Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-7xsfk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-28T00:59:26.575Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 17 - An Institutional Perspective on Open Strategy: Strategy in World Society

from Part IV - Theoretical Perspectives

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 July 2019

By
Jan Goldenstein  and
Peter Walgenbach
Edited by
David Seidl ,
Georg von Krogh  and
Richard Whittington
David Seidl
Affiliation:
Universität Zürich
Georg von Krogh
Affiliation:
Swiss Federal University (ETH), Zürich
Richard Whittington
Affiliation:
Saïd Business School, University of Oxford
Get access

Summary

This chapter uses new institutional theory to shed light on the recent trend toward openness and inclusiveness in strategy making. New institutional theory depicts an extraordinary vivid strand in management and organizational research. This vitality is foremost reflected in the large amount of different theoretical substrands that populate new institutional theory (for an overview, see Greenwood et al., 2017). While some of these substrands such as institutional work or institutional entrepreneurship tend to highlight micro-processes, we, in this chapter, focus on Open Strategy as a world societal phenomenon. Therefore, we draw on world society theory (Meyer, 2010) as this stream in new institutional theory sheds light on macro-processes.

Type
Chapter
Information
Cambridge Handbook of Open Strategy , pp. 289 - 304
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abbott, A. D. (1988). The system of professions: An essay on the division of expert labor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Appleyard, M. M., & Chesbrough, H. W. (2017). The dynamics of open strategy: From adoption to reversion. Long Range Planning, 50(3), 310–321.Google Scholar
Aten, K., & Thomas, G. F. (2016). Crowdsourcing strategizing. Communication technology affordances and the communicative constitution of organizational strategy. Journal of Business Communication, 53(2), 148–180.Google Scholar
Baptista, J., Wilson, A. D., Galliers, R. D., & Bynghall, S. (2017). Social media and the emergence of reflexiveness as a new capability for open strategy. Long Range Planning, 50(3), 322–336.Google Scholar
Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. London: Penguin Press.Google Scholar
Bjelland, O. M., & Wood, R. C. (2008). An inside view of IBM’s “Innovation Jam.” MIT Sloan Management Review, 50(1), 31–40.Google Scholar
Boli, J., & Thomas, G. M. (1997). World polity in the world polity: A century of international non-governmental organization. American Sociological Review, 62, 171–190.Google Scholar
Bromley, P., & Meyer, J. W. (2014). They are all organizations: The cultural roots of blurring between the nonprofit, business, and government sectors. Administration & Society, 29(1), 1–28.Google Scholar
Bromley, P., & Meyer, J. W. (2015). Hyper-organization: Global organizational expansion. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bromley, P., & Powell, W. W. (2012). From smoke and mirrors to walking the talk: Decoupling in the contemporary world. Academy of Management Annals, 1(1), 1–48.Google Scholar
Campbell, J. L. (2007). Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 946–957.Google Scholar
Chesbrough, H. W., & Appleyard, M.M. (2007). Open innovation and strategy. California Management Review, 50(1), 57–76.Google Scholar
Ciabuschi, F., Forsgren, M., & Martin, O. M. (2011). Rationality vs. ignorance: The role of MNE headquarters in subsidiaries’ innovation processes. Journal of International Business Studies, 42(7), 958–970.Google Scholar
Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Cornelissen, J. P., & Werner, M. D. (2014). Putting framing in perspective: A review of framing and frame analysis across the management and organizational literature. Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 181–235.Google Scholar
Czarniawska, B., & Joerges, B. (1996). Travel of ideas. In Czarniawska, B. & Sevon, G. (Eds.), Translating organizational change (pp. 13–48). Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Djelic, M.-L., & Quack, S. (2003). Introduction. In Djelic, M.-L. & Quack, S. (Eds.), Globalization and institutions: Redefining the rules of the economic game (pp. 1–14). New York: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Dobusch, L. (2014). How exclusive are inclusive organisations? Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion: An International Journal, 33(3), 220–234.Google Scholar
Drori, G. S., Höllerer, M., & Walgenbach, P. (Eds.). (2014a). Global themes and local variations in organization and management: Perspectives on glocalization. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Drori, G. S., Höllerer, M., & Walgenbach, P. (2014b). Unpacking the glocalization of organization: From term, to theory, to analysis. European Journal of Cultural and Political Sociology, 1, 85–99.Google Scholar
Drori, G. S., & Meyer, J. W. (2006). Scientization: Making a world safe for organizing. In Djelic, M.-L. & Sahlin-Anderson, K. (Eds.), Transnational governance: Institutional dynamics or regulations (pp. 32–52). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Drori, G. S., Meyer, J. W., & Hwang, H. (Eds.). (2006). Globalization and organization: World society and organizational change. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Drori, G. S., Meyer, J. W., & Hwang, H. (2009). Global organization: Rationalization and actorhood as dominant scripts. In Meyer, R. E., Sahlin, K., Venetresca, M., & Walgenbach, P. (Eds.), Research in the sociology of organizations: Ideology and institutions (pp. 17–43). Bingley: Emerald.Google Scholar
Drori, G. S. (2008). Institutionalism and globalization studies. In Greenwood, R., Oliver, C., Sahlin, K., & Suddaby, R. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 448–472). Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
Evans, V. (2015). The crucible of language: How language and mind create meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Goldenstein, Jan; Philipp, Poschmann; Händschke, Sebastian; Walgenbach, Peter (2019): Global and local orientation in organizational actorhood: A comparative study of large corporations from Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States. In: European Journal of Cultural and Political Sociology (forthcoming).Google Scholar
Greenwood, R., Oliver, C., Meyer, R. E., & Lawrence, T. B. (Eds.). (2017). The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Greenwood, R., Raynard, M., Kodeih, F., Micelotta, E. R., & Lounsbury, M. (2011). Institutional complexity and organizational responses. Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 317–371.Google Scholar
Greenwood, R., Suddaby, R., & Hinings, C. R. (2002). Theorizing change: The role of professional associations in the transformation of institutionalized fields. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 58–80.Google Scholar
Haack, P., Schoeneborn, D., & Wickert, C. (2012). Talking the talk, moral entrapment, creeping commitment? Exploring narrative dynamics in corporate responsibility standardization. Organization Studies, 33(5–6), 815–845.Google Scholar
Hart, S., & Banbury, C. (1994). How strategy-making processes can make a difference. Strategic Management Journal, 15(4), 251–269.Google Scholar
Hautz, J., Seidl, D., & Whittington, R. (2017). Open strategy: Dimensions, dilemmas, dynamics. Long Range Planning, 50(3), 298–309.Google Scholar
Hensmans, M. (2003). Social movement organizations: A metaphor for strategic actors in institutional fields. Organization Studies, 24(3), 355–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoffman, A. J. (1999). Institutional evolution and change: Environmentalism and the US chemical industry. Academy of Management Journal, 42(4), 351–371.Google Scholar
Höllerer, M. A., Walgenbach, P., & Drori, G. S. (2017). The consequences of globalization for institutions and organizations. In Greenwood, R., Oliver, C., Meyer, R. E., & Lawrence, T. B. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 224–254). Los Angeles: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Jepperson, R. L. (1991). Institutions, institutional effects, and institutionalism. In Powell &, W. W. DiMaggio, P. J. (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 143–163). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kennedy, M. T., & Fiss, P. C. (2009). Institutionalization, framing, and diffusion: The logic of TQM adoption and implementation decisions among US hospitals. Academy of Management Journal, 52(5), 897–918.Google Scholar
Lawrence, T. B., & Suddaby, R. (2006). Institutions and institutional work. In Clegg, S., Hardy, C., Nord, W. R., & Lawrence, T. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organization studies (pp. 215–254). London: Sage Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, S. H., Peng, M. W., & Barney, J. (2007). Bankruptcy law and entrepreneurship development: A real options perspective. Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 257–272.Google Scholar
Lizardo, O. (2010). The problem of the cultural determination of cognition in institutional theory. Culture (Newsletter of the Sociology of Culture Section of the American Sociological Association), 24.Google Scholar
Lounsbury, M., & Glynn, M.A. (2001). Cultural entrepreneurship: Stories, legitimacy, and the acquisition of resources. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6–7), 545–564.Google Scholar
Mack, D. Z., & Szulanski, G. (2017). Opening up: How centralization affects participation and inclusion in strategy making. Long Range Planning, 50(3), 385–396.Google Scholar
Meyer, J. W., & Jepperson, R. L. (2000). The actors of modern society: The cultural construction of social agency. Sociological Theory, 18(1), 100–120.Google Scholar
Meyer, J. W. (2000). Globalization: Sources and effects on national states and societies. International Sociology, 15(2), 233–248.Google Scholar
Meyer, J. W. (2010). World society, institutional theories, and the actor. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 1–20.Google Scholar
Meyer, J. W. (2014). Empowered actors, local settings, and global rationalization. In Drori, G. S., Höllerer, M., & Walgenbach, P. (Eds.), Global themes and local variations in organization and management: Perspectives on glocalization (pp. 413–424). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Meyer, J. W., Boli, J., & Thomas, G. M. (1994). Ontology and rationalization in the western cultural account. In Scott, W. R. & Meyer, J. W. (Eds.), Institutional environments and organizations: Structural complexity and individualism (pp. 9–27). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Meyer, J. W., Boli, J., Thomas, G. M., & Ramirez, F. O. (1997). World society and the nation-state. American Journal of Sociology, 103(1), 144–181.Google Scholar
Meyer, J. W., & Bromley, P. (2013). The worldwide expansion of organization. Sociological Theory, 31(4), 366–389.Google Scholar
Meyer, J. W., Drori, G. S., & Hwang, H. (2006). World society and the proliferation of formal organization. In Meyer, J. W., Drori, G. S., & Hwang, H. (Eds.), Globalization and organization. World society and organizational change (pp. 25–49). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, R. E., & Höllerer, M. A. (2010). Meaning structures in a contested issue field: A topographic map of shareholder value in Austria. Academy of Management Journal, 53(6), 1241–1262.Google Scholar
Peng, M. W., Sun, S. L., Pinkham, B., & Chen, H. (2009). The institution-based view as a third leg for a strategy tripod. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(3), 68–81.Google Scholar
Popper, K. R. (1945). The open society and its enemies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Powell, W. W., & Colyvas, J. A. (2008). Micro-foundations of institutional theory. In Greenwood, R., Oliver, C., Sahlin, K., & Suddaby, R. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 276–298). Los Angeles: Sage Publishing.Google Scholar
Sahlin-Anderson, K., & Engwall, L. (2002). Carriers, flows, and sources of management knowledge. In Sahlin-Anderson, K. & Engwall, L. (Eds.), The expansion of management knowledge: Carriers, flows, and sources (pp. 3–32). Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Santos, F. M., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2005). Organizational boundaries and theories of organization. Organization Science, 16(5), 491–508.Google Scholar
Scott, W. R. (1994). Conceptualizing organizational fields: Linking organizations and societal systems. In Derlien, H.-U., Gerhardt, U., & Scharpf, F. W. (Eds.), Systemrationalitat und Partialinteresse (pp. 203–221). Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft.Google Scholar
Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and organizations (4th ed.). Los Angeles: Sage Publishing.Google Scholar
Stieger, D., Matzler, K., Chatterjee, S., & Ladstaetter-Fussenegger, F. (2012). Democratizing strategy: How crowdsourcing can be used for strategy dialogs. California Management Review, 54(4), 44–69.Google Scholar
Strang, D. (2014). Boomerang diffusion at a global bank: Total Quality Management and national culture. In Drori, G. S., Höllerer, M. A., & Walgenbach, P. (Eds.), Global themes and local variations in organization and management: Perspectives on glocalization (pp. 107–118). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Strang, D., & Meyer, J. W. (1993). Institutional conditions for diffusion. Theory and Society, 22(4), 487–511.Google Scholar
Tempel, A., & Walgenbach, P. (2007). Global standardization of organizational forms and management practices? What new institutionalism and the business-systems approach can learn from each other. Journal of Management Studies, 44(1), 1–24.Google Scholar
Thomas, G. M., Meyer, J. W., Ramirez, F. O., & Boli, J. (Eds.). (1987). Institutional structure: Constituting state, society, and the individual. Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
Thornton, P. H., Ocasio, W., & Lounsbury, M. (2012). The institutional logics perspective: A new approach to culture, structure, and process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Vaara, E., & Whittington, R. (2012). Strategy-as-practice: Taking social practices seriously. Academy of Management Annals, 6(1), 285–336.Google Scholar
von Krogh, G., Haefinger, S., Spaeth, S., & Wallin, M. W. (2012). Carrots and rainbows. Motivation and social practice in open source software development. MIS Quarterly, 36(2), 649–676.Google Scholar
Walgenbach, P., Drori, G. S., & Höllerer, M. A. (2017). Between local mooring and global orientation. A neo-institutional theory perspective on the contemporary multinational corporation. In Dörrenbächer, C. & Geppert, M. (Eds.), Research in the sociology of organizations, 49. Multinational corporations and organization theory: Post millennium perspectives (pp. 99–125). Bingley: Emerald.Google Scholar
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations (2nd print). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Whittington, R., Cailluet, L., & Yakis-Douglas, B. (2011). Opening strategy: Evolution of a precarious profession. British Journal of Management, 22(3), 531–544.Google Scholar
Whittington, R., Yakis-Douglas, B., & Ahn, K. (2016). Cheap talk? Strategy presentations as a form of chief executive officer impression management. Strategic Management Journal, 37(12), 2413–2424.Google Scholar
Wooten, M., & Hoffman, A. J. (2008). Organizational fields: Past, present and future. In Greenwood, R., Oliver, C., Suddaby, R., & Sahlin-Andersson, K. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 130–148). Los Angeles: Sage Publishing.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×