Knowledge that Transforms

It is customary among contemporary organization theorists to equate North American and European scholarship with objectivist and subjectivist metatheoretical positions (respectively), treat these p...

This study examines how designing for product development influences project performance in distinct technological environments. Drawing on a series of computational experiments and paired-case comparisons of six product development projects, we specifically examine how new product development performance is affected by project design and the technological environment. By triangulating across the computational experiments and case studies, we find the existence of performance trade-offs in product development as well as the importance of performance priorities in influencing project design. These findings permit us to elaborate on existing contingency-based perspectives of new product development and put forward a novel mediating model. In this mediating model of product development, we suggest that the technological environment shapes performance priorities, which in turn influence project design and ultimately the performance outcomes of new product development efforts. This model further highlights that project designs can evolve as a function of performance outcomes, although this process can be inhibited by the presence of design evolution constraints. This research contributes significantly to our understanding of designing projects for new product development.

Research on social networks has grown considerably in the last decade. However, there is a certain amount of confusion about network theory—for example, what it is, what is distinctive about it, and how to generate new theory. This paper attempts to remedy the situation by clarifying the fundamental concepts of the field (such as the network) and characterizing how network reasoning works. We start by considering the definition of network, noting some confusion caused by two different perspectives, which we refer to as realist and nominalist. We then analyze two well-known network theories, Granovetter's strength of weak ties theory [Granovetter, M. S. 1973. The strength of weak ties. Amer. J. Sociol. 78(6) 1360–1380] and Burt's structural holes theory [Burt, R. S. 1992. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Havard University Press, Cambridge, MA], to identify characteristic elements of network theorizing. We argue that both theories share an underlying theoretical model, which we label the network flow model, from which we derive additional implications. We also discuss network phenomena that do not appear to fit the flow model and discuss the possibility of a second fundamental model, which we call the bond model. We close with a discussion of the merits of model-based network theorizing for facilitating the generation of new theory, as well as a discussion of endogeneity in network theorizing.

In this paper I uncover the routine, ongoing practices that sustain institutional multiplicity. Drawing on a comparative study of the two high-tech conferences held in Israel in 2002, I examine how diverse institutions are discursively handled in field-configuring events. Institutional multiplicity was expressed at this site through two identity discourses, one that situated the industry within a national context and another that oriented it toward the global markets. In addition, the conferences were constructed around different best-practice discourses that focused on guidelines for either investment or management. These four discourses reflected and further affected power relations between the field's actors, and they were differentially distributed across separate social spaces between the conferences and within them. The contribution of this study to our understanding of institutional multiplicity lies in demonstrating how it is maintained in practice, politically negotiated between actors, and refracted across separate social spaces.

Most entrepreneurs emanate from established organizations, yet systematic theorizing about the ways in which organizations shape the entrepreneurial process has only recently begun to emerge. We provide a framework for organizing this emerging literature. We focus on four different metaphors in the literature for how organizations matter in the entrepreneurial process and suggest promising avenues for future research.

Two contradictory perspectives of family business conduct and performance are prominent in the literature. The stewardship perspective argues that family business owners and managers will act as farsighted stewards of their companies, investing generously in the business to enhance value for all stakeholders. By contrast, the agency and behavioral agency perspectives maintain that major family owners, in catering to family self-interest, will underinvest in the firm, avoid risk, and extract resources. This paper argues that both these views have application but under different circumstances, determined in part by the degree to which the firm and its executive actors are embedded within the family and thus identify with its interests. Stewardship behavior will be less common, and agency behavior will be more common the greater the number of family directors, officers, generations, and votes, and the more executives are susceptible to family influence. These findings are supported among Fortune 1000 firms, as well as among the subsample of those firms that are family businesses.

Research in strategy has identified and tried to explain four types of rents: monopolistic rents, efficiency rents, quasi rents, and Schumpeterian rents. Building on previous work on political and institutional strategies, we add a fifth type of rent: influence rents. Influence rents are the extra profits earned by a firm because the rules of the game (laws, regulations, and informal rules) are designed or changed to suit it. To aid the analysis of the relationship between institutional context and firm performance and to provide a structure to guide research, we develop a framework with five key components: (a) an identification of the five fundamental problems of a market economy, (b) a typology that describes the five different types of institutions that emerge to solve these problems, (c) the market-ordering mechanisms used by institutions to solve these problems, (d) the common causes of weak institutional performance, and (e) generic strategies used by firms to exploit these weaknesses of an institutional context to enhance firm performance. We highlight potential applications of the framework as well as an illustrative research agenda that can advance the development of theory to explain the emergence and persistence of influence rents.

Each year shareholders, via exercise of their proxy votes, have the opportunity to voice their support or displeasure with firms and director nominees. Examining over 2,000 Fortune 500 director nominees, we explore those indicators available to shareholders at the time of directors' (re)election to provide insight into shareholder discontent with director monitoring. By studying actual voting behaviors, we provide new perspective to understanding director elections as a governance process. Employing a multilevel approach, we find support for agency-theoretic relationships between several firm and director characteristics and shareholder opposition to directors seeking (re)election to the board. At the firm level, we find that CEO compensation level and board size are positively related to the withholding of shareholder votes in director elections, a behavior indicative of shareholder discontent. Complementing these findings, at the director level, we find that affiliated director status, tenure, and number of outside directorships are positively related, and director block ownership is negatively related to shareholder discontent with director monitoring.