faculty. It will also create the Kalsi Faculty Research Fund, which aims to take emerging research to the next level.

Additionally, UH says it will also bring industry experts to campus to present and collaborate with students via the forthcoming Kalsi Seminar Series.

Manmohan Kalsi earned both his master’s degree and Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from UH. He went on to found Sugar Land-based Kalsi Engineering in 1978, which pioneered hydrodynamic rotary sealing technology and valve technology for nuclear power plants. In 2014, he established an endowed professorship within Cullen College in honor of the late UH professor Gabriel Fazekas.

"This gift provides a tremendous boost to our department's strategic momentum,” Karolos Grigoriadis, chair of the Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, said in a news release. “By simultaneously supporting faculty, graduate researchers and collaborative seminars, the Kalsis are strengthening every part of our research enterprise and creating new opportunities for discovery, collaboration and student mentorship.”

Meanwhile, Houston’s The Hamill Foundation also gave a $1 million gift to UH’s Andy and Barbara Gessner College of Nursing. The funds will establish The Hamill Foundation Endowed Professorship in Community Care Nursing, to support a faculty member focused on community-based nursing education, partnerships, research, and outreach to underserved communities in Houston.

Additionally, the funding will go toward efforts to address nurse shortages through the newly established UH Health program. The Hamill Foundation has donated $6 million previously to UH through the years, but the latest $1 million is the largest single investment from the foundation to date.

“The Hamill Foundation continues to help us raise the bar for nursing education and address the nursing shortage,” Kathryn Tart, founding dean and professor at Gessner College and Humana Endowed Dean's Chair in Nursing, said in a news release. “The enduring commitment and generosity of The Hamill Foundation allow us to answer the call and educate generations of competent and caring nursing professionals.”

Both of the recent gifts help fund UH’s $1 billion Can’t Stop Houston: The Centennial Campaign. As of September, the university had raised more than $881 million. UH turns 100 years old in March 2027.

SpaceX's supersized Starship rocket launches into orbit for first time

Out in Space

SpaceX launched its enormous Starship into orbit for the first time Monday, September 28, and successfully delivered the most advanced Starlink satellites yet, but cut the flight short to ensure safety.

The spacecraft reentered over the Pacific and splashed down north of Hawaii three hours after blasting off from Texas. The company had been aiming for a 10-hour flight, spanning six full laps around Earth, to prove its readiness for NASA’s Artemis moon program.

Starship tipped over and erupted in flames upon splashdown, a dramatic end to the mission.

Elon Musk's Starship almost didn't make it to orbit when one of its engines shut down prematurely. But with everything else working well and the bad engine no longer needed, flight controllers decided, after several tense minutes, to proceed as planned.

“Starship is orbital,” Mission Control announced to cheers.

NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman congratulated SpaceX on reaching orbit and “managing every step in a safe, responsible and especially inspirational way.”

Rocket carries 26 of Musk's most advanced Starlink satellites

Musk’s showpiece rocket — the biggest and most powerful ever built — carried 26 of the latest Starlinks to join the 11,000 older models already providing internet service. They popped out of the spacecraft one by one, drawing more cheers from the SpaceX crowd at the Starbase launch site.

The decision to end the flight early came soon afterward. SpaceX said hours later in an online update that the decision was made “out of an abundance of caution” because of the early engine trouble.

It was Starship’s 14th full-scale launch from Texas’ southern tip in three years. Earlier test flights ventured no farther than the Indian Ocean halfway around the world, often crashing in flames and briefly skimming space.

This time, the intent was for SpaceX to circle the globe from an altitude of 170 miles (275 kilometers) — not just once but six times over almost 10 hours, ending with a Pacific splashdown near Chile. While Starship achieved the proper orbit, zipping along at 17,500 mph (28,000 kph), flight controllers opted to play it safe and bring it back several hours sooner, after just a couple of laps.

The first-stage booster was never meant to return to the Starbase launch site either, dropping instead into the Gulf of Mexico within minutes of the morning liftoff.

SpaceX wants to ensure that everything works before flying Starship back to Starbase. If the spacecraft breaks apart over land and rains debris onto people, “our popularity would diminish very rapidly,” Musk said at a business summit earlier this month. “That’s why we’re being extremely cautious here.”

Depending on the findings from Monday's orbital debut, the next Starship could return to the launch pad, where giant mechanical arms would grab the hovering spacecraft. If the catch works — Musk gives it even or slightly better odds — then SpaceX will refly the spacecraft by year’s end or early next year.

The 407-foot (124-meter) rocket was designed from the start to be fully reusable, a key to lowering launch costs. SpaceX managed to salvage the last Starship from the Indian Ocean in July. Engineers modified the newly launched Starship’s heat shield based on hands-on inspections of the recovered spacecraft, which is being tugged back to Starbase.

SpaceX wants Starship to be certified for orbital flight

SpaceX is pressing hard to certify Starship for orbital flight, a vital step toward moon and Mars travel.

NASA’s Artemis III mission is coming up as soon as next summer, a triple-launch docking exercise in orbit around Earth between an Orion capsule full of astronauts and competing lunar landers. Jeff Bezos’ Blue Moon would blast off first, followed by Orion — which would close in for a linkup — and then Musk’s Starship for a docking with Orion once Blue Moon is unleashed.

The next mission, Artemis IV, is slated for no sooner than 2028 and would have astronauts landing on the moon in either Blue Moon or Starship, whichever is ready first. Subsequent moonshots will alternate between the two billionaires’ landers.

Musk originally developed Starship for Mars, intending to launch scores of them with the red planet’s first settlers. For now, he plans to focus on the moon and use Starship to haul satellites into orbit by the truckload, phasing out the company’s frailer Falcon 9 rocket within several years. A second Starship launch site is nearing completion at Florida’s Kennedy Space Center and a third is planned for Louisiana.

View All Listings