Search results

The paper aims to investigate the prevailing institutional logics that underpin the organisational behaviours of Chinese contractors and the institutional complexity they face across several strategic areas when they undertake projects abroad.

The paper draws mainly on industry literature, reports and government websites to develop a typology of two ideal types of institutional logics that prevail among Chinese international contractors. The configurations of institutional complexity in different strategic areas are analysed through pattern-matching.

Two main logics are identified, namely, construction and investment logics. These logics in turn lead to patterns of volatile complexity in the strategic areas of business, technology, human resources and marketing; patterns of aligned complexity in operational and information technology strategic areas; and patterns of segregated complexity in financial strategic area.

The paper presents an ongoing doctoral research. It provides a preliminary understanding of the institutional logics affecting Chinese international contractors and sets out the first step to understand the relationship between complex institutional environments and organisational responses.

Chinese international contractors commonly face resistance, and at times resentment, from the local industries in the countries they operate. The findings of this paper are a first step towards a better understanding of why this is the case and what can be done to rectify the situation and improve long and short-term project performance.

This paper provides practical implications for Chinese contractors to understand their internal context of institutional complexity and provides the basis for further understanding of Chinese contractors’ strategic responses.

In this study, we develop further understanding of how institutional change is created within a mature and local industry. In this pursuit, we examine how a collaborative large project governance model was institutionalized at an industrial sector-level through both industry-level activities and “institutional projects”.

This study builds on the foundations of institutional fields and institutional change, suggesting that projects are not only shaped by their contexts but also produce institutional change themselves. We conducted extensive fieldwork on the institutionalization of a collaborative project governance model in Finland.

The findings illustrate how institutional change in governance of large and complex inter-organizational projects is created at the institutional field level. The institutionalized collaborative project governance model includes aspects of both relational and contractual governance. The change was facilitated by temporal links between the institutional projects as well as vertical links between the institutional projects and the field-level development programs.

This is one of the first studies to address how a collaborative large project governance model becomes the norm at the institutional field level beyond the boundaries of an individual project or organization.

Increasing amount of empirical research in operations and supply chain management is using institutional theory as its theoretical lens. Yet, a common scale to measure the three institutional pressures – coercive, mimetic and normative – is lacking. Many studies use proxies or a single, grouped, construct of external pressures which present methodological challenges. This study aims to present the development of multi-item scales to measure institutional pressures (in a purchasing context).

First, items were generated based on the theoretical construct definitions. These items were then tested through academic sorting and an international survey. The first empirical testing failed to produce reliable and valid scales, and further refinement and analysis revealed that coercive pressure splits into two separate constructs. A second q-sorting was then conducted with purchasing practitioners, followed by another survey in Italy to verify the new measurement scale for four institutional pressures.

The multimethod and multistage measurement development reveals that empirically the three institutional pressures actually turn into four pressures. The theoretical construct of coercive pressure splits into two distinct constructs: coercive market pressure and coercive regulatory pressure.

The results of the paper, namely, the measurement scales, are an important theoretical and methodological contribution to future empirical research. They present a much-needed measurement for these theoretical constructs increasingly used in management research.

Public health strategies and activities are intrinsically complex. According to the literature, this “wickedness” depends on the different interests and expectations of the stakeholders and the community, the fragmented governance of the related services and the challenges in measuring and assessing public health outcomes. Existent performance measures and management systems for public health are not designed to cope with wickedness since they are mainly focused on inputs and outputs, neglecting broader outcomes because of their long-term impact and the poor accountability of results. This research aims to tackle this shortfall by adopting a dynamic performance management (DPM) approach.

This research explores the case of the vaccination campaign of a Regional Health System. Through the analysis of an illustrative case study, the research discusses both opportunities and limits of the proposed approach.

This research highlights that DPM supports performance management (PM) in wicked contexts, thanks to the adoption of a system-wide perspective and the possibility of using simulation to experiment with alternative strategies and benchmarking performance results with simulated trends.

This article tackles a gap related to the management of wicked problems both from a theory and a practical perspective. In particular, this research suggests the adoption of DPM as an approach that may support policymakers in tackling social pluralism, institutional complexity and scientific uncertainty all at once.

This paper aims to examine the multiplicity of corporate social responsibility (CSR) standards, explaining its nature, dynamics and implications for multinational enterprises (MNEs) and international business (IB), especially in the context of CSR and global value chain (GVC) governance.

This paper leverages insights from the literature in political science, policy, regulation, governance and IB; from the own earlier work; and from an inventory of CSR standards across a range of sectors and products.

This analysis’ more nuanced approach to CSR standard multiplicity helps distinguish the different categories of standards; uncovers the existence of different types of standard multiplicity; and highlights complex trends in their evolution over time, discussing implications for the various firms targeted by, or involved in, these initiatives, and for CSR and GVC governance research.

This paper opens many avenues for future research on CSR multiplicity and its consequences; on lead firms governing GVCs from an IB perspective; and on institutional and market complexity.

By providing overviews and classifications, this paper helps clarify CSR standards as “new regulators” and “instruments” for actors in business, society and government.

This paper contributes by filling gaps in different existing literatures concerning standard multiplicity. It also specifically adds a new perspective to the IB literature, which thus far has not fully incorporated the complexity and dynamics of CSR standard multiplicity in examining GVCs and MNE strategy and policy.