Search results

1 – 3 of 3
Open Access
Article
Publication date: 19 March 2024

Katja Rinne-Koski and Merja Lähdesmäki

Municipalities seek new opportunities for co-producing services in rural areas. One potential partner is community-based social enterprises (CBSEs). However, whilst service…

Abstract

Purpose

Municipalities seek new opportunities for co-producing services in rural areas. One potential partner is community-based social enterprises (CBSEs). However, whilst service co-production through CBSEs obscures the traditional roles of actors, it may lead to a legitimation crisis in local service provision. In this paper, the ways CBSEs are legitimised as service providers in rural areas are addressed from the CBSE and municipality perspectives.

Design/methodology/approach

Empirical data combine interviews with CBSE representatives and open-ended national survey responses from municipality decision-makers. The data analysis is based on a qualitative content analysis to examine legitimation arguments.

Findings

Results show that unestablished legitimacy and un-institutionalised support structures for co-production models build mistrust between CBSEs and municipalities, which prevents the parties from seeing the benefits of cooperation in service production.

Research limitations/implications

The research focusses on the legitimation of CBSEs in service co-production in rural areas. As legitimation seems to be a context-specific process, future research is needed regarding other contexts.

Practical implications

Municipalities interested in the co-production of services might benefit from establishing a collaborative and responsive (rural) service policy forum that would institutionalise new models of co-production and enable better design and governance of service provision.

Originality/value

Results will give new theoretical and practical insights into the importance of legitimacy in the development of service co-production relationships.

Details

International Journal of Public Sector Management, vol. ahead-of-print no. ahead-of-print
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0951-3558

Keywords

Open Access
Article
Publication date: 5 February 2024

Vladislav Valentinov and Constantine Iliopoulos

Transaction cost economics sees a broad spectrum of governance structures spanned by two types of economic adaptation: autonomous and cooperative. Stakeholder theorists have drawn…

Abstract

Purpose

Transaction cost economics sees a broad spectrum of governance structures spanned by two types of economic adaptation: autonomous and cooperative. Stakeholder theorists have drawn much inspiration from transaction cost economics but have not paid explicit attention to the centrality of the idea of adaptation in this literature. This study aims to address this gap.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors develop a novel conceptual framework applying the distinction between the two types of economic adaptation to stakeholder theory.

Findings

The authors argue that the idea of cooperative adaptation is particularly useful for describing the firm’s collaboration with primary stakeholders in the joint value creation process. In contrast, autonomous adaptation is more relevant for firms interacting with secondary stakeholders who are not directly engaged in joint value creation and may not have formal contractual relationships with the firm. Accordingly, cooperative adaptation can be seen as vital for resolving team production problems affecting joint value creation, whereas autonomous adaptation addresses how the firm maintains legitimacy within the larger stakeholder environment.

Originality/value

Similar to its significance for transaction cost economics, the distinction between the two types of adaptation equips stakeholder theory with a new systematic understanding of a potentially broad spectrum of firm–stakeholder collaboration forms.

Details

Society and Business Review, vol. ahead-of-print no. ahead-of-print
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1746-5680

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 9 August 2022

Chee Wei Cheah and Kian Yeik Koay

Underpinned by the legitimacy perspective, this study explores how ride-hailing services are legitimized through resource exchange among the industry players. The authors explore…

Abstract

Purpose

Underpinned by the legitimacy perspective, this study explores how ride-hailing services are legitimized through resource exchange among the industry players. The authors explore the types of legitimacy involved in the legitimation process. The authors also examine the political games being played by the actors to attain legitimacy.

Design/methodology/approach

This qualitative study involves thirty-one stakeholders/interviewees from emerging Asia. The interview data are supported by online documents and observations.

Findings

Thematic analysis shows that the industry players collaborate to achieve political, market, alliance, social, and investment legitimacy. The collaborations also legitimize industry players' existence through an eclectic mix of the numerous stakeholders' actions. This study shows how Dacin's proposed four types of legitimacy are coexisting and interconnected. It also highlights the neglected political legitimacy.

Originality/value

The findings guide the policymakers and ride-hailing operators experiencing competing requests to legitimize sustainable ride-hailing service development in urban cities.

Details

European Journal of Innovation Management, vol. 27 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1460-1060

Keywords

1 – 3 of 3