Revitalizing Threat-Rigidity: Construct Clarification and Measure Validation

Abstract

This paper resolves inconsistencies in threat-rigidity research, providing content clarification. Four studies demonstrate creation of a survey measure, incorporating recent trends and research and alleviating the paucity of measurement alternatives. Dimensions include restriction of information processing, reliance on existing routines, short-term focus, reliance on decision makers, decision-maker reticence, and stress.

Entrepreneurial Orientation and Environmental Hostility: A Threat Rigidity Perspective

“…The threat rigidity thesis suggests that, ceteris paribus, organizations tend to constrain their strategic actions when faced with threatening operational environments (Staw et al, 1981). The logic is that firms begin restricting their information processing as environmental threats increase, restricting the range of options under consideration, and thereby increasing rigidity and inaction (Osiyevskyy & Dewald, 2018; Slyngstad, 2016). Research further suggests that firms in these environments emphasize capital management and conservation of resources (Chattopadhyay et al, 2001; Osiyevskyy & Dewald, 2015; Sarkar & Osiyevskyy, 2018; Shimizu, 2007), which in extreme cases leads to organizational paralysis (George et al, 2006).…”

“…A curvilinear relationship between hostility and EO addresses part of the paradox, but potentially not all. Chattopadhyay et al (2001) suggest a variety of moderating factors that influence the effect of environmental threats on strategic behaviors, organizational slack being among the most prominent (Slyngstad, 2016). We argue that a firm’s recoverable slack—the excess capital embedded within an organizational cost structure (George, 2005)—acts as a buffer to a firm’s inclination to diminish its EO when faced with increasing levels of hostility.…”