Organizational settlements: theorizing how organizations respond to institutional complexity

Research on hybrid organizations and institutional complexity commonly depicts the presence of multiple logics within organizations as an exceptional situation. In this essay, we argue that all organizations routinely adhere to multiple institutional logics. Institutional complexity only arises episodically, when organizations embrace a newly salient logic. We propose two concepts to develop this insight. First, we suggest the notion of organizational settlement to refer to the way in which organizations durably incorporate multiple logics. Second, we define organizational hybridization as a change process whereby organizations abandon their existing organizational settlement and transition to a new one, incorporating a newly salient logic. Overall, we propose a shift in attention from the exceptionality of hybrid configurations of multiple logics towards exploring the dynamics of transitions from one state of complexity to another

Cross-border regions in Europe - Significance and drivers of regional cross-border co-operation

Accepted versio

What are Business Models: Towards a Theory of Performative Representations

Despite a rich extant literature, it is unclear what business models are. We assess three dominant conceptions of business models in the academic literature: as transactional structures, value extracting devices, and mechanisms for structuring the organization. To overcome the shortcomings of these approaches, we draw on theories of performativity, social typecasting, and managerial cognition. We propose an alternative conception of business models as performative representations that work in three ways: as narratives that convince, typifications that legitimate, and recipes that guide social action. Rather than actual features of firms, business models are representations that allow managers to articulate and instantiate the value of new technologies

The governance of formal university–industry interactions: understanding the rationales for alternative models

This article develops a conceptual framework to explain the economic rationale underpinning the choice of different modes of governance of formal university–industry interactions: personal contractual interactions, where the contract regulating the collaboration involves a firm and an individual academic researcher, and institutional interactions, where the relationship between the firm and the academic is mediated by the university. Although institutional interactions, for numerous reasons, have become more important, both governance modes are currently being implemented. We would argue that they have some important specificities that need to be understood if university–industry knowledge transfer is to be managed effectively and efficiently

Protecting scientists from Gordon Gekko: how organizations use hybrid spaces to engage with multiple institutional logics

Previous work on institutional complexity has discussed two solutions that organizations deploy internally when engaging externally with multiple institutional logics: blended hybrids where logics are combined throughout the organization, and structural hybrids where different logics dominate in different compartments within the organization. While blended hybrids have been extensively investigated, few studies have examined how structural hybrids are constructed and maintained. We address this imbalance by studying university-industry research centers as instances of distinct organizational spaces used to engage with a minority logic. We found that these spaces require three kinds of work: (a) leveraging, where dominant logic practices are drawn on to achieve minority logic objectives; (b) hybridizing, where the practices inside the space are modified to allow engagement with the minority logic; and (c) bolstering, where the space is shielded against excessive minority logic influence and anchored back into the organization. Furthermore, contrary to the existing literature we found that the spaces were hybrid, rather than being dominated by a single logic. Our finding is likely generalizable across many instances of structural hybrids given the integration problems that organizations with pure single logic spaces would face, combined with the usefulness of hybrid spaces. Our study is novel in revealing the work needed to sustain hybrid spaces and questioning the previously held conceptualization of structural hybrids as made up of single-logic compartments

Business Model Innovation: How Iconic Business Models Emerge

Despite ample research on the topic of business model innovation, little is known about the cognitive processes whereby some innovative business models gain the status of iconic representations of particular types of firms. This study addresses the question: How do iconic business models emerge? In other words: How do innovative business models become prototypical exemplars for new categories of firms? We focus on the case of Airbnb, and analyze how six mainstream business media publications discussed Airbnb between 2008 and 2013. The cognitive process whereby Airbnb’s business model became the iconic business model for the sharing economy involved three phases. First, these publications drew on multiple analogies to try to assimilate Airbnb’s innovative business model into their existing system of categories. Second, they developed a more nuanced understanding of Airbnb’s business model. Finally, they established it as the prototypical exemplar of a new type of organization. We contribute to business model research by providing an elaborated definition of the notion of the iconic business model which is rooted in social categorization research, and by theorizing the cognitive process that underpins the emergence of iconic business models. Our study also complements research on the role of analogical reasoning in business model innovation. Finally, we complement the market categorization literature by documenting a case of the emergence of a prototypical exemplar

Social Valuation Across Multiple Audiences: The Interplay of Ability and Identity Judgments

How is an evaluating audience influenced by previous evaluations made by another audience? This question is critical to individuals and organizations reaching out to multiple audiences for key resources. While extant work has suggested evaluators are influenced by previous evaluations made by their peers, we develop theory about how evaluators’ assessment of a candidate is shaped by previous evaluations made by an external (non-peer) audience. We argue that the latter represent exogenous indices that affect evaluators in two opposing ways: they positively influence peer valuation by pointing to candidates’ unobservable abilities; yet, since they are conferred by an external audience, they are also indicative of candidates’ deviation from an expected peer identity. The combination of the two opposite effects suggests an inverted U-shaped relationship between exogenous indices and peer valuation. Further, this effect is moderated by the identity proximity between audiences, and the availability of previous peer evaluations (endogenous indices). We test and find support for our arguments using unique data on the peer valuation of 9,502 academic scientists applying for research grants at a research university. Our work contributes to the understanding of valuation and socially endogenous inferences, and has implications for the management of organizations in multi-audience environments

Attention to Exploration: The Effect of Academic Entrepreneurship on the Production of Scientific Knowledge

We study how becoming an entrepreneur affects academic scientists' research. We propose that entrepreneurship will shift scientists' attention away from intradisciplinary research questions and toward new bodies of knowledge relevant for downstream technology development. This will propel scientists to engage in exploration, meaning they work on topics new to them. In turn, this shift toward exploration will enhance the impact of the entrepreneurial scientist's subsequent research, as concepts and models from other bodies of knowledge are combined in novel ways. Entrepreneurship leads to more impactful research, mediated by exploration. Using panel data on the full population of scientists at a large research university, we find support for this argument. Our study is novel in that it identifies a shift of attention as the mechanism underpinning the beneficial spillover effects from founding a venture on the production of public science. A key implication of our study is that commercial work by academics can drive fundamental advances in science

How are management fashions institutionalized? The role of institutional work

We explore how transitory management fashions become institutionalized. Based on the concepts of institutional entrepreneurship and institutional work, we postulate that fashionable management practices acquire permanence when they are anchored within fieldwide institutions. The building of such institutions requires various types of institutional work, including political work, technical work and cultural work. Based on a review of the empirical literature on various management fashions, we identify the actors engaging in these different types of works, and their skills. Our results suggest that the institutionalization effect is stronger if more types of institutional work are deployed and if the skill sets of the involved actors vary. We also argue that institutional construction in the case of management fashions is likely to take the form of decentralized `partaking' rather than being led by a single dominant institutional entrepreneur. We conclude with implications for the study of management fashions and the role of agency in institutionalization

Are public subsidies effective for university spinoffs? Evidence from SBIR awards in the University of California system

This study examines the impact of public subsidies, and specifically, Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) awards on university spinoff companies. Using unique data for a population of University of California spinoffs, we find pronounced differences between companies commercializing digital technologies (software and hardware), and those that focus on other product spaces. For digital spinoffs, receiving an SBIR award has a negative impact on raising venture capital and no impact on IPOs, exits or first sales. Conversely, for non-digital firms (e.g., biotechnology, energy), receiving an SBIR award has a positive effect on raising venture capital and performance outcomes. We reason that digital technologies are subject to faster cycle times and higher market uncertainty, relative to technological uncertainty. Digital firms may therefore benefit less from subsidies designed to support technology development, and private investors may view the need of digital companies to obtain such subsidies as a negative certification. Our findings inform policy by suggesting that the industrial domain may be an important boundary condition for the effectiveness of SBIR-type subsidies for university spinoffs