The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Deconstructing complexity: Configurations of institutional complexity and structural hybridity
Open accessAbstract
This article unpacks the notion of institutional complexity and highlights the distinct sets of challenges confronting hybrid structural arrangements. The framework identifies three factors that contribute to the experience of complexity—namely, the extent to which the prescriptive demands of logics are incompatible, whether there is a settled or widely accepted prioritization of logics within the field, and the degree to which the jurisdictions of the logics overlap. The central thesis is that these “components” of complexity variously combine to produce four distinct institutional landscapes, each with differing implications for the challenges organizations face and for how they might respond. The article explores the situational relevance of an array of hybridizing responses and discusses their implications for organizational legitimacy and performance. It concludes by specifying the boundary conditions of the framework and highlighting fruitful directions for future scholarship.
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
Differentiation and Integration in Complex Organizations
Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2391211 · Cited by 3,937
HISTORICAL INSTITUTIONALISM IN COMPARATIVE POLITICS
Thelen, K. (1999) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.369 · Cited by 3,409
KEEPING AN EYE ON THE MIRROR: IMAGE AND IDENTITY IN ORGANIZATIONAL ADAPTATION.
Dutton, J. E., & Dukerich, J. M. (1991) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/256405 · Cited by 2,931
Fligstein, N., & McAdam, D. (2012) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199859948.001.0001 · Cited by 1,857
Managing the Rivalry of Competing Institutional Logics
Reay, T., & Hinings, C. R. (2009) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840609104803 · Cited by 1,821
Toward a Theory of Paradox: A Dynamic equilibrium Model of Organizing
Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2009.0223 · Cited by 1,631
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 6×
“Thus, while federated structures provide the benefits of flexibility and responsiveness, these are generally gained at the expense of coordination and collaboration among different units, which may engage in self-interested behavior to further their own goals (Battilana and Dorado, 2010; Besharov and Smith, 2014).”
BackgroundInfluentialMaking Standards Stick: A Theory of Coupled vs. Decoupled Compliance
Sandholtz, K. W. (2012) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840612443623 · Cited by 150
Cited by
Digital innovation and transformation: An institutional perspective
Hinings, B., Gegenhuber, T., & Greenwood, R. (2018) · Information and Organization · doi:10.1016/j.infoandorg.2018.02.004 · Cited by 1,537
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
Metadata
- Authors
- Raynard, M.
- Venue
- Strategic Organization
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2016-07-31
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 310-335
- ISSN
- 1476-1270 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-315X
- OpenAlex
- W2342089632
- Cited by
- 187
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 21.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Deconstructing complexity: Configurations of institutional complexity and structural hybridity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1476127016634639
- The paper
- Raynard, M. (2016). Deconstructing complexity: Configurations of institutional complexity and structural hybridity. Strategic Organization. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127016634639
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.