value based management, ethic of care, Indigenous business, Maori business, sustainability, relational wellbeing and wealth, stakeholder theory,

Organizations are searching for innovative business approaches that deliver profits and create shared value for all stakeholders. We show what can be learned from the relational wisdom approach of Indigenous Māori and reframe the prevailing economic argument that has seen companies profit and prosper at the expense of communities and ecologies. We develop an ethic of kaitiakitanga model premised on Māori values which holds the potential to enrich and further humanize our understanding of business. The Māori economy is a globally connected, prosperous, and profitable sector of the New Zealand economy. By drawing on Māori values, we present a wisdom position through an ethic of kaitiakitanga or stewardship to emphasize and illustrate the interconnectedness of life in a woven universe. Through practicing kaitiakitanga, organizations can build businesses where wisdom is consciously created through reciprocal relationships. In this worldview of business, humans are stewards endowed with a mandate to use the agency of their mana (spiritual power, authority, and sovereignty) to create mauri ora (conscious well-being) for humans and ecosystems-and this commitment extends to organizations.

No abstract

This study analyses the key contributors to radical organizational change in five New Zealand state-owned enterprises during their ownership transition between 1985 and 1995. Abrupt government reform policies, organizations' market positions, realization of rapid technological innovation, proactive managerial actions and the new owners' strategic intent are established as key conditions of radical change in state-owned enterprises. We integrate our findings with institutional theory and resource dependency theory to argue that organizational dynamics in times of uncertainty depend on deinstitutionalization of old and institutionalization of new patterns of resource dependency.

Research Question/Issue This study examines the phenomenon of principal–principal conflicts in privatized companies in Vietnam. Since different types of shareholders may have competing interests, our study aims to address the following question: “How do different types of shareholders affect principal–principal conflicts in privatized companies in Asian emerging economies?” Research Findings/Insights Through a qualitative study, including 31 semistructured interviews with various governance actors from 14 privatized companies in Vietnam, we identify four types of principal–principal conflicts: (a) state controlling owners versus nonstate owners, (b) manager‐owners and affiliated strategic investors versus employee‐owners, (c) multiple opportunistic strategic investors versus minority employee‐owners, and (d) hibernating strategic investors versus other inside owners. Theoretical/Academic Implications Our study contributes to the extant research on principal–principal conflicts in emerging economies. We advance the debate on the complexity of relationships between inside and outside shareholders. Our findings demonstrate that an understanding of controlling and minority shareholders and institutional conditions provides a more fine‐grained understanding of the complexity of principal–principal conflicts. Practitioner/Policy Implications Our findings offer insights into how different types of shareholders seek to advance their own interests. This, in turn, can lead to them misinterpreting legal requirements. Thus, policymakers should consider different types of strategic investors and their strategic intent in the privatization process.