Organization Studies

Most theorizing on the relationship between corporate social/environmental performance (CSP) and corporate financial performance (CFP) assumes that the current evidence is too fractured or too variable to draw any generalizable conclusions. With this integrative, quantitative study, we intend to show that the mainstream claim that we have little generalizable knowledge about CSP and CFP is built on shaky grounds. Providing a methodologically more rigorous review than previous efforts, we conduct a meta-analysis of 52 studies (which represent the population of prior quantitative inquiry) yielding a total sample size of 33,878 observations. The meta-analytic findings suggest that corporate virtue in the form of social responsibility and, to a lesser extent, environmental responsibility is likely to pay off, although the operationalizations of CSP and CFP also moderate the positive association. For example, CSP appears to be more highly correlated with accounting-based measures of CFP than with market-based indicators, and CSP reputation indices are more highly correlated with CFP than are other indicators of CSP. This meta-analysis establishes a greater degree of certainty with respect to the CSP-CFP relationship than is currently assumed to exist by many business scholars.

There is current interest in the competitive advantage that knowledge may provide for organizations and in the significance of knowledge workers, organ izational competencies and knowledge-intensive firms. Yet the concept of knowledge is complex and its relevance to organization theory has been insuf ficiently developed. The paper offers a review and critique of current approaches, and outlines an alternative. First, common images of knowledge in the organizational literature as embodied, embedded, embrained, encultured and encoded are identified and, to summarize popular writings on knowledge work, a typology of organizations and knowledge types is constructed. How ever, traditional assumptions about knowledge, upon which most current speculation about organizational knowledge is based, offer a compartmental ized and static approach to the subject. Drawing from recent studies of the impact of new technologies and from debates in philosophy, linguistics, social theory and cognitive science, the second part of the paper introduces an altern ative. Knowledge (or, more appropriately, knowing) is analyzed as an active process that is mediated, situated, provisional, pragmatic and contested. Rather than documenting the types of knowledge that capitalism currently demands the approach suggests that attention should be focused on the (culturally located) systems through which people achieve their knowing, on the changes that are occurring within such systems, and on the processes through which new knowledge may be generated.

Organizational learning is currently the focus of considerable attention, and it is addressed by a broad range of literatures. Organization theory, industrial econ omics, economic history, and business, management and innovation studies all approach the question of how organizations learn. A number of branches of psychology are also revealing on the issue. This paper assesses these various literatures by examining the insights they allow in three main areas: first, the goals of organizational learning; second, the learning processes in organizations; and third, the ways in which organizational learning may be facilitated and impeded. It contends that while the various literatures are revealing in particular aspects of organizational learning, a more complete understanding of its complexity requires a multi-disciplinary approach. The contributions of the different approaches are analyzed, and some areas are suggested where the transfer of analytical concepts may improve understanding.

We investigated an organizational field where competing institutional logics existed for a lengthy period of time. We identified four mechanisms for managing the rivalry of competing logics that facilitated and strengthened the separate identities of key actors, thus providing a way for competing logics to co-exist and separately guide the behaviour of different actors. We contribute to the institutional literature by showing that competing logics can co-exist and rivalry between logics can be managed through the development of collaborative relationships.

This paper presents a model of project capability-building consisting of two interacting levels of learning. First, it describes the bottom-up, ‘project-led’ phases of learning that occur when a firm moves into a new technology/market base: an exploratory ‘vanguard project’ phase; a ‘project-to-project’ phase to capture lessons learned; and a ‘project-to-organization’ phase when an organization increases its capabilities to deliver many projects. Second, it addresses the ‘business-led’ learning (within which the project-led learning is embedded) that occurs when ‘top-down’ strategic decisions are taken to create and exploit the company-wide resources and capabilities required to perform increasingly predictable and routine project activities.

Given the recent accumulation of research on inter-organizational relations and networks and the current fragmentation of the field, it is time to take stock and explore the achievements of, and future challenges for, this field of study. On the basis of a network analysis of the 158 articles on inter-organizational relations and networks that were published in four leading journals from 1980 to 1996, this paper empirically explores the linkages among, and configurations of, core theories and concepts underlying earlier empirical research on inter-organizational relations and networks. We identify core, as well as peripheral, areas of research interest in the field and point out areas of overlap and consolidation. Moreover, our empirical analysis shows that the field segments into four substantive research perspectives, namely social network, power and control, institutional, and institutional economics and strategy clusters. In sum, we suggest an innovative, empirically grounded approach towards a literature review that aims at a synopsis of a field of study and highlights possibly fruitful avenues for future research.

Porter's (1980) three generic strategies have received a great deal of attention recently in the literature on strategic management. In this, the first of two papers, we employ methods of taxonomy on the PIMS data base of consumer durable business units to determine whether Porter's differentiation, cost leadership and focus types occur with any degree of regularity. Then, in a sequel paper to appear in O.S. we examine whether the types differ among each other and between types not displaying differentiation or cost leadership in their growth and ROI performance.

While most literature promotes a positive impact of social capital on various organizational performance outcomes, empirical results on the social capital—organizational performance link are not conclusive. We propose that one reason for the discordant findings is that research has largely not accounted for the mediating process steps that translate social capital into organizational performance outcomes. We suggest that organizational performance outcomes of organization members’ social capital hinge on the mediating processes of resource mobilization, assimilation, and use. An empirical study of 218 projects in the German engineering industry supports our theoretical model. Findings show that knowledge transfer (conceptualized as the mobilization, assimilation, and use of knowledge resources) mediates between organization members’ intra-organizational social capital and organizational performance outcomes of growth and innovation performance. The present study thus contributes to a deeper understanding of the value of intra-organizational social capital.

The concept of governmentality was developed by Michel Foucault to address the specificity of contemporary neo-liberal forms of governance — premised on the active consent and subjugation of subjects, rather than their oppression, domination or external control. These neo-liberal forms of governance are evident in new forms of alliance contracting in the construction industry. We review the major innovations in organization form in the sector, before considering the specific management practices of surveillance and control that are typically associated with governance in these projects. Project management has been a historically evolving field. This paper reports on an example of governmentality applied to the practice of project management. While governmentality refers to the design of project governance as an activity, the management of projects as a mode of organization, irrespective of the mode of governance, is highly complex and uncertain. These themes have already been widely addressed in organization theory. Here, we draw on recent treatments of them that combine transaction costs and resource dependence perspectives. Moreover, we argue that projects also display an acute sense of temporality, as Schutzian-influenced approaches have explored. In the context of governmentality, complexity, uncertainty and temporality are addressed in a specific and highly innovative project management.

The research methods used in the ethnography are spelt out, as well as the methods used in constructing the interpretation of the case. Economies in authoritative surveillance have been sought through building collaborative commitment and transparency into the moral fibre of a project. The governmental tools used to do this are a strong project culture, monetized key performance indicators, and a stake-holder conception of the project to bind different organizational stakeholders together. The case does not record an unqualifiedly successful project: the governmentality that was constructed had limits, as the case spells out. The failure indicates some issues that the stakeholder theory of the firm will need to address. We conclude that governmentality projects premised on stakeholder conceptions are particularly susceptible to discrepancies between ambition and outcome. In such a context, the constant injunction to improve may itself be an integral part of the governmental method. Hence, governmentality is particularly appropriate for understanding quality management issues.