Faking It or Muddling Through? Understanding Decoupling in Response to Stakeholder Pressures

We advance a multilevel argument that challenges and qualifies existing explanations of firms' responses to institutional pressures. In an in-depth study of 17 multinational corporations involving 359 interviews with internal and external actors, we find that firms facing identical pressures decouple policy from practice in different ways and for different reasons. When firms' responses are generated locally, without firmwide coordination, these responses can be either intentional or emergent. In the presence of information asymmetry between firms and their stakeholders, we find that managers' responses are intentional (“faking it”) and depend on how they perceive their interests. In the presence of competing stakeholder expectations, responses are emergent (“muddling through”) and depend on the degree of consensus among managers in their readings of the environment. These findings suggest that theories of decoupling need to be broadened to include the role of “muddling through” and the interplay of inter...

[1]  Peer C. Fiss Building Better Causal Theories: A Fuzzy Set Approach to Typologies in Organization Research , 2011 .

[2]  J. Battilana,et al.  BUILDING SUSTAINABLE HYBRID ORGANIZATIONS: THE CASE OF COMMERCIAL MICROFINANCE ORGANIZATIONS , 2010 .

[3]  András Tilcsik,et al.  From Ritual to Reality: Demography, Ideology, and Decoupling in a Post-Communist Government Agency , 2010 .

[4]  Mihai Paunescu,et al.  Mapping the institutional capital of high-tech firms: A fuzzy-set analysis of capitalist variety and export performance , 2010 .

[5]  Peer C. Fiss,et al.  INSTITUTIONALIZATION, FRAMING, AND DIFFUSION: THE LOGIC OF TQM ADOPTION AND IMPLEMENTATION DECISIONS AMONG U.S. HOSPITALS , 2009 .

[6]  Peer C. Fiss,et al.  Comparative organizational analysis across multiple levels: A set-theoretic approach , 2009 .

[7]  Jill M. Purdy,et al.  Conflicting Logics, Mechanisms of Diffusion, and Multilevel Dynamics in Emerging Institutional Fields , 2009 .

[8]  M. Zollo,et al.  Psychological Antecedents to Socially Responsible Behavior , 2008 .

[9]  Sarah Kaplan Cognition, Capabilities, and Incentives: Assessing Firm Response to the Fiber-Optic Revolution , 2008 .

[10]  Sarah Kaplan Framing Contests: Strategy Making Under Uncertainty , 2008, Organ. Sci..

[11]  K. Basu,et al.  Corporate Social Responsibility: A Process Model of Sensemaking , 2008 .

[12]  Patricia H. Thornton,et al.  Institutional Logics , 2008 .

[13]  M. Toffel,et al.  Organizational Responses to Environmental Demands: Opening the Black Box , 2008 .

[14]  Toru Yoshikawa,et al.  Corporate Governance Reform as Institutional Innovation: The Case of Japan , 2007, Organ. Sci..

[15]  Scott Sonenshein The role of construction, intuition, and justification in responding to ethical issues at work: The sensemaking-intuition model , 2007 .

[16]  Peer C. Fiss A set-theoretic approach to organizational configurations , 2007 .

[17]  F. D. Bakker,et al.  Ideologically motivated activism: How activist groups influence corporate social change activities , 2007 .

[18]  Linda Argote,et al.  A Behavioral Theory of the Firm - 40 Years and Counting: Introduction and Impact , 2007, Organ. Sci..

[19]  A. Hillman,et al.  Strategic Management Journal Research Notes and Commentaries Investor Activism, Managerial Responsiveness, and Corporate Social Performance , 2022 .

[20]  Peer C. Fiss,et al.  The Symbolic Management of Strategic Change: Sensegiving Via Framing and Decoupling , 2006 .

[21]  Jeffrey Q. Barden,et al.  Cognitive Underpinnings of Institutional Persistence and Change: A Framing Perspective , 2006 .

[22]  Michael J. Lenox,et al.  The Strategic Use of Decentralized Institutions: Exploring Certification With the ISO 14001 Management Standard , 2005 .

[23]  D. Hambrick,et al.  FACTIONAL GROUPS: A NEW VANTAGE ON DEMOGRAPHIC FAULTLINES, CONFLICT, AND DISINTEGRATION IN WORK TEAMS , 2005 .

[24]  Peer C. Fiss,et al.  The Diffusion of Ideas over Contested Terrain: The (Non)adoption of a Shareholder Value Orientation among German Firms , 2004 .

[25]  Ruth V. Aguilera,et al.  Putting the S Back in Corporate Social Responsibility: a Multi-Level Theory of Social Change in Organizations , 2004 .

[26]  Iain J. Clelland,et al.  Talking Trash: Legitimacy, Impression Management, and Unsystematic Risk in the Context of the Natural Environment , 2004 .

[27]  Theresa S. Cho,et al.  ISOMORPHISM IN REVERSE: INSTITUTIONAL THEORY AS AN EXPLANATION FOR RECENT INCREASES IN INTRAINDUSTRY HETEROGENEITY AND MANAGERIAL DISCRETION , 2004 .

[28]  J. D. Margolis,et al.  Misery Loves Companies: Rethinking Social Initiatives by Business , 2003 .

[29]  L. Preston,et al.  Managing the Extended Enterprise: The New Stakeholder View , 2002 .

[30]  A. Kumaraswamy,et al.  INSTITUTIONAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN THE SPONSORSHIP OF COMMON TECHNOLOGICAL STANDARDS: THE CASE OF SUN MICROSYSTEMS AND JAVA * , 2002 .

[31]  S. Winter,et al.  Replication as Strategy , 2001 .

[32]  Petra Christmann,et al.  Globalization and the Environment: Determinants of Firm Self-Regulation in China , 2001 .

[33]  T. Feddersen,et al.  Saints and Markets: Activists and the Supply of Credence Goods , 2001 .

[34]  Kendall Roth,et al.  Why Companies Go Green: A Model of Ecological Responsiveness , 2000 .

[35]  Daniel J. Brass,et al.  A Grounded Model of Organizational Schema Change During Empowerment , 2000 .

[36]  M. Pratt,et al.  Classifying Managerial Responses to Multiple Organizational Identities , 2000 .

[37]  Jocelyn Viterna,et al.  Political Demands, Political Opportunities: Explaining the Differential Success of Left-Libertarian Parties , 1999 .

[38]  Philip L. Cochran,et al.  Integrated and Decoupled Corporate Social Performance: Management Commitments, External Pressures, and Corporate Ethics Practices , 1999 .

[39]  Mark W. Dirsmith,et al.  The Coupling of the Symbolic and the Technical in an Institutionalized Context: The Negotiated Order of the Gao's Audit Reporting Process , 1999, American Sociological Review.

[40]  Brian Uzzi,et al.  Corporate Social Capital and the Cost of Financial Capital: An Embeddedness Approach , 1999 .

[41]  Edward J. Zajac,et al.  The symbolic management of stockholders: Corporate governance reforms and shareholder reactions , 1998 .

[42]  D. Snow,et al.  MOBILIZATION AT THE MARGINS: RESOURCES, BENEFACTORS, AND THE VIABILITY OF HOMELESS SOCIAL MOVEMENT ORGANIZATIONS* , 1996 .

[43]  Gerald R. Salancik,et al.  Organizational Discretion in Responding to Institutional Practices: Hospitals and Cesarean Births , 1996 .

[44]  Curtis D. Hardin,et al.  Shared reality: How social verification makes the subjective objective. , 1996 .

[45]  T. Jones INSTRUMENTAL STAKEHOLDER THEORY: A SYNTHESIS OF ETHICS AND ECONOMICS , 1995 .

[46]  T. Jones,et al.  An Agent Morality View of Business Policy , 1995 .

[47]  Edward J. Zajac,et al.  Substance and Symbolism in CEOs' Long-Term Incentive Plans , 1994 .

[48]  Barbara Gray,et al.  Testing a Model of Organizational Response to Social and Political Issues , 1994 .

[49]  Praveen R. Nayyar,et al.  Information asymmetries: a source of competitive advantage for diversified service firms , 1990 .

[50]  Robert Dreeben,et al.  Coupling and Control in Educational Organizations. , 1986 .

[51]  Henry Mintzberg,et al.  Of strategies, deliberate and emergent , 1985, Strategic Management Journal.

[52]  W. Hamilton,et al.  The evolution of cooperation. , 1984, Science.

[53]  Klaus Krippendorff,et al.  Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology , 1980 .

[54]  Hayne E. Leland,et al.  Quacks, Lemons, and Licensing: A Theory of Minimum Quality Standards , 1979, Journal of Political Economy.

[55]  John W. Meyer,et al.  Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony , 1977, American Journal of Sociology.

[56]  M. Hannan,et al.  The Population Ecology of Organizations , 1977, American Journal of Sociology.

[57]  M. C. Jensen,et al.  Harvard Business School; SSRN; National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER); European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI); Harvard University - Accounting & Control Unit , 1976 .

[58]  K. Davis The Case for and Against Business Assumption of Social Responsibilities , 1973 .

[59]  George A. Akerlof The Market for “Lemons”: Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism , 1970 .

[60]  Muzafer Sherif,et al.  In common predicament : social psychology of intergroup conflict and cooperation , 1967 .

[61]  M. Shubik,et al.  A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. , 1964 .

[62]  J. March The Business Firm as a Political Coalition , 1962, The Journal of Politics.

[63]  J Tudor-Hart,et al.  On the nature of prejudice. , 1961, The Eugenics review.