Search results

Like an online carnival, Web3 aims to turn the internet’s social order upside down. Unlike a carnival, Web3 wants to be more than a weeklong party and morph into a legitimate substitute for the internet’s status quo. Web3’s secret sauce for upheaval is decentralized, permissionless technologies, in particular blockchain technologies. In this exploratory paper, we draw on the concept of institutional isomorphism to muse about Web3’s future and to highlight the inherent tension between striving to be different from Web2 yet wanting to become more legitimate. We argue that technical merits are hardly enough to realize Web3’s high aspirations. Regulatory pressures, rampant uncertainty, and the professional norms of Web3 participants drive the space to adopt many of the organizational structures and practices that it aims to displace. To maintain divergence from Web2, despite isomorphic pressures, we suggest that it is important to increase the overall diversity of people in Web3, to double down on the value of decentralization, and to reaffirm Web3’s commitment to creatively re-imagine various institutional arrangements.

In order to overcome potential limitations in their own experience with a strategic action, firms will often outsource to expert firms that have greater experience with such actions. In this study, the authors contribute to theory on organizational experience and learning by examining an important but understudied type of experience – outsourced experience. The authors show whether, and under what conditions, such experience may be beneficial for focal firms. In the context of acquisitions, the authors find that outsourced acquisition experience brought to acquisition deals by advisors is typically assessed by markets to be detrimental but may become beneficial if such experience is specific to the acquirer’s context. Further, the authors find that acquirers’ own knowledge can signal that they are less reliant on advisor experience, thus mitigating its potentially harmful effects. Theoretical and practical implications of the results are discussed.

Relational contracting is increasingly being applied to complex and uncertain construction projects. However, it has proved hard to achieve stable performance and industry-level learning in this field. This paper employs an institutional perspective to analyze how legitimacy for relational contracting has been produced and challenged in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden, including implications for dissemination and learning.

A collaborative case study design is used, where longitudinal accounts of the developments in relational contracting over more than 25 years in four Nordic countries were developed by scholars based in each country. The descriptions are underpinned by literature sources from research, practice and policy.

The countries share similar problem perceptions that have triggered the de-institutionalization of traditional contracting practices. Models and policies developed elsewhere are important sources of knowledge and legitimacy. Most countries have seen pendulum movements, where dissemination of relational contracting is followed by backlashes when projects fail to meet projected outcomes. Before long, however, relational contracting tends to re-emerge under new labels and in slightly new forms. Such a proliferation of concepts presents further obstacles to learning. Successful institutionalization is found to rely on realistic goals in combination with broad competence development at the organizational and industry levels.

In seeking inspiration from other countries, policymakers should go beyond contract models to also consider strategies to manage industry-level learning.

The paper provides a unique longitudinal cross-country perspective on the field of relational contracting. As such, it contributes to the small stream of literature on long-term institutional change in the construction sector.

This paper aims to unveil the darker side of cryptocurrencies by delving into its role as an obstacle to investments in Middle East and African (MEAs) countries, unravelling the challenges involved. Indeed, despite the rise of blockchain-related technologies, specifically cryptocurrencies, having undeniably unlocked new avenues for business and society, crypto for venture funding purposes may exhibit a “dark side” due to their use for unethical purposes, for example, money laundering or terrorism financing, largely diffused in certain areas of MEA countries.

Through an explorative research design, using a mix of techniques based on both qualitative and interpretive methods, we conducted in-depth interviews among 33 European managers of companies engaged in MEA markets or aspiring to invest in such foreign markets, to analyse their thoughts, perceptions and possible strategies concerning the management of the “dark side” of cryptocurrencies in MEAs.

Our investigation unearthed seven pivotal issues, which manifest as significant barriers related to the ambivalent use of crypto for funding projects, encompassing seven important consequential elements: (1) lack of knowledge about the technology’s potentialities; (2) perceptions of crypto technology’s ambivalence; (3) reputation and image consequences; (4) uncertainty about the destination of the invested funds; (5) decreased attractiveness of MEAs; (6) competition and market; and (7) lack of control and regulation. We grouped these into technology-related, business-related and legal- and policy-related barriers. Such findings underline the probable decrease in attractiveness of MEAs in terms of investments, together with the triggering factors and potential strategic solutions to mitigate such circumstances.

Future studies could explore a broader sample of managers since we only considered the perception of European managers operating in companies that invest (or are intending to invest) in MEAs. Moreover, future research may extend the analysis to MEA-native companies or those engaging in reciprocal exchanges with Western countries.

Practically, our findings suggest several elements in which to intervene to mitigate managers’ negative perception of the unethical use of cryptocurrencies in MEAs and to support CEOs’ and CFOs’ strategies, together with requirements to ensure the unaltered attractiveness of investments in an otherwise thriving region of the world, without overlooking the protection and safeguarding of investments and the health of the market and competition. Furthermore, a call for future research in this domain, along with at least minimal regulatory mechanisms, clearly emerges.

Our findings underline the social challenges associated with the perception and acceptance of cryptocurrencies in these contexts, influencing cultural and social dynamics. Moreover, the identification of these barriers could underscore the significance of awareness of and education on blockchain technology and cryptocurrencies within society, including implications for policymakers.

Despite prior investigations into the negative effects of cryptocurrencies as a form of venture funding, no studies to date have examined managers’ perceptions by focusing on possible barriers to investment in MEA countries due to the unethical usage of crypto. Importantly, this paper unravels the unexplored complexities of crypto’s impact on ethical investments in MEAs, showcasing an original perspective.

This paper aims to explore how historical context influences the content and selection of rhetorical legitimation strategies. Using case study method, this paper will focus on how insurance companies and labor tried to defend their legitimacy in the context of enactment of Medicare in the USA. What factors influenced the strategic (rhetorical) decisions made by insurance companies and labor unions in their institutional work?

The study is empirically grounded in archival research, involving an analysis of over 9,000 pages of congressional hearings on Medicare covering the period 1958–1965.

The authors show that rhetorical legitimation strategies depend significantly on the specific historical circumstances in which those strategies are used. The historical context lent credibility to certain arguments and organizations are forced to decide either to challenge widely held assumptions or take advantage of them. The authors show that organizations face strong incentives to pursue the latter option. Here, both the insurance companies and labor unions tried to show that their positions were consistent with classical liberal ideology, because of high respect of classical liberal principles among different stakeholders (policymakers, voters, etc.).

It is uncertain how much the results of the study could be generalized. More information about the organizations whose use of rhetorics the authors studied could have strengthened our conclusions.

The practical relevancy of the revised paper is that the authors should not expect hegemony challenging rhetorics from organizations, which try to influence legislators (and perhaps the larger public). Perhaps (based on the findings), this kind of rhetorics is not even very effective.

The paper helps to understand better how organizations try to advance their interests and gain acceptance among the stakeholders.

In this paper, the authors show how historical context in practice influence rhetorical arguments organizations select in public debates when their goal is to influence the decision-making of their audience. In particular, the authors show how dominant ideology (or ideologies) limit the options organizations face when they are choosing their strategies and arguments. In terms of the selection of rhetorical justification strategies, the most pressing question is not the “real” broad based support of certain ideologies. Insurance company and labor union representatives clearly believed that they must emphasize liberal values (or liberal ideology) if they wanted to gain legitimacy for their positions. In existing literature, it is often assumed that historical context influence the selection of rhetorical strategies but how this in fact happens is not usually specified. The paper shows how interpretations of historical contexts (including the ideological context) in practice influence the rhetorical strategies organizations choose.

We investigate how existing investment in strong external corporate governance mechanism—use of Big 4 audit firms—affect compliance with corporate governance audit (CGA) regulation in Nigeria and Kenya. While both countries are characterized by weak enforcement, they differ in their corporate governance audit regulatory strategies.

The study adopts neo-institutional theory as a theoretical framework and uses logit and probit models and generalized estimating equations as empirical models to test the hypotheses developed.

The study finds that persuasive coercive isomorphism provides reputational benefits to clients of multinational audit firms in Kenya and encourages them to conduct and report their CGA. In Nigeria, clients of multinational audit firms are less likely to conduct CGA as there is no persuasive coercive isomorphism in place. We also find many internal corporate governance variables to positively influence CGA.

The success of any regulation is dependent on the level of compliance by regulated entities. As clients of multinational audit firms usually have the motivation and resources to employ such high quality audit firms, it is expected that if they are well motivated, they will commit similar level of resources to conducting CGA. In Nigeria, the Financial Reporting Council should develop some persuasive measures to encourage clients of multinational audit firms to conduct CGA. In both Nigeria and Kenya, enforcement of internal corporate governance frameworks should be strengthened.

This is the first study to explore how regulatory strategies affect strategic responses of regulated entities to CGA regulation, introducing a new dimension to the ESG literature.

This paper aims to explore the effects of innovation awards on subsequent innovation behaviors in organizations. Specifically, the authors investigate whether winning an external innovation award helps diffuse the award-winning innovations and develop additional innovation projects in the organization. Furthermore, the authors study the contextual influence of innovators’ organizational hierarchy on experiencing and using the winning consequence.

The authors collected survey data from clinics and hospitals that participated in a state-level innovation award program sponsored by a large health-care insurer and provider in Midwestern states. The authors tested the hypotheses using ordinary least squares regressions and supplemented the method with a post hoc analysis using Fisher’s least significant difference test.

The authors find that awards help a “bottom-up” innovation (i.e., an innovation initiated by a lower-level employee) disseminate at a larger scale due to award-bestowed legitimacy and reputation, whereas a “top-down” innovation (i.e., an innovation initiated by a top manager) does not experience the same benefit. On the other hand, the organizations that won the innovation award with a “top-down” innovation showed a higher number of additional innovation projects after winning, as manager–innovators experienced a boost in their confidence to engage in further innovation projects.

This paper offers a unique and nuanced examination of how innovation awards influence organizational innovation. By bridging literatures on awards and innovation, the authors propose the mechanisms through which innovation awards confer legitimacy and reputation upon the award winners and their innovations. Furthermore, the authors add insights into the recent academic interests in employee-driven innovation by showing the different benefits of innovation awards depending on the innovators’ organizational hierarchies.

The purpose of this study is to enrich the literature on employee relations with a new model focusing on the effect of institutional structure and that of employees’ organizational identification on the relationship between institutional structure in an organization and employees’ pro-environmental behaviors, which represents an alternative approach for understanding employees’ pro-environmental performance.

We collect multi-level and multi-source data from 52 four- or five-star hotels in China (N = 963). For data analysis, we adopt the approach of multilevel structural equation modeling.

The results suggest that organizations’ green institutional structure (G-structure) can significantly influence employees’ organizational identification, which in turn can increase their pro-environmental performance.

We propose a new multi-level theoretical perspective to explain employees’ pro-environmental behaviors. While prior studies on the issue mainly consider only the effects of such micro-level variables as ability, motivation and personality, we focus on the effect of organizational institution and its interaction with micro-level variables so that we can evaluate the effect a commonly-studied contextual variable, i.e. green institutions, on the behaviors. Moreover, in this new theoretical model, we also take into account the effect of another insufficiently-tested micro-level variable, i.e. employees’ identification, which has not been considered as frequently as other micro-level variables in studying employees’ pro-environmental performance. Our results highlight the importance of all these variables and suggest a valuable alternative model for more comprehensive research of employees’ green performance.