Element contents
Series: Elements in Organization Theory
Organizational Learning from Performance Feedback: A Behavioral Perspective on Multiple Goals
A Multiple Goals Perspective
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 January 2021
Summary
This Element synthesizes the current state of research on organizational learning from performance feedback and develops a new perspective that deals with the influence of multiple goals. In keeping with the centrality of motives in Cyert & March's influential model, this new perspective rests on a foundation of individual level behaviors that are responsive to mechanisms at the organizational and environmental level of analysis. A key aim is to lay out an agenda for a new wave of empirical research on the interconnections of decision-makers, organizations, and the environment that influence organizational responses to performance.
Keywords
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Series: Elements in Organization TheoryOnline ISBN: 9781108344289Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 18 February 2021
References
Anand, B. N., Barnett, K. F., and Carpenter, E. L. 2007 “Random House.” Harvard Business School Publishing, Case no. 9–704–438.Google Scholar
Anand, B. N., Rukstad, M. G., and Kostring, C. 2005 “Bertelsmann AG.” Harvard Business School Publishing, Case no. 9–703–405.Google Scholar
Argote, L. and Miron-Spektor, E. 2011 “Organizational learning: From experience to knowledge.” Organization Science, 22: 1123–1137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Audia, P. G. and Brion, S. 2007 “Reluctant to change: Self-enhancing responses to diverging performance measures.” Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 102: 255–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Audia, P. G., Brion, S., and Greve, H. R. 2015 “Self-assessment, self-enhancement, and the choice of comparison organizations for evaluating organizational performance.” Advances in Strategic Management: Cognition and Strategy, 35: 89–118.Google Scholar
Audia, P. G. and Goncalo, J. A. 2007 “Past success and creativity over time: A study of inventors in the hard disk drive industry.” Management Science, 53: 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Audia, P. G. and Greve, H. R. 2006 “Less likely to fail? Low performance, firm size, and factory expansion in the shipbuilding industry.” Management Science, 52: 83–94.Google Scholar
Audia, P. G., Locke, E. A., and Smith, K. G. 2000 “The paradox of success: An archival and a laboratory study of strategic persistence following a radical environmental change.” Academy of Management Journal, 43: 837–853.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Audia, P. G., Rousseau, H. E., and Brion, S. 2021 “CEO power and nonconforming reference group selection.” Organization Science, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Audia, P. G. and Sorenson, O. 2001 “A multilevel analysis of organizational success and inertia.” London School of Business: Manuscript.Google Scholar
Barnard, C. I. 1938 The Functions of the Executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Barnett, W. P., Greve, H. R., and Park, D. Y. 1994 “An evolutionary model of organizational performance.” Strategic Management Journal, 15: 11–28.Google Scholar
Bartley, T. and Child, C. 2011 “Movements, markets and fields: The effects of anti-sweatshop campaigns on U.S. firms, 1993–2000.” Social Forces, 90: 425–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Battilana, J. and Dorado, S. 2010 “Building sustainable hybrid organizations: The case of commercial microfinance organizations.” Academy of Management Journal, 53: 1419–1440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baum, J. A. C. and Dahlin, K. B. 2007 “Aspiration performance and railroads’ patterns of learning from train wrecks and crashes.” Organization Science, 18: 368–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baum, J. A. C., Rowley, T. J., Shipilov, A. V., and Chuang, Y.-T. 2005 “Dancing with strangers: Aspiration performance and the search for underwriting syndicate partners.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 50: 536–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benner, M. J. and Tripsas, M. 2012 “The influence of prior industry affiliation on framing in nascent industries: the evolution of digital cameras.” Strategic Management Journal, 33: 277–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg, J. M. 2016 “Balancing on the creative highwire: Forecasting the success of novel ideas in organizations.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 61: 433–468.Google Scholar
Bidwell, M. 2011 “Paying more to get less: The effects of external hiring versus internal mobility.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 56: 369–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blagoeva, R. R., Mom, T. J., Jansen, J. J., and George, G. 2020 “Problem-solving or self-enhancement? A power perspective on how CEOs affect R&D search in the face of inconsistent feedback.” Academy of Management Journal, 63: 332–355.Google Scholar
Blau, P. M. 1955 The Dynamics of Bureaucracy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Blettner, D. P., He, Z.-L., Hu, S., and Bettis, R. A. 2015 “Adaptive aspirations and performance heterogeneity: Attention allocation among multiple reference points.” Strategic Management Journal, 36: 987–1005.Google Scholar
Boeker, W. 1989 “The development and institutionalization of subunit power in organizations.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 34: 388–410.Google Scholar
Boone, C. and Özcan, S. 2016 “Ideological purity vs. hybridization trade-off: When do Islamic banks hire managers from conventional banking?” Organization Science, 27: 1380–1396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briscoe, F., Chin, M. K., and Hambrick, D. C. 2014 “CEO ideology as an element of the corporate opportunity structure for social activists.” Academy of Management Journal, 57: 1786–1809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briscoe, F. and Gupta, A. 2016 “Social activism in and around organizations.” The Academy of Management Annals, 10: 671–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bromiley, P. 1991 “Testing a causal model of corporate risk taking and performance.” Academy of Management Journal, 34: 37–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bromiley, P. and Harris, J. D. 2014 “A comparison of alternative measures of organizational aspirations.” Strategic Management Journal, 35: 338–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bromley, P. and Meyer, J. W. 2015 Hyper-organization: Global Organizational Expansion. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Burt, R. S., Christman, K. P., and Kilburn, H. C. 1980 “Testing a structural theory of corporate cooptation: Interorganizational directorate ties as a strategy for avoiding market constraints on profits.” American Sociological Review, 45: 821–841.Google Scholar
Campbell, W. K. and Sedikides, C. 1999 “Self-threat magnifies the self-serving bias: A meta-analytic integration.” Review of General Psychology, 3: 23–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castilla, E. J. 2015 “Accounting for the gap: A firm study manipulating organizational accountability and transparency in pay decisions.” Organization Science, 26: 311–333.Google Scholar
Chadwick, P. 1992 A Psychological Study of Paranoia and Delusional Thinking. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Chatterji, A. K., Levine, D. I., and Toffel, M. W. 2009 “How well do social ratings actually measure corporate social responsibility?” Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 18: 125–169.Google Scholar
Chatterji, A. K. and Toffel, M. W. 2010 “How firms respond to being rated.” Strategic Management Journal, 31: 917–945.Google Scholar
Christensen, C. M. and Bower, J. L. 1996 “Customer power, strategic investment, and the failure of leading firms.” Strategic Management Journal, 17: 197–218.Google Scholar
Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., and Olsen, J. P. 1972 “A garbage can model of organizational choice.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 17: 1–25.Google Scholar
Cyert, R. M. and March, J. G. 1963 A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Davis, G. F., McAdam, D., Scott, W. R., and Zald, M. N. 2005 Social Movements and Organization Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Davis, G. F. and Mizruchi, M. S. 1999 “The money center cannot hold: Commercial banks in the U. S. system of governance.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 44: 215–239.Google Scholar
Delmas, M. A. and Toffel, M. W. 2008 “Organizational responses to environmental demands: opening the black box.” Strategic Management Journal, 29: 1027–1055.Google Scholar
Desai, V. M. 2008 “Constrained growth: How experience, legitimacy, and age influence risk taking in organizations.” Organization Science, 19: 594–608.Google Scholar
Desai, V. M. 2014 “The impact of media information on issue salience following other organizations’ failures.” Journal of Management, 40: 893–918.Google Scholar
DiMaggio, P. J. and Powell, W. W. 1983 “The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields.” American Sociological Review, 48: 147–160.Google Scholar
Diwas, K. C., Staats, B. R., and Gino, F. 2013 “Learning from my success and from others’ failure: Evidence from minimally invasive cardiac surgery.” Management Science, 59: 2435–2449.Google Scholar
Dunning, D., Meyerowitz, J. A., and Holzberg, A. D. 1989 “Ambiguity and self-evaluation: The role of idiosyncratic trait definitions in self-serving assessments of ability.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57: 1082.Google Scholar
Durand, R., Rao, H., and Monin, P. 2007 “Code and conduct in French cuisine: Impact of code changes on external evaluations.” Strategic Management Journal, 28: 455–472.Google Scholar
Edelman, L. B. 1992 “Legal ambiguity and symbolic structures: Organizational mediation of civil rights law.” American Journal of Sociology, 97: 1531–1576.Google Scholar
Edwards, R. 1979 Contested Terrain: The Transformation of the Workplace in the Twentieth Century. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Elsbach, K. D. and Kramer, R. M. 1996 “Members’ responses to organizational identity threats: Countering the business week rankings.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: 442–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elvira, M. M. and Graham, M. E. 2002 “Not just a formality: Pay system formalization and sex-related earnings effects.” Organization Science, 13: 601–617.Google Scholar
Felson, R. B. 1981 “Self-and reflected appraisal among football players: A test of the Meadian hypothesis.” Social Psychology Quarterly, 44: 116–126.Google Scholar
Festinger, L. 1954 “A theory of social comparison processes.” Human Relations, 7: 117–140.Google Scholar
Fiegenbaum, A. 1990 “Prospect theory and the risk-return association.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 14: 184–203.Google Scholar
Fiegenbaum, A. and Thomas, H. 1988 “Attitudes towards risk and the risk return paradox: Prospect theory explanations.” Academy of Management Journal, 31: 395–407.Google Scholar
Friedland, R. and Alford, R. 1991 “Bringing society back: Symbols, practices, and institutional contradictions.” In Powell, W. W., and DiMaggio, P. (eds.), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis: 232–263. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Gaba, V. and Greve, H. R. 2019 “Safe or profitable? The pursuit of conflicting goals.” Organization Science, 30: 647–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaba, V. and Joseph, J. 2013 “Corporate structure and performance feedback: Aspirations and adaptation in m-form firms.” Organization Science, 24: 1102–1119.Google Scholar
Gavetti, G., Greve, H. R., Levinthal, D. A., and Ocasio, W. 2012 “The behavioral theory of the firm: Assessment and prospects.” Academy of Management Annals, 6: 1–40.Google Scholar
Gibbons, R. 1998 “Incentives in organizations.” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 12: 115–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Govindarajan, V. 1988 “A contingency approach to strategy implementation at the business-unit level: integrating administrative mechanisms with strategy.” Academy of management Journal, 31: 828–853.Google Scholar
Greenwood, R., Raynard, M., Kodeih, F., Micelotta, E. R., and Lounsbury, M. 2011 “Institutional complexity and organizational responses.” Academy of Management Annals, 5: 317–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greve, H. R. 1998 “Performance, aspirations, and risky organizational change.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 44: 58–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greve, H. R. 2003a “A behavioral theory of R&D expenditures and innovation: Evidence from shipbuilding.” Academy of Management Journal, 46: 685–702.Google Scholar
Greve, H. R. 2003b “Investment and the behavioral theory of the firm: Evidence from shipbuilding.” Industrial and Corporate Change, 12: 1051–1076.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greve, H. R. 2003c Organizational Learning from Performance Feedback: A Behavioral Perspective on Innovation and Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Greve, H. R. 2008 “A behavioral theory of firm growth: Sequential attention to size and performance goals.” Academy of Management Journal, 51: 476–494.Google Scholar
Greve, H. R. 2011 “Positional rigidity: Low performance and resource acquisition in large and small firms.” Strategic Management Journal, 32: 103–114.Google Scholar
Greve, H. R. and Gaba, V. 2020 “Performance feedback in organizations and groups: common themes.” In Argote, L., and Levine, J. (eds.), Handbook of Group and Organizational Learning: 315–336. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Greve, H. R. and Song, S. Y. 2017 “Amazon warrior: How a platform can restructure industry power and ecology.” Advances in Strategic Management, 37: 299–335.Google Scholar
Greve, H. R. and Teh, D. 2018 “Goal selection internally and externally: A behavioral theory of institutionalization.” International Journal of Management Reviews, 20: S19–S38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guinote, A. 2017 “How Power Affects People: Activating, wanting, and goal seeking.” Annual Review of Psychology, 68: 353–381.Google Scholar
Gulati, R. and Gargiulo, M. 1999 “Where do interorganizational networks come from?”American Journal of Sociology, 104: 1439–1493.Google Scholar
Haunschild, P. R. and Rhee, M. 2004 “The role of volition in organizational learning: The case of automotive product recalls.” Management Science, 50: 1545–1560.Google Scholar
Heilman, M. E., Block, C. J., and Stathatos, P. 1997 “The affirmative action stigma of incompetence: Effects of performance information ambiguity.” Academy of Management Journal, 40: 603–625.Google Scholar
Hillman, A. J. 2005 “Politicians on the board of directors: Do connections affect the bottom line?” Journal of Management, 31: 464–481.Google Scholar
Hillman, A. J., Withers, M. C., and Collins, B. J. 2009 “Resource dependence theory: A review.” Journal of Management, 35: 1404–1427.Google Scholar
Hinings, B. and Meyer, R. E. 2018 Starting Points: Intellectual and Institutional Foundations of Organization Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hitt, M. A., Beamish, P. W., Jackson, S. E., and Mathieu, J. E. 2007 “Building theoretical and empirical bridges across levels: Multilevel research in management.” Academy of Management Journal, 50: 1385–1399.Google Scholar
Hoffman, A. J. 1999 “Institutional evolution and change: Environmentalism and the U.S. chemical industry.” Academy of Management Journal, 42: 351–371.Google Scholar
Hsu, G., Roberts, P. W., and Swaminathan, A. 2012 “Evaluative schemas and the mediating role of critics.” Organization Science, 23: 83–97.Google Scholar
Hu, S. and Bettis, R. A. 2018 “Multiple organization goals with feedback from shared technological task environments.” Organization Science, 29: 873–889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, A. H. and Audia, P. G. 2012 “Self-enhancement and learning from performance feedback.” Academy of Management Review, 37: 211–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joseph, J. and Gaba, V. 2015 “The fog of feedback: Ambiguity and firm responses to multiple aspiration levels.” Strategic Management Journal, 36: 1960–1978.Google Scholar
Joseph, J., Klingebiel, R., and Wilson, A. J. 2016 “Organizational structure and performance feedback: Centralization, aspirations, and termination decisions.” Organization Science, 27: 1065–1083.Google Scholar
Joseph, J., Ocasio, W., and McDonnell, M.-H. 2014 “The structural elaboration of board independence: Executive power, institutional logics, and the adoption of CEO-only board structures in U.S. corporate governance.” Academy of Management Journal, 57: 1834–1858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kacperczyk, A., Beckman, C. M., and Moliterno, T. P. 2015 “Disentangling risk and change: Internal and external social comparison in the mutual fund industry.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 60: 228–262.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. 1979 “Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk.” Econometrica, 47: 263–291.Google Scholar
Keltner, D., Gruenfeld, D. H., and Anderson, C. 2003 “Power, approach, and inhibition.” Psychological Review, 110: 265–284.Google Scholar
Kirkpatrick, D. D. 2003 “Searching for motives in Random House ouster.” New York Times.Google Scholar
Kleinbaum, A. M. 2012 “Organizational misfits and the origins of brokerage in intrafirm networks.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 57: 407–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kotiloglu, S., Chen, Y., and Lechler, T. 2019 “Organizational Responses to Performance Feedback: A Meta-Analytic Review.” Strategic Organization, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Kunda, Z. 1987 “Motivated inference: Self-serving generation and evaluation of causal theories.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53: 636–647.Google Scholar
Kunda, Z. 1990 “The case for motivated reasoning.” Psychological Bulletin, 108: 480–498.Google Scholar
Lant, T. K. 1992 “Aspiration level adaptation: An empirical exploration.” Management Science, 38: 623–644.Google Scholar
Lant, T. K., Milliken, F. J., and Batra, B. 1992 “The role of managerial learning and interpretation in strategic persistence and reorientation: An empirical exploration.” Strategic Management Journal, 13: 585–608.Google Scholar
Lehman, D. W., Hahn, J., Ramanujam, R., and Alge, B. J. 2011 “The dynamics of the performance-risk relationship within a performance period: The moderating role of deadline proximity.” Organization Science, 22: 1613–1630.Google Scholar
Levinthal, D. A. 1991 “Random walks and organizational mortality.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 36: 397–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levinthal, D. A. and March, J. G. 1993 “The myopia of learning.” Strategic Management Journal, 14: 95–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levitt, B. and March, J. G. 1988 “Organizational learning.” In Scott, W. R., and Blake, J. (eds.), Annual Review of Sociology, 14: 319–340. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.Google Scholar
Lopes, L. L. 1987 “Between hope and fear: The psychology of risk.” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 20: 255–295.Google Scholar
Lounsbury, M. 2001 “Institutional sources of practice variation: Staffing college and university recycling programs.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 46: 29–56.Google Scholar
Lucas, G. J., Knoben, J., and Meeus, M. T. 2018 “Contradictory yet coherent? Inconsistency in performance feedback and R&D investment change.” Journal of Management, 44: 658–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malter, D. 2014 “On the causality and cause of returns to organizational status: Evidence from the Grands Crus Classés of the Médoc.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 59: 271–300.Google Scholar
Manns, C. L. and March, J. G. 1978 “Financial adversity, internal competition, and curriculum change in a university.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 23: 541–552.Google Scholar
March, J. G. 1978 “Bounded rationality, ambiguity, and the engineering of choice.” Bell Journal of Economics, 9: 587–608.Google Scholar
March, J. G. and Shapira, Z. 1992 “Variable risk preferences and the focus of attention.” Psychological Review, 99: 172–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mautner, G. and Learmonth, M. 2020 “From administrator to CEO: Exploring changing representations of hierarchy and prestige in a diachronic corpus of academic management writing.” Discourse and Communication, 14: 273–293.Google Scholar
Mazmanian, M. and Beckman, C. M. 2018 “‘Making’ your numbers: Engendering organizational control through a ritual of quantification.” Organization Science, 29: 357–379.Google Scholar
Meyer, J. W. and Rowan, B. 1977 “Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony.” American Journal of Sociology, 83: 340–363.Google Scholar
Meyer, J. W., Scott, W. R., and Strang, D. 1987 “Centralization, fragmentation, and school district complexity.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 32: 186–201.Google Scholar
Mezias, S. J., Chen, Y. R., and Murphy, P. R. 2002 “Aspiration-level adaptation in an American financial services organization: A field study.” Management Science, 48: 1285–1300.Google Scholar
Miller, D. and Chen, M.-J. 1994 “Sources and consequences of competitive inertia: A study of the U.S. airline industry.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 39: 1–23.Google Scholar
Mintzberg, H. 1979 The Structuring of Organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Moliterno, T. P., Beck, N., Beckman, C. M., and Meyer, M. 2014 “Knowing your place: Social performance feedback in good times and bad times.” Organization Science, 25: 1684–1702.Google Scholar
Morgeson, F. P. and Hofmann, D. A. 1999 “The structure and function of collective constructs: Implications for multilevel research and theory development.” Academy of Management Review, 24: 249–265.Google Scholar
Ocasio, W. 1997 “Towards an attention-based theory of the firm.” Strategic Management Journal, 18: 187–206.Google Scholar
Owen-Smith, J. and Powell, W. W. 2001 “To patent or not: Faculty decisions and institutional success at technology transfer.” The Journal of Technology Transfer, 26: 99–114.Google Scholar
Pache, A.-C. and Santos, F. 2010 “When worlds collide: The internal dynamics of organizational responses to conflicting institutional demands.” Academy of Management Review, 35: 455–476.Google Scholar
Park, S. H., Westphal, J. D., and Stern, I. 2011 “Set up for a fall: The insidious effect of flattery and opinion conformity toward corporate leaders.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 56: 257–302.Google Scholar
Pfeffer, J. and Fong, C. T. 2005 “Building organization theory from first principles: The self-enhancement motive and understanding power and influence.” Organization Science, 16: 372–388.Google Scholar
Pfeffer, J. and Salancik, G. R. 1978 The External Control of Organizations. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Posen, H. E., Keil, T., Kim, S., and Meissner, F. D. 2018 “Renewing research on problemistic search—A review and research agenda.” Academy of Management Annals, 12: 208–251.Google Scholar
Purdy, J. M. and Gray, B. 2009 “Conflicting logics, mechanisms of diffusion, and multilevel dynamics in emerging institutional fields.” Academy of Management Journal, 52: 355–380.Google Scholar
Rowley, T. I., Shipilov, A. V., and Greve, H. R. 2017 “Board reform versus profits: The effect of rankings on the adoption of governance practices.” Strategic Management Journal, 38: 815–833.Google Scholar
Ruefli, T. W. 1990 “Mean-variance approaches to risk-return relationships in strategy: Paradox lost.” Management Science, 36: 368–380.Google Scholar
Salancik, G. R. and Pfeffer, J. 1974 “The bases and use of power in organizational decision making: The case of a university.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 19: 453–473.Google Scholar
Sauder, M. 2006 “Third parties and status position: How the characteristics of status systems matter.” Theory and Society, 35: 299–321.Google Scholar
Sauder, M. and Espeland, W. N. 2009 “The discipline of rankings: Tight coupling and organizational change.” American Sociological Review, 74: 63–82.Google Scholar
Scott, W. R. 1987 Organizations: Rational, Natural and Open Systems, 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Sedikides, C. and Strube, M. J. 1997 “Self evaluation: To thine own self be good, to thine own self be sure, to thine own self be true, and to thine own self be better.” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology: 29: 209–269.Google Scholar
Sengul, M. and Gimeno, J. 2013 “Constrained delegation: Limiting subsidiaries’ decision rights and resources in firms that compete across multiple industries.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 58: 420–471.Google Scholar
Sharkey, A. J. and Bromley, P. 2015 “Can ratings have indirect effects? Evidence from the organizational response to peers’ environmental ratings.” American Sociological Review, 80: 63–91.Google Scholar
Shinkle, G. A. 2012 “Organizational aspirations, reference points, and goals.” Journal of Management, 38: 415–455.Google Scholar
Shipilov, A. V., Greve, H. R., and Rowley, T. J. 2019 “Is all publicity good publicity? The impact of direct and indirect media pressure on the adoption of governance practices.” Strategic Management Journal, 40: 1368–1393.Google Scholar
Siggelkow, N. and Levinthal, D. A. 2003 “Temporarily divide to conquer: Centralized, decentralized, and reintegrated organizational approaches to exploration and adaptation.” Organization Science, 14: 650–669.Google Scholar
Singh, J. V. 1986 “Performance, slack, and risk taking in organizational decision making.” Academy of Management Journal, 29: 562–585.Google Scholar
Smith, E. B. and Chae, H. 2017 “The effect of organizational atypicality on reference group selection and performance evaluation.” Organization Science, 28: 1134–1149.Google Scholar
Smith, W. K. and Besharov, M. L. 2019 “Bowing before dual gods: How structured flexibility sustains organizational hybridity.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 64: 1–44.Google Scholar
Sosa, M. L. 2011 “From old competence destruction to new competence access: Evidence from the comparison of two discontinuities in anticancer drug discovery.” Organization Science, 22: 1500–1516.Google Scholar
Staw, B. M. 1976 “Knee-deep in the big muddy: A study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action.” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 16: 27–44.Google Scholar
Staw, B. M., Barsade, S. G., and Koput, K. W.. 1997 “Escalating at the credit window: A longitudinal study of bank executives’ recognition and write-off of problem loans.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 82: 132–142.Google Scholar
Staw, B. M., Sandelands, L. E., and Dutton, J. E. 1981 “Threat-rigidity effects in organizational behavior: A multi-level analysis.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 26: 501–524.Google Scholar
Suddaby, R. and Greenwood, R. 2005 “Rhetorical strategies of legitimacy.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 50: 35–67.Google Scholar
Terlaak, A. and King, A. A. 2006 “The effect of certification with the ISO 9000 quality management standard: A signaling approach.” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 60: 579–602.Google Scholar
Tetlock, P. E., Skitka, L., and Boettger, R. 1989 “Social and cognitive strategies for copying with accountability: Conformity, complexity, and bolstering.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57: 632–640.Google Scholar
Thornton, P. H. 2001 “Personal versus market logics of control: A historically contingent theory of the risk of acquisition.” Organization Science, 12: 294–311.Google Scholar
Thornton, P. H. 2002 “The rise of the corporation in a craft industry: Conflict and conformity in institutional logics.” Academy of Management Journal, 45: 81–101.Google Scholar
Thornton, P. H. 2004 Markets from Culture: Institutional Logics and Organizational Decisions in Higher Education Publishing. Stanford, California: Stanford Business Books.Google Scholar
Thornton, P. H. and Ocasio, W. 1999 “Institutional logics and the historical contingency of power in organizations: Executive succession in the higher education publishing industry.” American Journal of Sociology, 105: 801–843.Google Scholar
Thornton, P. H., Ocasio, W., and Lounsbury, M. 2012 The Institutional Logics Perspective: A New Approach to Culture, Structure and Process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tripsas, M. 2009 “Technology, identity, and inertia through the lens of ‘the digital photography company’.” Organization Science, 20: 441–460.Google Scholar
Tuggle, C. S., Schnatterly, K., and Johnson, R. A. 2010a “Attention patterns in the boardroom: How board composition and processes affect discussion of entrepreneurial issues.” Academy of Management Journal, 53: 550–571.Google Scholar
Tuggle, C. S., Sirmon, D. G., Reutzel, C. R., and Bierman, L. 2010b “Commanding board of director attention: Investigating how organizational performance and CEO duality affect board members’ attention to monitoring.” Strategic Management Journal, 31: 946–968.Google Scholar
Tushman, M. L. and Anderson, P. 1986 “Technological discontinuities and organizational environments.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 31: 439–465.Google Scholar
Wang, T., Wezel, F. C., and Forgues, B. 2016 “Protecting market identity: When and how do organizations respond to consumers’ devaluations?” Academy of Management Journal, 59: 135–162.Google Scholar
Westphal, J. D. and Bednar, M. K. 2005 “Pluralistic ignorance in corporate boards and firms’ strategic persistence in response to low firm performance.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 50: 262–298.Google Scholar
Westphal, J. D. and Zajac, E. J. 1995 “Who shall govern? CEO/board power, demographic similarity, and new director selection.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 40: 60–83.Google Scholar
Wiseman, R. M. and Bromiley, P. 1991 “Risk-return associations: Paradox or artifact? An empirically tested explanation.” Strategic Management Journal, 12: 231–241.Google Scholar
Wry, T., Cobb, J. A., and Aldrich, H. E. 2013 “More than a metaphor: Assessing the historical legacy of resource dependence and its contemporary promise as a theory of environmental complexity.” Academy of Management Annals, 7: 441–488.Google Scholar
Zhang, C. M. and Greve, H. R. 2018 “Delayed adoption of rules: A relational theory of firm exposure and state cooptation.” Journal of Management, 44: 3336–3363.Google Scholar
- 32
- Cited by