Search results

This chapter develops the theoretical framework used to inform the study, which is based largely on neoinstitutional theory. This monograph recognizes that a holistic perspective and richer insights are needed when examining complex issues associated with the adoption of internationally acceptable practices. The proposed theoretical framework incorporates international influences, domestic influences, and intraorganizational dynamics. In the context of globalization, China’s convergence with internationally acceptable principles and standards is largely shaped by international forces, including supranational organizations, foreign investors, and international accounting firms. Furthermore, in order to examine the operation of those imported ideas, it is essential to consider China’s contextual setting, which comprises the political system, economic system, legal system, social and cultural system, and accounting infrastructure. In addition, the convergence process is also influenced by interaction among organizational players who may actively mobilize their power to preserve the status quo and protect their power and interests. The outcome and the process of loose coupling deeply intertwine with and reflect upon international influences, domestic influences, and intraorganizational dynamics.

Research examining the joint role of serial acquisitions and subsidiary autonomy in holistic value provision within servitizing industrial firms is scarce. Thus, this paper aims to investigate the role of serial acquisition and subsidiary autonomy in providing value within servitizing industrial networks.

A conceptual framework is developed based on the case study of a large Swedish industrial group specializing in selling industrial products and providing industrial solutions to business customers through its numerous subsidiaries.

The analysis of 14 interviews with the five subsidiaries and seven customer firms and secondary data reveals interesting findings concerning the role of serial niche acquisition strategy and subsidiary autonomy in customer value provision in servitizing organizations. In particular, the authors find that the role of acquisitions in industrial firms extends beyond growth to customer sensing and proximity. Likewise, the authors find that subsidiary autonomy facilitates value provision to customers in industrial networks.

The paper provides a more nuanced understanding of how serial acquisitions and subsidiary autonomy are intertwined and jointly affect industrial firms’ value provision activities amidst the servitization transition in an intraorganizational network.

Intraorganizational knowledge and information sharing are important steps toward more-accessible organizational knowledge. The aim of this study is to qualitatively explore factors that contribute to employees' motivations for sustaining intraorganizational knowledge-sharing behaviors and to examine the impact of these factors in a quantitative study with the Austrian Federal Ministry of Defense. This ministry faces a retirement wave in the next 5–10 years. Intraorganizational knowledge sharing before, during, and following this wave will play a decisive role for the organization in the near future.

An exploratory sequential mixed-methods study was conducted. The study design involved a qualitative study phase with expert interviews and stakeholder workshops (n = 9) and a quantitative study phase based on a cross-sectional online survey with an implicit association test on intraorganizational knowledge sharing (n = 59).

In the qualitative study phase, three main research topics regarding intraorganizational knowledge sharing were identified: employee attitude, organizational support, and specific relational aspects of knowledge transfer, such as reciprocal relationships among employees and opportunities for knowledge exchange. A hierarchical multiple regression analysis revealed that perceived organizational support was the only factor that was a significant predictor of motivation for engaging in knowledge sharing. We also analyzed the data for moderation effects and demonstrated that sociopsychological factors (e.g., the engagement or openness of colleagues to share their knowledge) further strengthened the positive relationship between employees' perceived support and personal willingness to share knowledge.

We conclude that an organizational culture that supports knowledge sharing within the organization is highly relevant for motivating employees to share their knowledge. Practitioners will also benefit from the insights of the various dimensions of employees' willingness to engage in knowledge-sharing behaviors to better design further interventions in organizations.

In accordance with an exploratory sequential mixed-methods approach, we followed a transdisciplinary process in which scientific and practical experiences and knowledge were integrated. For this purpose, interviews and workshops with experts and stakeholders in the organization were conducted. The qualitative findings were incorporated into a quantitative survey and an implicit association test for the employees of the organization. This approach demonstrates a different and more holistic approach to analyzing a real-world problem in the context of a governmental agency in order to investigate the multidimensional and complex topic of intraorganizational knowledge sharing.

Leaders derive their capacity for driving institutional change from their power over organizations, but prior research says little about how leaders with limited power over a dominant intraorganizational group can acquire such a capacity for institutional action. This chapter develops a multilevel model that helps to understand how leaders of public service organizations were able to introduce “contract organization” form of organizational governance that enabled them to outsource the provision of public services to private firms. By doing so, this chapter adds to existing accounts of how power and political processes can give rise to organizational and institutional change.

How do organizations manage multiple logics in response to institutional complexity? In this paper, we explore how intraorganizational problems related to multiple logics may be addressed via the mechanism of institutional bricolage – where actors inside an organization act as “bricoleurs” to creatively combine elements from different logics into newly designed artifacts. An illustrative case study of a global brewery group’s development of such an artifact – a Responsible Drinking Guide Book – is outlined. We argue that intraorganizational institutional bricolage first requires the problematization of organizational identity followed by a social process involving efforts to renegotiate the organization’s identity in relation to the logics being integrated. We show that in response to growing pressures to be more “responsible,” a group of organizational actors creatively tinkered with and combined elements from social responsibility and market logics by drawing upon extant organizational resources from different times and spaces in an effort to reconstitute their collective organizational identity.

How do organizations manage multiple logics in response to institutional complexity? In this paper, we explore how intraorganizational problems related to multiple logics may be addressed via the mechanism of institutional bricolage – where actors inside an organization act as “bricoleurs” to creatively combine elements from different logics into newly designed artifacts. An illustrative case study of a global brewery group’s development of such an artifact – a Responsible Drinking Guide Book – is outlined. We argue that intraorganizational institutional bricolage first requires the problematization of organizational identity followed by a social process involving efforts to renegotiate the organization’s identity in relation to the logics being integrated. We show that in response to growing pressures to be more “responsible,” a group of organizational actors creatively tinkered with and combined elements from social responsibility and market logics by drawing upon extant organizational resources from different times and spaces in an effort to reconstitute their collective organizational identity.

This study aims to investigate how various aspects of intraorganizational career advancement – current career attainments, recent pace of upward mobility, and future prospect of career advancement – affect voluntary turnover, drawing empirical evidence from a multinational corporation (MNC) in Taiwan's cultural and labor market environment.

The empirical study was based on statistical analyses of personnel records of 303 employees in a multinational bank in Taiwan. A discrete‐time logistic model was used to analyse voluntary turnover events.

Results showed that salary increase and job status generally reduced voluntary turnover. A ceiling position on the job ladder induced turnover and also moderated the relationship between corporate title duration and turnover and that between age and turnover.

Because the empirical evidence was based on data collected from one MNC in Taiwan's distinct research context, this may limit the generalizability of some findings in the study.

Whereas much of the literature on turnover has focused on psychological models, this study adopts an objective career perspective and highlights the significance of intraorganizational career advancement in affecting voluntary turnover. It also deepens one's understanding of career development and choices in a Chinese cultural environment.

This paper aims to examine why the sustainability paradox exists and how it unfolds by focusing on intraorganizational dynamics. It explores how organizational actors perceive and make sense of sustainability and thereby contribute to the sustainability paradox.

In a case study on IREN, an Italian listed multi-utility with considerable engagements with sustainability, data collection through interviews, e-mails and document analysis revealed contradictions raised by directors and middle managers. Findings were analyzed by iterating with the literature used to frame this study, which combines organizational sensemaking, paradoxes and management control.

The sustainability paradox comprises various facets. Directors and middle managers interpret sustainability differently depending on their role within the organization and their perceptions of the concept itself. Different interpretations thus occur within and across organizational levels and functions, impacting how sustainability is implemented and monitored. The use of parallel management control systems (MCSs) reflects multiple and fragmented sensemaking, which explains the facets of the sustainability paradox.

Although this work illuminates the role played by individuals at top- and middle-management organizational levels and MCSs in relation to the sustainability paradox, more research is needed on how individuals make sense of sustainability at the lowest organizational levels.

Organizations claiming commitment to sustainability must establish communication forms on the practicalities of sustainability throughout the organization to stimulate shared sensemaking and the design and use of inclusive MCSs.

This paper explains why and how organizations unconsciously enact various facets of the sustainability paradox.

Institutional theory had been developed for the purpose of explaining widespread diffusion, mimetic adoption and institutionalization of organizational practices. However, further extensions of institutional theory are needed to explain a range of different institutional trajectories and organizational responses since institutionalized standards constitute a minority of all diffusing practices. The study presents a theoretical framework which offers guidelines for explaining and predicting various adoption, variation and post-adoption scenarios.

The paper is primarily conceptual in nature, and the arguments are developed based on previous institutional theory and organizational change literature.

The notion of institutional inertia is proposed in order to provide a more detailed explanation of when and why organizations ignore, adopt, modify, maintain and abandon practices and the way intra-organizational institutional pressures shape, direct and constrain these processes. It is specified whether institutional inertia will be temporarily eclipsed or whether it will actively manifest itself during adoption, adaptation and maintaining attempts. The study distinguishes between four institutional profiles of organizational practices – institutionalized, institutionally friendly, neutral and contested practices – which can vary along three dimensions: accuracy, extensiveness and meaning. The variation and post-adoption outcomes for each of them can be completely characterized and predicted by only three parameters: the rate of institutional inertia, institutional profile of these practices and whether they are interpretatively flexible. In turn, an extent of intraorganizational institutional resistance to new practices is determined by their institutional profile and flexibility.

It is expected that proposed theoretical explanations in this paper can offer insights into these empirical puzzles and supply a broader view of organizational and management changes. The study’s theoretical propositions help to understand what happens to organizational practices after they are handled by organizations, thus moving beyond the adoption/rejection dichotomy.

The paper explores and clarifies the nature of institutional inertia and offers an explanation of its manifestation in organizations over time and how it shapes organizational practices in the short and long run. It challenges a popular assumption in organizational literature that fast and revolutionary transition is a prerequisite for successful change. More broadly, the typology offered in this paper helps to explain whether and how organizations can successfully handle and complete their change and how far they can depart from institutional norms.