The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Strategy and commitments to institutional logics: Organizational heterogeneity in business models and governance
Abstract
Theory and research on institutional pluralism and complexity provide an opportunity to re-examine a key question of strategy: the sources of organizational heterogeneity in the creation and capture of value. Concretely, we focus on the implications for value creation and capture in terms of organizations’ business models and governance strategies, respectively. We posit that strategic organizational choices are shaped by available institutional logics and theorize that greater institutional pluralism leads to increased heterogeneity—rather than isomorphism—in business models and governance strategies. As the mechanism for heterogeneity, we explain how pluralism leads to differentiated organizational commitments to distinct combinations and prioritizations of institutional logics. The article further examines how institutional complexity, wherein latent contradictions between logics become salient, provides opportunities for strategic change. We theorize that framing exposed contradictions as incompatible or paradoxical implies differentiated outcomes with respect to transformations in organizations’ business models and governance strategies.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage
Barney, J. (1991) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639101700108 · Cited by 48,334
Strategic Responses to Institutional Processes
Oliver, C. (1991) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1991.4279002 · Cited by 8,950
Corporate Social and Financial Performance: A Meta-Analysis
Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840603024003910 · Cited by 7,641
The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications
Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258887 · Cited by 5,846
Stakeholder Theory: The State of the Art
Parmar, B. L., Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Purnell, L., & de Colle, S. (2010) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2010.495581 · Cited by 2,755 · cited 2×
“As Freeman et al. (2010) recognize, however, initial affinities between strategic management scholarship and broader stakeholder perspectives (Learned et al., 1965; MacMillan 1978; Schendel and Hofer, 1979) gave way to divergence between the two disciplines, as stakeholder theory became associated…”
BackgroundStakeholder Theory: The State of the Art
Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Parmar, B. L., & de Colle, S. (2010) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815768 · Cited by 2,634
Open source software and the “private-collective” innovation model: Issues for organization science
Hippel, E. V., & Krogh, G. V. (2003) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.14.2.209.14992 · Cited by 2,145
Managing the Rivalry of Competing Institutional Logics
Reay, T., & Hinings, C. R. (2009) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840609104803 · Cited by 1,821
Multiple Institutional Logics in Organizations: Explaining Their Varied Nature and Implications
Besharov, M. L., & Smith, W. K. (2014) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2011.0431 · Cited by 1,571 · cited 2×
“(Re)framing strategies can vary based on the centrality and compatibility of logics to which organizations have made prior commitments (Besharov and Smith, 2014), on the degree of disruptiveness of field-level changes (Hoffman, 1999), and on an organization’s relative position in the field (Greenwood et al.”
BackgroundValue Creation and Value Capture: A Multilevel Perspective
Lepak, D. P., Smith, K. G., & Taylor, M. S. (2007) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2007.23464011 · Cited by 1,489
Cited by
An Institutional Logics Perspective on the Gig Economy
Frenken, K., Vaskelainen, T., Fünfschilling, L., & Piscicelli, L. (2020) · Theorizing the Sharing Economy: Variety and Trajectories of New Forms of Organizing · doi:10.1108/s0733-558x20200000066005 · Cited by 118
Ahmadi, H., Nilashi, M., Shahmoradi, L., Ibrahim, O., Sadoughi, F., Alizadeh, M., & Alizadeh, A. (2018) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2018.05.021 · Cited by 47
Organizations’ Management Configurations Towards Environment and Market Performances
Ren, S., Fan, D., & Tang, G. (2023) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-022-05299-4 · Cited by 25
Metadata
- Authors
- Ocasio, W., & Radoynovska, N.
- Venue
- Strategic Organization
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2016-07-31
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 287-309
- ISSN
- 1476-1270 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-315X
- OpenAlex
- W2336151054
- Cited by
- 202
- References
- 11
- FWCI
- 35.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Strategy and commitments to institutional logics: Organizational heterogeneity in business models and governance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1476127015625040
- The paper
- Ocasio, W., & Radoynovska, N. (2016). Strategy and commitments to institutional logics: Organizational heterogeneity in business models and governance. Strategic Organization. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127015625040
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
