Search results

This chapter examines the transition in the US banking industry from a community to a national logic, developing a general model to explain how and when shifts in institutional logics occur. Based on qualitative historical evidence and discrete-time event history analysis predicting the introduction of legislation favoring the national logic, this chapter proposes that dramatic exogenous events such as the Great Depression or more gradual processes such as modernization favored the industry's transition to the national logic, but that such exogenous events had a greater influence in areas where strategic actors could capitalize on them. The qualitative evidence presented here suggests that struggles involving organizational identity and “legitimacy politics” played an important role in the shift in logics. Our theorizing focuses on how, when the environment changes in an incremental fashion, actors are primed with new possibilities, which may shift their collective identities, but when environmental changes are discontinuous, they provide actors strategic opportunities to alter the balance of logics in the environment.

Platform, open/user innovation, and ecosystem strategies embrace and enable interactions with external entities. Firms pursuing these approaches conduct business and interact with environments differently than those pursuing traditional closed strategies. This chapter considers these strategies together highlighting similarities and differences between platform, open/user innovation, and ecosystem strategies. We focus on managerial and organizational challenges for organizations pursuing these strategies and identify four institutional logic shifts associated with these strategic transitions: (1) increasing external focus, (2) moving to greater openness, (3) focusing on enabling interactions, and (4) adopting interaction-centric metrics. As mature incumbent organizations adopt these strategies, there may be tensions and multiple conflicting institutional logics. Additionally, we consider four strategic leadership topics and how they relate to platform, open/user innovation, and ecosystem strategies: (1) executive orientation and experience, (2) top management teams, (3) board-management relations, and (4) executive compensation. We discuss theoretical implications, and consider future directions and research opportunities.

The major purpose of this paper is to answer the overarching questions of how multinational corporations (MNCs) address the multiple institutional logics of accountability and pressures of the field in which they operate and how the dominant logic changes and shifts in response to such pressures pre- and post-disaster situation.

In-depth interpretive textual analyses of multiple longitudinal data sets are conducted to study the case of the Fundão dam disaster. The data sources include historical documents, academic articles and public institutional press releases from 2000 to 2016, covering the environment leading to the case study incident and its aftermath.

The findings reveal how MNCs' plurality of and, at times, conflicting institutional logics shape the organizational behaviors, actions and nonactions of actors pre-, peri- and post-disaster. More specifically, the predominance bureaucracy embedded in the state-corporatist logic of the host country before a disaster allows the strategic subunit of an MNC to continue operating while causing various forms of environmental damage until a globally visible disaster triggers a reversal in the dominant logic toward the embrace of wider, global, emergent social and environmental accountability.

This paper contributes to discussions regarding the need to explore in depth of how MNCs respond to multiple institutional pressures in practice. This study extends the literature concerning disaster accountability, state-corporatism and logic-shifting by exploring how MNCs respond to the plurality of institutional logics and pressures over time and showing how, in some cases, logics not only reinforce but also contrast with each other and how a globally exposed disaster may trigger a shift in the dominant logic governing MNCs' responses.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate how the changing of institutional logics in an established field shapes the developmental networks of high‐achievers.

This research combines time series analysis of more than 80 years of historical data (1922‐2004) with qualitative analysis of induction speeches of 99 hall of fame players from the same period.

Findings indicate that a change in field logics from a more staid “insular” logic to a market or more business‐oriented logic coincided with changes in key players' developmental networks. In particular, the key players' self‐identified developmental relationships become both more numerous and more diverse in nature. Results of the time series analysis connect the shift in logic with the late 1950s which was an important time in Major League Baseball's history. It was during this period that, for the first time, each team had at least one African American player on their roster and each team had an average of at least one full‐time scout based in a country outside the USA – both indicators of MLB's increasingly global search for talent.

The study focuses on extraordinary career performers (versus all performers) in an all‐male professional sport where the nature of the sport and the number of organizations remains relatively stable over time.

These findings show how changes to industry level logics can affect individual level changes in mentoring and developmental networks. In particular, they demonstrate how organizations can create and remove potential developer roles as their respective logics change from era to era.

This is the first known study to explore the effect of macro level changes on mentoring and developmental networks at the individual level.

Drawing from the institutional logics and organizational disaster literature, this paper aims to illustrate that the replacement of logics can be problematic in a high-risk industry such as coal mining by adding an institutional perspective to the understanding of disasters.

This paper investigated the field of coal mining in Turkey historically from archival data resources. A comprehensive, qualitative inquiry of a single-case study was then conducted.

The findings suggest that a shift from social welfare logic to business logic in the coal-mining industry can lead to coal-mining disasters, resulting from changing practices through an increase in the number of private enterprises through royalty contracts, the use of an increased labor force instead of mechanical methods and systems and the maximization of profit by underestimating the effects of taking almost no occupational safety measures.

The connection between institutional logics and organizational disasters could lead institutional actors to question their understanding of institutional logics.

This paper provides original research evidence for the relationship between industrial disasters and institutional logics.

Drawing upon prior work in cognition, organizational learning, strategy, and organization theory, a multi-level, longitudinal account of change in core competence is presented. The central concern addressed is how knowledge passes from “individual” to “organizational,” and how insight present in one part of the organization comes into broader currency. Data from a mature industry firm form the foundation for a depiction of change as a cognitive process involving multiple individuals, groups, and levels within the organization. Speculative propositions and a process model are presented.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the multi-level mechanisms of institutional formation and change and, in particular, how this occurs through the interplay of multi-level mechanisms? This is answered with a processual analysis of the International Paralympic Committee which is the international governing body of sports for people with an impairment.

This study uses a case-study approach based upon archival records, collected in relevant national and international sport organizations. More than 2,700 pages of archives were gathered, some of them being accessible to researchers for the first time. Embargo was also successfully lifted on recent and sensitive documents.

This study highlights multi-level mechanisms involved in institutional change processes triggered by a shifting institutional logic at the organizational field level. This paper also shows how field logic shifted at the moment of alignment between the societal, field and organizational levels. Moreover, it underlines how societal discourses influenced processes of institutional change by shaping the range of organizational actions available at the organizational and field levels.

This paper proposes a rare account of institutional change processes in which interplay between the societal, field, and organizational levels is analyzed. Furthermore, this paper provides a longitudinal investigation of an under-researched empirical setting, the Paralympic movement. Finally, this study integrates insights from the disability studies’ research field, which significantly deepens this analysis.

This study gives insights into how marginalized logics evolve after having been replaced by a new dominant logic. In light of the case of UK trade book publishing where an editorial logic persisted and morphed after the increasing commercialization of the field – epitomized by the proliferation of so-called “factory fiction” – the authors identify three generative paths of marginalized logic evolution: preservation, purification and radicalization. The authors show how these paths hinge on the activities of three groups of actors who resist conforming to a dominant logic. The findings of this study advance scholars’ understanding of the historical evolution of institutional logics, but also remind them that the acts of resistance are typically embedded in macro-level dynamics related to broader institutional processes. In particular, this study sheds light on the different ways in which acts of resistance may be structured by actors’ experience of friction between competing institutional logics.

The paper introduces a multi-level model to reduce prejudice through supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) at the institutional, organizational, and individual levels. The purpose of the model is to provide theoretically undergirded pathways to explain how societal events calling for systemic changes in DEI practices can engage and inculcate such systemic changes in organizations and institutions.

The model draws upon macro-level (i.e. institutional theory and institutional logics) theories from sociology and strategic management, meso-level theories from leadership and strategy, and micro-level organizational behavior and human resource management theories.

Resting on open systems theory (Katz and Kahn, 1966) as a backdrop, the authors address how institutional changes result in organizational level changes driving multi-level outcomes of increased DEI, reduced prejudice in work-related settings, and performance gains. The authors suggest the recursive nature of the model can trigger institutional level shifts in logics or result in isomorphic pressures that further change organizational fields and organizations.

The contribution rests in a multi-level examination to help understand how environmental pressures can motivate organizations to enact broader changes related to social justice, specifically increasing efforts in DEI inside the operational aspects of the organization. By enacting these changes, the authors suggest the resultant positive changes in organizations will enhance culture and performance, creating isomorphic pressure for industry wide changes that may begin to move the needle on addressing systemic problems that feed prejudicial behavior in the workplace.