Journal of Management Studies

ABSTRACT This article examines a piece of corporate theatre. Although theatre has entered organization studies through the dramatistic writing of Kenneth Burke and the dramaturgical writings of Erving Goffman, this article is concerned with an approach variously described asorganizational, radical,situationorcorporatetheatre that treats theatre not primarily as a resource, an ontology or a metaphor but as a technology. This approach involves the deployment by an organization of dramatists, actors, directors, set designers, lighting specialists, and musicians to put on performances in front of audiences. Using frameworks derived from studies of theatre a particular piece of corporate theatre is described and analysed. It is argued that this form of theatre appears to be used to contain reflection and to promote the views of a particular group within an organization. It does not confront an audience but subtly suggests alternative ways of evaluating, construing and understanding issues. This may be achieved by anaesthetizing audience reaction by encouraging imaginative participation in the performance so that cherished beliefs and values do not appear to be directly challenged.

Despite the central place of rationality in the organization theory, strategic management, and decision‐making literatures, we know relatively little about why some strategic decision‐making procedures are more rational than others. This question was addressed in a study of 57 strategic decisions in 24 companies, using a multiple‐informant, structured interview protocol. Results indicate that environmental competitive threat, perceived external control of the organization, and the uncertainty of the strategic issues being addressed are related to procedural rationality. Surprisingly, some of these relationships were in the opposite direction from our predictions. These results are interpreted within a framework that emphasizes the link between procedural rationality and managerial discretion.

abstract  Drawing on the strategic management and international business literatures, this study examines the relationships between the experiences of newly selected CEOs and their choice of foreign direct investment (FDI) entry modes. Based on a sample
 of 380 foreign market entry events involving acquisitions, greenfield investments, and joint ventures, our findings indicate that CEOs with less firm experience preferred acquisitions and greenfield investments to joint ventures and, older CEOs were more likely to opt for joint ventures over greenfield investments. In addition, CEOs with throughput functional experience favoured acquisitions over joint ventures and greenfield investments. Finally, CEO international experience was associated with a greater propensity to choose greenfield investments and acquisitions over joint ventures and also greenfield investments over acquisitions. The implications of the findings from the perspective of theory and managerial practice are discussed, along with possible directions for future research.

abstract  Although strategy process research has provided careful and in‐depth descriptions and examinations of strategy, micro‐level processes and activities have been less commonly evaluated, especially as regards strategy creation and development. This paper examines how managers create and develop strategy in practice. A dual longitudinal case methodology, including a single in‐depth study combined with a multiple retrospective study is used, involving four multinational companies. The findings show a twofold character of strategy creation, including fundamental different strategy activities in the periphery and centre, reflecting their diverse location and social embeddedness. Strategy making in the periphery was inductive, including externally oriented and exploratory strategy activities like trial and error, informal noticing, experiments and the use of heuristics. In contrast, strategy making in the centre was more deductive involving an industry and exploitation focus, and activities like planning, analysis, formal intelligence and the use of standard routines.

A firm's ability to acquire and exploit external knowledge is often critical to achieving and sustaining a competitive advantage. In this study, we adopt a multi‐dimensional view of absorptive capacity and focus specifically on the application of external knowledge that has been obtained via university‐firm collaborations. We examine various organizational conditions that we propose influence a firm's ability to apply external knowledge for explorative and exploitative innovations. We collected data by a survey of firms in industries that frequently work with university research centres (URCs) and from publicly available sources. Results show that predictors of exploration and exploitation of the application of external knowledge differ. Surprisingly, technological relatedness, a common measure of absorptive capacity, is negatively associated with the application of external knowledge to explorative innovations, indicating that knowledge from more distant sources is applied more to exploration. Results also indicate that the effects of two external learning capabilities (prior experience with URCs and technological capability) on knowledge application are moderated in such a way by the tacitness of the knowledge transferred that experience is a stronger predictor when the knowledge is more explicit and technological capability is a stronger predictor when the knowledge is more tacit. We discuss the implications of these findings for research on the application of external knowledge.

Scholars in management and economics widely share the assumption that business firms focus on profits only, while it is the task of the state system to provide public goods. In this view business firms are conceived of as economic actors, and governments and their state agencies are considered the only political actors. We suggest that, under the conditions of globalization, the strict division of labour between private business and nation‐state governance does not hold any more. Many business firms have started to assume social and political responsibilities that go beyond legal requirements and fill the regulatory vacuum in global governance. Our review of the literature shows that there are a growing number of publications from various disciplines that propose a politicized concept of corporate social responsibility. We consider the implications of this new perspective for theorizing about the business firm, governance, and democracy.

Growing recognition that communication with stakeholders forms an essential element in the design, implementation and success of corporate social responsibility (CSR) has given rise to a burgeoning CSR communication literature. However this literature is scattered across various sub‐disciplines of management research and exhibits considerable heterogeneity in its core assumptions, approaches and goals. This article provides a thematically‐driven review of the extant literature across five core sub‐disciplines, identifying dominant views upon the audience of CSR communication (internal/external actors) and CSR communication purpose, as well as pervasive theoretical approaches and research paradigms manifested across these areas. The article then sets out a new conceptual framework – the 4Is of CSR communication research – that distinguishes between research on CSR Integration, CSR Interpretation, CSR Identity, and CSR Image. This typology of research streams organizes the central themes, opportunities and challenges for CSR communication theory development, and provides a heuristic against which future research can be located.

This article takes stock of the discourse on ‘political CSR’ (PCSR), reconsiders some of its assumptions, and suggests new directions for what we call ‘PCSR 2.0’. We start with a definition of PCSR, focusing on firms’ contribution to public goods. We then discuss historical antecedents to the debate and outline the original economic and political context. The following section explores emerging changes in the institutional context relevant to PCSR and reconsiders some of the assumptions underlying Habermas’ thesis of the postnational constellation. This highlights some neglected issues in previous works on PCSR, including the influence of nationalism and fundamentalism, the role of various types of business organisations, the return of government regulation, the complexity of institutional contexts, the efficiency of private governance, the financialization and digitalization of the economy, and the relevance of managerial sensemaking. Finally, we discuss the contributions to this special issue and relate them to the newly emerging research agenda.

Although stakeholder theory and corporate social responsibility (CSR) have evolved into major theoretical frameworks for exploring social issues in management, there is a limited and often misleading understanding of the relationship between them that inhibits the management field from adopting a social orientation to a full extent. Our aim is to remove unnecessary barriers that preclude collaboration between scholars in the stakeholder theory and CSR camps; empower organizational scholars and practitioners with a more nuanced language for dealing with social issues in management; and enable the creation of a coherent and integrative theoretical foundation in the area of social issues in management that has previously been at a disadvantage to other areas in management. In our conceptual analysis, we argue that stakeholder theory and CSR provide distinct but complementary theoretical frameworks with some overlap. The actual decision to choose a particular framework depends on the problem one wants to solve and the settings of that problem.

abstract  This paper addresses an important gap in the literature intersection between network theory and networked innovation by developing a theoretical framework on how to leverage learning alliances across extra‐ and intra‐corporate levels to support both exploration and exploitation of innovation to secure its creation and its implementation. A detailed case of the Volvo C70 development is analysed with focus on how the full innovation from exploration to exploitation of innovation seem to rely on fundamentally different types and structures of networks. Our detailed description and analysis of how a ‘transformation network’ was established and operated across different organizational levels to secure not only transfer, but also transformation and integration of knowledge into commercialized innovation makes an important contribution to extant theory on inter‐organizational knowledge transfer and networking.