Search results

Purpose – This chapter examines the international Clubhouse movement, which features a unique “partnership model” that enables individuals who have serious and persistent mental illness to take an active role in their recovery. Consumer–provider and consumer–consumer supportive relationships are deepened through engagement in a range of cooperative activities both in the Clubhouse and in the local community.

Methodology – Data for this study have been gathered via case materials, semi-structured interviews, review of official publications, direct experience, participant observation, primary and secondary sources.

Findings – This study is consistent with other research demonstrating the efficacy of the Clubhouse model in providing mental health consumer assistance and support to gain paid employment, an education, and adequate housing.

Research limitations – While data have been gathered from a variety of sources encompassing a large number of Clubhouses, this is a single case study that includes limited comparative analysis with other modalities.

Practical implications – The Clubhouse model is an option that shows great promise for assisting mental health consumers to obtain employment, education, housing, and supportive relationships including peer support. It also promotes leadership development and participation in collective action for policy reform.

Originality/value – The Clubhouse approach is grounded in an empowerment paradigm of helping that emphasizes a strengths-based perspective, resiliency, activated consumers, collaborative partnerships with professionals, high expectations, self-help, mutual assistance, self-advocacy, and collective action for social change.

The chapter contributes to the theoretical understanding of how corporate governance affects organizational processes and outcomes in not-for-profit organizations. The contribution claims that cooperation is not only a good proposition held by the variety of actors relevant to corporate governance of non-for-profit organizations, but it also determines the wealth maximization of organization's stakeholders. Theoretical results, according to the common agency framework, are driven by the case study of the largest humanitarian organization’ corporate governance: the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC).

Current trends such as a steadfast movement toward globalization, increased connectivity and use of networks in business relationships, rapidly changing technology, increased pressure for economic profitability, and economic concern create an environment where a focus on global team effectiveness is imperative. This study provides greater clarity on the workings of global hybrid team effectiveness including an examination of accelerators and decelerators. It also proposes a new model of Global Working behaviors to be applied systematically to all McKinsey 7-S areas – Strategy, Structure, Systems, Shared Values, Style, Skills, and Staff – in order to accelerate global hybrid team effectiveness.

We explore a case example of hybridity between a large worker-owned cooperative and a union through three lenses: organizational forms, multiple institutional logics, and organizational identity. We delineate three types of organizational hybridity: (1) stretching an existing organizational form; (2) creating a new organizational form; and (3) and retaining multiple discrete organizational forms in a common venture. The cooperative–union hybrid shares members from the two contributing organizations, and so can be classified as a matrix sub-form of multi-organizational hybridity. This study describes how the coop-union hybrid manages the multiple logics and identities retained from both contributing organizations. It considers the hazards of combining these logics and identities, and offers some suggestions on how to avoid potential difficulties. Finally, given the complexity and inefficiencies of the matrix form, we explore whether matrix hybridity is a transitional or permanent form in this particular instance of a cooperative–union venture.

A key challenge for hybrid organizations is managing to recombine the different institutional logics they incorporate while navigating complex, fast-changing environments. To examine how hybrids address this issue, the authors analyze the evolution of the Italian fiscal police – the Guardia di Finanza – from its foundation in 1862. Building on this unique case of a fiscal law enforcement agency that incorporates public fiscal and military logics, the authors propose that hybrid organizations can integrate the different logics they incorporate on the basis of four mechanisms. The mechanisms of upward and downward vertical integration trigger the integration of different logics throughout the entire organization. Integrated horizontal task extension and integrated horizontal competency extension enable an organization to manage a broader range of tasks while it develops the competencies that environmental complexity demands. These four mechanisms interact and, when properly managed, reinforce each other. With this chapter, the authors contribute to research on the processual nature of organizational hybridity and to broader research on the role of structures and competencies in dealing with environmental complexity.

Our editorial argues that categories theory can be advanced by embracing heuristics research, and the insight that audiences often evaluate items based on multiple valued criteria. Thus, rather than building on extant theory – which suggests that categories embody specific evaluative criteria, or that audiences operate according to a set “theory of value” – the authors argue that hybrids research would benefit from attending to the underlying processes that actors use to weigh and balance the diverse considerations that guide their decisions. The authors define and discuss three commonly used heuristics (satisficing, lexicographic preferences, and elimination by aspects), and show how these might lead audiences to support different types of hybrid entities.

As complex, intractable social problems continue to intensify, organizations increasingly respond with novel approaches that bridge multiple institutional spheres and combine forms, identities, and logics that would conventionally not go together, creating hybridity. Scholarly research on this phenomenon has expanded in tandem, raising questions about how the concept of organizational hybridity can maintain analytical clarity while accommodating a diverse range of empirical manifestations. Reviewing and integrating extant literature, the authors argue that to achieve both analytical rigor and real-world relevance, research must account for variation in how hybridity is organizationally configured, temporally situated, and institutionally embedded. The authors develop a framework that captures this heterogeneity and discuss three key implications for hybridity research: drawing on multiple theoretical lenses, examining varied empirical contexts, and adopting multi-level and dynamic perspectives.

Global virtual teams (GVTs), also known as transnational or distributed teams, are increasingly common as organizations strive to maintain a global presence, find top and diverse talent, and cope with economic constraints. Despite increasing adoption of GVTs, there is a dearth of research addressing whether GVTs are an effective coping strategy for dealing with the world economic crisis and if there are unintended negative consequences on employee well-being as a result of their use. Thus, a focal question guiding the development of this chapter is whether or not GVTs are a sustainable solution for organizations? In this chapter we present a generic framework depicting the cycle by which macroeconomic demands impose changes on organization's structures, which trickle down to the level of the individual who has to cope with the demands the new structure has imposed. We discuss GVTs as an intervention (or cure) for organizations’ dealing with the current world economic crisis and how this organizational intervention inevitably becomes the context (or cause) for the kinds of stressors or demands employees face.

Social enterprises are increasingly recognized as a new form of organization (combining social and business goals) providing innovative and scalable solutions to widespread and complex socioenvironmental problems. Yet, they often struggle to keep themselves afloat due to the difficulty in accessing required resources. Networking approaches provide social enterprises with cost-effective ways to fulfill these resource requirements. Such approaches, although useful, give rise to dilemmas while building ties with both financial and non-financial actors. Although much research has been conducted on social enterprise networking or partnerships, little is known about how social enterprises address such dilemmas. This chapter explores how do social entrepreneurs address moral dilemmas while networking with key stakeholders? To answer this question, we analyze the existing literature to understand the networking strategies adopted and the moral dilemmas experienced by the social entrepreneurs. Based on our review of literature, we present four kinds of social enterprises in terms of their networking situations and choices: (1) secluded saints (less known and less connected; high on moral values); (2) secluded devils (less known and less connected; low on moral values); (3) saints waving at the devils (well known and well connected; low on moral values); (4) saints in the pack of devils (well known and well connected; high on moral values). These categories are used to explain how social enterprises with different values, interact with and use their networks for different purposes. We discuss the possible consequences of each strategy and keep the question, how to reach the state of “successful saints,” open for future research. By presenting these different networking situations, our matrix sheds new lights on different social entrepreneurial networking options and their possible outcomes. This can act as a guide and a cautionary note, not only for the social enterprises but also for any hybrid organizations dealing with conflicting networking choices.