An Integrative Model of Legitimacy Judgments.

Tost, Leigh Plunkett

doi:10.5465/amr.2011.65554690

Cited by 223 publications

(262 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

248

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Bitektine (2011) describes a range of decision processes that individuals experience when making assessments about the legitimacy, status and reputation of organizations. Tost (2011), similarly, identifies three component elements (instrumental, relational and moral) of individual legitimacy judgments. Both studies reflect efforts to effectively model the cognitive effects of institutional pressures at the level of the individual.…”

Section: Theory the Cognitive/phenomenological Foundations Of Institumentioning

confidence: 99%

Reflexivity: The role of embedded social position and entrepreneurial social skill in processes of field level change

Suddaby

Viale

Gendron

2016

Research in Organizational Behavior

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

General rightsThis document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. AbstractWe examine the micro-foundations of field-level organizational change by analyzing the role of social skill and social position in individuals. Our core argument is that differences in an individual's social skill and in their social position produce different degrees of reflexivity or awareness of existing social arrangements. We demonstrate how the interaction of social skill and social position produce distinct types or categories of reflexivity, each of which contributes to institutional stability or change.Keywords: agency, institutions, organizational fields, reflexivity, social position, social skill 1 Understanding the sources of profound organizational change -i.e. the creation of new organizational forms, new modes of production or social and technological innovation -is a fundamental issue for organizational theory. Researchers have consistently moved to increasingly higher levels of analysis in their efforts to explain how change can occur in highly institutionalized settings. Over the past four decades the analytic focus has shifted away from the organization and moved to studying the organizational environment as a fundamental determinant of the direction, pace and content of change. As a result, considerable attention has been devoted to viewing change through the interpretive lens of the sector (Scott & Meyer, 1983), the population (Hannan & Freeman, 1977), the network (DiMaggio, 1991; Powell, White, Koput, & Owen-Smith, 2005) and, increasingly, the organizational field (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983;Fligstein, 2013).Used largely within the context of institutional theory, the organizational field is defined, variously, as "key suppliers, resource and product consumers, regulatory agencies and other organizations that produce similar services or products" (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983) or "organizations that interact frequently and fatefully with each other" (Scott, 1994). A key distinguishing feature of the construct, however, is the phenomenological understanding that the social and cultural environment created by communities of organizations and their ideational expectations of each other is every bit as important in understanding processes of change as the technical environment of material resources (Meyer & Rowan, 1977). In counterpoint to most economic based theories of organizational change, institutional theory argues that organizational change is often the 2 result of social pressures to conform to field based norms of legitimacy rather than economic pressures.Institutional theory, thus, has become highly influential in management theory because it has the ability to explain why and how organizations often change in ways that defy traditional economic explanations (Suddaby, 2013). Early articulations of the theory focused attention on how field norms pressured organizations to adopt changes that produced increasing similarity (DiMaggio & Po...

show abstract

Section: Theory the Cognitive/phenomenological Foundations Of Institumentioning

confidence: 99%

Reflexivity: The role of embedded social position and entrepreneurial social skill in processes of field level change

Suddaby

Viale

Gendron

2016

Research in Organizational Behavior

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Tensions due to perceived incompatibility between expertise types and sources can be experienced as cognitive inconsistency (Monge and Contractor 2003), leading consumers to question the legitimacy (Tost 2011) of clinical expertise, especially when compared with their experiential lay expertise (Hartzler and Pratt 2011).…”

Section: Structural Tension 3: Managing a Fragmented And Complex Servmentioning

confidence: 99%

Responsibility and Well-Being: Resource Integration under Responsibilization in Expert Services

Anderson

Spanjol

Jefferies

et al. 2016

Journal of Public Policy & Marketing

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Responsibilization, or the shift of functions and risks from providers and producers to consumers, has become an increasingly common policy in service systems and marketplaces (e.g., financial, health, governmental). Because responsibilization is often considered synonymous with consumer agency and well-being, the authors take a transformative service research perspective and draw on resource integration literature to investigate whether responsibilization is truly associated with well-being. The authors focus on expert services, for which responsibilization concerns are particularly salient, and question whether this expanding policy is in the public interest. In the process, they develop a conceptualization of resource integration under responsibilization that includes three levels of actors (consumer, provider, and service system), the identification of structural tensions to resource integration, and three categories of resource-integration practices (access, appropriation, and management) necessary to negotiate responsibilization. The findings have important implications for health care providers, public and institutional policy makers, and other service systems, all of which must pay more active attention to the challenges consumers face in negotiating responsibilization and the resulting well-being outcomes.

show abstract

“…Legitimacy assessments are social judgments of the desirability and appropriateness of an organization or its actions (Bitektine, 2011;Suchman, 1995;Tost, 2011). By providing a contrasting approach to rationalist explanations of merger success and failure (Trautwein, 1990), the merger literature drawing on legitimacy theory argues that assessments of legitimacy by stakeholders associated with mergers, and the organizational responses to 'manage' such assessments, are central to understanding the social dynamics informing the merger process.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Legitimacy defense during post-merger integration: Between coupling and compartmentalization

Sinha

Daellenbach

Bednarek

2015

Strategic Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During post-merger integration, the realization of the benefits of potential synergies depends on managing the legitimacy of the merger. However, we still know little about how threats that change stakeholders' assessments of a merger's legitimacy are managed. This study is based on the merger case of Air New Zealand's trans-national acquisition of Ansett Australia where a delegitimizing event occurred at Ansett relatively early after the integration had started. The study builds a framework of an evolving legitimation process depicting the oscillation between legitimation responses that maintain the coupling between the two organizations and a compartmentalization response used to manage diverse stakeholders' legitimacy demands and illegitimacy spillover concerns. We explain how these legitimation responses can create an unproductive oscillation where stakeholder assessments of illegitimacy build up and ultimately become unresolvable. Our processual framework provides novel insights regarding when attempts to defend legitimacy can prove selfdefeating, demonstrating how previous responses emphasizing integration or separation can affect the success of subsequent swings back to coupling or compartmentalization.

show abstract

An Integrative Model of Legitimacy Judgments.

Cited by 223 publications

References 0 publications

Reflexivity: The role of embedded social position and entrepreneurial social skill in processes of field level change

Reflexivity: The role of embedded social position and entrepreneurial social skill in processes of field level change

Responsibility and Well-Being: Resource Integration under Responsibilization in Expert Services

Legitimacy defense during post-merger integration: Between coupling and compartmentalization

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About