Knowledge that Transforms

This paper explores how organizations respond to simultaneous institutional influences from two distinct sources: the industry in which they operate and the local geographic community in which they are headquartered. We theorize that the existence of institutional equivalents—other organizations at the same intersection of different fields, such as the same industry and the same community—provides a clear and well defined reference category for firms and thus shapes which subset of peers the focal organization imitates most closely. We develop hypotheses about how the presence or absence of institutional equivalents affects organizations’ responses to behavioral cues from different peer groups, how these effects vary when peers in different fields exhibit inconsistent behaviors, and how organizational characteristics, such as size and performance, strengthen or weaken the influence of institutional equivalents. We test our propositions through a longitudinal analysis of philanthropic contributions by Fortune 1000 firms from 1980 to 2006. Our framework illuminates how simultaneous presence in multiple fields affects organizations and introduces to institutional theory the concept of institutional equivalence, which we argue is a critical factor in determining how organizations respond to multiple institutional cues.

This study explores the impact of modern patent pools—inter-organizational collaborative arrangements for promoting the adoption of technology standards—on the rate of follow-on innovations based on pooled technologies, the vertical structure of associated industries, and organizational capabilities of noncollaborating firms. On one hand, the formation of modern pools can boost follow-on innovation by lowering the search, negotiation, and licensing costs associated with pooled standards. On the other hand, modern pools may decrease the incentives to invest in follow-on innovations because of cannibalization risks and grant-back provisions. To the extent that modern pools succeed in establishing a dominant standard, their collaborative nature and their reliance on markets for technology can reduce technological uncertainty and appropriation hazards, hence triggering vertical disintegration in related industries. Moreover, by establishing a dominant standard, modern pools can effectively diminish the relative importance of integrative capabilities inside firms. Employing a combination of empirical strategies, I show that the formation of seven major modern patent pools has, on average, increased the rate of follow-on innovations based on the pooled standards by about 14%. Moreover, the results suggest that the establishment of modern pools can facilitate a shift toward vertical disintegration in associated industries where upstream technology-focused organizations would disproportionally contribute to the development of follow-on complementary technologies. The results also suggest that modern pools reduce the relative importance of integrative capabilities and provide a more advantageous position for specialized startups vis-à-vis diversifying entrants. I discuss the implications for literatures on organizational economics, organizational capabilities, business ecosystems, standards, and nascent industries.

Past research has established that new firms can enhance their attractiveness to prospective resource providers by affiliating with more reputable firms. But research on this process has yet to fully account for two critical realities underscored by recent research: (1) firms need to acquire resources from different groups of resource providers and (2) reputation is multidimensional. Drawing on the organizational reputation literature and on information processing theory, we propose that two groups of resource providers will respond differently to new firms’ affiliations in accordance with differences in the groups’ abilities to recognize and interpret reputation-related signals. We also propose that within a single group of resource providers, distinct characteristics of the affiliate will exert different influences. We test these propositions using longitudinal data from Belgian firms that affiliated with venture capital (VC) investors. Consistent with our predictions, we find that characteristics of a VC affiliate exert more influence on prospective financiers than on prospective employees. We further find that prospective financiers were more influenced by a VC’s industry-specific experience than by its media prominence, whereas prospective employees were more influenced by a VC’s media prominence than by its industry-specific experience. Taken together, the findings show that new firms’ resource attraction trajectories are shaped by their affiliates in more complex ways than past research has accounted for.

Organizational network research has demonstrated that multiple benefits accrue to people occupying brokerage positions. However, the extant literature offers scant evidence of the process postulated to drive such benefits (information brokerage) and therefore leaves unaddressed the question of how brokers broker. We address this gap by examining the information-brokerage interactions in which actors engage. We argue that the information-brokerage strategies of brokers differ in three critical ways from those of actors embedded in denser network positions. First, brokers more often broker information via short-term interactions with colleagues outside their network of long-term relationships, a process we label “unembedded brokerage.” Second, when they engage in unembedded brokerage, brokers are more likely than are actors in dense network positions to intermediate the flow of information between the brokered parties, consistent with a tertius gaudens strategy. Conversely, and third, when they broker information via their network of long-term ties (embedded brokerage), brokers are more likely than are densely connected actors to facilitate a direct information exchange between the brokered parties, consistent with a tertius iungens strategy. Using a relational event model, we find support for our arguments in an empirical analysis of email communications among employees in a medium-sized, knowledge-intensive organization, as well as in a replication study. The theory and evidence we present advance a novel, temporal perspective on how brokers broker, which reconciles structural and process views of network brokerage. Our findings substantiate the notion of brokers as a dynamic force driving change in organizational networks, and they help to integrate within a unitary explanatory framework tertius iungens and tertius gaudens views of brokerage.

Organizational life consists of an ever-changing world of encounters, experiences, and complex sociomaterial relations. Within this context, standard routines can be seen as a solution to problems of inefficiency within organizations, especially when associated with images of stability, repeatability, and standardization. This can bring a sense of order where there is disorder, and stability in the face of change. However, whereas standard routines may be seen as providing solutions within complex and ever-changing organizational worlds, they can also be viewed as sources of organizational problems. Through an ethnographic examination of two routines within a newspaper-printing factory, our paper seeks to build on and add to contributions within routine dynamics (RD) by highlighting the emergence and coexistence of change and stability and the enactment of standard routines through a performative process of difference and repetition. In particular, our paper examines how organizational stability and change emerge through the dynamic relations underlying the enactment of difference and repetition and how these relations involve various—sometimes hidden—microprocesses that include the simplification and amplification of facts, scripts, and concerns. By drawing together the findings from our ethnographic research, studies within the area of RD, and concepts relating to a Deleuzian and Latourian perspective, our paper therefore contributes to the work on the repetition of routines by further unpacking the generative sociomaterial dynamics, creative forces, and microprocesses that underlie the emergence of stability and change through difference and repetition.

I examine the microlevel processes involved when members of an organization seek to persuade others to internalize a new institutional logic. To do so I conduct a qualitative study of the Alpha course, an evangelizing movement designed to convert agnostics to a particular—and contested—interpretation of Christianity. My analysis suggests that the process of persuading actors to adopt a new logic entails four distinct kinds of microinstitutional work and illustrates the dynamics underpinning each of them. It also delineates three discrete paths that targeted actors may follow in response to persuasive attempts. I contribute to organization theory by building a framework that conceptualizes the microfoundations of institutional persuasion and conversion. The framework illustrates the two-way nature of institutional communication and highlights the potential of emotion and ritual performance to connect actors with—and alienate actors from—institutional logics.

Organizations increasingly rely on teams that span national and organizational boundaries, yet team members in emerging countries and vendor firms are not treated as professional peers by their Western and client-based peers. To understand how they respond to this identity threat, we integrate two literatures that suggest two possible answers: an organizational response, based on the critical literature on top-down identity regulation, and an individual response, based on the positive literature on bottom-up identity construction. Drawing on in-depth interviews and archival data from three Indian information technology (IT) offshore outsourcing firms, we examine how organizational and individual identity processes work in tandem to address this threat. We find that firms do not resolve this threat by regulating employee identity directly as they claim, but instead provide workers with an organizational toolkit—a set of organizationally available cultural resources (e.g., frames and stories) and political resources (e.g., policies and procedures) that workers use selectively and strategically to construct positive identities. By bringing a toolkit perspective to identity processes, we contribute to theory and research on cross-level identity linkages, the strategic nature of identity processes, and the local context of global identity.

This study investigates the effects of scientists’ inbound mobility on the research performance of incumbent scientists in an academic setting. The theoretical framework integrates insights from learning theory and social comparison theory to suggest two main mechanisms behind these effects: localized learning and social comparison. The authors propose several hypotheses about the conditions that might intensify or weaken such effects. Specifically, the arrival of new scientific personnel is likely to exert stronger positive effects on the performance of incumbent scientists with shorter (cf. longer) organizational tenure; in addition, academic departments with less diversified expertise and with higher levels of internal collaborations likely reap greater benefits from learning by hiring. The empirical findings, based on a longitudinal analysis of a sample of 94 U.S. academic chemical engineering departments, provide empirical support for these contentions.

Building on an in-depth ethnographic study at a renowned research laboratory, we show how the interactions of organizational routines can be more or less generative by tracing and analyzing how human and nonhuman actors (actants) connect routines. Adopting a performative perspective, we compare the connecting of such actants and study how they are engaged in routine performances. We relate observed differences in the generativity of routine interactions to whether actants become mediators or intermediaries. Whereas intermediaries merely maintain connections between routines, mediators can modify them when performing routine connections. We identify three generative effects mediators can lead to: (1) the creation of innovative outcomes, (2) the adaptation of existing routine performances, and/or (3) the emergence of new routine performances. Similar to the conception of organizational routines as dynamic and generative systems, we show that the way actants operate through their engagement renders routine interactions and thus ecologies of routines more or less generative.

Problem-solving research and formal problem-solving practice begin with the assumption that a problem has been identified or formulated for solving. The problem-solving process then involves a search for a satisfactory or optimal solution to that problem. In contrast, we propose that, in informal problem solving, a need and a solution are often discovered together and tested for viability as a “need–solution pair.” For example, one may serendipitously discover a new solution and assess it to be worth adopting although the “problem” it would address had not previously been in mind as an object of search or even awareness. In such a case, problem identification and formulation, if done at all, come only after the discovery of the need–solution pair. We propose the identification of need–solution pairs as an approach to problem solving in which problem formulation is not required. We argue that discovery of viable need–solution pairs without problem formulation may have advantages over problem-initiated problem-solving methods under some conditions. First, it removes the often considerable costs associated with problem formulation. Second, it eliminates the constraints on possible solutions that any problem formulation will inevitably apply.