Why do firms respond to social movement pressures differently? This study investigates how the strategic motivation of firms, as captured by competitor activity and market dependence, influences the likelihood of their response to social movement demands. We examine this through a longitudinal analysis of wind power adoption by electric utilities in U.S. deregulated markets. We find that when either competitor actions aligned with movement demands or firm dependence on targeted markets increase, the positive effect of movement activism on firm response diminishes. In contrast, as strategic motivation declines, increases in movement activism become more influential at eliciting firm responses . Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

This article provides a review and analysis of institutional entrepreneurship research with a focus on the emergence of this literature within two largely divergent streams: sociology-based institutional theory and economics-based institutional economics. The authors completed a review of 141 articles from these concurrent, but unlinked, research streams to understand how their integration might contribute to the further understanding of institutional entrepreneurship. Each stream is reviewed on its respective approaches to the following topics: the nature of the institutional entrepreneur, the types of institutions addressed, the determinants of institutional entrepreneurship, the mechanisms used in the process, and the empirical focus of each stream. The article recommends greater assimilation of the two streams and discusses specific opportunities for conceptual integration. Finally, the article offers an agenda for incorporating entrepreneurship research into the study of institutional entrepreneurship. Findings from this review suggest that while institutional economics focuses mostly on the antecedents and outcomes of institutional entrepreneurship, the institutional theory perspective is more concerned with the process and mechanisms that drive such change. The authors also suggest that entrepreneurship theory can greatly advance our understanding of institutional entrepreneurship by informing whether and how opportunities for institutional change are recognized, discovered, and created, as well as by providing insights on the antecedents and mechanisms of such activity. Most important, integrating the unique perspectives and domains of institutional theory, institutional economics, and entrepreneurship research in the study of institutional entrepreneurship provides substantial opportunity for expanding our understanding of the concept and its implications.

Using insights from institutional theory, sociology, and entrepreneurship we develop and test a model of the relationship between centralized and decentralized institutions on entrepreneurial activity. We suggest that both decentralized institutions that are socially determined as well as centralized institutions that are designed by governmental authorities are important in promoting firm foundings in the environmental context. In a sample of the U.S. solar energy sector we find that state-sponsored incentives, environmental consumption norms, and norms of family interdependence are related to new firm entry in this sector. Our findings also suggest that the efficacy of state-level policies in the sponsoring of entrepreneurial growth is dependent upon the social norms that prevail in the entrepreneur's environment. We expand entrepreneurship theory and the study of institutions and the natural environment by demonstrating the integral role that social norms play in influencing the creation of new firms and by illustrating the potential effect social norms have on the effect of policy that seeks to encourage environmentally responsible economic activity.

This study explores the hybridization of field-level logics, a process that integrates previously incompatible logics within an organizational field. Through an inductive study of the wind energy field in Colorado, we find that logic hybridization resulted when social movement organizations, incumbent firms, and policy makers variously responded to incompatibility between economizing and ecologizing logics. Compromise and framing efforts catalyzed social movements to alter the balance of power in the field, which transformed the relationship between field logics. Hybrid organizations then emerged to establish, legitimize, and embed a new set of inter-linked frames, practices, and arrangements that integrated previously incompatible logics. Incumbent firms and policy makers further formalized and embedded the new hybridized logic in the field. Our findings suggest that the hybridization of field level logics is a complex process in which organizational actions and field-level conditions recursively influence each other over time.

This study of the U.S. wind energy industry extends theory on the process of industry emergence by developing and testing a coevolutionary model of the relationship between social movement organizations (SMOs), institutions, and industries. Building on research that suggests that SMOs can influence institutions and the path of emerging industries, we show that the growth of an industry can also influence the diversity of social movements by motivating the participation of specialist SMOs. These new SMOs in turn deploy distinct knowledge, capabilities, goals, and strategies to produce institutional changes that are necessary for the continued growth of the industry. Our study offers a more complete conceptualization of the influence of social movements on industry emergence and growth, and it extends understanding of how SMO diversity is produced.

While entrepreneurial activity has been an important force for social and ecological sustainability; its efficacy is dependent upon the nature of market incentives. This limitation is sometimes explained by the metaphor of the prisoner's dilemma, which we term the green prison. In this prison, entrepreneurs are compelled to environmentally degrading behavior due to the divergence between individual rewards and collective goals for sustainable development. Entrepreneurs, however, can escape from the green prison by altering or creating the institutions—norms, property rights, and legislation—that establish the incentives of competitive games. We provide a variety of evidence of such entrepreneurial action and discuss its implications for theory and practice.

In this article we develop a theoretical framework to explain values-based rivalry between activists and firms by integrating and advancing key insights from competitive dynamics and social activist research. The first part of our framework conceptualizes the unique tensions, actions, and responses that characterize values-based rivalry and distinguish it from rivalry between firms. The second part of our framework conceptualizes the role of managers’ perceptions in shaping their firms’ likelihood of responding to activists’ actions during values-based rivalry. Overall, our conceptualization primarily expands competitive dynamics research to account for rivalry between dissimilar actors and, in doing so, broadens social activist research to account for such rivalry.