Understanding Radical Organizational Change: Bringing Together the Old and the New Institutionalism

Greenwood, Royston; Hinings, C. R.

doi:10.5465/amr.1996.9704071862

Cited by 2,062 publications

(1,479 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

1,397

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It may prove fruitful to consider this finding in the context of frameworks provided in the organizational change literature. Change theorists have argued that change processes meaningfully differ and therefore can be distinguished by the extent to which they involve a shift in the strategic orientation of a system and challenge existing schemata (Bartunek and Moch 1987;Greenwood and Hinings 1996). First-order changes are characterized by incremental shifts that are consistent with an established framework or set of operating assumptions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Profiling Capacity for Coordination and Systems Change: The Relative Contribution of Stakeholder Relationships in Interorganizational Collaboratives

Nowell

2009

American J of Comm Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In response to increasing demands for greater coordination and collaboration among community institutions, interorganizational collaboratives (i.e., coalitions, partnerships, coordinating councils) have emerged as a popular mechanism for strengthening the capacity of a community system to respond to public and social issues. This study adopts a network approach to explore the relative importance of dense networks of cooperative relationships among members of interorganizational collaboratives for two outcomes of effectiveness: improving interorganizational coordination and fostering systems change. Based on survey and social network data collected from 48 different collaboratives, findings indicate that, relative to other key characteristics of collaboratives identified in previous literature, cooperative stakeholder relationships were the strongest predictor of systems change outcomes. However, for coordination outcomes, stakeholder relationships were overshadowed in importance by the leadership and decision making capacity of the collaborative. Collectively, findings suggest key differences in the requisite capacity profiles for coordination and systems change outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Profiling Capacity for Coordination and Systems Change: The Relative Contribution of Stakeholder Relationships in Interorganizational Collaboratives

Nowell

2009

American J of Comm Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Yet within the context of revolutionary change we might well be able to substantially narrow the timeframe (Gersick, 1991). Defined in terms of the scale and pace of upheaval, revolutionary change, in affecting virtually all parts of the organization simultaneously, encompasses significant and major change in organizational and strategic precedents (Greenwood and Hinings, 1996;Rajagopalan and Spreitzer, 1996). Such events are usually associated with outside pressures triggered by some form of crisis (Barker and Duhaime, 1997), akin to the 'punctuated equilibrium' model of Tushman and Romanelli (1995) and representative of the Asian financial crisis.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Temporal Dynamics of Crossvergence: Institutionalizing MNC Integration Strategies in Post-Crisis ASEAN

Andrews

Chompusri

2005

Asia Pacific J Manage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study utilizes the temporal lens afforded by the unprecedented pace of the Asian financial crisis to re-conceptualize the convergence-divergence-crossvergence (CDC) framework. Grounded at the Western-headquartered ASEAN subsidiary, CDC is hypothesized as a dialectical progression comprising Western corporate culture (‘convergence’) ASEAN societal culture (‘divergence’) and ending with the institutionalization of these forces (‘crossvergence’) as a transient re-equilibrium. Against a backdrop of increasing macro-level turbulence, the CDC dialectic is then fed through a dyadic cycle of environmental shocks and organizational responses. Managerial implications are discussed along with suggestions for future research. Copyright Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005convergence-divergence-crossvergence, cross-cultural organizational change, dialectical progression, institutionalization, multinational corporations, ASEAN,

show abstract

“…In that the current process of SE institutionalization is proving fragile by imposing normative rigidity partially neglecting the richness and the relevance of SE context-based nature. Beyond the idealistic and utopian tension of a regulation-free SE, we believe that at least at this early stage of SE translation into practice, exploring the widest contextual variety of SE manifestations is required to orient a more realistic and meaningful institutionalization process capable of accounting also for social emergentism (Powell & DiMaggio, 1991) and for the interaction between rules and actual actions (Greenwood & Hinings, 1996). Although presently SE seems to rest upon a functional managerial logic in the way it is conceived and pursued, the dialogic essence characterizing its dynamic tension toward negotiation and sharing between company and stakeholders might act as an enabler of the capability of the firm to account for that social emergentism that is now required to guarantee the selective relevance of the company issues.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stakeholder Engagement beyond the Tension between Idealism and Practical Concerns

Biraghi¹,

Gambetti²,

Romenti³

2017

IJBM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper digs into the existing controversial literature on stakeholder engagement (SE) to understand and critically confront with ambivalence in the concept. This is done by exploring how SE is conceptually framed and pragmatically pursued in the representations of current business practices. The study is designed according to a qualitative interpretive approach based on depth interviews with a purposively selected theoretical sample of key informants with established expertise in stakeholder relationship management practices. According to our findings, SE appears torn between an idealistic impetus on the fringe of a utopian vision of the business, and its often trivial translation into practice urged by the pragmatic necessity to meet accountability requirements. This tension stems from corporate governance logics and organizational business models of firms, which are often not prone to guarantee the participatory and genuinely dialogic exchange between company and stakeholders advocated by the idealistic mandate of SE. In terms of contribution the paper provides a critical inductive reconstruction of current meanings and clashes embedded in enacting SE.

show abstract

Understanding Radical Organizational Change: Bringing Together the Old and the New Institutionalism

Cited by 2,062 publications

References 61 publications

Profiling Capacity for Coordination and Systems Change: The Relative Contribution of Stakeholder Relationships in Interorganizational Collaboratives

Profiling Capacity for Coordination and Systems Change: The Relative Contribution of Stakeholder Relationships in Interorganizational Collaboratives

Temporal Dynamics of Crossvergence: Institutionalizing MNC Integration Strategies in Post-Crisis ASEAN

Stakeholder Engagement beyond the Tension between Idealism and Practical Concerns

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About