David Chandler, Francisco Polidoro Jr., Wei Yang
Academy of Management Journal,
We have long known that organizational reputation is consequential. While highlighting the effects of a reputation for ‘good’ behavior, however, prior work has largely overlooked the possibility that a reputation for ‘bad’ behavior is qualitatively distinct. In addition, we know that organizational reputation is multidimensional. Although this is conceptually intriguing only if different types of reputation produce different effects, concurrent tests of such differences are rare. In response, we study the effects of multiple reputations for bad behavior on media coverage of a serious error by the firm. Due to the need for the news to be ‘new,’ we predict the media is more likely to cover errors that supplement a firm’s general ‘character reputation,’ but will likely ignore errors that are redundant given a firm’s specific ‘capability reputation.’ We test this theory in the context of 113 major oil spills in the U.S., from 1985 to 2016. Results
Benjamin M. Cole, David Chandler
Administrative Science Quarterly,
Organizational impression management theory traditionally explains how firms manage threats from specific events or from campaigns orchestrated by non-competitors, such as activists or regulators, but has not attempted to explain the complex dynamics of impression management campaigns orchestrated by a firm’s competitor. To address this oversight, we analyze one of the bitterest rivalries in corporate historythe war of the currents between Thomas Edison and George Westinghouse, which ended in the triumph of Westinghouse’s alternating current over Edison’s direct current for electric power transmission. We define competitive impression management as activity by a firm or its employees that is intended to alter the perceptions of a competing firm or its offerings in the eyes of a common audience. By combining historical case study and grounded theory methods, our findings reveal that the war of the
Violina P. Rindova, Luis L. Martins, Santosh B. Srinivas, David Chandler
Journal of Management,Vol. 44, Issue 6, Pages: 2175-2208.
A review of the literature on organizational rankings across management, sociology, education, and law reveals three perspectives on these complex evaluationsrankings are seen as a form of information intermediation, as comparative orderings, or as a means for surveillance and control. The information intermediation perspective views rankings as information products that address information asymmetries between the ranked organizations and their stakeholders; the comparative orderings perspective views them as representations of organizational status and reputation; and the surveillance and control perspective emphasizes their disciplining power that subjects ranked organizations to political and economic interests. For each perspective, we identify core contributions as well as additional questions that extend the current body of research. We also identify a new perspectiverankings entrepreneurship
David Chandler, William M. Foster
Academy of Management 77th Annual Meeting (Best Paper) Proceedings,
The idea that institutions are functions of complex processes that evolve gradually over long periods is taken-for-granted. In spite of this, our understanding of the past and how it informs current institutional configurations remains under-theorized. Where work exists, it tends to be overly literal-treating the past as a sequence of path-dependent, static events. In contrast, we theorize the past as a fluid resource (more stable or more fragile) that is interpreted in the present. The resulting model situates institutions both synchronically in nested hierarchies and diachronically in layers of sediment. We augment this model with a case-study of an essential U.S. institution (constitutional law) and the organization that embodies it (the Supreme Court). In particular, we analyze two Court decisions that define the constitutionality of the death penalty and reveal two conflict mechanisms (subversion in the present and excavation of
William M. Foster, Diego M. Coraiola, Roy Suddaby, Jochem Kroezen, David Chandler
Business History,Vol. 59, Issue 8, Pages: 1176-1200.
History has long been recognised as a strategic and organisational resource. However, until recently, the advantage conferred by history was attributed to a firm’s ability to accumulate heterogeneous resources or develop opaque practices. In contrast, we argue that the advantage history confers on organisations is based on understanding when the knowledge of the past is referenced and the reasons why it is strategically communicated. We argue that managers package this knowledge in historical narratives to address …
Pamela R. Haunschild, Francisco Polidoro Jr., David Chandler
Organization Science,Vol. 26, Issue 6, Pages: 1682-1701.
We know that organizations change over time as a result of their ability to learn and their tendency to forget. What we know less about, however, is why they might change back, despite evidence suggesting that this occurs. In this paper, we develop and test a model of organizational oscillation that explains why firms cycle through periods of learning and periods of forgetting. In particular, we identify a dual role for serious errors, which push firms toward a focus on safety while also pulling them away from other foci, such as efficiency or …
David Chandler, and Hokyu Hwang
Journal of Management, Volume 41, Issue 5, pp. 1446-1476
In spite of recent interest in its microfoundations, institutional theory’s account of what, why, and when ideas diffuse remains limited and oversocialized. As such, it is unclear how firms decide what to adopt and how these decisions evolve across a population as innovations spread and become taken for granted. We review recent work in institutional theory on this issue and draw from learning theory to inform institutional accounts of adoption decisions in ways that add to current explanations of organizational heterogeneity. In particular, we develop a model of adoption strategies that explains how firms identify which practices to adopt by drawing on knowledge that is either local or distant (search scope) to understand what works and what does not (mindfulness). We then theorize how the decision to adopt is further conditioned by the extent of diffusion (temporal variation) and the characteristics of the field, organization, and innovation (decision context). We discuss the implications of this model for our understanding of how things diffuse and identify additional ways in which the microfoundations of institutional theory can be advanced by studying how organizations learn.
Research in the Sociology of Organizations (Institutions and Ideals: Philip Selznick’s Legacy for Organizational Studies), Volume 44, March 2015, Pages 201-235
This paper investigates the substance of institutions in the context of business ethics. In particular, I test a theory of stakeholder attention to resource commitments by firms that implement the Ethics and Compliance Officer (ECO) position, from 1990 to 2008. Results support the hypothesized curvilinear relationship between resource commitments and stakeholder attention À while both high and low levels of ECO implementation generate low levels of reported ethics transgressions (the former due to good firm behavior and the …
Business Expert Press, November 2014
The goal of this project is to detail the core, defining principles of strategic CSR that differentiate it as a concept from the rest of the CSR/sustainability/business ethics field. It is designed to be a provocative piece, but one that solidifies the intellectual framework around an emerging concept–strategic CSR. The foundation for these principles comes from my perspective as a management professor within the business school. As such, it is a pragmatic philosophy, oriented around stakeholder theory, that is designed to persuade …
Organization Science, Volume 25 Issue 6, August 2014, Pages 1722-1743
The institutional environment is complex. This complexity is characterized by forces that ebb and flow in wavelike patterns as societal expectations evolve, with attention coalescing around specific events and then dissipating. Some of these critical events are broad and affect many firms, whereas others are narrow and affect individual firms. In either case, when they occur, these events elevate organizational susceptibility to societal demands but encourage different kinds of behavior in response. This study seeks to model this complexity in an area of growing interest for organization scholars—business ethics. In particular, I examine how firms respond to shifting societal pressures for greater ethical behavior by adopting and implementing the Ethics and Compliance Officer position, from 1990 to 2008. Results demonstrate that although firms decide when to adopt in response to broad fieldwide critical events, it is narrower firm-specific critical events that determine resource commitments in implementation.
Academy of Management Review, Volume 39 Issue 3, July 2014, Pages 396-406.
Institutional theory tells us that institutions “matter”(Powell, 1996: 297). They matter because they are powerful predictors of action, both enabling and constraining actors within socially constructed ranges of acceptable behavior (Greenwood, Oliver, Sahlin-Andersson, & Suddaby, 2008). In spite of the importance of demonstrating that institutions matter, however, institutional theory can be less helpful in terms of explaining why institutions are so influential. In particular, there is still much work to be done to investigate the values on …
David Chandler, William B. Werther Jr
Sage Publications, Inc., 2014
Blending theory with practical application, Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility, Third Edition is a comprehensive CSR and strategy text. As such, it supports courses taught either as standalone electives or as core components of the business school curriculum across all discipline areas. Integral to the book’s unique format is its mix of theory and practical application divided into two parts. After five chapters that provide an overview of the field, core concepts, and practical challenges, the second half of the book illustrates the …
David Chandler, Pamela R Haunschild, Mooweon Rhee, Christine M Beckman
Strategic Organization, Vol 11, Issue 3, August 2013, pp. 217-244
In this article, we explore the differential effects of a firm’s reputation and status on its interorganizational network. We hypothesize that due to its stable, unitary, and relational characteristics, status has a stronger influence on partner selection than reputation, which is less stable, multidimensional, and based more on perceptions of product quality and financial performance. Results from our analyses of the director networks of the 300 largest US firms from 1985 to 1993 confirm that across multiple measures of network characteristics, it is status that is the stronger predictor. In particular, high-status firms have networks that are higher in partner quality but are less diverse and contain fewer opportunities to bridge structural holes than the networks of high-reputation firms. These results contribute to our understanding of the different effects of reputation and status on firm behavior by emphasizing the importance of studying both together in order to understand the effects of either. They also contribute to work on interorganizational networks by demonstrating how structure emerges primarily as a function of focal firm status.