Search

We examine the role of ownership in organizational responses to performance shortfalls. State owners prize performance stability over being competitive, and their firms thus frame performance shortfalls differently than private firms do. In particular, state firms’ performance-stability orientation makes them respond to small performance shortfalls more readily than private firms do. They largely disregard performance comparisons with industry competitors, which more readily trigger divestitures at private firms. Comparisons among state firms matter relatively more. We find empirical support for these propositions in the population of Chinese state and private firms publicly traded in Shanghai and Shenzhen Stock Exchanges from 2003 to 2019. The frame-contingent responsiveness we document extends theory of organizational behavior and adds important nuance to our understanding of state-firm inertia.

We take a process perspective to review the literature on corporate responses to social activism and argue that theoretical advances have not kept pace with the extensive and expanding scope of the literature. We identify three critical assumptions in the literature, which we believe can be traced back to two overarching issues: a mechanistic conceptualization that ascribes limited reflexivity to managers and an overreliance on variance theorizing. In order to tackle these challenges and propel future research, we suggest a research agenda that revolves around an enhanced role for managerial reflexivity in theory development and a stronger emphasis on the process-oriented view of the relationship between activism and response.

We build on recent studies on daughter-to-father influence to explore how male founders’ fatherhood of daughters impacts female representation in their ventures. We find that, conditional on the total number of children, fathering an additional daughter versus a son is associated with a 4% (11%) increase in female director (employee) representation. This daughter-to-father effect gradually matures as daughters grow up and socialize in schools and workplaces, and it increases as daughters age, suggesting that male founders vicariously learn from their daughters about the constraints women face throughout the daughters’ life cycles. Heterogeneity analyses (regarding founder cohort, divorce status, and social class), combined with qualitative evidence, further substantiate the plausibility of vicarious learning as a potential yet understudied mechanism underlying daughter effects. In addition, daughter effects on employee recruitment are concentrated in microbusinesses (number of employees is ≤10) where the founder is close in decision authority to all employees. These findings add important nuances to our understanding of daughter effects in organizational contexts and extend theory of gender homophily in organizations.

Institutional theory research on institutional intermediation typically focuses on how institutional intermediaries address voids in market-based institutions that inhibit entrepreneurship. In doing so, the research rarely studies what types of institutional intermediaries entrepreneurs prefer to use. We address this gap with a microinstitutional inquiry of how entrepreneurs in a rudimentary market-based economy differ in the relevance they place on different types of institutional intermediaries. Using a sample from the Indrachok market in Kathmandu, Nepal, and using a three-stage qualitative and quantitative abductive investigation of a cascading set of increasingly refined research questions, we identify two key preferences for institutional intermediaries. First, we find a key institutional intermediation tripod consisting of three locally focused institutional intermediaries: family, suppliers, and peer entrepreneurs. The tripod is supplemented by institutional intermediaries with more moderate preference in this context: four other locally focused institutional intermediaries (local politicians, police, religious figures, and political gangs) and three broad-based institutional intermediaries (government, microlenders, and nongovernmental organizations). Second, the importance of suppliers and peers as institutional intermediaries reflects entrepreneurs’ registration status (registered versus unregistered) and microgeographic location (dispersed versus clustered businesses). The research reconceptualizes institutional intermediation in rudimentary market-based economies from the entrepreneurs’ perspective, identifying mechanisms that shape entrepreneurs’ preferences and providing proposition for future testing.