Why do some firms drive radical innovation, while others only deliver incremental innovation? We argue that the answer may lie in the latent divisions within top management teams (TMTs). Drawing on the categorization–elaboration model, we propose that TMT task-related faultlines create a paradoxical effect: while they enhance incremental innovation by promoting within-subgroup cohesion, they simultaneously hinder radical innovation by stimulating between-subgroup fragmentation. Using a sample of Chinese listed manufacturing firms, we conduct empirical analysis which reveals that the strength of TMT task-related faultlines is positively associated with firms’ incremental innovation but negatively associated with radical innovation. Further analysis demonstrates that CEO functional diversity attenuates the negative relationship between TMT task-related faultlines and radical innovation. TMT ownership share weakens both the positive link between TMT task-related faultlines and incremental innovation and the negative link between TMT task-related faultlines and radical innovation. This research advances scholarly understanding of TMT composition, particularly TMT task-related faultlines and their dual effects on innovation typologies, contributing to the literature at the intersection of TMT composition and firm innovation, and offering actionable guidance for firms when making strategic choices about whether to prioritize incremental innovation or pursue radical innovation.
AlexanderLVan KnippenbergD (2014) Teams in pursuit of radical innovation: A goal orientation perspective. Academy of Management Review39(4): 423–438.
2.
AlexievASJansenJJVan den BoschFA, et al. (2010) Top management team advice seeking and exploratory innovation: The moderating role of TMT heterogeneity. Journal of Management Studies47(7): 1343–1364.
3.
BachrachDGKimKYPatelPC, et al. (2023) Birds of a feather?: Firm sales growth and narcissism in the upper echelons at the CEO-TMT interface. The Leadership Quarterly34(2): 101621.
4.
BeckerTE (2005) Potential problems in the statistical control of variables in organizational research: A qualitative analysis with recommendations. Organizational Research Methods8(3): 274–289.
5.
BeneitoP (2006) The innovative performance of in-house and contracted R&D in terms of patents and utility models. Research Policy35(4): 502–517.
6.
BerronePFosfuriAGelabertL, et al. (2013) Necessity as the mother of “green” inventions: Institutional pressures and environmental innovations. Strategic Management Journal34(8): 891–909.
7.
BezrukovaKJehnKAZanuttoEL, et al. (2009) Do workgroup faultlines help or hurt? A moderated model of faultlines, team identification, and group performance. Organization Science20(1): 35–50.
8.
BezrukovaKThatcherSJehnKA, et al. (2012) The effects of alignments: Examining group faultlines, organizational cultures, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology97(1): 77.
9.
BlagoevaRRMomTJJansenJJ, et al. (2020) Problem-solving or self-enhancement? A power perspective on how CEOs affect R&D search in the face of inconsistent feedback. Academy of Management Journal63(2): 332–355.
10.
BrownRJTurnerJC (1981) Interpersonal and intergroup behavior. In: TurnerJCGilesH (eds) Intergroup Behavior. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 33–64.
11.
CarmeliADuttonJEHardinAE (2015) Respect as an engine for new ideas: Linking respectful engagement, relational information processing and creativity among employees and teams. Human Relations68(6): 1021–1047.
12.
CartonAMCummingsJN (2012) A theory of subgroups in work teams. Academy of Management Review37(3): 441–470.
13.
CheungSYGongYWangM, et al. (2016) When and how does functional diversity influence team innovation? The mediating role of knowledge sharing and the moderation role of affect-based trust in a team. Human Relations69(7): 1507–1531.
14.
ChiricoFIrelandRDPittinoD, et al. (2025) Resource orchestration, socioemotional wealth, and radical innovation in family firms: Do multifamily ownership and generational involvement matter?. Research Policy54(1): 105106.
15.
ContiRGambardellaAMarianiM (2014) Learning to be Edison: Inventors, organizations, and breakthrough inventions. Organization Science25(3): 833–849.
16.
CooperDPatelPCThatcherSM (2014) It depends: Environmental context and the effects of faultlines on top management team performance. Organization Science25(2): 633–652.
17.
CortesAFHerrmannP (2021) Strategic leadership of innovation: A framework for future research. International Journal of Management Reviews23(2): 224–243.
18.
CrossanMMApaydinM (2010) A multi-dimensional framework of organizational innovation: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Management Studies47(6): 1154–1191.
19.
CrosslandCZyungJHillerNJ, et al. (2014) CEO career variety: Effects on firm-level strategic and social novelty. Academy of Management Journal57(3): 652–674.
20.
DewarRDDuttonJE (1986) The adoption of radical and incremental innovations: An empirical analysis. Management Science32(11): 1422–1433.
21.
Dunlap-HinklerDKotabeMMudambiR (2010) A story of breakthrough versus incremental innovation: Corporate entrepreneurship in the global pharmaceutical industry. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal4(2): 106–127.
FrankKA (2000) Impact of a confounding variable on a regression coefficient. Sociological Methods & Research29(2): 147–194.
24.
GaertnerSLMannJAMurrellAJ, et al. (1989) Reduction of intergroup bias: The benefits of recategorization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology57(2): 239–249.
25.
GeorgakakisDGrevePRuigrokW (2017) Top management team faultlines and firm performance: Examining the CEO-TMT interface. The Leadership Quarterly28(6): 741–758.
26.
GrigoriouKRothaermelFT (2014) Structural microfoundations of innovation: The role of relational stars. Journal of Management40(2): 586–615.
27.
HambrickDCMasonPA (1984) Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review9(2): 193–206.
28.
HarrisonJSBoivieSSternI, et al. (2024) Inventor CEO involvement and firm exploitative and exploratory innovation. Strategic Management Journal45(11): 2227–2256.
29.
HilbeJM (2011) Negative Binomial Regression. Cambridge University Press.
30.
HillADJohnsonSGGrecoLM, et al. (2021) Endogeneity: A review and agenda for the methodology-practice divide affecting micro and macro research. Journal of Management47(1): 105–143.
31.
HomanACGündemirSBuengelerC, et al. (2020) Leading diversity: Towards a theory of functional leadership in diverse teams. Journal of Applied Psychology105(10): 1101.
32.
HomanACHollenbeckJRHumphreySE, et al. (2008) Facing differences with an open mind: Openness to experience, salience of intragroup differences, and performance of diverse work groups. Academy of Management Journal51(6): 1204–1222.
33.
JiaNHuangKGZhangCM (2019) Public governance, corporate governance, and firm innovation: An examination of state-owned enterprises. Academy of Management Journal62(1): 220–247.
34.
JungHJLeeJJ (2016) The quest for originality: A new typology of knowledge search and breakthrough inventions. Academy of Management Journal59(5): 1725–1753.
35.
KimKYPatelPC (2021) A multilevel contingency model of employee ownership and firm productivity: The moderating roles of industry growth and instability. Organization Science32(3): 625–648.
36.
KimKYPatelPC (2024) Nonlinear effect of employee ownership on organizational financial misdeeds: The moderating role of organizational size. Journal of Applied Psychology109(4): 573.
37.
KobargSStumpf-WollersheimJWelpeIM (2019) More is not always better: Effects of collaboration breadth and depth on radical and incremental innovation performance at the project level. Research Policy48(1): 1–10.
38.
KrollMWaltersBALeSA (2007) The impact of board composition and top management team ownership structure on post-IPO performance in young entrepreneurial firms. Academy of Management Journal50(5): 1198–1216.
39.
LarckerDFRusticusTO (2010) On the use of instrumental variables in accounting research. Journal of Accounting and Economics49(3): 186–205.
40.
LauDCMurnighanJK (1998) Demographic diversity and faultlines: The compositional dynamics of organizational groups. Academy of Management Review23(2): 325–340.
41.
LauDCMurnighanJK (2005) Interactions within groups and subgroups: The effects of demographic faultlines. Academy of Management Journal48(4): 645–659.
42.
Leicht-DeobaldUHuettermannHBruchH, et al. (2021) Organizational demographic faultlines: Their impact on collective organizational identification, firm performance, and firm innovation. Journal of Management Studies58(8): 2240–2274.
43.
LiJHambrickDC (2005) Factional groups: A new vantage on demographic faultlines, conflict, and disintegration in work teams. Academy of Management Journal48(5): 794–813.
44.
LiMJonesCD (2019) The effects of TMT faultlines and CEO-TMT power disparity on competitive behavior and firm performance. Group & Organization Management44(5): 874–914.
45.
LiXVermeulenF (2021) High risk, low return (and vice versa): The effect of product innovation on firm performance in a transition economy. Academy of Management Journal64(5): 1383–1418.
46.
MayoMvan KnippenbergDGuillénL, et al. (2016) Team diversity and categorization salience: Capturing diversity-blind, intergroup-biased, and multicultural perceptions. Organizational Research Methods19(3): 433–474.
47.
MeyerBGlenzA (2013) Team faultline measures: A computational comparison and a new approach to multiple subgroups. Organizational Research Methods16(3): 393–424.
48.
MeyerBShemlaMLiJ, et al. (2015) On the same side of the faultline: Inclusion in the leader’s subgroup and employee performance. Journal of Management Studies52(3): 354–380.
49.
MiragliaMRussoSDBouvilleG (2025) The hazards of performance management: An investigation into its effects on employee absenteeism and presenteeism. Human Relations78(7): 847–875.
50.
MoserSReinwaldMKunzeF (2023) Does my leader care about my subgroup? A multilevel model of team faultlines, LMX quality, and employee absenteeism. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology32(2): 234–244.
51.
PheneAAlmeidaP (2008) Innovation in multinational subsidiaries: The role of knowledge assimilation and subsidiary capabilities. Journal of International Business Studies39(5): 901–919.
52.
PierceJLRubenfeldSAMorganS (1991) Employee ownership: A conceptual model of process and effects. Academy of Management Review16(1): 121–144.
53.
PostCLokshinBBooneC (2022) What changes after women enter top management teams? A gender-based model of strategic renewal. Academy of Management Journal65(1): 273–303.
54.
QianCCaoQTakeuchiR (2013) Top management team functional diversity and organizational innovation in China: The moderating effects of environment. Strategic Management Journal34(1): 110–120.
55.
RichardOCWuJMarkoczyLA, et al. (2019) Top management team demographic-faultline strength and strategic change: What role does environmental dynamism play?. Strategic Management Journal40(6): 987–1009.
56.
RosenbuschNBrinckmannJBauschA (2011) Is innovation always beneficial? A meta-analysis of the relationship between innovation and performance in SMEs. Journal of Business Venturing26(4): 441–457.
57.
ShinTYouJ (2023) Faults and faultlines: The effects of board faultlines on CEO dismissal. Journal of Management49(4): 1344–1393.
58.
SinghJAgrawalA (2011) Recruiting for ideas: How firms exploit the prior inventions of new hires. Management Science57(1): 129–150.
59.
SirmonDGHittMAIrelandRD, et al. (2011) Resource orchestration to create competitive advantage: Breadth, depth, and life cycle effects. Journal of Management37(5): 1390–1412.
60.
SlaterSFMohrJJSenguptaS (2014) Radical product innovation capability: Literature review, synthesis, and illustrative research propositions. Journal of Product Innovation Management31(3): 552–566.
61.
StollbergerJAl-AtwiAADe CremerD (2023) Untangling the team social capital–team innovation link: The role of proportional task conflict as well as group-and differentiated individual-focused transformational leadership. Human Relations76(6): 871–900.
62.
SunPDengZWrightM (2021) Partnering with Leviathan: The politics of innovation in foreign-host-state joint ventures. Journal of International Business Studies52(4): 595–620.
63.
ThatcherSPatelPC (2011) Demographic faultlines: A meta-analysis of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology96(6): 1119.
64.
ThatcherSMJehnKAZanuttoE (2003) Cracks in diversity research: The effects of diversity faultlines on conflict and performance. Group Decision and Negotiation12(3): 217–241.
65.
ThatcherSMMeyerBKimY, et al. (2024) A meta-analytic integration of the faultlines literature. Organizational Psychology Review14(2): 238–281.
66.
ThatcherSMPatelPC (2012) Group faultlines: A review, integration, and guide to future research. Journal of Management38(4): 969–1009.
67.
TuggleCSSchnatterlyKJohnsonRA (2010) Attention patterns in the boardroom: How board composition and processes affect discussion of entrepreneurial issues. Academy of Management Journal53(3): 550–571.
68.
TurnerJCHoggMAOakesPJ, et al. (1987) Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
69.
Van KnippenbergDDawsonJFWestMA, et al. (2011) Diversity faultlines, shared objectives, and top management team performance. Human Relations64(3): 307–336.
70.
Van KnippenbergDDe DreuCKHomanAC (2004) Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology89(6): 1008.
71.
WangYStuartTLiJ (2021) Fraud and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly66(2): 267–297.
72.
WiersemaMFBowenHP (2009) The use of limited dependent variable techniques in strategy research: Issues and methods. Strategic Management Journal30(6): 679–692.
73.
XiaoTMakhijaMKarimS (2022) A knowledge recombination perspective of innovation: Review and new research directions. Journal of Management48(6): 1724–1777.
74.
XieZLiJ (2018) Exporting and innovating among emerging market firms: The moderating role of institutional development. Journal of International Business Studies49(2): 222–245.
75.
XuDZhouKZChenS (2023) The impact of communist ideology on the patenting activity of Chinese firms. Academy of Management Journal66(1): 102–132.
76.
XuDZhouKZDuF (2019) Deviant versus aspirational risk taking: The effects of performance feedback on bribery expenditure and R&D intensity. Academy of Management Journal62(4): 1226–1251.
77.
YouYSrinivasanSPauwelsK, et al. (2020) How CEO/CMO characteristics affect innovation and stock returns: Findings and future directions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science48(4): 1229–1253.
78.
ZhengGWangSXuY (2018) Monetary stimulation, bank relationship and innovation: Evidence from China. Journal of Banking & Finance89(5): 237–248.
79.
ZhouKZDongM (2025) Inward foreign direct investment and technological innovation of local firms: Differential impacts on incremental and radical innovation. Journal of International Business Studies56(9): 1170–1187.
80.
ZhouKZGaoGYZhaoH (2017) State ownership and firm innovation in China: An integrated view of institutional and efficiency logics. Administrative Science Quarterly62(2): 375–404.
81.
ZhouKZLiCB (2012) How knowledge affects radical innovation: Knowledge base, market knowledge acquisition, and internal knowledge sharing. Strategic Management Journal33(9): 1090–1102.
