通过数字来服从和反对:量化国际合作社联盟的混合组织

IF 7 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Journal of Management Studies Pub Date : 2024-07-14 DOI:10.1111/joms.13123
Benjamin Huybrechts, Dylan Nelson, Teresa Nelson, Noreen O'Shea, Frédéric Dufays
{"title":"通过数字来服从和反对:量化国际合作社联盟的混合组织","authors":"Benjamin Huybrechts, Dylan Nelson, Teresa Nelson, Noreen O'Shea, Frédéric Dufays","doi":"10.1111/joms.13123","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Collectives of hybrid organizations have emerged with the aim of promoting the plural goals and values embodied by their member organizations. Doing so, however, often requires simultaneous conformity and opposition to dominant institutional norms, such as those underlying mainstream market activity. We examine how hybrid collectives navigate this ‘conform‐and‐oppose’ tension as they seek to promote their members' hybrid form through quantification – i.e., the use of numbers to label, count, and describe members. Analyzing the case of the International Cooperative Alliance, we identify four interrelated dimensions (valorization, validity, reactivity, and retroaction) through which a hybrid collective can harness quantification to manage differing commitments to market and social goals and values within and beyond the collective – a process we name formative quantification. Core to this process are two filtering mechanisms – validity searching and values queuing – through which a hybrid collective integrates stakeholder perceptions of truth (validity) and value (valorization) to navigate hybrid tensions. Our work extends theory on hybrid tension management to the inter‐organizational level, while shifting the view of organizational quantification from a tool of conformity‐enhancing evaluation towards a collective search for numbers that both conform to and oppose taken‐for‐granted norms.","PeriodicalId":48445,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conform and Oppose through Numbers: Quantifying Hybrid Organizations at the International Cooperative Alliance\",\"authors\":\"Benjamin Huybrechts, Dylan Nelson, Teresa Nelson, Noreen O'Shea, Frédéric Dufays\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/joms.13123\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Collectives of hybrid organizations have emerged with the aim of promoting the plural goals and values embodied by their member organizations. Doing so, however, often requires simultaneous conformity and opposition to dominant institutional norms, such as those underlying mainstream market activity. We examine how hybrid collectives navigate this ‘conform‐and‐oppose’ tension as they seek to promote their members' hybrid form through quantification – i.e., the use of numbers to label, count, and describe members. Analyzing the case of the International Cooperative Alliance, we identify four interrelated dimensions (valorization, validity, reactivity, and retroaction) through which a hybrid collective can harness quantification to manage differing commitments to market and social goals and values within and beyond the collective – a process we name formative quantification. Core to this process are two filtering mechanisms – validity searching and values queuing – through which a hybrid collective integrates stakeholder perceptions of truth (validity) and value (valorization) to navigate hybrid tensions. Our work extends theory on hybrid tension management to the inter‐organizational level, while shifting the view of organizational quantification from a tool of conformity‐enhancing evaluation towards a collective search for numbers that both conform to and oppose taken‐for‐granted norms.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48445,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Management Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Management Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13123\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Management Studies","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13123","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

混合组织集体的出现是为了促进其成员组织所体现的多元目标和价值观。然而,要做到这一点,往往需要同时遵守和反对主流的制度规范,如主流市场活动的基本规范。我们将研究混合型集体如何通过量化--即使用数字来标记、计算和描述其成员--来促进其成员的混合形式,从而驾驭这种 "顺应与提出 "的紧张关系。通过分析国际合作社联盟的案例,我们发现了四个相互关联的方面(价值化、有效性、反应性和追溯性),通过这四个方面,混合集体可以利用量化来管理集体内外对市场和社会目标及价值的不同承诺--我们将这一过程命名为形成性量化。这一过程的核心是两个过滤机制--有效性搜索和价值排队,通过这两个机制,混合集体可以整合利益相关者对真理(有效性)和价值(价值化)的认知,从而驾驭混合紧张局势。我们的工作将混合张力管理的理论扩展到了组织间层面,同时将组织量化的视角从一种增强一致性的评估工具转向了对既符合又反对公认规范的数字的集体搜索。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Conform and Oppose through Numbers: Quantifying Hybrid Organizations at the International Cooperative Alliance
Collectives of hybrid organizations have emerged with the aim of promoting the plural goals and values embodied by their member organizations. Doing so, however, often requires simultaneous conformity and opposition to dominant institutional norms, such as those underlying mainstream market activity. We examine how hybrid collectives navigate this ‘conform‐and‐oppose’ tension as they seek to promote their members' hybrid form through quantification – i.e., the use of numbers to label, count, and describe members. Analyzing the case of the International Cooperative Alliance, we identify four interrelated dimensions (valorization, validity, reactivity, and retroaction) through which a hybrid collective can harness quantification to manage differing commitments to market and social goals and values within and beyond the collective – a process we name formative quantification. Core to this process are two filtering mechanisms – validity searching and values queuing – through which a hybrid collective integrates stakeholder perceptions of truth (validity) and value (valorization) to navigate hybrid tensions. Our work extends theory on hybrid tension management to the inter‐organizational level, while shifting the view of organizational quantification from a tool of conformity‐enhancing evaluation towards a collective search for numbers that both conform to and oppose taken‐for‐granted norms.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
16.40
自引率
5.70%
发文量
99
期刊介绍: The Journal of Management Studies is a prestigious publication that specializes in multidisciplinary research in the field of business and management. With a rich history of excellence, we are dedicated to publishing innovative articles that contribute to the advancement of management and organization studies. Our journal welcomes empirical and conceptual contributions that are relevant to various areas including organization theory, organizational behavior, human resource management, strategy, international business, entrepreneurship, innovation, and critical management studies. We embrace diversity and are open to a wide range of methodological approaches and philosophical perspectives.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Issue Information - Notes for Contributors Business, Conflict, and Peace: A Systematic Literature Review and Conceptual Framework Outcome‐Based Typology of Social Enterprises: Interlacing Individual Transformation, Capital Provision, and Societal Influence Multimodal Collective Sensemaking in Extreme Contexts: Evidence from Maritime Search and Rescue
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1