Search results

This paper aims to propose a framework for understanding interpartner sensemaking in cross‐national strategic alliances, and to discuss how to manage the problems arising from the cultural differences and internal tensions that are inherent in such alliances.

The paper starts from the notion that interpartner sensemaking of the complexities of strategic alliances has important implications for the evolution of cross‐national alliances. The two fundamental interpretive frames that relate to sensemaking are described, that of sensemaking of chaos and that of sensemaking in chaos, and the paper examines how an appreciation of these interpretive frames enables one to better manage cultural differences and internal tensions that inevitably arise in cross‐national alliances.

The framework makes clear that the two types of interpartner sensemaking (“sensemaking of chaos” and “sensemaking in chaos”) need to be appreciated as interpretive frames that are present among the alliance managers to effectively interact and influence partner firms.

As interpartner sensemaking occurs at all stages of alliance evolution, future research may seek to assess the impact of conflicting interpretive schemes: in the stages of formation, operation, and outcome; concerning issues of appropriation and coordination; and in learning processes.

Briefly, the two types of interpartner sensemaking call for different strategies for managing alliances. Alliance partners embedded in different national cultures rely on interpretive schemes to make sense of the conflicts, contradictions, and internal tensions that emerge in strategic alliances.

The paper responds to the need of managers with alliance responsibilities for a framework to help identify and exploit the most effective ways of accounting for the role of interpartner sensemaking in alliances for productive interactions and performance.

This chapter explores archetypal change in the context of professional service firms. To understand recent and ongoing changes in professional service firms, we briefly show how the professional archetype has evolved since the 1960s. We then present four theoretical models to describe processes by which institutionalized archetypes can change, and possibly coexist in the same field. Three professional archetypes are described, each in the context of historical development and the change model described earlier. At the one extreme is the traditional professional partnership; at the other the larger, multidisciplinary, corporate, global professional network, or GPN; in between is the “Star” form – relatively specialized, flatter structure, resisting significant growth, with fixations on excellence, and being the leader in a professional niche.

The purpose of this study is to explore the use of shared services by end-users and why this may conflict with the use as intended by the shared service center (SSC) management.

By applying structuration theory, this empirical study draws on qualitative data obtained from semi-structured interviews with managers and end-users of an SSC. This SSC is part of a Dutch subsidiary of a multinational corporation that produces professional electronics for the defense and security market.

We find two main types of shared services usage by end-users which were not intended by the SSC management: avoidance and window-dressing. These forms of unintended usage were the result of contradictions in social structures related to the centralization and decentralization models as appropriated by end-users and management.

Our findings show that the benefits of shared services depends on how well contradictions in managers’ and end-users’ interpretive schemes, resources, and norms associated with centralization and decentralization models are resolved.

A popular argument in existing studies is that the benefit of shared services follows from the design of the SSC’s organizational structure. These studies overlook the fact that shared services are not always used as their designers intended and, therefore, that success depends on how the SSC’s organizational structure is appropriated by end-users. As such, the originality of this study is our focus on the way shared services are used by their end-users in order to explain why SSCs succeed or fail in reaping their promised benefits.

The purpose of this paper is to illustrate and analyse how the concept of timely accounting information can be understood as the interplay between material and social elements, to provide a basis for theorising timeliness in the context of managerial work.

Using an enactment perspective, this paper rests upon the assumption that timeliness is not a uniform information quality mainly dependent on the accounting artefact, but something that is also shaped in managerial action. The paper builds on a qualitative study of a construction firm.

Three types of enactments are illustrated: affordable-speed, right-time and instantly-actionable, showing how timeliness is not only determined by the accounting artefact but also by management style, organisational values and routines and managers’ previous experiences of technology. With regards to the artefact, the paper identifies a number of material aspects that contribute to timeliness, such as system interfaces and presentation of data. The enactment of timeliness is largely characterised by virtues of efficiency and control rather than by opportunity seeking.

The research design limits the generalisability. However, insights into the elements involved in managers’ understanding of timeliness provide a basis for further micro-level studies of timeliness.

With a multifaceted vocabulary of what timeliness means, organisations can more precisely define wherein a timeliness-related problem lies.

In comparison to previous studies, this paper provides a more contextual and nuanced understanding of timeliness.

Marion has just taken on the directorship of a joint university/public library. You, as her protégé, are interested in observing how she approaches the new venture. You are curious about what information she will gather, whose advice she will seek, how she will figure out the expectations others have of her and the library, how she will prioritize the many challenges before her, and how she will negotiate her leadership role with the staff. In other words, you want to study Marion's organizational sensemaking.

To explore how and why the social structures of strategic partnerships are shaped by actors and how these interrelate with a team's interpersonal relationships over time. Grasping the complexity of this interplay is essential if we want to comprehend what actually goes on in these partnerships and understand why actors often disengage from them.

In three cases, 14 in-depth interviews were held with knowledgeable actors about important events and activities that influenced the relationships between partners. Interview data were triangulated with journals kept by the lead author, who participated as an engaged scholar in the three cases. Because this study took an interdisciplinary approach, new insights could evolve from the multi-level analysis.

Trust has a moderating effect on the relation between open-book accounting and the degree of control a dominant party wants to exercise. When the level of control is raised, this can signal distrust to the other partners, which can harm the relationship. When partners feel more dependent on each other's capabilities to reach their long-term goals, the parties seem to be less likely to put the blame on one of the partners in the case of undesirable events.

Managers should be aware of their power position and acknowledge the effects of power on their relationships. If long-term and close collaboration does not emerge in their partnership, it may be due to how they use their power position.

Thanks to the interdisciplinary approach, this is the first study that shows the significance of trust and power in maintaining strategic partnerships in the construction industry, and how trust can affect the financial rules of actors.

This paper aims to examine, through a qualitative study, how auditor independence is socially constructed within the network of individuals involved in the realization of ISO 14001 audit engagements – ISO auditors, consultants, and managers of certified companies. The paper analysis focuses on the sense-making strategies used by actors within the network to develop and sustain trust (or doubt) in professional independence.

This study is predicated on a theoretical perspective centered on sense-making processes and the construction of inter-subjective meanings around claims to expertise. Interviews were conducted with 36 Canadian practitioners – including ISO auditors, managers of certification bodies, accreditation inspectors, consultants, and corporate environmental managers – to better understand how confidence into auditor independence is constituted in the flow of daily life within the small group of people involved in the surroundings of ISO 14001 audit engagements.

Practitioners use a range of sense-making strategies to construct and maintain the belief that IS0 14001 audits meet the professional requirements of auditor independence. As such, the constitution of confidence involves stereotyping, distancing, storytelling and procedural mechanisms that are collectively mobilized in the production of a culture of comfort surrounding the concept of auditor independence.

Through interviews with a range of actors involved in the achievement of ISO 14001 audits, the study provides insight into the production of meaning related to one of the chief claims surrounding auditing expertise, that of professional independence. This paper also points to a lack of self-criticism in the ISO auditing community since practitioners seem disinclined to adopt a reflective attitude of professional skepticism towards the claim of auditor independence.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a commentary on “Remaining consistent with method? An analysis of grounded theory research in accounting”, a paper by Gurd.

Like Gurd, the authors conducted a bibliographic study on prior pieces of research claiming the use of grounded theory.

The authors found a large diversity of ways of doing grounded theory. There are as many ways as articles. Consistent with the spirit of grounded theory, the field suggested the research questions, methods and verifiability criteria. From the same sample as Gurd, the authors arrived at different conclusions.

In our research, the authors did not verify the consistency of claims with grounded theory. The authors took for granted that the article authors had understood and made operational the suggestions of the founders of the method.

The four canons of grounded theory can be considered as reference marks rather than as the rules of the method. Accordingly, the researcher is free to develop his or her own techniques and procedures.

This paper stimulates debate on grounded theory‐based research. On the other hand, it conveys the richness and the variety of interpretive research. Two similar studies, using similar samples and methods, arrive at different (divergent) conclusions.

The purpose of this paper is to propose a framework for understanding how alliance partners interpret alliance functioning and how these interpretations shape their subsequent behaviors. Also, to discuss how interpretive schemes in cross‐national strategic alliances impact upon the management of the problems arising from the cultural conflicts and discrepancies inherent in such alliances.

Proceeding from the notion that interpretive schemes have important implications for the evolution of cross‐national alliances, the paper describes the two fundamental interpretive schemes that relate to sensemaking – that of sensemaking of and in chaos, and examines how an appreciation of these interpretive schemes enable us to better manage cultural conflicts and discrepancies that inevitably arise in cross‐national alliances.

The framework makes clear that the two types of interpretive schemes − “sensemaking of chaos” and “sensemaking in chaos” − need to be appreciated as interpretive frames that are present among the alliance managers to effectively interact and influence partner firms.

Briefly, the two types of the interpretive schemes call for different strategies for developing them. Alliance partners embedded in different national cultures rely on interpretive schemes to make sense of the conflicts and discrepancies that emerge in cross‐national alliances.

The paper responds to the need of managers with alliance responsibilities for a framework to help develop the most effective ways of managing interpretive schemes in alliances for productive interactions and performance.

Examines the process of change in hospitals that has emerged following the introduction of the health quasi‐market in 1991. Blends empirical evidence with Greenwood and Hinings’ archetype and tracks of change concepts to analyse the process which is labelled quasi‐market transformation (QMT). Argues that, before 1991, hospitals tended to operate within structures and systems underpinned by an interpretive scheme. Represents these similarities of configuration as the directly‐managed (DM) hospital archetype. When change initiatives challenged this configuration, the outcomes were negotiated and resulted in “adjustmental” change. In contrast, shows the introduction of the quasi‐market to have involved the first transformation of the DM archetype’s interpretive scheme, systems and structures. Analyses four years of transition to reveal that QMT has been interpreted differently within hospitals. However, presents data to suggest that many hospitals now display significant similarities in terms of configuration. Represents these similarities within the emerging Trust hospital archetype.