Institutional judo: how entrepreneurs use institutional forces to create change

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine an entrepreneur’s attempt to gain legitimacy and change institutions in a multiple institutions setting. Design/methodology/approach – The authors conducted a qualitative case study to track an entrepreneur’s efforts to create a new financial instrument and get it accepted and traded on the New York Stock Exchange. Findings – The authors introduce the concept of institutional judo, analogous to the martial art where a fighter uses his opponent’s forces against him. While institutional theory has focussed on how institutional pressures force actors to conform, the term judo refers to an actor using institutional pressures to their advantage in changing those very institutions. Research limitations/implications – This qualitative research involves a single case study, but is most suited to revealing extensions of theory and subtle processes. Practical implications – The approach allowed the authors to provide a nuanced look at the actual change efforts by an entrepreneur to gain legitimacy. Social implications – This study provides a nuanced look at actual attempts to change institutions. Originality/value – Institutional judo offers a new change mechanism within institutional theory.

Resilient agility in volatile economies: institutional and organizational antecedents

“…We postulate that, while both widely applicable, EO and bricolage become especially pivotal for resilient agility in contexts characterized by institutional instability and estrangement. We further posit that resilient agility in volatile economies can be embodied by savvy and adept firms that are quick at finding alternative and handy solutions and evading institutional limitations and voids to survive hardships (Elert and Henrekson, 2016;Hansen et al, 2015). Their EO and bricolage can turn adverse aspects of institutional instability and estrangement into productive forces and foster resilient agility.…”

“…We argue that some actors embedded in volatile institutional fields become hardened and are acclimatized over time to unfavorable institutional factors and internalize constructive and dynamic means to leverage threats as opportunities. In this vein, institutional factors are not public goods with mechanically equivalent influences on all agents, but instead have varied influences due to divergent means applied by each agent embedded in the institutional environment (Hansen et al, 2015).…”

Organizational Change and the Imperatives of Managing Employee Resistance: A Conceptual Review

“…John Kotter one of the Gurus of change talks about his 8-Step model to help in implementation of change, the 8-Step Model is a classic model which has formed the base on many change management models (Senior & Fleming, 2004). Hansen, Randolph, Chen, Robinson, Marin and Lee (2015) argued that business leaders must also manage the people within its walls as many institutionalized opponents can negatively influence prospective adopters. A firm's employees must undertake a learning phase to develop competencies and new processes during technological-induced change (Ahsan, Ozer, & Alakent, 2010).…”

“…Managing and leading employees in a changing environment is critical to overall business success. Hansen, Randolph, Chen, Robinson, Marin and Lee (2015) argued that business leaders must understand that both influencers and opponents seek to encourage imitators, and managers must use institutional pressures to their advantage in changing those very institutions. Thus, managers are needed to anticipate and manage resistance, draw up a plan of action, and a realistic timeline to allow the firm to remain healthy and competitive (Cullen, Edwards, Casper, & Gue, 2014).…”

From decoy to target

“…The review is based on: "Institutional Judo: how entrepreneurs use institutional forces to create change" by Hansen et al (2015). In this lengthy piece, the authors challenge existing views by suggesting that entrepreneurs can become major forces of institutional change.…”