The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Multiplicity of Institutional Logics and the Heterogeneity of Organizational Responses
Abstract
This paper shows that organizations in market settings face complex institutional contexts to which they respond in different though patterned ways. We show how both regional state logics and family logics impact on organizational responses to an overarching market logic. Regional logics are particularly potent when the activities of firms, especially of large firms, are concentrated in regions whose governments champion regional distinctiveness and where the regional activities of the firm are significant. Family logics affect the decision to downsize, especially in smaller firms. This paper advances institutional theory by showing the influences of nonmarket institutions on market behavior, contributes to the growing recognition of community influences, and highlights the importance of historical context.
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
Business planning as pedagogy: Language and control in a changing institutional field
Oakes, L. S., Townley, B., & Cooper, D. J. (1998) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393853 · Cited by 675
Professional HRM Practices in Family Owned-Managed Enterprises*
de Kok, J. M. P., Uhlaner, L. M., & Thurik, A. R. (2006) · Journal of Small Business Management · doi:10.1111/j.1540-627x.2006.00181.x · Cited by 290
Cited by
Institutional Complexity and Organizational Responses
Greenwood, R., Raynard, M., Kodeih, F., Micelotta, E. R., & Lounsbury, M. (2011) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2011.590299 · Cited by 3,519
Self-citationAdvancing Research on Hybrid Organizing – Insights from the Study of Social Enterprises
Battilana, J., & Lee, M. (2014) · The Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.1080/19416520.2014.893615 · Cited by 2,107
Imprinting: Toward a Multilevel Theory
Marquis, C., & Tilcsik, A. (2013) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2013.766076 · Cited by 1,576
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
Building Inclusive Markets in Rural Bangladesh: How Intermediaries Work Institutional Voids
Mair, J., Martí, I., & Ventresca, M. J. (2012) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2010.0627 · Cited by 1,207
Metadata
- Authors
- Greenwood, R., Díaz, A. M., Li, S. X., & Lorente, J. C.
- Venue
- Organization Science
- Published
- 2010-04
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 521-539
- ISSN
- 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5455
- OpenAlex
- W2113421427
- Cited by
- 1,102
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 36.53
- 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: The Multiplicity of Institutional Logics and the Heterogeneity of Organizational Responses. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/orsc.1090.0453
- The paper
- Greenwood, R., Díaz, A. M., Li, S. X., & Lorente, J. C. (2010). The Multiplicity of Institutional Logics and the Heterogeneity of Organizational Responses. Organization Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0453
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.
