We advance a novel perspective to study how field actors co‐develop field governance through continuous interactions. Field governance determines the formal and informal rules of a field, defining membership boundaries and core practices. Prior research has mostly studied the establishment of top‐down regulations or the work of advocacy and social movement organisations to influence or overthrow existing regimes. We review 147 previously disconnected articles on field governance and institutional work and identify interactional governing activities (IGAs), the concept we advance and define as the strategic and interactional activities actors deploy to develop, disrupt and maintain field governance. Depending on field conditions, we propose that actors combine IGAs in various interaction modes to either oppose the existing order, lobby for change or collaborate to jointly develop field governance. We contribute to the scholarly understanding of field governance development by proposing a continuous process that extends beyond influencing regulatory decision‐making to include knowledge‐building and interactional infrastructure‐development activities. Our study provides novel insights on collaborative institutional work for field governance co‐development by heterogeneous actors. By defining and categorising IGAs, we contribute to both a more integrative theoretical understanding of field governance as well as a playbook for practitioners, collective interest organisations and regulators engaged in field‐building work.
{"title":"Interactional governing activities: A novel perspective on how actors co‐develop field governance","authors":"Natalia Mityushina, Lisa Hehenberger","doi":"10.1111/ijmr.12394","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12394","url":null,"abstract":"We advance a novel perspective to study how field actors co‐develop field governance through continuous interactions. Field governance determines the formal and informal rules of a field, defining membership boundaries and core practices. Prior research has mostly studied the establishment of top‐down regulations or the work of advocacy and social movement organisations to influence or overthrow existing regimes. We review 147 previously disconnected articles on field governance and institutional work and identify <jats:italic>interactional governing activities</jats:italic> (IGAs), the concept we advance and define as the strategic and interactional activities actors deploy to develop, disrupt and maintain field governance. Depending on field conditions, we propose that actors combine IGAs in various interaction modes to either oppose the existing order, lobby for change or collaborate to jointly develop field governance. We contribute to the scholarly understanding of field governance development by proposing a continuous process that extends beyond influencing regulatory decision‐making to include knowledge‐building and interactional infrastructure‐development activities. Our study provides novel insights on collaborative institutional work for field governance co‐development by heterogeneous actors. By defining and categorising IGAs, we contribute to both a more integrative theoretical understanding of field governance as well as a playbook for practitioners, collective interest organisations and regulators engaged in field‐building work.","PeriodicalId":48326,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Management Reviews","volume":"53 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.1,"publicationDate":"2025-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143071561","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Zhe Cao, Martie‐Louise Verreynne, Rui Torres de Oliveira
Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) are crucial in driving innovation, creating employment, and fostering economic development. To achieve these goals, they collaborate with various organizations, including universities, to extend their internal resources and capabilities, thereby scaling their efforts. However, inconsistent results and vague theoretical conclusions harbour ambiguity and a lack of paradigmatic analysis, hindering scholars’ ability to integrate and advance insights and harness the full potential of SME‐university collaboration for impactful outcomes. Our systematic literature review addresses these issues by providing a comprehensive and up‐to‐date understanding of the literature on SME‐university collaboration. Our review encompasses 145 peer‐reviewed publications from 1981 to 2023, showcasing the diversity of research regarding journal outlets, publication timelines, methodologies, empirical contexts, theoretical lenses, and themes. Our review reveals three paradigmatic collaboration logics: technology transfer, knowledge co‐development, and value co‐creation. We analyse and synthesize these insights to propose an overarching conceptual framework for theorizing SME‐university collaborations and supporting future research. We combine these to articulate theoretical and policy implications and present a future research agenda.
{"title":"Reflecting back and looking forward: A systematic literature review of SME–university collaborations","authors":"Zhe Cao, Martie‐Louise Verreynne, Rui Torres de Oliveira","doi":"10.1111/ijmr.12393","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12393","url":null,"abstract":"Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) are crucial in driving innovation, creating employment, and fostering economic development. To achieve these goals, they collaborate with various organizations, including universities, to extend their internal resources and capabilities, thereby scaling their efforts. However, inconsistent results and vague theoretical conclusions harbour ambiguity and a lack of paradigmatic analysis, hindering scholars’ ability to integrate and advance insights and harness the full potential of SME‐university collaboration for impactful outcomes. Our systematic literature review addresses these issues by providing a comprehensive and up‐to‐date understanding of the literature on SME‐university collaboration. Our review encompasses 145 peer‐reviewed publications from 1981 to 2023, showcasing the diversity of research regarding journal outlets, publication timelines, methodologies, empirical contexts, theoretical lenses, and themes. Our review reveals three paradigmatic collaboration logics: technology transfer, knowledge co‐development, and value co‐creation. We analyse and synthesize these insights to propose an overarching conceptual framework for theorizing SME‐university collaborations and supporting future research. We combine these to articulate theoretical and policy implications and present a future research agenda.","PeriodicalId":48326,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Management Reviews","volume":"86 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.1,"publicationDate":"2024-12-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142884379","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Deceptive signalling occurs when resource seekers provide communication or observable behaviour that seems to indicate high‐quality attributes yet actually misleads about the resource seekers’ attributes. Deceptive signalling is an everyday phenomenon that hurts investors, consumers and high‐quality ventures alike, leading to resource misallocation and market inefficiencies. It is also a challenge for researchers interested in signalling theory, as deceptive signalling defies signalling theory's predictions, leading to ambiguity regarding if and how deceptive signals should be analysed from a signalling theory perspective. Research on deceptive signalling has accumulated, yet it is scattered across disciplines and discourses, which hampers our ability to understand the phenomenon and obstructs progress in signalling theory. To mitigate this state of affairs, this paper provides a cross‐disciplinary integrative review, systematizing extant research on deceptive signalling, developing suggestions for the integration of deceptive signalling into signalling theory and outlining a research agenda on currently unresolved questions in signalling research pertaining to deceptive signalling. Developing a better understanding of deceptive signalling seems particularly pressing as recent advances in AI technologies, which reduce the detectability of deceptive signals as well as the costs for producing such signals, will presumably lead to an exacerbation of deceptive signalling problems.
{"title":"Deceptive signalling: Causes, consequences and remedies","authors":"Norbert Steigenberger","doi":"10.1111/ijmr.12392","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12392","url":null,"abstract":"Deceptive signalling occurs when resource seekers provide communication or observable behaviour that seems to indicate high‐quality attributes yet actually misleads about the resource seekers’ attributes. Deceptive signalling is an everyday phenomenon that hurts investors, consumers and high‐quality ventures alike, leading to resource misallocation and market inefficiencies. It is also a challenge for researchers interested in signalling theory, as deceptive signalling defies signalling theory's predictions, leading to ambiguity regarding if and how deceptive signals should be analysed from a signalling theory perspective. Research on deceptive signalling has accumulated, yet it is scattered across disciplines and discourses, which hampers our ability to understand the phenomenon and obstructs progress in signalling theory. To mitigate this state of affairs, this paper provides a cross‐disciplinary integrative review, systematizing extant research on deceptive signalling, developing suggestions for the integration of deceptive signalling into signalling theory and outlining a research agenda on currently unresolved questions in signalling research pertaining to deceptive signalling. Developing a better understanding of deceptive signalling seems particularly pressing as recent advances in AI technologies, which reduce the detectability of deceptive signals as well as the costs for producing such signals, will presumably lead to an exacerbation of deceptive signalling problems.","PeriodicalId":48326,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Management Reviews","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.1,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142841987","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Research on the branding of small‐ and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs), known as SME branding, has garnered substantial interest over the past two decades. Although researchers acknowledge the importance of stakeholders and networks as co‐creators of SME brands, a comprehensive conceptualisation of SME brand co‐creation remains lacking. The current study addresses this gap by combining systematic literature searches with a cumulative narrative review. By analysing 136 journal articles using brand co‐creation and process theory lenses, the study identifies two SME brand co‐creation eras—the initiation era and the advanced era—and categorises the research across these eras into three principal streams and eight sub‐streams. Synthesising insights from across these eras and streams concludes in conceptualising SME brand co‐creation in terms of concepts, developmental processes and causal processes, as well as introducing a framework called the SME brand co‐creation research diamond. The framework visually illustrates the intertwined nature of authentic brand co‐creation culture, co‐creation types and outcomes from the viewpoints of concepts, developmental processes and causal processes, emphasising interactions with stakeholders and wider society. As the first to conceptualise SME brand co‐creation, this study lays the groundwork for advancing the field into the expansion era. The study advises researchers to comprehend their work in a wider context, position their own research and further examine SME brand co‐creation. It also assists SME owners, managers and entrepreneurs in recognising and developing aspects of brand co‐creation culture and stakeholder and societal activities, along with their broader implications.
{"title":"Conceptualising SME brand co‐creation","authors":"Mari Juntunen","doi":"10.1111/ijmr.12391","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12391","url":null,"abstract":"Research on the branding of small‐ and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs), known as SME branding, has garnered substantial interest over the past two decades. Although researchers acknowledge the importance of stakeholders and networks as co‐creators of SME brands, a comprehensive conceptualisation of SME brand co‐creation remains lacking. The current study addresses this gap by combining systematic literature searches with a cumulative narrative review. By analysing 136 journal articles using brand co‐creation and process theory lenses, the study identifies two SME brand co‐creation eras—<jats:italic>the initiation era</jats:italic> and <jats:italic>the advanced era</jats:italic>—and categorises the research across these eras into three principal streams and eight sub‐streams. Synthesising insights from across these eras and streams concludes in conceptualising SME brand co‐creation in terms of <jats:italic>concepts</jats:italic>, <jats:italic>developmental processes</jats:italic> and <jats:italic>causal processes</jats:italic>, as well as introducing a framework called <jats:italic>the SME brand co‐creation research diamond</jats:italic>. The framework visually illustrates the intertwined nature of authentic brand co‐creation culture, co‐creation types and outcomes from the viewpoints of concepts, developmental processes and causal processes, emphasising interactions with stakeholders and wider society. As the first to conceptualise SME brand co‐creation, this study lays the groundwork for advancing the field into <jats:italic>the expansion</jats:italic> era. The study advises researchers to comprehend their work in a wider context, position their own research and further examine SME brand co‐creation. It also assists SME owners, managers and entrepreneurs in recognising and developing aspects of brand co‐creation culture and stakeholder and societal activities, along with their broader implications.","PeriodicalId":48326,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Management Reviews","volume":"39 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.1,"publicationDate":"2024-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142815574","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Marica Grego, Marcin Bartosiak, Biagio Palese, Gabriele Piccoli, Stefano Denicolai
Business and management scholars have always placed a strong emphasis on the study of capabilities. As digital technology moves from the back office to the forefront of digital innovation and transformation, organizations increasingly recognize the vital role of their digital‐related capabilities. Yet, despite the attention, substantial confusion remains in the cross‐disciplinary management and business literature, caused by conflating related, yet distinct, constructs: information technology (IT) capabilities, IT‐enabled capabilities and digital capabilities. Our objective in this article is twofold. First, we analyse the capability literature across business research areas to identify weaknesses, contradictions, controversies or inconsistencies regarding ‘IT’ and ‘digital’ constructs. We do so by conducting a theory‐driven critical review encompassing 360 studies in fields ranging from accounting to strategy. Second, our article advances a theoretical framework that clarifies the differences across IT capabilities, IT‐enabled capabilities and digital capabilities. It also provides solid ground for future inquiry by ensuring reliable knowledge accumulation while pointing research attention to unique and novel research questions.
{"title":"Disentangling the ‘digital’: A critical review of information technology capabilities, information technology–enabled capabilities and digital capabilities in business research","authors":"Marica Grego, Marcin Bartosiak, Biagio Palese, Gabriele Piccoli, Stefano Denicolai","doi":"10.1111/ijmr.12389","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12389","url":null,"abstract":"Business and management scholars have always placed a strong emphasis on the study of capabilities. As digital technology moves from the back office to the forefront of digital innovation and transformation, organizations increasingly recognize the vital role of their digital‐related capabilities. Yet, despite the attention, substantial confusion remains in the cross‐disciplinary management and business literature, caused by conflating related, yet distinct, constructs: information technology (IT) capabilities, IT‐enabled capabilities and digital capabilities. Our objective in this article is twofold. First, we analyse the capability literature across business research areas to identify weaknesses, contradictions, controversies or inconsistencies regarding ‘IT’ and ‘digital’ constructs. We do so by conducting a theory‐driven critical review encompassing 360 studies in fields ranging from accounting to strategy. Second, our article advances a theoretical framework that clarifies the differences across IT capabilities, IT‐enabled capabilities and digital capabilities. It also provides solid ground for future inquiry by ensuring reliable knowledge accumulation while pointing research attention to unique and novel research questions.","PeriodicalId":48326,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Management Reviews","volume":"60 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.1,"publicationDate":"2024-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142789937","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Leandro Gauss, Daniel P. Lacerda, Julio C. M. Siluk, A. Georges L. Romme
The application of design science (DS) in the field of operations management (OM) is believed to be lopsided, with most studies pursuing theory‐to‐practice rather than practice‐to‐theory applications of DS. However, this belief has remained untested at the level of the entire body of DS applications in OM. This paper therefore reviews and synthesises 66 peer‐reviewed DS‐based publications (2003–2024) and presents a novel configurational framework. We analyse the DS applications through the lens of this framework to conclude that most of these applications contribute incrementally to extant theories but make a rather revelatory contribution to practice. This analysis points at four main reasons: DS is still an emerging research methodology, which is not labelled as such in many applications; OM researchers often assume that problem‐solving is the primary purpose of DS, which inhibits the delivery of more theoretical research outcomes; the lack of methodological guidelines to support the transition from specific to generalised knowledge; and the rather fragmented body of knowledge on DS, which is dispersed across multiple sources and different domains. This paper offers a configurational framework for DS to guide OM scholars in their efforts to explore scientific discoveries beyond problem‐solving.
{"title":"Design science in operations management: A review and synthesis of the literature","authors":"Leandro Gauss, Daniel P. Lacerda, Julio C. M. Siluk, A. Georges L. Romme","doi":"10.1111/ijmr.12390","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12390","url":null,"abstract":"The application of design science (DS) in the field of operations management (OM) is believed to be lopsided, with most studies pursuing theory‐to‐practice rather than practice‐to‐theory applications of DS. However, this belief has remained untested at the level of the entire body of DS applications in OM. This paper therefore reviews and synthesises 66 peer‐reviewed DS‐based publications (2003–2024) and presents a novel configurational framework. We analyse the DS applications through the lens of this framework to conclude that most of these applications contribute incrementally to extant theories but make a rather revelatory contribution to practice. This analysis points at four main reasons: DS is still an emerging research methodology, which is not labelled as such in many applications; OM researchers often assume that problem‐solving is the primary purpose of DS, which inhibits the delivery of more theoretical research outcomes; the lack of methodological guidelines to support the transition from specific to generalised knowledge; and the rather fragmented body of knowledge on DS, which is dispersed across multiple sources and different domains. This paper offers a configurational framework for DS to guide OM scholars in their efforts to explore scientific discoveries beyond problem‐solving.","PeriodicalId":48326,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Management Reviews","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.1,"publicationDate":"2024-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142789936","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Anneke Schaefer, Caroline Gatrell, Laura Radcliffe
This review takes a transdisciplinary approach to work–family (WF) research, offering new perspectives on different family forms in the context of employment. It focuses on lone‐parents and blended families, highlighting how management research on the WF interface has been constrained by traditional definitions of ‘family’, assuming intact couple relationships. The review shows that the WF experiences of lone‐parents and blended families differ significantly from those of traditional or nuclear families. Our findings demonstrate that blended and lone‐parent families struggle with conventional WF policies based on traditional family forms. These families face four main challenges: (1) complex residential arrangements and relationships with co‐parents; (2) managing (limited) resources; (3) navigating stigma; and (4) narrow cultural scripts defining family roles. Utilizing cross‐domain identity transition theory, we question the traditional ideas at the core of current WF theory. We demonstrate that non‐traditional families occupy a ‘liminal’ WF space due to their more fluid parental, occupational and household identities compared to traditional families. We urge employers and policy makers to recognize and address the distinct WF challenges faced by lone‐parents and blended families. Employers should develop flexible working policies that accommodate complex residential arrangements and provide resources to support lone and blended family structures. Policy makers should consider revising family leave policies to be more inclusive of diverse family forms. Future research should further explore the diverse experiences of employed parents, including those from LGBTQIA+ communities, using our framework, which encourages researchers to think differently regarding existing WF theories through the consideration of our four themes.
{"title":"Understanding the liminal situation of lone‐parent and blended families—A review and agenda for work–family research","authors":"Anneke Schaefer, Caroline Gatrell, Laura Radcliffe","doi":"10.1111/ijmr.12388","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12388","url":null,"abstract":"This review takes a transdisciplinary approach to work–family (WF) research, offering new perspectives on different family forms in the context of employment. It focuses on lone‐parents and blended families, highlighting how management research on the WF interface has been constrained by traditional definitions of ‘family’, assuming intact couple relationships. The review shows that the WF experiences of lone‐parents and blended families differ significantly from those of traditional or nuclear families. Our findings demonstrate that blended and lone‐parent families struggle with conventional WF policies based on traditional family forms. These families face four main challenges: (1) complex residential arrangements and relationships with co‐parents; (2) managing (limited) resources; (3) navigating stigma; and (4) narrow cultural scripts defining family roles. Utilizing cross‐domain identity transition theory, we question the traditional ideas at the core of current WF theory. We demonstrate that non‐traditional families occupy a ‘liminal’ WF space due to their more fluid parental, occupational and household identities compared to traditional families. We urge employers and policy makers to recognize and address the distinct WF challenges faced by lone‐parents and blended families. Employers should develop flexible working policies that accommodate complex residential arrangements and provide resources to support lone and blended family structures. Policy makers should consider revising family leave policies to be more inclusive of diverse family forms. Future research should further explore the diverse experiences of employed parents, including those from LGBTQIA+ communities, using our framework, which encourages researchers to think differently regarding existing WF theories through the consideration of our four themes.","PeriodicalId":48326,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Management Reviews","volume":"70 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.1,"publicationDate":"2024-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142718284","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Qijun Zhou, Honglan Yu, Kweku Adams, Rexford Attah‐Boakye, Jeaneth Johansson
Adopting digital technologies in different organizations has become a trend over the last decade, yet our understanding regarding impact of digital technologies on strategising needs to be more cohersive. This paper reviews existing research on how digital transformation intersects with strategic management to adress this gap. Specifically, the aim is to explore how the digital context changes strategising. Based on a systematic review of empirical evidence from 163 journal papers, we showcased the manifestation of strategising in the digital age in terms of strategic practitioners, practices and praxis. By consolidating these findings, a typology of strategic actions in the digital age is developed and discussed, highlighting the interplay among changes in strategy‐as‐practice parameters. This framework clarifies in strategic scenarios of digital transformation and identifies various strategic directions and actions. Overall, we argue that although digital transformation has created additional strategic options, it has yet to change the underlying assumptions of strategising in firms.
{"title":"Uncovering the impact of digital technologies on strategising: Evidence from a systematic literature review","authors":"Qijun Zhou, Honglan Yu, Kweku Adams, Rexford Attah‐Boakye, Jeaneth Johansson","doi":"10.1111/ijmr.12387","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12387","url":null,"abstract":"Adopting digital technologies in different organizations has become a trend over the last decade, yet our understanding regarding impact of digital technologies on strategising needs to be more cohersive. This paper reviews existing research on how digital transformation intersects with strategic management to adress this gap. Specifically, the aim is to explore how the digital context changes strategising. Based on a systematic review of empirical evidence from 163 journal papers, we showcased the manifestation of strategising in the digital age in terms of strategic practitioners, practices and praxis. By consolidating these findings, a typology of strategic actions in the digital age is developed and discussed, highlighting the interplay among changes in strategy‐as‐practice parameters. This framework clarifies in strategic scenarios of digital transformation and identifies various strategic directions and actions. Overall, we argue that although digital transformation has created additional strategic options, it has yet to change the underlying assumptions of strategising in firms.","PeriodicalId":48326,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Management Reviews","volume":"53 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.1,"publicationDate":"2024-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142673237","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Existing literature on meta‐organization is divided into two distinct streams in organizational and management studies, with different definitions and boundaries, potentially leading to inconsistencies and theoretical misalignment. Can we disambiguate the conceptualizations of meta‐organizations, and what insights can be gleaned from this clarification? Using a systematic review of the meta‐organization literature, we propose a novel classification, distinguishing between meta‐organizations as ‘meta‐level actors’, rooted in the organizational perspective, and meta‐organizations as ‘orchestrated systems’, grounded in the management perspective. While synthesizing current knowledge about meta‐organizations, we highlight the commonalities, divergences and specificities of both perspectives. We contribute to the literature on meta‐organizations by bringing greater clarity to the field, by disambiguating the uses of meta‐organization, by outlining a state of the art for both new categories and by providing a detailed research agenda. We also provide fundamental insights about two distinct ways of meta‐organizing, that is creating order among and beyond single organizations through collectively decided social orders and orchestrated social orders.
{"title":"One name for two concepts: A systematic literature review about meta‐organizations","authors":"Philippe Coulombel, Héloïse Berkowitz","doi":"10.1111/ijmr.12385","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12385","url":null,"abstract":"Existing literature on meta‐organization is divided into two distinct streams in organizational and management studies, with different definitions and boundaries, potentially leading to inconsistencies and theoretical misalignment. Can we disambiguate the conceptualizations of meta‐organizations, and what insights can be gleaned from this clarification? Using a systematic review of the meta‐organization literature, we propose a novel classification, distinguishing between meta‐organizations as ‘meta‐level actors’, rooted in the organizational perspective, and meta‐organizations as ‘orchestrated systems’, grounded in the management perspective. While synthesizing current knowledge about meta‐organizations, we highlight the commonalities, divergences and specificities of both perspectives. We contribute to the literature on meta‐organizations by bringing greater clarity to the field, by disambiguating the uses of meta‐organization, by outlining a state of the art for both new categories and by providing a detailed research agenda. We also provide fundamental insights about two distinct ways of meta‐organizing, that is creating order among and beyond single organizations through <jats:italic>collectively decided</jats:italic> social orders and <jats:italic>orchestrated</jats:italic> social orders.","PeriodicalId":48326,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Management Reviews","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.1,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142643176","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Geographical location sets the broad scene for people's access to knowledge and resources that are critical for career progression. Acknowledging the importance of location and following calls for a contextualized approach to career studies, an increasing body of literature on career success has incorporated geographical considerations over the past decades. However, this literature remains fragmented across disciplines, and a comprehensive understanding of how location influences individual success is lacking. This gap limits researchers’ ability to explain, predict and interpret the role of geographical location in career success. This gap also impedes a clear understanding of multi‐level influences that shape career outcomes, as location is a critical aspect of the macro context. We conducted a systematic review of 99 empirical studies published from 1970 to 2024, using a multi‐disciplinary, multi‐method and multi‐faceted approach. We developed an integrative model that illuminates how factors embedded in geographical context affect multiple aspects of career success through imprinting, (de)mobilizing and contingency mechanisms. Our review advances knowledge of career success from proximal to distal contexts and offers a shifting perspective of city and national career actors. In addition, it extends several streams of theory and scholarship by revealing the cross‐level effects on individual outcomes. We propose a future research agenda and provide suggestions for general career actors, companies and policymakers.
{"title":"Career success and geographical location: A systematic review and future research agenda","authors":"Huainan Wang, Mina Beigi, Yehuda Baruch","doi":"10.1111/ijmr.12386","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12386","url":null,"abstract":"Geographical location sets the broad scene for people's access to knowledge and resources that are critical for career progression. Acknowledging the importance of location and following calls for a contextualized approach to career studies, an increasing body of literature on career success has incorporated geographical considerations over the past decades. However, this literature remains fragmented across disciplines, and a comprehensive understanding of how location influences individual success is lacking. This gap limits researchers’ ability to explain, predict and interpret the role of geographical location in career success. This gap also impedes a clear understanding of multi‐level influences that shape career outcomes, as location is a critical aspect of the macro context. We conducted a systematic review of 99 empirical studies published from 1970 to 2024, using a multi‐disciplinary, multi‐method and multi‐faceted approach. We developed an integrative model that illuminates how factors embedded in geographical context affect multiple aspects of career success through imprinting, (de)mobilizing and contingency mechanisms. Our review advances knowledge of career success from proximal to distal contexts and offers a shifting perspective of city and national career actors. In addition, it extends several streams of theory and scholarship by revealing the cross‐level effects on individual outcomes. We propose a future research agenda and provide suggestions for general career actors, companies and policymakers.","PeriodicalId":48326,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Management Reviews","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.1,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142597131","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：