Search results

This volume explores an expansive array of organizational imaginaries, or understandings of organizational possibilities, with a focus on how collectivist-democratic organizations offer alternatives to conventional for-profit managerial enterprises. These include worker and consumer cooperatives and other enterprises that, to varying degrees, (1) emphasize social values over profit; (2) are owned not by shareholders but by workers, consumers, or other stakeholders; (3) employ democratic forms of managing their operations; and (4) have social ties to the organization based on moral and emotional commitments. The contributors to this volume examine how these enterprises generate solidarity among members, network with other organizations and communities, contend with market pressures, and enhance their larger organizational ecosystems. In this introductory paper, the authors put forward an inclusive organizational typology whose continuums account for four key sources of variation – values, ownership, management, and social relations – and argue that enterprises fall between these two poles of the collectivist-democratic organization and the for-profit managerial enterprise. Drawing from this volume’s empirical studies, the authors situate these market actors within fields of competition and contestation shaped not just by state action and legal frameworks, but also by the presence or absence of social movements, labor unions, and meta-organizations. This typology challenges conventional conceptualizations of for-profit managerial enterprises as ideals or norms, reconnects past models of organizing among marginalized communities with contemporary and future possibilities, and offers activists and entrepreneurs a sense of the wide range of possibilities for building enterprises that differ from dominant models.

How do radical technological fields become naturalized and taken for granted? This is a fundamental question given both the positive and negative hype surrounding the emergence of many new technologies. In this chapter, we study the emergence of the US nanotechnology field, focusing on uncovering the mechanisms by which leaders of the National Nanotechnology Initiative managed hype and its concomitant legitimacy challenges which threatened the commercial viability of nanotechnology. Drawing on the cultural entrepreneurship literature at the interface of strategy and organization theory, we argue that the construction of a naturalizing frame – a frame that focuses attention and practice on mundane, “rationalized” activity – is key to legitimating a novel and uncertain technological field. Leveraging the insights from our case study, we further develop a staged process model of how a naturalizing frame may be constructed, thereby paving the way for a decrease in hype and the institutionalization of new technologies.

Prior research has documented the importance of the state and social movements for the emergence and proliferation of alternative organizational forms. Yet, we lack a comprehensive and interactive understanding of the larger environment that sustains cooperatives and other collectivist-democratic organizations. Using the example of Brazil’s Solidarity Economy Movement, a longstanding social movement to address poverty and inequality, we describe how a multilevel ecosystem of organizations and institutions creates conditions favorable for the growth of alternative organizational forms – in this context, democratic cooperatives that the Movement calls solidarity economy enterprises (SEEs). Drawing from archival data, interviews, and a government survey of over 19,000 SEEs between 2005 and 2012, we map out the key actors at each level of the ecosystem, identifying three primary mechanisms by which these actors collectively enabled the creation and development of SEEs: (1) providing glue for action; (2) organizing for action; and (3) engaging in action. These mechanisms, in turn, allowed for greater communication and cohesion and the exchange of information and experiences among the Movement’s participants, thereby enhancing their interconnectedness and the institutionalization of their practices.

The closing plenary of the 2015 Alberta Institutions Conference offered an opportunity to reflect on the current status of the institutional perspective and the direction it may take in the future. Our four panelists, Mary Ann Glynn, Tom Lawrence, Renate Meyer, and William Ocasio, reflected on how institutionalists can matter. In a first conversation, Renate and William discussed how institutionalists can matter to different audiences, and whether or not the desire to matter should drive research. In a second conversation, Tom proposed problem-driven research as a means of developing relevant theoretical insights. In a third and final conversation, Mary Ann encouraged us to reconsider the role of institutions and culture in shaping the collective rationality of actors and to reveal what matters in everyday occurrences.

This research aims to describe sustainability practices adopted by companies and the influence they have with the involvement of stakeholders.

Qualitative investigation, using case study methodology, was undertaken in 17 companies that use strategic sustainability practices in some way. The companies were observed under the theoretical perspective of social responsibility and sustainability, and with the approach of strategic practices.

Interpreting the data produces an alternative framework of analysis for strategic organizational activities oriented toward the understanding of practices of sustainability, especially in processes aimed at catering to and/or involving stakeholders. The research further supports the idea that sustainability practices, regardless of their level of implementation, have a strong relationship, in these companies, with stakeholder interests.

The intent is that the proposed analytical framework will allow further debate toward better understanding of actions focused on environmental determinism and internal company conditions.

Global value chains (GVCs) have been challenged by several emerging macro-trends during the last years. Among them, sustainability of production and consumption patterns is becoming a central theme given the necessity to mitigate the degradation of the environment and the over-exploitation of scarce natural resources. In this respect, scholars and practitioners increasingly propose the circular economy (CE) approach as a systemic solution to overcome the conventional linear “take–make–use–dispose” model underlying the structure of contemporary global economy. However, the international business (IB) community has introduced the topic of CE only marginally in its debate. The aim of the present study is to fill this research gap identifying the opportunities for integrating IB and CE principles. Thus, the main objective is to investigate whether and how the adoption of the CE paradigm by multinational enterprises (MNEs) may affect activities, geographical configuration, and governance of their relevant GVCs.

The authors address the issue from a conceptual point of view, identifying direct and indirect impacts of CE adoption on GVC, relative enablers, and possible broader implications. Lastly, the authors propose some reflections for future investigations.