Search

In markets, individuals use three main evaluation modes to categorize and subsequently value organizations based on received organizational cues: prototype-based, exemplar-based, and goal-based evaluation. Starting with the premise that individual audience members use prototype-based evaluation as a default evaluation mode when receiving expected organizational cues, this paper derives a theory that connects unexpected organizational cues with an individual audience member's likelihood of switching from prototype-based evaluation to either exemplar-based or goal-based evaluation. Individual audience members' switches between modes, which we refer to as evaluation-mode heterogeneity, lead to changes in their valuation of typical organizations relative to atypical organizations. Our proposed theory has important consequences for research on valuation in markets accounting for apparently conflicting findings in prior studies, and on optimal distinctiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Corporate sustainability has gone mainstream, and many companies have taken meaningful steps to improve their own environmental performance. But while corporate political actions such as lobbying can have a greater impact on environmental quality, they are ignored in most current sustainability metrics. It is time for these metrics to be expanded to critically assess firms based on the sustainability impacts of their public policy positions. To enable such assessments, firms must become as transparent about their corporate political responsibility (CPR) as their corporate social responsibility (CSR). For their part, rating systems must demand such information from firms and include evaluations of corporate political activity in their assessments of corporate environmental responsibility.

Organizations need to both differentiate themselves while conforming to their audiences' expectations. To meet this demand, organizations may span different categories. However, valuing spanners is challenging for audiences. We contend that spanners' valuation depends on category nesting, as the congruence of informational cues varies between basic categories and subcategories. Furthermore, we expect that more expert audiences find spanners to be more congruent (and hence, more valuable) at a subordinate level than at a basic level of categorization. We test our hypotheses using a mixed-methods design in the context of venture capital investments. We analyze observational data on more than 29,000 venture capital deals and develop two experimental studies. Our findings support our hypotheses that subcategory spanning lowers valuation, and that this effect is attenuated as investors' expertise increases. Our experimental studies further show that congruence is a causal mechanism explaining these effects. Our findings have important implications for research on organizational conformity and optimal distinctiveness, categorization in markets from an information processing perspective, and the impact of expertise on valuation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Raters of corporations play an important role in assessing domains ranging from sustainability to corporate governance to best workplaces. Scholars increasingly rely on these ratings to test theories about corporate social responsibility (CSR), corporate governance and the influence of stakeholders. Though these raters frequently develop sophisticated methodologies, we find they often diverge in their ratings of the same firm, creating uncertainty for managers and stakeholders, and also posing challenges for researchers. We document the surprising lack of convergence of social ratings for the first time using six well-established socially responsible investing (SRI) raters, with comparisons of overlap, correlations, and regression analysis. Our results suggest that scholars should interpret empirical results with caution and at least use multiple ratings schemes in studies of CSR and governance.

We develop and test a theory of howunintended audiences create reaction costs for firms that use corporate social responsibility (CSR) as a signal. We introduce and define reaction costs as costs that signal senders incur when unintended audiences react negatively to a true signal that was intended for another audience. We argue that activist hedge funds--an unintended audience--treat CSR as a signal that firms have wasteful intentions and capabilities, which prevent firms from maximizing shareholder value in the short term. On that basis, we hypothesize that activist hedge funds are more likely to target firms with higher levels of CSR, thus imposing reaction costs on these firms. We further argue that this relationship is weaker when firms operate in industries with high levels of CSR, and strongerwhen firms' financial communication is vague. Using data on activist hedge fund campaigns in the U.S. between 2000 and 2016, we find supporting results. Our study shows that CSR signals may be costlier than previously assumed and contributes to research on CSR, signaling, and corporate governance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We explore the way validity and propriety cues contribute to legitimacy judgments about a practice and to explaining whether the subunit of a large firm increases or decreases the implementation of this practice. Empirically, we examine the extent to which 65 subsidiaries of a multinational enterprise implemented three corporate social responsibility practices. Adopting a set-theoretic approach, we find that both validity and propriety cues are extremely relevant to the understanding of subunits' implementation of practices over time. The endorsement of a practice in a subunit's environment plays a particularly crucial role in the extent to which it is implemented, relative to authorization by the parent firm. Furthermore, subunits strongly rely on the active evaluation of the practice's propriety, such that the consonance between the two propriety dimensions (strategic importance and value compatibility) is central to implementation increase, while dissonance between them can favor implementation decrease. By advancing our understanding of legitimacy judgment formation and practice implementation patterns, our study enriches explanations of organizational conformity and decoupling, and contributes to our understanding of how firms respond to multiple institutional demands. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We develop a conceptual understanding of when and how organizations respond to normative pressures. More precisely, we examine two main factors underlying the willingness and ability of organizations to respond to an issue: issue salience and the cost-benefit analysis of resource mobilization. We suggest that decision makers' interpretation of issue salience in conjunction with their perception of the costs and benefits of taking action to address the issue generates five potential responses: symbolic compliance and symbolic conformity, substantive compliance and substantive conformity, and inaction. We extend the baseline model by examining a number of boundary conditions. By focusing on the willingness and ability of organizations to respond to normative pressures, and by adopting the issue as the unit of analysis, our model helps explain intraorganizational as well as interorganizational response heterogeneity to institutional complexity. We contribute to the institutional research tradition and offer useful implications for managerial practice, from strategic management to policy making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Corporate sustainability has gone mainstream, and many companies have taken meaningful steps to improve their own environmental performance. But while corporate political actions such as lobbying can have a greater impact on environmental quality, they are ignored in most current sustainability metrics. It is time for these metrics to be expanded to critically assess firms based on the sustainability impacts of their public policy positions. To enable such assessments, firms must become as transparent about their corporate political responsibility (CPR) as their corporate social responsibility (CSR). For their part, rating systems must demand such information from firms and include evaluations of corporate political activity in their assessments of corporate environmental responsibility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Legitimating agencies such as accreditation organizations, which face selection pressures to maintain their legitimacy among their constituents and expand the domain of their activities, is proposed. The case of the international expansion of the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) is taken to address this issue.

Conventional wisdom has it that successful market entry depends on market preemption and first-mover advantage. Such 'pioneering' is seen by many managers as enabling a company to achieve greater scale [...]

We conceptualize the roots of cognitive, linguistic, and communicative theories of institutions and outline the promise and potential of a stronger communication focus for institutional theory. In particular, we outline a theoretical approach that puts communication at the heart of theories of institutions, institutional maintenance, and change, and we label this approach communicative institutionalism. We then provide a brief introduction to the set of articles contained in the Special Topic Forum on Communication, Cognition, and Institutions and describe the innovative theorizing of these articles in the direction of communicative theories of institutions. Finally, we sketch a research agenda and further steps and possibilities for theory and research integrating communication and institutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Organizational adaptation is equivocal. On the one hand, the concept is ubiquitous in management research and acts as the glue binding together the central issues of organizational change, performance, and survival. On the other hand, it lurks around in various guises (e.g., "fit," "alignment," "congruence," and "strategic change") studied from multiple theoretical streams (e.g., behavioral, resource based, and institutional) and at different levels of analysis (e.g., organization and industry levels). In a novel approach to reviewing 443 adaptation articles that leverages both computational and hand-coded analysis, we produce an interactive visual of the themes most studied by adaptation scholars. We inductively draw out a definition of adaptation as intentional decision making undertaken by organizational members, leading to observable actions that aim to reduce the distance between an organization and its economic and institutional environments. We then review the literature across three main areas of inquiry and six theoretical perspectives that surfaced from our analysis and identify 11 difficulties that have hampered adaptation research in the past 50 years. Our review suggests ways to address these difficulties to enable future research to develop and cumulate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The impact of organizational code-preserving and code-violating changes on external evaluation of organizational behavior by third parties is examined.

In this article, we investigate family firms' position in the intercorporate ownership network. Rooting our predictions in the Behavioral Agency Model and a Network analytical framework, we predict and find that family involvement decreases the likelihood of business group affiliation and of cross-group ties leading to a lower embeddedness within the overall network. We predict and find the opposite effect for community involvement. We use the complete longitudinal dataset of publicly listed firms' corporate ownership ties in India (2001, 2005, and 2009). Theoretical and substantive contributions are to research on family businesses and to research on interorganizational networks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]