Cooperation and Political Economic Performance in Affluent Democratic Capitalism

Hicks, Alexander; Kenworthy, Lane

doi:10.1086/231403

Cited by 277 publications

(126 citation statements)

References 74 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

122

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Among the most visible of such institutions is the varieties of corporatism across countries. We construe corporatism as "located in the realm of institutional behavior" (Schmitter 1981: 295)-an exploration of how society is organized to achieve its economic goals rather than as a political ideology (Cawson 1986, Hicks and Kenworthy 1998, Jepperson 2002. In this vein, the organization of society is characterized as either more corporatist-a society of orders with a set of rights and obligations, or less corporatist (pluralist)-a society of individuals bound in loose association (e.g.…”

Section: Corporatist and Pluralist Institutional Logicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Key elements of the inter-institutional system (Thornton et al 2012) support organizations in developing structures emphasizing collective duties rather than individual rights and interests within the national context. Thus, social and economic groupings, guilds and associations feature prominently in these countries (Hicks and Kenworthy 1998, Schofer and Fourcade-Gourinchas 2001, Jepperson 2002. In other corporatist countries like Germany, Japan and Korea, industry groups operate in a close relationship with the state to promote national competitiveness, suggesting a strong guiding hand of the government coupled with tightly knit corporatist networks (Spencer et al 2005).…”

Section: Corporatist and Pluralist Institutional Logicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It encompasses not only material structures such as interest groups and business associations (Hicks and Kenworthy 1998) but also embodies norms, values and symbolic aspects of the nature of social organization characterized by a greater degree of cooperation versus competition. Thus, as Jepperson (2002: 61) notes, corporatism and pluralism polity forms "capture strikingly well the distinctive 'institutional logics' (Friedland and Alford 1991) and political cultures of the Anglo, Nordic, Germanic, and French orbits.…”

Section: Corporatist and Pluralist Institutional Logicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This measure captures the availability of corporatist versus pluralist logics within the arena, and hence, the extent to which corporatist versus pluralist logics get activated in dyadic exchanges that drive inter-organizational learning. Country level scores for participating firms are obtained from the HicksKenworthy scale of corporatism (Hicks andKenworthy 1998, Kenworthy 2000) with values ranging from 0 to 1, where 1 is most corporatist. This is a quantitative composite index varying over time capturing the level of inter-organizational networks such as business confederations, and level of cooperation between labor and management, the government and interest groups, and between financial investors and firms.…”

Section: Independent Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of importance to our study is the theory of corporatism as a national-level social system wherein, on one end of the continuum, a high level of corporatism fosters a logic of overarching cooperation and coordination through which organizations achieve their desired goals, and on the other end of the continuum, a low level of corporatism, or pluralism, engenders competitive and market-based solutions (Schmitter 1981, Cawson 1986, Jepperson 2002. Cross-national variations in corporatism are shown to hold important consequences for outcomes such as distinctive approaches to countries' technology policies (Spencer et al 2005) and the redistribution of wealth (Hicks and Kenworthy 1998), inter-firm technological alliance formation and knowledge flows (Vasudeva et al 2013), and training attitudes of individuals (Luo 2007). In this study, we suggest that the level of corporatism characterizing participating firms' home countries activates distinctive institutional logics that foster cooperative versus competitive approaches within an SSO thereby altering inter-organizational interactions and learning outcomes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Institutional Logics and Interorganizational Learning in Technological Arenas: Evidence from Standard-Setting Organizations in the Mobile Handset Industry

Vasudeva

Alexander

Jones

2015

Organization Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Institutional logics and inter-organizational learning in technological arenas: Evidence from standard setting organizations in the mobile handset industry. Organization Science, 26 (3). pp. 830-846. ISSN 1047-7039 Available from: http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/25399We recommend you cite the published version. The publisher's URL is: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2014.0940Refereed: No (no note) Disclaimer UWE has obtained warranties from all depositors as to their title in the material deposited and as to their right to deposit such material. UWE makes no representation or warranties of commercial utility, title, or fitness for a particular purpose or any other warranty, express or implied in respect of any material deposited. UWE makes no representation that the use of the materials will not infringe any patent, copyright, trademark or other property or proprietary rights. UWE accepts no liability for any infringement of intellectual property rights in any material deposited but will remove such material from public view pending investigation in the event of an allegation of any such infringement. We would like to express our sincere gratitude to the three anonymous reviewers and Senior Editor William Ocasio for providing us with excellent guidance throughout the review process. We greatly benefited from the feedback provided by the seminar participants at the University of Minnesota, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, the Ohio State University and the University of Alberta. We are indebted to our interviewees from various telecommunications standard setting organizations for sharing their valuable insights with us. Timothy Simcoe, Andrew Van de Ven, Joel Waldfogel and Akbar Zaheer provided helpful comments. All errors remain our own. PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR TEXT. 2 AbstractConceptualizing standard setting organizations (SSOs) as technological arenas within which firms from different countries interact and learn, we offer insights into the interplay between firms' institutional logics and their inter-organizational learning outcomes. We suggest that firms' inter-organizational learning is embedded in their macro-level country contexts, characterized by more corporatist versus less corporatist (pluralist) institutional logics. Whereas corporatism spurs coordinated approaches, pluralism engenders competitive interactions that affect the extent to which firms span organizational and technological boundaries and learn from each other. We test our theory using longitudinal analysis of 181 dyads involving 26 firms participating in 17 SSOs in the global mobile handset industry. We find that inter-organizational learning, measured by patent citations, involving corporatist firm dyads significantly increases when the dominant logic within the arena is also corporatist. By making cooperative schemas more accessible a dominant corporatist logic also enhances inter-organizational learning across technologically distant dyads. When a pluralist logic dominates the arena, corporatist dyads learn less because firms in the...

show abstract

Section: Corporatist and Pluralist Institutional Logicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Corporatist and Pluralist Institutional Logicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Corporatist and Pluralist Institutional Logicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Independent Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Institutional Logics and Interorganizational Learning in Technological Arenas: Evidence from Standard-Setting Organizations in the Mobile Handset Industry

Vasudeva

Alexander

Jones

2015

Organization Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

State and Economy

Campbell¹

2007

The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The literature on the relationship between states and economies is vast. This entry focuses exclusively on states and economies in advanced capitalist societies. In this context, sociologists tend to follow Max Weber in viewing nation‐states as organizations consisting of administrative, legislative, judicial, and military apparatuses that govern a finite territory, ultimately through the use of force if necessary. They tend to view economies as systems of material production that are organized around market exchange and the pursuit of profit, and that are embedded in a variety of surrounding institutions, including political ones. Research in the area of state and economy has focused on several questions. How does the economy affect the state? How does the state affect the economy? How are state–economy relations organized? How are state–economy relations changing?

show abstract

State and Economy

Campbell¹

2015

The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The literature on the relationship between states and economies is vast. This entry focuses exclusively on states and economies in advanced capitalist societies. In this context, sociologists tend to follow Max Weber in viewing nation‐states as organizations consisting of administrative, legislative, judicial, and military apparatuses that govern a finite territory, ultimately through the use of force if necessary. They tend to view economies as systems of material production that are organized around market exchange and the pursuit of profit, and that are embedded in a variety of surrounding institutions, including political ones. Research in the area of state and economy has focused on several questions: How does the economy affect the state? How does the state affect the economy? How are state–economy relations organized? How are state–economy relations changing?

show abstract

Cooperation and Political Economic Performance in Affluent Democratic Capitalism

Cited by 277 publications

References 74 publications

Institutional Logics and Interorganizational Learning in Technological Arenas: Evidence from Standard-Setting Organizations in the Mobile Handset Industry

Institutional Logics and Interorganizational Learning in Technological Arenas: Evidence from Standard-Setting Organizations in the Mobile Handset Industry

State and Economy

State and Economy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About