Search results

In his 2022 paper, in the Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting and Financial Management, Sven Modell reviews and reflects on the public sector's institutional research dealing with performance measurement and management (PMM) over the past decade. Modell suggests potential extensions of this body of research. This paper seeks to contribute to the path that Modell initiated. It offers directions in which institutional theory might contribute further to research on agentic aspects of PMM in the public sector.

The paper is a rejoinder emphasizing how institutional theory could further nurture reflection on PMM research in the public sector. The authors draw upon Modell's article and ongoing research in the institutional theory field.

Modell insists that institutional research on PMM in the public sector should explore the constitutive effects of PMM practices while conceiving such practices as institutionally embedded phenomena. The authors seek to extend this approach by considering the role of agency in institutional processes. To do this, the authors build on recent institutional research on agency, discussing how those new conceptualizations could nurture and develop the understanding of PMM practices in the public sector. The authors further discuss implications for coupling and decoupling as sites of agency. Such literature is relevant for examining emerging themes in public-sector accounting because it allows the authors to better conceptualize the underlying mechanisms of agency in the context of public service provision characterized by institutional complexity.

This paper details several implications of the current developments in new institutional theory in examining agency in the relationship between institutions and PMM, pointing at the case of decoupling. In so doing, the authors seek to stimulate a constructive exchange between public-sector accounting and a broader institutionalist body of research and suggest ways of extending the PMM research agenda.

In order to address the gender divide in technology entrepreneurship, we explore how different national contexts impact policies and policy implementation. We investigate how transnational concerns (macro level) about women’s low participation in (technology) entrepreneurship are translated and implemented amongst actors at the meso level (technology incubators) and understood at the micro level (women tech entrepreneurs).

We adopt gender institutionalism as a theoretical lens to understand what happens in the implementation of gender equality goals in technology entrepreneurship policy. We apply Gains and Lowndes’ (2014) conceptual framework to investigate the gendered character and effects of institutional formation. Four countries represent different levels of gender equality: high (Norway and Sweden), medium (Ireland) and low (Israel). An initial policy document analysis provides the macro level understanding (Heilbrunn et al., 2020). At the meso level, managers of technology business incubators (n = 3–5) in each country were interviewed. At the micro level, 10 female technology entrepreneurs in each country were interviewed. We use an inductive research approach, combined with thematic analysis.

Policies differ across the four countries, ranging from women-centred approaches to gender mainstreaming. Macro level policies are interpreted and implemented in different ways amongst actors at the meso level, who tend to act in line with given national policies. Actors at the micro level often understand gender equality in ways that reflect their national policies. However, women in all four countries share similar struggles with work-life balance and gendered expectations in relation to family responsibilities.

The contribution of our paper is to (1) entrepreneurship theory by applying gendered institutionalism theory to (tech) entrepreneurship, and (2) our findings clearly show that the gendered context matters for policy implementation.

The purpose of this paper is to inspire a different way of thinking about digitalization and organizational change by theorizing simultaneity as an alternative to the otherwise dominant root metaphor of sequence in the literature on digitalization and organizational change.

The theoretical argument is based on a reading of central contributions to the literature on digital technology and organizational change, and particularly inspired by the work positing a constitutive entanglement of technology and organization. We argue for an extension of this line of thinking with a reading of Latour’s notion tonalities. The relevance of the theoretical argument is demonstrated through an illustrative empirical example of the phenomenon digital-ready legislation.

The paper identifies sequence as a root metaphor in the organization and digital change literature. It develops a simultaneity view and illustrates its relevance through the example of digital-ready legislation, pinpointing how technological, organizational and legal elements are attuned to one another at the same time rather than in sequence.

The sequentiality view has dominated the change management research, which has travelled from research into practice. The simultaneity view has the potential to offer a new approach to planning change, with a focus on the simultaneous alignment of, e.g. legal, organizational and technological elements.

The paper offers an alternative to dominant views on digitalization and organizational change, drawing on an overlooked notion in Latour’s scholarship, namely tonalities. This has potential to qualify the entanglement thesis and develop simultaneity as a new metaphor for understanding digital change.

Corporate governance has become a core topic in management research and business practice. Recent debates like – environmental responsibility, sustainability, ethics, corporate control, generation, protection and distribution of wealth, the role of the board and senior executives in setting standards for performance management, and stakeholder relationship management – have strong links to organisational trust. However, management literature has been relatively silent on how various corporate governance configurations and perspectives potentially shape trust relations within the organisation, especially in Africa. Thus, this chapter reviews corporate governance through the lens of the institutional logics perspective evident in western capitalism and develops a framework connecting various governance configurations to organisational trust. Doing so provides new directions for those seeking to develop further research in corporate governance, institutional logics and organisational trust.

This paper examines the ways in which Chinese university middle managers evaluate subordinate performance in response to the Chinese Double First-Class University Plan, a national project that ranks the performance of universities. In exploring compromise arrangements, the hybridised valuing activity of middle managers is found to be shaped by emergent and extant macro-foundations.

The qualitative data from 49 semi-structured interviews at five Chinese public universities were conducted. Drawing on macro-foundational studies and the sociology of worth (SW) theory, the analysis helps to identify socially shared patterns of actions and outcomes.

The findings elucidate the interplay between diverse economic, social, political and institutional values and the compromise-making by middle managers. The authors find that contextual factors restrict Chinese academic middle managers' autonomy, preventing workable compromise. Through the selective adoption of international and local management practices, compromise has evolved into a private differential treaty at the operational level.

A nuanced explanation reveals how the macro-foundations of Chinese society influence middle managers who engage with accounting when facilitating compromise. This study helps outsiders better understand the complex convergence and divergence of performance evaluative practices in Chinese universities against the backdrop of global market-based forces and the moral dimensions of organisational life. The findings have wider implications for the Chinese government in navigating institutional steps and developing supportive policies to enable middle managers to advance productive but also sustainable compromise.

Our prior work has identified a trade-off that new entrants face in obtaining favorable market reception, whereby initial entrants suffer from a deficit of legitimacy whereas later entrants suffer from a deficit of authenticity. This research has also proposed that a single mechanism is responsible for this trade-off: the tendency for customers and other stakeholders to assess the entrant's claim to originality based on the visible work that it has done to legitimate the new product or organizational form. This chapter extends and deepens our understanding of such “legitimation work” by showing how it can illuminate cases that seem in the first instance to defy this trade-off. In particular, we focus on two “off-diagonal” cases: (a) when, as in the case of “patent trolls” and fraudulent innovators, early entrants are viewed as inauthentic despite having a credible claim to originality; (b) when late entrants, as in the case of Dell Computers, mechanical watches and baseball ballparks, are viewed as authentic despite obviously not being the originators. We clarify how each off-diagonal case represents an ‘exception that proves the rule’ whereby audiences attribute authenticity on the basis of legitimation work rather than on the order of entry per se. The last case also leads to an opportunity to clarify why “cultural appropriation” can sometimes project authenticity and sometimes inauthenticity, why audiences bother to make inferences about a producer's authenticity on the basis of visible legitimation work, and why legitimacy is a universal goal of early movers whereas authenticity varies in its importance.

This paper aims to propose and assess a framework to analyse the institutionalization of Industry 4.0 (I4.0) through a framing analysis.

The framework was developed by combining the institutional approach with orders of worth, drawing insights from a comprehensive literature review. To assess it, the authors conducted a qualitative analysis of annual reports from companies with the largest market capitalization over a six-year period and interviewed union representatives in Spain and Sweden.

The framework comprises five dimensions (industrial, market, civic, green and connectionist). The empirical results reveal that companies consistently frame I4.0 with an emphasis on industrial and market perspectives. In contrast, unions place a stronger emphasis on civic issues, with Spanish unions holding a more negative view of I4.0, expressing concerns about working conditions and unemployment.

The proposed framework brings interesting insights into the dispute over the meaning of I4.0. Although this empirical study was limited to companies and unions in Sweden and Spain, the framework can be expanded for broader investigations, involving additional stakeholders in one or more countries. The discussion outlined using the varieties of capitalism approach is relevant for understanding the connection between the meso and macro levels of this phenomenon.

In navigating the landscape of I4.0, managers should remain flexible, and ready to tailor their strategies and operations to align with the distinct demands and expectations of stakeholders and their specific institutional environments. Similarly, policymakers are urged to acknowledge these contextual intricacies when crafting strategies for implementing I4.0 initiatives across national settings.

Based on the empirical findings, this study underscores the importance of fostering social dialogue and involving stakeholders in the implementation of I4.0. Policymakers and other stakeholders should take proactive measures, tailored to each country’s context, to mitigate potential adverse effects on labour and workers.

The study presents a novel framework that facilitates the systematic comparison of I4.0 framing by different actors. This contribution is significant because the way actors frame I4.0 affects its interpretation and implementation. Additionally, the aggregate analysis of results enables cross-country comparisons, enhancing our understanding of regional disparities.

Multinational enterprises (MNEs) own and control technological resources and capabilities that make them critical actors in accelerating the transition toward net zero. Even beyond the energy sector, stakeholders are putting increasing pressure on MNEs to reduce the carbon intensity of their operations, that is, to improve their carbon performance. While there is unambiguous evidence that national climate policy is a critical catalyst for long-term carbon performance improvements, there is limited research on how MNEs’ carbon strategies react to climate policies. This chapter reviews the concepts, drivers, and strategies connected to carbon performance in the broader sustainability and management literature to clarify potential complementarities to international business (IB). The authors then highlight how MNEs will face increasing institutional complexity along two dimensions: (1) the structural diversity of institutional environments and (2) institutional dynamism, primarily reflected by public policy. The proposed conceptual framework maps these two dimensions to national and subnational levels, and the authors present two data sources that allow the quantitative analysis of country differences in the diversity and dynamism of national climate policy. The authors conclude that there are ample opportunities for IB researchers to explore MNEs’ strategic reactions to climate policy and to inform policymakers about the consequences of national climate policy in the global economy.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how, in a context of economic, political, social and environmental transitions, SMart, a cultural and artistic social enterprise (CASE), has developed a relevant cooperative model to contribute to mitigate the structural labour precariousness of artists and creators.

The research design includes a mixed-method approach that combines qualitative and quantitative methodologies with emphasis on the former. Namely, the organisation is SMartbe and its replication across nine European countries was studied as a revelatory case study. Five main types of techniques were deployed in the course of this research, including desk review, direct (participant) observation, interviews, focus group and questionnaire (Likert-scale survey).

CASEs constitute a specific institutional arrangement that offers innovative labour arrangements for cultural workers and artists to fight against precariousness. Social enterprises are embedded in the social and solidarity economy and stand at the crossroads of markets, civil society and the public, which places them in a critical position: depending on the logic, actors and contexts at play, social enterprises can ensure to varying degrees the general interest through their social mission, their sustainability via the real participation of all their stakeholders and the carrying out of economic activities that are fully consistent with their mission.

It is within this type of sustainability and participation that transformative social innovation can emerge within CASEs. Their potential to contribute to transformative social innovation is based on its four objectives: cultural (to imagine human, participative and sustainable alternatives); social (to achieve a social –including the environment – mission and join the ecosocial transition); participatory (empowering and impacting the public sphere); and economic (being financially sustainable and fair).