Search results

In this chapter, I develop a theoretical framework to address the financial–social performance debate in strategy research, drawing on literatures on institutional logics and organizational forms.

I test the theoretical framework using an exploratory empirical approach based on ideal types with global microfinance data. A joint consideration of financial and social performances of microfinance organizations (MFOs) helps classify them into four ideal types – self-sustainable, mission-drifting, failing, and subsidized. I examine how an MFO’s organizational form and the configurations of institutional logics of the nation within which it is embedded jointly explain which ideal type the MFO falls into.

Based on a study of 1455 MFOs in 98 countries between 1995 and 2007, I show that the interactions between national institutional logics and organizational forms add significant predicting power in estimating MFOs’ ideal types. Explaining the intricate relationships between the financial and social performance of MFOs thus requires a simultaneous consideration of both the configuration of national logics and organizational forms.

The theoretical framework introduced in this chapter builds on recent developments in the institutional logics perspective and research on organizational forms, extending our understanding of the financial–social performance relationship among organizations. It also advances the social entrepreneurship literature by focusing our attention on various institutions at both national and organizational levels that may facilitate or inhibit social venture efficacy.

We witness rising tensions between online gig-economy platforms, incumbent firms, regulators, and labor unions. In this chapter, we use the framework of institutional logics as an analytical lens and scheme to understand the fundamental institutional challenges prompted by the advent of the online gig economy. We view gig-economy platforms as corporations that organize and self-regulate markets. In doing so, they span two parallel markets: the market for platforms competing to provide intermediation services and the market for the self-employed competing on platforms to provide peer-to-peer services. Self-regulation by platforms also weakens the traditional roles of the state. While the corporation and market logics empower the platform, they weaken self-employed suppliers as platforms’ design constrain suppliers to grow into a full-fledged business by limiting their entrepreneurial freedom. At the same time, current labor law generally does not classify suppliers as employees of the platform company, which limits the possibility to unionize. The current resolutions to this institutional misalignment are sought in “band aid solutions” at the level of sectors. Instead, as we argue, macro-institutional reform may be needed to re-institutionalize gig work into established institutional logics.

Over the last decades, the social sciences have become increasingly concerned with the role of the state and the politics of institutional restructuring. Within mainstream political science this has led to the development of a “state-centered” research program that emphasizes the autonomy of institutions. Marxist theory, however, has continued to adhere to a “society-centered” perspective, seeking to combine an ability to account for institutional change with the analysis of more structural social and economic forces. After some introductory comments that frame the problematic within which the paper is situated (Section 1), I discuss in Section 2 three of the most important recent Marxist attempts to construe the relation between socio-economic imperatives and political institutions. My argument is that Marxists’ attempts to relativize the autonomy of state institutions are too often still based on the postulation of an unexplained structural moment. This leaves them vulnerable to institutionalist claims concerning the autonomous nature of institutions. Section 3 proposes a different way of thinking the role of institutions in capitalist society. This approach breaks with a causalist, structuralist mode of explanation and relies on a more hermeneutic understanding of the role of institutions. I will shift the problematic to the relation between institutions and agency, arguing for a more pragmatist understanding of the role of institutions and an agency-based understanding of the formation of socio-economic imperatives. Section 4 concludes with some thoughts on the prospects held out, as well as the challenges faced, by the approach proposed in this paper.

Social enterprise organizations (SEOs) arise from entrepreneurial activities with the aim to achieve social goals. SEOs have been identified as alternative and/or complementary to the actions of governments and international organizations to address poverty and poverty-related social needs. Using a number of illustrative cases, we explore how variation of local institutional mechanisms shapes the local “face of poverty” in different communities and how this relates to variations in the emergence and strategic orientations of SEOs. We develop a model of the productive opportunity space for SEOs as a basis and an inspiration for further scholarly inquiry.

It is now commonplace to depict the contemporary world as one of rapid, increasing, and frequently cataclysmic change. Such forces as disappearing colonialism, revolution in communications and technology, international technical assistance, and spreading ideology cancel out centuries of relative stability, replacing it with conditions of economic upheaval, social disorientation, and political instability. While the so-called developed nations prepare to harness at least a portion of space, most of the rest of the world –spurred along by the West and by the revolution of rising expectations – struggles to cross the threshold of social and economic modernity.

In this chapter the restructuration of the Finnish welfare state is examined in the context of rural Finland and especially within the framework of the structural change in agriculture. After briefly outlining the context of globalizing food markets and the Common Agricultural Policy for the condition of Finnish farmers, the chapter focuses on the economic impacts of the ongoing structural transformation on ex-farmers' position in society and the cultural and political aspects of this transformation. After this, the transitions in the overall position of the farmers will be connected with the current restructuring of the Nordic welfare state in Finland. The conclusion highlights the most critical features in the structural change of the welfare state regime as they are recognized against this background. A special concern of this chapter is how the remodelling of the welfare state treats the principle of universalism, which is justly regarded as the focal characteristic of the Nordic welfare states. The changing position of farmers has been selected as a point of departure for two reasons: agriculture is still the most important rural livelihood in Finland and, consequently, transitions in agriculture have a strong impact on rural areas.

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.

This chapter sheds light on how the internationalization of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) is jointly influenced by the ownership involvement of the state and other relational investors and by the home country’s institutional setting. It integrates international business literature and insights from the theory of corporate governance into a varieties of capitalism framework. Taking a configurational perspective, the interdependencies that link the SOE internationalization to the joint effects of particular combinations of actors and institutions are analyzed. As a result, it is argued that only a few home country–SOE governance configurations favor the expansion of SOEs abroad: (i) a configuration in which the state is a dominant owner capable of aligning the interests of any other private shareholder and the government is embedded in a proactive institutional context, so as to effectively orchestrate the internationalization process, (ii) a configuration in which, assuming the home country institutions markedly deficient in supporting interventions, relational co-owners are involved in SOE ownership and governance and have commitment, influential power, and competencies to equip the company with an effective strategy and competitive advantages to be exploited abroad. In all other configurations, the international performance of SOEs is worse, being undermined by institutional contexts that favor an inward-looking approach of the state and government, and/or by principal–principal agency problems.

The core goal of the “micro-foundational” agenda appears to be less an institutionalism founded in the micro, or reduced to the micro, and more some form of integrative institutionalism: that is, an institutionalism that does justice to the perpetual, co-constitutive interplay of local activities (the micro) and trans-local patterns (the macro). In this chapter, thus, the authors argue for a conscious, explicit embrace of integrative institutionalism; and of the broader agenda that this terminology opens up. Based on this overdue rewording the authors highlight additional problems and possibilities – providing a constructive reformulation and elaboration of the “micro-foundational” agenda as it currently stands.

This chapter examines the institutional configuration of internal CSR in MNCs operating in Canada and Brazil, as well as headquarters-subsidiary relations within the institutional settings of their home and host countries.

The institutional logics perspective is used as it provides a systematic approach to understanding the institutional orders at play in the development of soft policies.

Whereas the institutional framework of the host country is a key factor in the regulatory and distributive spheres, the spheres of discretionary spending and soft policies are largely influenced and shaped by the MNCs through self-regulation, and may also be guided by intergovernmental institutions and NGOs.

The empirical data is limited to two case studies. It seeks to understand the multiple facets of CSR reality and produce contextual insights. Generalizations might fit better with other context communities – research subjects and the researchers who investigate them, beyond the mining industry – in a non-positivist, non-probabilistic sense, than with other context settings within the same industry.

The chapter concludes that institutional discourses and practices around internal CSR seek to strengthen a firm’s legitimacy. CSR does not necessarily increase the MNC’s performance when viewed in a market logic, but its operational viability can align with the corporation’s global strategy and identity. It also highlights resistance resulting from professional and community institutional logics.

This chapter contributes to the literature on internal CSR and is original in including an MNC from the South with subsidiaries in the North.