2013Organization Management JournalRequires access

From Endogenization to Justification: Strategic Responses to Legitimacy Challenges in Contentious Organizational Fields

Paul‐Brian McInerney

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

Fields are contested social arenas. By examining the case of a single organization, in this case a social enterprise, the author shows how organizations respond to legitimacy challenges from members of the field and how such responses shape the organization's form and practices. At times, organizations endogenize, that is, incorporate practices from the field. Findings indicate that responses reflect strategies under constraint. Endogenizing institutionalized practices constrains managers’ ability to exercise agency. Endogenizing contested practices afford agency by allowing managers to translate those practices to accord with local exigencies. This article extends literature on impression management and institutional theory by showing how organizations respond to diffuse threats to legitimacy. In doing so, this article advances the study of organizational field dynamics and contention.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Fields are contested social arenas. By examining the case of a single organization, in this case a social enterprise, the author shows how organizations respond to legitimacy challenges from members of the field and how such responses shape the organization's form and practices. At times, organizations endogenize, that is, incorporate practices from the field. Findings indicate that responses reflect strategies under constraint. Endogenizing institutionalized practices constrains managers’ ability to exercise agency. Endogenizing contested practices afford agency by allowing managers to translate those practices to accord with local exigencies. This article extends literature on impression management and institutional theory by showing how organizations respond to diffuse threats to legitimacy. In doing so, this article advances the study of organizational field dynamics and contention.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Fields are contested social arenas. By examining the case of a single organization, in this case a social enterprise, the author shows how organizations respond to legitimacy challenges from members of the field and how such responses shape the organization's form and practices. At times, organizations endogenize, that is, incorporate practices from the field. Findings indicate that responses reflect strategies under constraint. Endogenizing institutionalized practices constrains managers’ ability to exercise agency. Endogenizing contested practices afford agency by allowing managers to translate those practices to accord with local exigencies. This article extends literature on impression management and institutional theory by showing how organizations respond to diffuse threats to legitimacy. In doing so, this article advances the study of organizational field dynamics and contention.

Key concepts: Organizational field, Legitimacy, Agency (philosophy), Field (mathematics), Impression management, Organizational theory, Constraint (computer-aided design), Sociology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
From Endogenization to Justification: Strategic Responses to Legitimacy Challenges in Contentious Organizational Fields — Research Paper | ScholarLens