Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m42fx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T14:31:44.792Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Distinctive context, divergent pattern: Diffusion of imported management practices in Turkey and implications for late-industrializing countries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 January 2020

Şükrü Özen Open the ORCID record for Şükrü Özen [Opens in a new window]  and
Çetin Önder
Şükrü Özen*
Affiliation:
Izmir University of Economics, İzmir, Turkey
Çetin Önder
Affiliation:
Social Sciences University of Ankara, Ankara, Turkey
*
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper, we develop and empirically test hypotheses about the diffusion of imported management practices in Turkey. We emphasize the sociopolitical legitimacy of these practices and present hypotheses as to timing, motivations, and self-promotion. We test these hypotheses with quantitative data on Total Quality Management (TQM) adoption by industrial companies in Turkey. Findings reveal that elite companies adopt TQM earlier on, self-report greater levels of sociopolitically driven legitimacy concerns, and are more likely to participate in a prestigious quality award contest. Overall, our study contributes to diffusion research guided by the new institutional approach by expanding existing models to the diffusion of imported practices across organizations in late-industrializing recipient countries. We particularly show that sociopolitical legitimacy of imported practices that is more characteristic of late-industrializing recipient contexts may generate a divergent pattern of diffusion whereby elite organizations emerge as early adopters and engage in brandishing adoption.

Keywords

new institutionalismdiffusionlate-industrializingTurkey
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Management & Organization , Volume 30 , Issue 2 , March 2024 , pp. 386 - 405
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press and Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management 2020.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ahmad, F. (1993). The making of modern Turkey. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Aldrich, H. E., & Fiol, C. M. (1994). Fools rush in? The institutional context of industry creation. Academy of Management Review, 19(4), 645–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alvarez, J. L. (1998). The sociological tradition and the spread and institutionalization of knowledge for action. In Alvarez, J. L. (Ed.), Diffusion and consumption of business knowledge (pp. 13–57). London: Macmillan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amsden, A. H. (2001). The rise of ‘the rest’: Challenges to the west from late-industrializing economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ansari, S. M., Fiss, P. C., & Zajac, E. J. (2010). Made to fit: How practices vary as they diffuse. Academy of Management Review, 35, 67–92.Google Scholar
Bae, J., Chen, S. J., & Rowley, C. (2011). From a paternalistic model towards what? HRM trends in Korea and Taiwan. Personnel Review, 40, 700–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buğra, A. (1998). Class, culture, and state: An analysis of interest representation by two Turkish business associations. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 30(4), 521–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buğra, A., & Üsdiken, B. (1995). Societal variations in state-dependent organizational forms: The South Korean chaebol and the Turkish holding. Paper presented at EMOT Workshop. Helsinki, Finland.Google Scholar
Chandler, A. D. (1962). Strategy and structure: Chapters in the American industrial enterprise. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Coltman, T., Devinney, T. M., Midgley, D. F., & Venaik, S. (2008). Formative versus reflective measurement models: Two applications of formative measurement. Journal of Business Research, 61(12), 1250–1262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Czarniawska, B., & Joerges, B. (1996). Travel of ideas. In Czarniawska, B., & Sevon, G. (Eds.), Translating organizational change (pp. 13–48). Berlin: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deming, W. E. (1986) Out of crisis. Cambridge: MIT Center for Advanced Engineering.Google Scholar
Djelic, M.-L. (2004). Social networks and country-to-country transfer: Dense and weak ties in the diffusion of knowledge. Socio-Economic Review, 2, 341–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drori, G. S., Höllerer, M. A., & Walgenbach, P. (2014). Unpacking the glocalization of organization: From term, to theory, to analysis. European Journal of Cultural and Political Sociology, 1, 85–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erçek, M. (2014). Explaining adoption of management innovations in less advanced settings: Evidence from Turkey. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 15(5), 994–1016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erçek, M., & İşeri-Say, A. (2009). Discursive ambiguity, professional networks, and peripheral contexts: The translation of Total Quality Management in Turkey, 1991–2002. International Studies of Management and Organization, 38, 80–101.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, 501–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gökşen, N. S., & Üsdiken, B. (2001). Uniformity and diversity in Turkish business groups: Effects of scale and time of founding. British Journal of Management, 12(4), 325–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenwood, R., & Suddaby, R. (2006). Institutional entrepreneurship in mature fields: The big five accounting firms. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 27–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, T. C., & Carruthers, B. G. (2009). Bankrupt global lawmaking and systemic financial crisis. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Höllerer, M. A. (2013). From taken-for-granted to explicit commitment: The rise of CSR in a corporatist country. Journal of Management Studies, 50(4), 573–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hwang, H., Jang, Y.S., & Park, K. (2014). The changing motivations of ISO 9000 adoption among Korean firms. In Drori, G. S., Höllerer, M. & Walgenbach, P. (Eds.), Organizations and managerial ideas: Global themes and local variations (pp. 339–354). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ishikawa, K. (1985) What is total quality control? The Japanese way. Prentice-Hall: Englewood-Cliffs.Google Scholar
Jack, G., & Westwood, R. (2009). International and cross-cultural management studies: A postcolonial reading. London: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juran, J. M. (1988). Juran on planning for quality. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Kennedy, M. T., & Fiss, P. C. (2009). Institutionalization, framing, and the logic of TQM adoption and implementation decisions among U.S. Hospitals. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 897–918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kipping, M., Engwall, L., & Üsdiken, B. (2009). Preface: The transfer of management knowledge to peripheral countries. International Studies of Management and Organization, 38, 3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krücken, G., & Drori, G. S. (Eds.) (2009). World society: The writings of John W. Meyer. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lawrence, T. B., Suddaby, R., & Leca, B. (Eds.) (2009). Institutional work: Actors and agency in institutional studies of organizations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leblebici, H., Salancik, G. R., Copay, A., & King, T. (1991). Institutional change and the transformation of interorganizational fields: An organizational history of the US radio broadcasting industry. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 333–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lounsbury, M. (2001). Institutional sources of practice variation: Staffing college and university recycling programs. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, 29–56.CrossRefGoogle 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, 289–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, M. C. J., & Whittington, R. (1999). Strategy, structure and systemness: National institutions and corporate change in France, Germany and UK, 1950–1993. Organization Studies, 20, 933–959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, J. W. (1996). Other hood: The promulgation and transmission of ideas in the modern organizational environment. In Czarniawska, B. & Sevon, G. (Eds.), Translating organizational change (pp. 191–240). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Meyer, J. W. (2009). Reflections: Institutional theory and world society. In Krücken, G. & Drori, G. S. (Eds.), World society: The writings of John W. Meyer (pp. 36–63). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
ONeill, H. M., Pouder, R. W., & Buchholtz, A. K. (1998). Patterns in the diffusion of strategies across organizations. Insights from the innovation diffusion literature. Academy of Management Review, 23, 98–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Özen, Ş. (2001). The context of diffusion process of TQM in Turkey. Paper presented in Creation of European Management Practice (CEMP) Conference on The Implementation of Management Ideas in European Companies, Molde, May 4–6.Google Scholar
Özen, Ş. (2002). Bağlam, aktör, söylem ve kurumsal değişim: Türkiyede Toplam Kalite Yönetiminin yayılım süreci. Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2, 47–90.Google Scholar
Özen, Ş. (2015). How does M-form from the US become holding in Turkey? A comparative study on glocalization. 31st EGOS Colloquium, July 2–4, Athens, Greece.Google Scholar
Özen, Ş., & Berkman, Ü. (2007). The cross-national reconstruction of managerial practices: TQM in Turkey. Organization Studies, 28, 825–851.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Özen, Ş., & Küskü, F. (2009). Corporate environmental citizenship variation in developing countries: An institutional framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 89, 297–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rossman, G. (2014) The diffusion of the legitimate and the diffusion of legitimacy. Sociological Science, 1, 49–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sahlin-Andersson, K., & Engwall, L. (Eds.) (2002). The expansion of management knowledge: Carriers, ideas and circulation. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Sturdy, A. (2004). The adoption of management ideas and practices theoretical perspectives and possibilities. Management Learning, 35, 155–179.CrossRefGoogle 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, 22–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsui-Auch, L. S., & Lee, Y.-J. (2003). The state matters: Management models of Singaporean Chinese and Korean business groups. Organization Studies, 24, 507–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Üsdiken, B., & Yıldırım-Öktem, Ö. (2008). Kurumsal ortamda degişim ve büyük aile holdingleri bünyesindeki şirketlerin yönetim kurullarında icrada görevli olmayan ve bağımsız üyeler. Amme İdaresi Dergisi, 41, 43–71.Google Scholar
Voronov, M., & Vince, R. (2012). Integrating emotions into the analysis of institutional work. Academy of Management Review, 37, 58–81.Google Scholar
Wallerstein, I. (1974). The modern world-system. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Westphal, J., 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, 366–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westphal, J. D., & Zajac, E. J. (1994). Substance and symbolism in CEOs long-term incentive plans. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 367–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitley, R. (1992). Business systems in East Asia. London, UK: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Zbaracki, M. J. (1998). Rhetoric and reality of Total Quality Management. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43, 602–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeitlin, J., & Herrigel, G. (Eds.) (2000). Americanization and its limits: Reworking US technology and management in post-war Europe and Japan. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar