Strategic and Organizational Insights into Learning and Innovation in Hybrids and “New” Organizations

  • Maria Carmela Annosi
  • Federica Brunetta
  • Mats Magnusson
  • Paolo Boccardelli
Chapter

Abstract

The aim of this chapter is to introduce the reader to the concepts of hybrid and new organizations. Its intent is also to make clear the type of contribution the book is intended to bring to the literature on hybrid organizations. The structure of the book and how to navigate it, together with a short summary of contributions, are presented.

References

  1. Bakker, R. M. (2010). Taking stock of temporary organizational forms: A systematic review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(4), 466–486.Google Scholar
  2. Battilana, J., & Lee, M. (2014). Advancing research on hybrid organizing–Insights from the study of social enterprises. The Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 397–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Battilana, J., Lee, M., Walker, J., & Dorsey, C. (2012). In search of the hybrid ideal. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 10(3), 50–55.Google Scholar
  4. Carlile, P. R. (2002). A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: Boundary objects in new product development. Organization Science, 13(4), 442–455.Google Scholar
  5. D’Aveni, R. (1994). Hypercompetition: Managing the dynamics of strategic management. New York.Google Scholar
  6. Daft, R. L., & Lewin, A. Y. (1993). Where are the theories for the “new” organizational forms? An editorial essay. Organization science, i–vi.Google Scholar
  7. Economist. (2009 December 15). The rise of the hybrid company.Google Scholar
  8. Greenwood, R., Raynard, M., Kodeih, F., Micelotta, E. R., & Lounsbury, M. (2011). Institutional complexity and organizational responses. Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 317–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Haveman, H. A., & Rao, H. (2006). Hybrid forms and the evolution of thrifts. American Behavioral Scientist, 49(7), 974–986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hoffman, A. J., Gullo, K., & Haigh, N. (2012). Hybrid organizations and positive social change: Bridging the for-profit & non-profit domains. In K. Golden-Biddle & J. E. Dutton (Eds.), Using a positive lens to explore social change and organizations: Building a theoretical and research foundation 131–153. Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.Google Scholar
  11. Ilinitch, A. Y., D’Aveni, R. A., & Lewin, A. Y. (1996). New organizational forms and strategies for managing in hypercompetitive environments. Organization Science, 7(3), 211–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jay, J. (2013). Navigating paradox as a mechanism of change and innovation in hybrid organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 56(1), 137–159.Google Scholar
  13. Kraatz, M. S., & Block, E. S. (2008). Organizational implications of institutional pluralism. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, R. Suddaby, & K. Sahlin-Andersson (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 243–275). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lounsbury, M. (2007). A tale of two cities: Competing logics and practice variation in the professionalizing of mutual funds. Academy of Management Journal, 50(2), 289–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Powell, W. W. (1990). The transformation of organizational forms: How useful is organization theory in accounting for social change? Beyond the marketplace: Rethinking economy and society, 301–329.Google Scholar
  16. Powell, W. W., White, D. R., Koput, K. W., & Owen-Smith, J. (2005). Network dynamics and field evolution: The growth of interorganizational collaboration in the life sciences. American Journal of Sociology, 110(4), 1132–1205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. PriceWaterhouseCoopers. (2016). Global Annual Review. PWC.Google Scholar
  18. Thornton, P. H., & Ocasio, W. (2008). The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism. Institutional logics. Google Scholar
  19. Thornton, P. H., Ocasio, W., & Lounsbury, M. (2012). The institutional logics perspective: A new approach to culture, structure, and process. Oxford University Press on Demand.Google Scholar
  20. Volberda, H. W. (1996). Toward the flexible form: How to remain vital in hypercompetitive environments. Organization Science, 7(4), 359–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maria Carmela Annosi
    • 1
  • Federica Brunetta
    • 2
  • Mats Magnusson
    • 3
  • Paolo Boccardelli
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Social Sciences and Management StudiesWageningen University and ResearchWageningenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Business and Management and LUISS Business SchoolLUISS Guido Carli UniversityRomeItaly
  3. 3.KTH Royal Institute of TechnologyStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations