Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The consequence of differences: How heterogeneity in practice adaptations affects the diffusion process

  • Published:
Asia Pacific Journal of Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study extends diffusion studies by developing the concept of heterogeneity in practice adaptations, defined as the differences in how adopters adapt to a new practice post adoption. I first propose that the combination of organizational learning and legitimacy construction leads to the curvilinear effects of heterogeneity in practice adaptations on the subsequent adoptions. Second, I argue that its effect varies depending on the stage of the diffusion process. I test this argument using the context of the diffusion of an informal corporate governance practice—the executive officer system—in Japan from 1997 to 2013. The findings demonstrate that the effect of heterogeneous adaptations is curvilinear with an inverted U-shape, and that its effect in the early stage differs from that in the late stage.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahmadjian, C. L., & Okumura, A. 2006. Corporate governance in Japan. In C. A. Mallin (Ed.). Handbook on International Corporate Governance: 130–147. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahmadjian, C. L., & Robbins, G. E. 2005. A clash of capitalisms: Foreign shareholders and corporate restructuring in 1990s Japan. American Sociological Review, 70(3): 451–471.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahmadjian, C. L., & Robinson, P. 2001. Safety in numbers: Downsizing and the deinstitutionalization of permanent employment in Japan. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(4): 622–654.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allison, P. D. 1984. Event history analysis: Regression for longitudinal event data. Beverly Hills:Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ansari, S., Fiss, P. C., & Zajac, E. J. 2010. Made to fit: How practices vary as they diffuse. Academy of Management Review, 35(1): 67–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ansari, S., Reinecke, J., & Spaan, A. 2014. How are practices made to vary ? Managing practice adaptation in a multinational corporation. Organization Studies, 35(9): 1313–1341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beckman, C. M., & Haunschild, P. R. 2002. Network learning: The effects of partners’ heterogeneity of experience on corporate acquisitions. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(1): 92–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bikhchandani, S., Hirshleifer, D., & Welch, I. 1992. A theory of fads, fashion, custom, and cultural change as informational cascades. Journal of Political Economy, 100(5): 992–1026.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bothner, M. S. 2003. Competition and social influence: The diffusion of the sixth-generation processor in the global computer industry. American Journal of Sociology, 108(6): 1175–1210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boxenbaum, E., & Jonsson, S. 2008. Isomorphism, diffusion and decoupling. In R. Goreenwood, C. Oliver, K. Sahlin, & R. Suddaby (Eds.). The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism: 78–99. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Briscoe, F., & Murphy, C. 2012. Sleight of hand? Practice opacity, third-party responses, and the interorganizational diffusion of controversial practices. Administrative Science Quarterly, 57(4): 553–584.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, J. 2007. Japanese corporate governance and the principle of “internalism.”. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15(1): 27–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, L. R., & Wholey, D. R. 1993. Adoption and abandonment of matrix management programs: effects of organizational characteristics and interorganizational networks. Academy of Management Journal, 36(1): 106–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. L. 2005. Where do we stand? Common mechanisms in organizations and social movements research. In G. F. Davis, D. McAdam, W. R. Scott, & M. N. Zald (Eds.). Social Movements and Organization Theory: 41–68. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carney, M., Gedajlovic, E., & Yang, X. 2009. Varieties of Asian capitalism : Toward an institutional theory of Asian enterprise. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 26(3): 361–380.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandler, D. 2014. Organizational susceptibility to institutional complexity: Critical events driving the adoption and implementation of the ethics and compliance officer position. Organization Science, 25(6): 1722–1743.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chizema, A. 2010. Early and late adoption of American-style executive pay in Germany: Governance and institutions. Journal of World Business, 45(1): 9–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chizema, A., & Kim, J. 2010. Outside directors on Korean boards: governance and institutions. Journal of Management Studies, 47(1): 109–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chizema, A., & Shinozawa, Y. 2012. The “company with committees”: Change or continuity in Japanese corporate governance? Journal of Management Studies, 49(1): 77–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Compagni, A., Mele, V., & Ravasi, D. 2015. How early implementations influence later adoptions of innovation: Social positioning and skill reproduction in the diffusion of robotic surgery. Academy of Management Journal, 58(1): 242–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connelly, B. L., Johnson, J. L., Tihanyi, L., & Ellstrand, A. E. 2011. More than adopters: Competing influences in the interlocking directorate. Organization Science, 22(3): 688–703.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. 1963. A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs:Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Czarniawska, B., & Sevón, G. 2005. Global ideas: How ideas, objects, and practices travel in the global economy. Copenhagen:Liber and Copenhagen Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delmas, M. A., & Montes-Sancho, M. J. 2010. Voluntary agreements to improve environmental quality: Symbolic and substantive cooperation. Strategic Management Journal, 31(6): 575–601.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. 1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2): 147–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dore, R. P. 2000. Stock market capitalism: Welfare capitalism: Japan and Germany versus the Anglo-Saxon. New York:Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drori, I., & Honig, B. 2013. A process model of internal and external legitimacy. Organization Studies, 34(3): 345–376.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edelman, L. B. 1992. Legal ambiguity and symbolic structures: Organizational mediation of civil rights law. American Journal of Sociology, 97(6): 1531–1576.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M., & Zbaracki, M. J. 1992. Strategic decision making. Strategic Management Journal, 13(Winter Special Issue 13): 17–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. 2008. Social cognition: From brains to culture, 3rd ed. New York:McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiss, P. C., Kennedy, M. T., & Davis, G. F. 2012. How golden parachutes unfolded: Diffusion and variation of a controversial practice. Organization Science, 23(4): 1077–1099.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiss, P. C., & Zajac, E. J. 2004. The diffusion of ideas over contested terrain: The (non) adoption of a shareholder value orientation among German firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49(4): 501–534.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fligstein, N. 1985. The spread of the multidivisional form among large firms, 1919-1979. American Sociological Review, 50(3): 377–391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilson, R. J., & Milhaupt, C. L. 2005. Choice as regulatory reform: The case of Japanese corporate governance. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 53(2): 343–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodstein, J. D. 1994. Institutional pressures and strategic responsiveness: Employer involvement in work-family issues. Academy of Management Journal, 37(2): 350–382.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, W. H. 2007. Econometirc analysis. Upper Saddle River:Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greve, H. R. 1998. Managerial cognition and the mimetic adoption of market positions: What you see is what you do. Strategic Management Journal, 19(10): 967–988.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greve, H. R. 2011. Fast and expensive: the diffusion of a disappointing innovation. Strategic Management Journal, 32(9): 949–968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greve, H. R., & Seidel, M. L. 2015. The thin red line between success and failure: Path dependence in the diffusion of innovative production technologies. Strategic Management Journal, 36(4): 475–496.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hambrick, D. C., Finkelstein, S., Cho, T. S., & Jackson, E. M. 2005. Isomorphism in reverse: Institutional theory as an explanation for recent increases in intraindustry heterogeneity and managerial discretion. In B. M. Staw, & R. M. Kramer (Eds.). Research in Organizational Behavior, vol. 26, vol. 26: 307–350. Greenwich: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansmann, H., & Kraakman, R. 2001. The end of history for corporate law. Georgetown Law Journal, 89: 439–468.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, D. A., & Klein, K. J. 2007. What’s the difference? Diversity constructs as separation, variety, or disparity in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32(4): 1199–1228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hashimoto, T. 1997. Gurupu keiei no tameno Soni no kozo kaikaku: Shin no gurobaru kigyo wo mezashita torishimariyakukai no kaikaku oyobi shikkoyakuinsei no donyu (Structural reform at Sony of group business: Boardroom reform aiming for a true global firm and its introduction). Torishimariyaku No Homu, 42: 8–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haunschild, P. R. 1993. Interorganizational imitation: The impact of interlocks on corporate acquisition activity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(4): 564–592.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haunschild, P. R., & Miner, A. S. 1997. Modes of interorganizational imitation: The effects of outcome salience and uncertainty. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(3): 472–500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, M. T., & Fiss, P. C. 2009. Institutionalization, framing, and diffusion: The logic of TQM adoption and implementation decisions among U.S. hospitals. Academy of Management Journal, 52(5): 897–918.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kraatz, M. S., & Zajac, E. J. 1996. Exploring the limits of the new institutionalism : The causes and consequences of illegitimate organizational change. American Sociological Review, 61(5): 812–836.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuha, J. 2004. AIC and BIC: Comparisons of assumptions and performance. Sociological Methods & Research, 33(2): 188–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lieberman, M. B., & Asaba, S. 2006. Why do firms imitate each other? Academy of Management Review, 31(2): 366–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, J. R., Gerlach, M. L., & Takahashi, P. 1992. Keiretsu networks in the Japanese economy: A dyad analysis of intercorporate ties. American Sociological Review, 57(5): 561–585.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lounsbury, M. 2001. Institutional sources of practice variation: Staffing college and university recycling programs. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(1): 29–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lounsbury, M., & Crumley, E. T. 2007. New practice creation: An institutional perspective on innovation. Organization Studies, 28(7): 993–1012.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, J., & Dow, S. 2009. Japanese keiretsu: Past, present. future. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 26(2): 333–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Okhmatovskiy, I., & David, R. J. 2012. Setting your own standards: Internal corporate governance codes as a response to institutional pressure. Organization Science, 23(1): 155–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, D. A., Jennings, P. D., & Zhou, X. 1993. Late adoption of the multidivisional form by large U.S. corporations: Political, institutional, and economic accounts. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(1): 100–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng, M. W. 2004. Outside directors and firm performance during institutional transitions. Strategic Management Journal, 25(5): 453–471.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raffaelli, R., & Glynn, A. M. 2014. Turnkey or tailored? Relational pluralism, institutional complexity, and the organizational adoption of more or less customized practices. Academy of Management Journal, 57(2): 541–562.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao, H., Greve, H. R., & Davis, G. F. 2001. Fool’s gold: Social proof in the initiation and abandonment of coverage by Wall Street analysts. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(3): 502–526.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao, H., & Sivakumar, K. 1999. Institutional sources of boundary-spanning structures: The establishment of investor relations departments in the Fortune 500 industrials. Organization Science, 10(1): 27–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, E. M. 2003. Diffusion of innovations, 5th ed. New York:Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenkopf, L., & Abrahamson, E. 1999. Modeling reputational and informational influences in threshold models of bandwagon innovation diffusion. Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory, 5(4): 361–384.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, W. G., & Tuschke, A. 2007. The adoption of institutionally contested organizational practices: The emergence of stock option pay in Germany. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1): 33–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schilling, M. A., Vidal, P., Ployhard, R. E., & Marangoni, A. 2003. Learning by doing something else: Variation, relatedness, and the learning curve. Management Science, 49(1): 39–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R. 2008. Institutions and organizations: Ideas and interests, 3rd ed. London:Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shropshire, C. 2010. The role of the interlocking director and board receptivity in the diffusion of practices. Academy of Management Review, 35(2): 246–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smets, M., Morris, T., & Greenwood, R. 2012. From practice to field: A multilevel model of practice-driven institutional change. Academy of Management Journal, 55(4): 877–904.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strang, D., & Macy, M. W. 2001. In search of excellence: Fads, success stories, and adaptive emulation. American Journal of Sociology, 107(1): 147–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strang, D., & Meyer, J. W. 1993. Institutional conditions for diffusion. Theory and Society, 22(4): 487–511.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strang, D., & Soule, S. A. 1998. Diffusion in organizations and social movements: From hybrid corn to poison pills. In J. Hagan, & K. S. Cook (Eds.). Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 24, vol. 24: 265–290. Palo Alto: Annual Reviews.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, M. C. 1995. Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3): 571–610.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terlaak, A., & Gong, Y. 2008. Vicarious learning and inferential accuracy in adoption processes. Academy of Management Review, 33(4): 846–868.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terlaak, A., & King, A. A. 2007. Follow the small? Information-revealing adoption bandwagons when observers expect larger firms to benefit more from adoption. Strategic Management Journal, 28(12): 1167–1185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tolbert, P. S., & Zucker, L. G. 1983. Institutional sources of change in the formal structure of organizations: The diffusion of civil service reform, 1880-1935. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(1): 22–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuschke, A., & Sanders, W. G. 2003. Antecedents and consequences of corporate governance reform: The case of Germany. Strategic Management Journal, 24(7): 631–649.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westphal, J. D., Gulati, R., & Shortell, S. M. 1997. Customization or conformity? An institutional and network perspective on the content and consequences of TQM adoption. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(2): 366–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamaguchi, K. 1991. Event history analysis. New-bury Park:Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoshikawa, T., & McGuire, J. 2008. Change and continuity in Japanese corporate governance. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 25(1): 5–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoshikawa, T., Tsui-Auch, L. S., & McGuire, J. 2007. Corporate governance reform as institutional innovation: The case of Japan. Organization Science, 18(6): 973–988.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, G. J., Charns, M. P., & Shortell, S. M. 2001. Top manager and network effects on the adoption of innovative management practices: A study of TQM in a public hospital system. Strategic Management Journal, 22(10): 935–951.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zbaracki, M. J. 1996. The rhetoric and reality of total quality management. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43(3): 602–636.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, N., & Delios, A. 2012. Diversification and diffusion: A social networks and institutional perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 29(3): 773–798.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP13J03748 and JP15H06215. I would like to thank Christine Chan and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive feedback and guidance throughout the review process. I also thank Christina Ahmadjian, Donal Crilly, Glenn Hoetker, Masaru Karube, Joel Baker Malen, and Hitoshi Mitsuhashi who provided insightful recommendations at different stages of the development of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate School of Economics, Kyushu University, 744 Motooka, Nishi-ku, Fukuoka, Japan

    Daisuke Uchida

Authors
  1. Daisuke Uchida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daisuke Uchida.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Uchida, D. The consequence of differences: How heterogeneity in practice adaptations affects the diffusion process. Asia Pac J Manag 38, 209–230 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-018-9624-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-018-9624-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation