Purpose This paper examines how chief executive officers' (CEOs') self-monitoring, a chameleon-like, impression-management trait, drives organizational effectiveness through innovation. We conceptualize effectiveness as (1) innovation-strategy volatility (how strongly firms shift their innovation focus over time) and (2) innovation-outcome variability (the spread of innovation pay-offs). Design/methodology/approach We develop an unobtrusive, multi-indicator index of CEO self-monitoring based on communication tone, public-popularity cues, ingratiation behavior and pay transparency. We link this index to a balanced 1998–2018 panel comprising 220 CEOs from 108 US firms in innovation-intensive industries. We estimate generalized-estimating-equation models with CEO and firm fixed effects and correct for selection bias with a two-stage Heckman procedure. Findings High self-monitoring CEOs instigate stronger innovation-strategy volatility yet keep their choices within socially accepted industry practices. They are associated with higher average innovation outcomes and greater outcome variability, indicating a high-impact/high-variance innovation profile. Practical implications Boards and HR executives can treat observable self-monitoring cues as inputs for leadership assessment and innovation-governance discussions. The findings suggest that high self-monitoring CEOs may require particular attention to communication consistency, portfolio review, and multi-year innovation metrics because they are associated with higher-impact but more variable innovation outcomes. Social implications The findings suggest that leader traits can shape not only innovation success, but also the variability of innovation outcomes. Boards and HR leaders should therefore consider how CEO self-monitoring may affect organizational stability, employee coordination, and long-term innovation accountability when firms pursue visible, high-impact innovation strategies. Originality/value We integrate upper-echelons, signaling and strategic-HRM theories to reframe self-monitoring as a micro-foundation of people-driven organizational effectiveness. The study answers recent calls for work that links leadership traits, signaling dynamics and firm performance, and it offers an archival self-monitoring measure that future scholars can readily extend.
Vlas et al. (Thu,) studied this question.