Knowledge that Transforms

In order to assess whether new theories are necessary to explain new forms of organizing or existing theories suffice, we must first specify exactly what makes a form of organizing “new.” We propose clear criteria for making such an assessment and show how they are useful in assessing if and when new theories of organizing may truly be needed. We illustrate our arguments by contrasting forms of organizing often considered novel, such as Linux, Wikipedia, and Oticon, against their traditional counterparts. We conclude that even when there may be little that existing theory cannot explain about individual elements in these new forms of organizing, opportunities for new theorizing lie in understanding the bundles of co-occurring elements that seem to underlie them and why the same bundles occur in widely disparate organizations.

Transitions in work memberships, relationships, and roles can result in work-related identity loss. This article contributes to a growing body of research examining identity transitions by providing a dynamic model to explain these identity losses. Our model incorporates principles from identity research and grief research to predict how employees will react to the loss of a work-related identity. We conceptualize the transition period as one of liminality, during which individuals engage in sensemaking and emotion regulation to determine who they were and who they are becoming. Specifically, the process involves cognitive and emotional processing in two domains: loss orientation and restoration orientation. We propose that emotions experienced (and their associated regulatory foci) are critical for determining whether individuals experience adaptive or maladaptive identity-related outcomes.

The author responds to the article "Titles matter: Addressing the normalization of othering," by C.J. Vinkenburg in a 2014 issue of the journal regarding the use of the terms "they" or "them" in article titles within the "Academy of Management" publications. Topics discussed include the referral to multicultural employees as "they" in an article written by the author, whether the term "they" implies that individuals are members of an outgroup, and how authors can avoid othering in research articles. The author also discusses ways to mitigate the problem of othering in the context of management research..

Corporate sustainability confronts managers with tensions between complex economic, environmental, and social issues. Drawing on the literature on managerial cognition, corporate sustainability, and strategic paradoxes, we develop a cognitive framing perspective on corporate sustainability. We propose two cognitive frames—a business case frame and a paradoxical frame—and explore how differences between them in cognitive content and structure influence the three stages of the sensemaking process—that is, managerial scanning, interpreting, and responding with regard to sustainability issues. We explain how the two frames lead to differences in the breadth and depth of scanning, differences in issue interpretations in terms of sense of control and issue valence, and different types of responses that managers consider with regard to sustainability issues. By considering alternative cognitive frames, our argument contributes to a better understanding of managerial decision making regarding ambiguous sustainability issues, and it develops the underlying cognitive determinants of the stance that managers adopt on sustainability issues. This argument offers a cognitive explanation for why managers rarely push for radical change when faced with complex and ambiguous issues, such as sustainability, that are characterized by conflicting yet interrelated aspects.

Over the past decade social capital has matured from a concept into a field of research. We identify some of the main theoretical developments over this period and point to some areas where further work appears warranted. We argue that the basic social capital thesis has now been widely accepted across a range of disciplines and fields, and that research is therefore naturally shifting toward more specific aspects and mechanisms.