Wesley D. Sine and Robert J. David
How do institutions affect entrepreneurship? Conversely, how do entrepreneurs impact institutions? Institutional theory has long struggled to explain the action and agency…
Abstract
How do institutions affect entrepreneurship? Conversely, how do entrepreneurs impact institutions? Institutional theory has long struggled to explain the action and agency inherent in entrepreneurship (DiMaggio, 1988; Barley & Tolbert, 1997). Contemporary institutionalist research in organization studies began with the question of how the institutional environment shapes the structures and behaviors of existing organizations. This research largely focused on how normative, regulative, and cognitive dimensions of the environment (Scott, 2008) constrain large, mature organizations and the circumstances that increase the adoption of new structures by such organizations (Meyer & Rowan, 1977; DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Tolbert & Zucker, 1983). A subsequent wave of research in the institutional tradition focused on institutional change within mature organizational fields (see Dacin, Goodstein, & Scott, 2002). Some recent research has studied the actors – “institutional entrepreneurs” – that create new or transform existing institutions (e.g., Greenwood, Suddaby, & Hinings, 2002; Maguire, Hardy, & Lawrence, 2004). Much less attention, however, has been paid within the institutional-theory literature to entrepreneurship: the processes of founding and managing new organizations.
David R. Selviah, Andy C. Walker, David A. Hutt, Kai Wang, Aongus McCarthy, F. Anibal Fernández, Ioannis Papakonstantinou, Hadi Baghsiahi, Himanshu Suyal, Mohammad Taghizadeh, Paul Conway, John Chappell, Shefiu S. Zakariyah, Dave Milward, Richard Pitwon, Ken Hopkins, Malcolm Muggeridge, Jeremy Rygate, Jonathan Calver, Witold Kandulski, David J. Deshazer, Karen Hueston, David J. Ives, Robert Ferguson, Subrena Harris, Gary Hinde, Martin Cole, Henry White, Navin Suyal, Habib ur Rehman and Chris Bryson
The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the research in a project aimed at developing manufacturing techniques for integrated optical and electronic interconnect…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the research in a project aimed at developing manufacturing techniques for integrated optical and electronic interconnect printed circuit boards (OPCB) including the motivation for this research, the progress, the achievements and the interactions between the partners.
Design/methodology/approach
Several polymer waveguide fabrication methods were developed including direct laser write, laser ablation and inkjet printing. Polymer formulations were developed to suit the fabrication methods. Computer‐aided design (CAD) tools were developed and waveguide layout design rules were established. The CAD tools were used to lay out a complex backplane interconnect pattern to meet practical demanding specifications for use in a system demonstrator.
Findings
Novel polymer formulations for polyacrylate enable faster writing times for laser direct write fabrication. Control of the fabrication parameters enables inkjet printing of polysiloxane waveguides. Several different laser systems can be used to form waveguide structures by ablation. Establishment of waveguide layout design rules from experimental measurements and modelling enables successful first time layout of complex interconnection patterns.
Research limitations/implications
The complexity and length of the waveguides in a complex backplane interconnect, beyond that achieved in this paper, is limited by the bend loss and by the propagation loss partially caused by waveguide sidewall roughness, so further research in these areas would be beneficial to give a wider range of applicability.
Originality/value
The paper gives an overview of advances in polymer formulation, fabrication methods and CAD tools, for manufacturing of complex hybrid‐integrated OPCBs.
Details
Keywords
Highlights the opinion that the importance of national culture in cross‐cultural management is diminishing, suggesting that the world is moving towards a single, global management…
Abstract
Highlights the opinion that the importance of national culture in cross‐cultural management is diminishing, suggesting that the world is moving towards a single, global management culture that is basically Western and, more specifically, American. Attempts to test this hypothesis by examining values held by future managers from five different cultures. Uses the Kruskal‐Wallis One Way ANOVA and the Mann‐Whitney tests to show that future managers from different cultural backgrounds will neigher adopt a mirror image of current management style in their cultures nor a global unified management style regardless of local culture.
Details
Keywords
Pamela S. Tolbert and Shon R. Hiatt
Foundational work on institutional theory as a framework for studying organizations underscored its relevance to analyses of entrepreneurship, but entrepreneurship research has…
Abstract
Foundational work on institutional theory as a framework for studying organizations underscored its relevance to analyses of entrepreneurship, but entrepreneurship research has often ignored the insights provided by this theoretic approach. In this chapter, we illustrate the utility of institutional theory as a central framework for explaining entrepreneurial phenomena by discussing three primary questions for entrepreneurship researchers: Under what conditions are individuals likely to found new organizations? What are key influences on the kinds of organizations they found? And what factors determine the likelihood of the survival of new organizations? We describe the kinds of answers that an institutional perspective provides to these questions, illustrate some of our arguments by drawing on a recent field of entrepreneurial endeavor, hedge funds, and discuss the implications of our analysis for further work by entrepreneurship researchers.
Grégoire Croidieu and Philippe Monin
We define diffusion as the spread of something within a social system. Diffusion is the most general and abstract term, and it embraces such processes as contagion, mimicry…
Abstract
We define diffusion as the spread of something within a social system. Diffusion is the most general and abstract term, and it embraces such processes as contagion, mimicry, social learning, organized dissemination, etc. (Strang & Soule, 1998). While the home territory of diffusion is innovation (see Rogers, 2003 for an authoritative review), more recent macro-diffusion research has developed, based on social movement and institutionalization arguments (Ansari, Fiss, & Zajac, 2010; Wejnert, 2002).