Knowledge that Transforms

AbstractFollowing the financial crisis, financial sector organizations faced increased pressures to reform their ‘risk cultures’. In this paper, we argue that the emergence of regulatory and managerial attention to risk culture is symptomatic of pressures to redefine the fundamental ends of financial institutions and to rebalance the pre‐crisis emphasis on a logic of opportunity and risk‐taking with a logic of precaution and risk control. Based on the analysis of normative practitioner texts and on extended contact with regulators, advisers and corporate actors in the UK financial sector over four years, we show how this initial complexity ofendsis translated into uncertainty and conflict about themeansthrough which risk culture might become an object amenable to intervention. On this basis, we contribute to the growing literature on ‘institutional complexity’ by showing how organizational actors address conflicting pressures aboutbothends and means, and by discussing some key implications of their simplification strategies. Our analysis also contributes to recent studies of ‘means‐ends decoupling’, showing how means, ends and the object of intervention itself – risk culture – co‐evolve as they are reconstructed by organizational actors via their everyday practices.

AbstractWe develop a psychological perspective on managers’ exploration orientation. Our study suggests that the regulatory focus of managers may in different ways, impact their orientation toward search, risk‐taking, and experimentation. Moreover, we argue that these relationships are contingent not only on the extent to which the organizational context fits with the motivational disposition of managers, but also on the complexity of decision‐making. Using an experimental setting, we find that managers’ regulatory focus affects their willingness to experiment with a wide range of alternatives and to deviate from existing best practices. Moreover, the promotion focus of managers heightens their exploration orientation in an organizational context with promotion‐focused cues in highly complex decision‐making. This study has important implications for our understanding of managers’ exploration orientation under conditions of complexity.

AbstractCorporate governance (CG) research has typically been studied from rather disparate disciplinary approaches, thereby offering myopic and often conflicting rationales. We develop an institutional configurational approach to integrate this ‘siloed’ field and explain CG patterns around the world. To do so, we draw on an inductive, theory‐building methodology based on fuzzy‐set logic to uncover the configurations across institutional actor‐centred domains and their impact on CG patterns. Empirically, we explore the necessary and sufficient causal conditions leading to different features of codes of good governance across 32 OECD countries. We generate propositions linking configurational institutional domains to code features. Our results show that a single institutional domain by itself is not sufficient to explain CG outcomes, and that these domains need to be considered in conjunction, leading, in turn, to the identification of four distinct configurational governance prototypes. Our study offers a comprehensive account of drivers of cross‐national differences in CG and yields useful insights for managing and regulating governance.

ABSTRACTIn this paper I argue that, rather than theory development aim at simplifying complex organizational phenomena, it should aim at complexifying theories – theoretical complexity is needed to account for organizational complexity. Defining the latter as the capacity for ‘nontrivial’ action, I explore a complex ‘system of picturing’ organizations as objects of study that provides an alternative to the hitherto dominant disjunctive style of thinking. A complex ‘system of picturing’ consists of an open‐world ontology, a performative epistemology, and a poetic praxeology. Complex theorizing is conjunctive: it seeks to make connections between diverse elements of human experience through making those analytical distinctions that will enable the joining up of concepts normally used in a compartmentalized manner. Insofar as conjunctive theorizing is driven by the need to preserve the ‘living‐forward – understanding backward’ dialectic, it is better suited to grasping the logic of practice and, thus, to doing justice to organizational complexity. We come close to grasping complexity when we restore the past to its own present and make distinctions that overcome dualisms, preserving as much as possible relationality, temporality, situatedness and, interpretive open‐endedness. I illustrate the argument with several examples from organizational and management research.

AbstractOrganizations have to cope with the complexity of their environment in order to survive. A considerable body of research has shown that organizations may respond to environmental complexity by creatinginternal complexity– for example, by expanding internal structures and processes. However, researchers know less about how organizations createcollaborative complexitycollectively – for example, by establishing alliances or developing common standards. This paper uses social systems theory to explore how organizations collaborate in response to complexity and to analyse the conditions under which they create either internal or collaborative complexity (or both) to address environmental complexity. It also examines how these types of complexity feed back into environmental complexity. To illustrate our conceptual model, we use corporate social responsibility (CSR).

AbstractThere has been much controversy concerning the relationship between outside CEO succession origin and firm performance. Some scholars take the organizational‐adaptation view to highlight the benefits of outside succession; yet others adopt the organizational‐disruption view to pose the selection of an outsider CEO as a disruptive and disadvantageous event for organizations. In this study, we develop an integrated multilevel framework that reconciles these opposing perspectives and examines the conditions under which the benefits of outside CEO succession outweigh the costs. Data from 109 CEO succession events in large international firms show that the performance advantages of outside succession materialize when the new CEO: (a) socio‐demographically resembles incumbent executives, (b) possesses a variety of experience, and (c) is hired by a well‐performing firm operating in a munificent industry. Overall, our research demonstrates that the performance implications of new CEO origin should not be considered in isolation, but in interaction with multilevel characteristics.

AbstractWe analyse business‐NGO (B2N) alliances through the lenses of multiple agency and behavioural agency theories to identify the sources of agency problems and the most effective choice of mitigation mechanisms. We contend that three types of agency relationships constitute B2N alliances: the relationship between the firm's managers and B2N alliance employees; the relationship between the NGO's managers and the B2N alliance employees; and the novel ‘claimed principal‐agent relationship’ involving the external beneficiary, the NGO's managers and the alliance employees. We argue that B2N alliances’ three types of agency problems stem from (1) the relative emphasis on public vs. private goods, both at the employee and at the partner levels, and (2) the level of the external beneficiary's voice. We then predict the mechanisms to mitigate these problems: hiring altruistic over self‐interested individuals; narrowly specifying the employees’ activities; emphasizing input‐based and intrinsic incentive mechanisms; and investing significantly into non‐intrusive monitoring mechanisms.

AbstractFocusing on the collaboration intersecting public, non‐profit and private spheres of economic activity, we analyse the conceptual forms of hybridity embedded in these novel inter‐organizational arrangements, and link them to different mechanisms of creating social value. We first disentangle alternative notions of hybrid arrangements in existing literature by proposing a conceptual typology on two theoretically complementary yet distinct dimensions: hybridity in governance and hybridity in organizational logics. We show how both forms of hybridity can jointly occur in complex public‐private and cross‐sector collaborations, and propose the notion of value as a crucial bridging point between these perspectives. Crucially, we develop a conceptual framework on key theoretical mechanisms leading to economic and social value in these inter‐organizational collaborations. Our work deepens the understanding of how diverse, hybrid forms of collaboration can create value and builds critical links between previously disparate streams of literature on public‐private interaction, cross‐sector collaboration and social enterprises.

AbstractThis article synthesizes the large and burgeoning literature on framing to unpack how frames achieve resonance with an audience. The analysis identifies two main resonance types: cognitive, based on an appeal to audiences’ beliefs and understandings, and emotional, based on an appeal to audiences’ feelings, passions, and aspirations. For each type, this paper delves into distinct mechanisms, applications, and outcomes to shed light on the complex bases for audiences’ reactions to framing and the factors that can hinder or favour resonance. Applications for this conceptualization of resonance and future venues of research are identified and discussed.