Institutional Regime, Opportunity Space and Organizational Path Constitution: Case Studies of the Conversion of Military Firms in China

Abstract

This study examines organizational path constitution from an institutional regime view. The research setting is the conversion of military firms to the civilian market in China since the country's economic reform in 1978. We begin with a questionnaire survey to better understand the situation and context of military conversion, and then conducted an embedded multiple-case study method that shows how different patterns of organizational path constitution arise from a process of change efforts, change outcomes and opportunity space. Our context further allows us to examine how heterogeneous locally-based institutional regimes affect the opportunity space of embedded organizations, enabling or constraining their change actions. The overall contribution is a theoretical model that reveals the relations between heterogeneous institutional regimes, opportunity spaces and organizational path constitution. Our findings have implications for the path dependence literature.

Evolutionary Game of the Civil-Military Integration With Financial Support

“…(3) When θ 1 < ε 1 < 0 and 0 < θ 2 < ε 2 in Situation 3, or 0 < θ 1 < ε 1 and θ 2 < ε 2 < 0 in Situation 7, the side with the positive additional income will get the ESS, which is shown in Table 6 and Fig.1 (3) and (7). We use Situation 3 as the representative, which shows that (0,0) and (1,1) are the saddle points, (1,0) is the unstable point, and (0,1) is the ESS.…”

“…Ascosta et al [6] examined that the size of defense companies has a positive and significant relationship with the production of civilian patents. Jing and Benner [7] conducted an embedded multiple-case study method that shows how different patterns for the conversion of military firms to the civilian market. In the study on the policy of the CMI in Chinese military enterprises, scholars have focussed on the behaviors of government (e.g., Liang et al [8], Zhao and Huang [9], Li and Bo [10]), the efficiency of dual-use technology (e.g., Li and Chen [11], Dongri et al [12]), the CMI innovation system (e.g., Han et al [13], You et al [14]) and so on.…”

Current Interest in the Theory of Organizational Path Dependence. A Short Update on the Occasion of the 2019 AMR Decade Award

“…Of utmost importance to us here are studies that investigate in a rather strict, path-theoretical manner relevant cases of organizational persistence (e.g. Jing & Benner, 2016;Ding, Kininmonth, & McKinstry, 2017;Fortwengel & Keller, 2020). We also greatly value those papers that engage critically with our theorizing and have thus stimulated our thinking (see, e.g., Garud, Kumaraswamy, & Karnøe, 2010;Suddaby & Foster, 2017).…”

“…In this narrower sense as well, path research is concerned not only with the emergence and maintenance of paths, but also with their creation, extension, diversification, disruption and dissolution (e.g. Garud & Karnøe, 2001;Garud et al, 2010;Djelic & Quack, 2007;Meyer & Schubert, 2007;Sydow, Windeler, Schubert, & Möllering, 2012;Isaksen, 2015;Gjelsvik & Aarstad, 2017;Jing & Benner, 2016;Bothello & Salles-Djelic, 2018). All of these aspects are of course of particular interest, not least to management and organization studies, and should in the future receive even more scholarly attention.…”

“…In most cases, however, the theory of organizational path dependence is only mentioned either together with other approaches considering organizational persistence (such as imprinting or escalating commitment), or used as a separate theoretical lens to analyze hyper-stable organizational or institutional arrangements (e.g. Jing & Benner, 2016).…”