Author

  • Mohd Faizal Jamaludin

    • Faculty of Accountancy, Universiti Teknologi MARA Kedah Branch, Sungai Petani Campus, Kedah Accounting Research Institute, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia
    • Malaysia

  • Marziana Madah Marzuki

    • Faculty of Accountancy, Universiti Teknologi MARA Kelantan Branch, Machang Campus, Kelantan Accounting Research Institute, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia
    • Malaysia

  • Wan Zurina Nik Abdul Majid

    • Faculty of Accountancy, Universiti Teknologi MARA Kelantan Branch, Machang Campus, Kelantan, Malaysia
    • Malaysia

  • Mohd Fahmee Bahaudin

    • Accounting Research Institute, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia
    • Malaysia

  • Nor Balkish Zakaria

    • Accounting Research Institute, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia
    • Malaysia

Abstract

Strategic decision-making at the board level is increasingly shaped by directors’ interorganisational networks. However, the mechanisms by which these structural positions translate into strategic influence remain underexplored. While existing scholarship acknowledges the value of director network centrality in enhancing resource access and legitimacy, the mediating role of information flow in converting this structural advantage into high-quality strategic decisions has received limited conceptual attention. Addressing this gap, the present study aims to develop a theoretical framework that explains how director network centrality influences strategic decision-making through board-level information flow. Using a narrative review methodology, this study synthesises 26 peer-reviewed articles sourced from the Scopus database. An integrative thematic analysis reveals three critical propositions: (1) director network centrality positively influences information flow; (2) information flow enhances strategic decision-making quality; and (3) information flow mediates the relationship between network centrality and strategic decision outcomes. The framework draws upon Resource Dependency Theory, Social Capital Theory, and the Knowledge-Based View of the Firm, offering a multi-level understanding of how network embeddedness, trust-based exchanges, and cognitive integration shape strategic governance. Theoretically, the study advances governance literature by positioning information flow as a cognitive mechanism within networked boards. Practically, it encourages organisations to reassess board effectiveness by considering directors’ network positions and internal information-sharing capabilities. The paper concludes by identifying conceptual limitations and proposing directions for future empirical validation. This framework offers a fresh perspective on how boardroom dynamics can be leveraged to enhance strategic agility and decision quality in complex environments.

Keywords

References

  • Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1997). Writing narrative literature reviews. Review of general psychology, 1(3), 311-320.
  • Bilgili, H., & Bilgili, T. v. (2024). Toward a knowledge-based view of the board: Modeling board intrafirm knowledge networks. Knowledge and Process Management, 31(1), 33–47. https://doi.org/10.1002/kpm.1762
  • Blanco-Alcántara, D., Díez-Esteban, J. M., & Romero-Merino, M. E. (2019). Board networks as a source of intellectual capital for companies: Empirical evidence from a panel of Spanish firms. Management Decision, 57(10), 2653–2671. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-12-2017-1238
  • Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
  • Cannella, B., Finkelstein, S., & Hambrick, D. C. (2009). Strategic Leadership: Theory and Research on Executives, Top Management Teams, and Boards. In Strategic Leadership: Theory and Research on Executives, Top Management Teams, and Boards. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195162073.001.0001
  • Carpenter, M. A., Geletkancz, M. A., & Sanders, Wm. G. (2004). Upper echelons research revisited: Antecedents, elements, and consequences of top management team composition. Journal of Management, 30(6), 749–778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jm.2004.06.001
  • Chen, L., Li, F., Wu, M., & Niu, R. (2025). Independent director network and carbon information disclosure: evidence from China. Social Responsibility Journal, 21(7), 1466-1483.
  • Cronin, B., Perra, N., Rocha, L. E. C., Zhu, Z., Pallotti, F., Gorgoni, S., ... & De Vita, R. (2021). Ethical implications of network data in business and management settings. Social Networks, 67, 29-40.
  • Eisenhardt, K. M., & Zbaracki, M. J. (1992). Strategic decision making. Strategic Management Journal, 13(2 S), 17–37. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250130904
  • Forbes, D. P., & Milliken, F. J. (1999). Cognition and corporate governance: Understanding boards of directors as strategic decision-making groups. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 489–505. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1999.2202133
  • Ford-Eickhoff, K., Plowman, D. A., & McDaniel Jr., R. R. (2011). Hospital boards and hospital strategic focus: The impact of board involvement in strategic decision making. Health Care Management Review, 36(2), 145–154. https://doi.org/10.1097/HMR.0b013e3182099f6e
  • Freeman, L. C. (1978). Centrality in social networks: conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1(3), 215–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-8733(78)90021-7
  • Hudson, K., & Morgan, R. E. (2024). Industry Exposure to Artificial Intelligence, Board Network Heterogeneity, and Firm Idiosyncratic Risk. Journal of Management Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13127
  • Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X
  • Larcker, D. F., So, E. C., & Wang, C. C. Y. (2013). Boardroom centrality and firm performance. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 55(2–3), 225–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2013.01.006
  • Liao, C.-C., & Chen, J.-. Y. (2009). Director networks and their similarity in r&d expenditure decision. International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, 1(23), 75–88. https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-67549098370&partnerID=40&md5=8c09270575d047c358aa705343dd68fd
  • Maya-Jariego, I., Alieva, D., & Holgado, D. (2021). Confidentiality, power relations and evaluation of potential harm in the study of the personal and organizational networks of travel agents in Moscow. Social Networks, 67, 55-64.
  • McClane, J., & Nili, Y. (2021). Social Corporate Governance. George Washington Law Review, 89(4), 932–1015. https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85127463310&partnerID=40&md5=0061719a52466bbaaeb3d7d876bb0767
  • Mizruchi, M. S. (1996a). What do interlocks do? An Analysis, Critique, and Assessment of Research on Interlocking Directorates. Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 271–298. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.22.1.271
  • Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242-266.
  • Nandy, M., Lodh, S., Kaur, J., & Wang, J. (2020). Impact of directors' networks on corporate social responsibility: A cross-country study. International Review of Financial Analysis, 72, 101601.
  • Nicholson, G. J., Alexander, M., & Kiel, G. C. (2004). Defining the social capital of the board of directors: An exploratory study. Journal of Management and Organization, 10(1), 54–72. https://doi.org/10.5172/jmo.2004.10.1.54
  • Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. (2015). External control of organizations—Resource dependence perspective. In Organisational Behaviour(pp. 355-370). Routledge.
  • Pignatel, I. (2008). Directors: Geographical and industry specialization? EuroMed Journal of Business, 3(1), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1108/14502190810873830
  • Qiu, S., & Sun, X. (2021). Director Networks and Cost of Equity Capital: Based on “busy Director Hypothesis” Analysis. Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/9594571
  • Shu, P.-G., Chiang, S.-J., & Wu, T.-Y. (2024). Board network and ESG performance: Evidence from China. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 31(6), 5709–5729. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2887
  • Stevenson, W. B., & Radin, R. F. (2015). The minds of the board of directors: the effects of formal position and informal networks among board members on influence and decision making. Journal of Management and Governance, 19(2), 421–460. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-014-9286-9
  • Wang, S., & Lv, J. (2025). Director Network Centrality and Firm Green Innovation: Moderating Effect of Absorptive Capacity. Business Ethics, the Environment and Responsibility. https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12822
  • Webster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2002). Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. MIS Quarterly, 13-23.

Downloads

No downloads have been recorded for this article yet. Figures appear here once readers begin downloading the full text.

How to Cite

Jamaludin, M. F., Marzuki, M. M., Nik Abdul Majid, W. Z., Bahaudin, M. F., & Zakaria, N. B. (2025). Impact of Director Networks on Strategic Decision-Making: The Mediating Role of Information Flow. Information Management and Business Review, 17(4(I), 112-124. https://doi.org/10.22610/imbr.v17i4(I).4742

Share this article

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Mohd Faizal Jamaludin, Marziana Madah Marzuki, Wan Zurina Nik Abdul Majid, Mohd Fahmee Bahaudin, Nor Balkish Zakaria (Author)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Author (s) should affirm that the material has not been published previously. It has not been submitted and it is not under consideration by any other journal. At the same time author (s) need to execute a publication permission agreement to assume the responsibility of the submitted content and any omissions and errors therein. After submission of revised paper in the light of suggestions of the reviewers, the editorial team  edits and formats manuscripts to bring uniformity and standardization in published material.

This work will be licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) and under condition of the license, users are free to read, copy, remix, transform, redistribute, download, print, search or link to the full texts of articles and even build upon their work as long as they credit the author for the original work. Moreover, as per journal policy author (s) hold and retain copyrights without any restrictions.

Keywords

Section

Research Paper

Published in

Vol. 17 No. 4(I) (2025) Circular Economy, Civic Technology & Social Innovation View issue contents

Published

2025-11-23

Submissions

Have research to publish? Information Management and Business Review welcomes submissions.

Make a Submission