Category Archives: Journal of Management Studies

Committed Actors, Institutional Complexity, and Pathways to Compromise: The Emergence of Islamic Banking in Germany

Posted on by

Abstract

The formation of the first Islamic bank in Germany in 2015 came with considerable tensions at the interface of the religious logic, on the one hand, and the state logic, on the other. With the Islamic religious logic being novel to the German field of banking and finance, innovative templates were established to deal effectively with the resulting tensions and conflicts. Drawing on qualitative data, we investigate how the bank, with its strong commitment to Islam, navigated such novel institutional complexity and the challenges stemming from the jurisdictional overlap. We identify four distinct compromise mechanisms in this institutionally complex situation, in which a committed actor prioritizes one logic over another: explaining, convincing, conceding and suspending. Importantly, as options, these mechanisms are situated in a cascading order of preference for the focal actor. More generally, our research posits that in any encounter between institutional logics in which the specific instantiation of a logic stems from a foreign interinstitutional system, the resulting novel institutional complexity may necessitate the development of innovative templates which, at the same time, may imply ‘stretching’ an institutional logic and, in consequence, impact the compatibility of its jurisdictional claims.

The AI of the Beholder: Intra‐Professional Sensemaking of an Epistemic Technology

Posted on by

Abstract

New technologies are equivocal, triggering sensemaking responses from the individuals who encounter them. As an ‘epistemic technology’ AI poses new challenges to the expertise and jurisdictions of professionals. Such challenges may be interpreted quite differently, however, depending on the specialized role identities which develop within the wider professional domain. We explore the sensemaking responses of these intra-professional groupings to the challenges posed by AI through an empirical study of professionals playing different roles (front-line, hybrid and field-level) in the field of radiology within NHS England. We found that these intra-professional groupings sought to make sense of AI through a triadic view focused on the interplay of professional, client and technology. This sensemaking, arising from different jurisdictional contexts, led individual professionals to perceive that their agency was diminished, complemented or enhanced as a result of the introduction of AI. Our findings contribute to the literature on professions and AI by showing how intra-professional differences affect sensemaking responses to AI as a jurisdictional contestant.

How do New Ventures Thrive in Ecosystem Venturing: The Impacts of Alliance Strategy and Technology Interdependence

Posted on by

Abstract

New ventures in an innovation ecosystem can not only receive benefits, but also face challenges. It is important to examine defence mechanisms that new ventures can employ for their healthy development in the innovation ecosystem. Based on resource dependence theory, combining with arguments from innovation ecosystems literature, this paper proposes that new ventures’ technological alliances with core competitors of ecosystem investors can be used as a social defence in ecosystem venturing. Furthermore, we investigate the moderator effects of technological interdependence – technological similarity and technological complementarity on the impacts of such a defence mechanism. Using longitudinal information of 4903 investor-investee dyads in ecosystem venturing, we find that (1) technological alliances with core competitors of the ecosystem investor has a positive relationship to venture performance, and (2) such relationship is negatively moderated by technological complementarity. Our findings provide important implications for research on innovation ecosystems and resource dependence theory.

Representing, Re‐presenting, or Producing the Past? Memory Work amongst Museum Employees

Posted on by

Abstract

Though it is widely understood that the past can be an important resource for organizations, less is known about the micro-level skills and choices that help to materialize different representations of the past. We understand these micro-level skills and choices as a practice: ‘memory work’ – a banner term gathering various activities that provide the scaffolding for a shared past. Seeking to learn from a context where memory work is central, we share insights from a quasi-longitudinal study of UK museum employees. We theorize three ideal-typic regimes of memory work, namely representing, re-presenting and producing the past, and detail the micro-practices through which these regimes are enacted. Through explaining the key features of memory work in this context, our paper offers novel, broader insights into the relationship between occupations and memory work, showing how occupations differ in their understanding of memory and how this shapes their memory work.

Entrepreneurial Orientation and Underconformity to Female Board Representation Norms

Posted on by

Abstract

Despite mounting societal demands for increased female representation on corporate boards, some firms underconform to institutional expectations, exhibiting significantly lower female board representation than their country peers. We argue that a firm's entrepreneurial orientation is positively viewed by stakeholders, providing its corporate leaders with greater latitude to deviate from governance norms. Drawing from social role theory regarding beliefs about the association between entrepreneurial success and typical male traits, we propose that this substitutive legitimacy drives corporate leaders of firms with an entrepreneurial orientation to underconform due to a desire to maintain their firm's orientation. However, the history of female leadership in the firm and disclosure about environmental and social activities moderate the effect of entrepreneurial orientation on underconformity to female board representation norms. A generalized estimating equations analysis of 8410 firm-year observations in 16 countries from 2012 to 2018 supports our predictions. Our study offers a novel explanation of heterogeneity in female board representation, informs theory of organizational non-conformity to institutional norms, and highlights potentially unintended consequences of entrepreneurial orientation.

Caught in a Landslide? Exploring how Far the Increasing Focus on Big Data Benefits or Damages Theoretical Development in Management Studies

Posted on by

Abstract

The author teams in this Point-Counterpoint (PCP) put forward contrasting views regarding the benefits – or otherwise – of using commercially generated corporate ‘big data’ algorithms to inform scholarly research. In this editorial, I reflect on the lines of reasoning for, and against, whether such data offers a reliable means of building new theory. Are academics who refuse to mine and analyse corporately owned big data taking sensible steps to manage scholarly integrity? Or are they Luddites? I invite readers to consider these timely and provocative PCP articles and to consider the implications, for management studies, of the key arguments presented.

Critical Management Studies: A Critical Review

Posted on by

Abstract

In this paper, we review the development of critical management studies, point at problems and explore possible developments. We begin by tracing out two previous waves of critical management studies. We then focus on more recent work in critical management studies and identify ten over-arching themes (Academia, alternatives organizations, control and resistance, discourse, Foucauldian studies, gender, identity, Marxism, post-colonialism, and psychoanalysis). We argue that CMS has largely relied on one-dimensional critique which focused on negation. This has made the field increasingly stale, focused on the usual suspects and predictable. We identify a number of problems calling for critique and rethinking. We label these author-itarianism, obscurantism, formulaic radicalism, usual-suspectism and empirical light-touchism.

Generating, Grading, and Ghosting: How Organizing Experts Shapes Expertise

Posted on by

Abstract

Experts increasingly refine their expertise into specialties as they labour in and around organizations. Yet, previous research assumes that experts are organized in the workplace in ways that passively accommodate or mirror pre-existing specialties and focuses on organizational structures that codify the content of experts’ knowledge as an encroachment. Drawing on a qualitative field study in an aeronautical organization's engineering unit, this paper examines the organizational structures that chart the area of experts’ knowledge, i.e., their specialties. The findings show that organizational structures are generative, defining the contours of existing expertise and catalysing the formation of new ones (generating). However, organizational structures also encode criteria that implicitly rank some forms of expertise over others, thereby reinforcing status hierarchies (grading), and misalignment across organizational structures renders some forms of expertise invisible (ghosting). By showing the active role of organizational structures in shaping expertise rather than simply housing it, this paper contributes to our understanding of expertise development as well as status dynamics and access to resources among experts. Further, the paper reveals how misalignments across multiple organizational structures may impact the management of knowledge and human capital.

Organizations, Institutions, and Symbols: Introduction to a Point‐Counterpoint Conversation

Posted on by

Abstract

The symbol is one of the key concepts in organization and management scholarship. Yet as indicated by the authors in this debate, it has not been adequately conceptualized and as such it remains rather blunt and opaque. In what is the first systematic conceptual debate on this topic, the authors of this Point-Counterpoint debate seek to address this issue. The respective essays, despite marked differences in their approaches, offer novel and thought-provoking accounts of what the symbol is and how it works. Taken together, these contributions offer a series of exciting new avenues to guide and redirect future research in this area.

Cross‐Sector Partnerships to Address Societal Grand Challenges: Systematizing Differences in Scholarly Analysis

Posted on by

Abstract

Research on how cross-sector partnerships (CSPs) contribute toward addressing societal grand challenges (SGCs) has burgeoned, yet studies differ significantly in what scholars analyze and how. These differences matter as they influence the reported results. In the absence of a comprehensive framework to expose the analytical choices behind each study and their implications, this diversity challenges interpretation and consolidation of evidence upon which novel theory and practical interventions can be developed. In this study, we conduct a systematic review of scholarly analysis in CSP management studies to develop a framework that contextualizes the SGC-related evidence and reveals scholars’ analytical choices and their implications. Conceptually, we advance the term ‘SGC interventions’ to illuminate the black box leading to SGC-related effects, thus helping to differentiate between transformative versus mitigative interventions in scholars’ analytical focus. Moreover, the framework stresses the logical interplay between the framing of the SGC-related problem and the reporting of the intervention's effects. Through this, we juxtapose what we call problem-centric versus solution-centric SGC analysis and so differentiate between their analytical purpose. We discuss the framework's implications for advancing an SGC perspective in scholarly analysis of CSPs and outline avenues for future research.