Hybrids and Industry Associations. Do Hybrids Need Collective Action? Multiple Logics and Association Membership in the US Shellfish Industry

Transcription

1 Hybrids and Industry Associations Do Hybrids Need Collective Action? Multiple Logics and Association Membership in the US Shellfish Industry Bogdan Prokopovych College of Business Administration University of Rhode Island Hybrids function within multiple and often conflicting logics (e.g. social vs. market, science vs. entrepreneurship) Industry associations represent interests of a group of member organizations. Can they represent interests of organizations that work within multiple logics? Empirical setting: Hybrid ventures that combine traditional trade with farming logics in the US shellfish industry 1 / 1 2 / 1 Hybrids... Associations... in dealing with competing logics, Form an identity through internal processes (Kraatz & Block, 2008; Battilana & Dorado, 2010) Engage in boundary work (Murray, 2010) Sensemake paradoxes of the logics (Jay, 2013) Selectively couple different elements (Pache & Santos, 2013) Represent industries and enforce norms (Greenwood, Suddaby and Hinings, 2002) Coerce member organizations into certain types of behavior valued by the industry or society (Lenox, 2006; Lenox and Nash, 2003; King and Lenox, 2000) Face two competing logics (Aldrich et al., 1994; Scmitter & Streeck, 1999)... Membership representing diverse interests of firms Influence competing with actors that represent other organizational domains 3 / 1 4 / 1

2 Theory and Hypotheses Theory and Hypotheses Representing organizations from different parts of the value chain makes an association more robust (Aldrich et al., 1994) Cost-minimizing behavior of firms can be conducive to membership in several associations, but Hybrids deal with competing logics from different organizational domains Divergent membership logics of many associations make it uncertain for hybrids to see how their interests would be represented (Aldrich et al., 1994; Scmitter & Streeck, 1999) Hypothesis 1. Organizations working within multiple logics are less likely to be members of industry associations than their industry peers working within a single logic. 5/1 Empirical Settings US Shellfish Industry Hypothesis 2. Working within multiple logics is negatively related to the number of associations the organization is a member of. 6/1 Hybrids vs. Non-hybrids Wild-harvesting Aquaculture Shellfish aquaculture and wild harvesting have been dominant business models Environmental and regulatory uncertainty Oyster wars (Smith, 2010) 7/1 8/1

3 Institutional logics Characteristics Aquaculture Wild-harvesting Organizational identity - Business - Traditional trade Temporal orientation - Financial year - Fishing season Institutional constraints - Licensing & permittintions - Permitting & tradi- Artifacts - Budgets - Catch - Technology - Traditional tools Decision-making & guiding - Value chain plan- - Availability of crops principles ning - Local knowledge - Access to the Commons Survey Methodology Sample frame: Focus on the US East Coast 1,000 shellfish farmers and wild harvesters Source of data: the US Department of Agriculture, the National Shellfish Association, the East Coast Growers Association, websites of aquaculture organizations Questionnaire: Based on interviews with experts: academics, regulators, NGO representatives Interviews with shellfishermen: association members, non-members Attendance of conferences Contained 20 questions and was pretested by 15 shellfish industry participants Administered by mail and in May August / 1 10 / 1 Measures Descriptives Association membership - Members of national, regional, or state shellfish associations -Dichotomous Number of associations - The total number of shellfish industry associations at the national, regional, state levels in which a shellfisherman is a member Hybrid venture - A shellfish business engaged in both aquaculture and wild-harvesting Control variables - Number of leases, time in business Variable N Mean St. Dev. Min Max 1. Association member Number of associations Hybrid Number of leases Time in industry Variable (2) (3) (4) (1) Association 1. member 2. Number of associations Hybrid Number of leases Time in industry / 1 12 / 1

4 Logit Estimates for Association Membership Model 0 Model 1 (Intercept) (0.40) (0.52) Hybrid (0.46) (0.48) Time in industry 0.02 (0.02) Number of leases 0.12 (0.08) N AIC log L Standard errors in parentheses significant at p <.10; p <.05; p <.01; p <.001 Effect of Being a Hybrid on the Probability of Association Membership(not adjusted for covariates) Prob (Association member) Hybrid 13 / 1 14 / 1 OLS Estimates for Number of Associations Conclusion Model 0 Model 1 (Intercept) (0.19) (0.25) Hybrid (0.23) (0.23) Time in industry 0.02 (0.01) Number of leases 0.02 (0.01) N R adj. R Standard errors in parentheses significant at p <.10; p <.05; p <.01; p <.001 Working within conflicting logics reduces the likelihood of membership in an association This suggests situations when the hybrid form is not a superior organizational form (Pache & Santos 2013) Hinders membership in associations that occurs through social matching of objectives (Barnett, 2000) Being a hybrid organization is negatively related to overlapping membership in several associations This translates into inability to find the shared collective voice (Barnett, 2013) Helps understand institutional complexity at the filed level (Greenwood et al., 2011) 15 / 1 16 / 1

5 Conclusion Managerial implications Increasing / retaining membership Limitations Idiosyncratic empirical context Data (absence of single data source, survey fatigue and distrust, cross-sectional data, selection) 17 / 1 18 / 1