The Experts below are selected from a list of 289425 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Eero Vaara - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Struggles over legitimacy in the Eurozone crisis : Discursive Legitimation strategies and their ideological underpinnings
Discourse & Society, 2014Co-Authors: Eero VaaraAbstract:This article focuses on the discursive underpinnings of the legitimacy crisis that the Eurozone as a transnational institution is facing. By adopting a critical discourse analysis (CDA) perspective, the empirical analysis focuses on the media discussion in Finland. The analysis shows how discourses of financial capitalism, humanism, nationalism and Europeanism played a central role in Legitimation, deLegitimation and reLegitimation. Furthermore, the analysis elaborates on the Legitimation strategies that were often used in the media texts: position-based authorizations involving institutionalized authorities and ‘voices of the common man’, knowledge-based authorizations focusing on economic expertise, rationalizations concentrating on economic arguments, moral evaluations based on unfairness used especially for deLegitimation, mythopoiesis involving alternative future scenarios and cosmology used to construct inevitability. By so doing, this study adds to our understanding of the discursive and ideological underpinnings of the social, political and financial crisis in Greece and other European countries and contributes to research on discursive Legitimation more generally.
-
A Recursive Perspective on Discursive Legitimation and Organizational Action in Mergers and Acquisitions
Organization Science, 2010Co-Authors: Philippe Monin, Eero VaaraAbstract:This paper challenges the predominant view that Legitimation is merely a specific phase in merger or acquisition processes. We argue that a better understanding of postmerger organizational dynamics calls for conceptualization of discursive Legitimation as an inherent part of unfolding merger processes. In particular, we focus on the recursive relationship between Legitimation and organizational action. We have two objectives: to outline a theoretical model that helps one to understand the dynamics of discursive Legitimation and organizational action in postmerger organizations, and to examine a revealing case to distinguish the inherent risks and problems in discursive Legitimation. Our case analysis focuses on the merger between the French pharmaceutical companies BioMérieux and Pierre Fabre. We adopt a critical multimethod approach and distinguish specific discursive dynamics and pathological tendencies in this case. The analysis highlights the unintended consequences of discursive Legitimation, the central role of sensegiving and sensehiding in discursive Legitimation, the inherently political nature of Legitimation and the risks associated with politicization, the special problems associated with fashionable discourses and the role of the media, the use of specific discursive strategies for Legitimation and deLegitimation, and the crucial role of actual integration results. This analysis adds to the existing research on mergers and acquisitions by treating discursive Legitimation as part of the merger dynamics. In particular, our case analysis provides a new explanation for merger failure. We also believe that the recursive model connecting discursive Legitimation and deLegitimation strategies to concrete organizational action makes a more general contribution to our understanding of organizational Legitimation.
-
a recursive perspective on discursive Legitimation and organizational action in mergers and acquisitions
Organization Science, 2010Co-Authors: Eero Vaara, Philippe MoninAbstract:This paper challenges the predominant view that Legitimation is merely a specific phase in merger or acquisition processes. We argue that a better understanding of postmerger organizational dynamics calls for conceptualization of discursive Legitimation as an inherent part of unfolding merger processes. In particular, we focus on the recursive relationship between Legitimation and organizational action. We have two objectives: to outline a theoretical model that helps one to understand the dynamics of discursive Legitimation and organizational action in postmerger organizations, and to examine a revealing case to distinguish the inherent risks and problems in discursive Legitimation. Our case analysis focuses on the merger between the French pharmaceutical companies BioMerieux and Pierre Fabre. We adopt a critical multimethod approach and distinguish specific discursive dynamics and pathological tendencies in this case. The analysis highlights the unintended consequences of discursive Legitimation, the central role of sensegiving and sensehiding in discursive Legitimation, the inherently political nature of Legitimation and the risks associated with politicization, the special problems associated with fashionable discourses and the role of the media, the use of specific discursive strategies for Legitimation and deLegitimation, and the crucial role of actual integration results. This analysis adds to the existing research on mergers and acquisitions by treating discursive Legitimation as part of the merger dynamics. In particular, our case analysis provides a new explanation for merger failure. We also believe that the recursive model connecting discursive Legitimation and deLegitimation strategies to concrete organizational action makes a more general contribution to our understanding of organizational Legitimation.
-
A Discursive Perspective on Legitimation Strategies in Multinational Corporations
Academy of Management Review (The), 2008Co-Authors: Eero Vaara, Jeanne TienariAbstract:Few studies have examined Legitimation in multinational corporations from a discursive perspective. To complement the existing institutional literature, we adopt a critical discourse analysis perspective that allows us to examine the microlevel processes of discursive Legitimation. We provide an example of a media text - dealing with a production unit shutdown - to demonstrate how this perspective elucidates the various textual strategies used to legitimate multinational corporations' actions and their controversial consequences.
-
pulp and paper fiction on the discursive Legitimation of global industrial restructuring
Organization Studies, 2006Co-Authors: Eero Vaara, Janne Tienari, Juha LaurilaAbstract:Despite the central role of legitimacy in social and organizational life, we know little of the subtle meaning-making processes through which organizational phenomena, such as industrial restructuring, are legitimated in contemporary society. Therefore, this paper examines the discursive Legitimation strategies used when making sense of global industrial restructuring in the media. Based on a critical discourse analysis of extensive media coverage of a revolutionary pulp and paper sector merger, we distinguish and analyze five Legitimation strategies: (1) normalization, (2) authorization, (3) rationalization, (4) moralization, and (5) narrativization. We argue that while these specific Legitimation strategies appear in individual texts, their recurring use in the intertextual totality of the public discussion establishes the core elements of the emerging legitimating discourse.
Philippe Monin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
A Recursive Perspective on Discursive Legitimation and Organizational Action in Mergers and Acquisitions
Organization Science, 2010Co-Authors: Philippe Monin, Eero VaaraAbstract:This paper challenges the predominant view that Legitimation is merely a specific phase in merger or acquisition processes. We argue that a better understanding of postmerger organizational dynamics calls for conceptualization of discursive Legitimation as an inherent part of unfolding merger processes. In particular, we focus on the recursive relationship between Legitimation and organizational action. We have two objectives: to outline a theoretical model that helps one to understand the dynamics of discursive Legitimation and organizational action in postmerger organizations, and to examine a revealing case to distinguish the inherent risks and problems in discursive Legitimation. Our case analysis focuses on the merger between the French pharmaceutical companies BioMérieux and Pierre Fabre. We adopt a critical multimethod approach and distinguish specific discursive dynamics and pathological tendencies in this case. The analysis highlights the unintended consequences of discursive Legitimation, the central role of sensegiving and sensehiding in discursive Legitimation, the inherently political nature of Legitimation and the risks associated with politicization, the special problems associated with fashionable discourses and the role of the media, the use of specific discursive strategies for Legitimation and deLegitimation, and the crucial role of actual integration results. This analysis adds to the existing research on mergers and acquisitions by treating discursive Legitimation as part of the merger dynamics. In particular, our case analysis provides a new explanation for merger failure. We also believe that the recursive model connecting discursive Legitimation and deLegitimation strategies to concrete organizational action makes a more general contribution to our understanding of organizational Legitimation.
-
a recursive perspective on discursive Legitimation and organizational action in mergers and acquisitions
Organization Science, 2010Co-Authors: Eero Vaara, Philippe MoninAbstract:This paper challenges the predominant view that Legitimation is merely a specific phase in merger or acquisition processes. We argue that a better understanding of postmerger organizational dynamics calls for conceptualization of discursive Legitimation as an inherent part of unfolding merger processes. In particular, we focus on the recursive relationship between Legitimation and organizational action. We have two objectives: to outline a theoretical model that helps one to understand the dynamics of discursive Legitimation and organizational action in postmerger organizations, and to examine a revealing case to distinguish the inherent risks and problems in discursive Legitimation. Our case analysis focuses on the merger between the French pharmaceutical companies BioMerieux and Pierre Fabre. We adopt a critical multimethod approach and distinguish specific discursive dynamics and pathological tendencies in this case. The analysis highlights the unintended consequences of discursive Legitimation, the central role of sensegiving and sensehiding in discursive Legitimation, the inherently political nature of Legitimation and the risks associated with politicization, the special problems associated with fashionable discourses and the role of the media, the use of specific discursive strategies for Legitimation and deLegitimation, and the crucial role of actual integration results. This analysis adds to the existing research on mergers and acquisitions by treating discursive Legitimation as part of the merger dynamics. In particular, our case analysis provides a new explanation for merger failure. We also believe that the recursive model connecting discursive Legitimation and deLegitimation strategies to concrete organizational action makes a more general contribution to our understanding of organizational Legitimation.
Bernhard Truffer - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the thorny road to technology Legitimation institutional work for potable water reuse in california
Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2016Co-Authors: Christian Binz, Sasha Harrislovett, Michael Kiparsky, David L Sedlak, Bernhard TrufferAbstract:Technological innovation that is incongruous with established social rules and practices is often confronted with strong skepticism and a lack of societal legitimacy. Yet, how the early actors in a new technological field create legitimacy for new products is not well researched. This paper addresses this gap by proposing an analytical framework for the early technology Legitimation phase that combines recent insights from innovation studies and institutional sociology. Both literatures agree that technology Legitimation depends on a complex alignment process in which the technology and its institutional context mutually shape each other. Innovation system studies recently proposed to explore these processes in more detail. So far, this literature has mainly treated legitimacy as an outcome of overall system maturation and has not ventured into assessing Legitimation as an active process. The framework we put forward in this paper conceptualizes technology Legitimation as being enacted by different actors in a technological innovation system through specific forms of institutional work. This framework is illustrated with a case study on potable water reuse, in this case the injection of treated wastewater into drinking water reservoirs — a technology most consumers confront with revulsion. California is among very few regions worldwide where this technology is becoming common practice. Interviews with 20 key stakeholders and content analysis of 124 newspaper articles reveal how technology proponents worked on legitimizing this controversial technology by engaging in system building and institutional work at various levels. We outline how the Legitimation process interrelates with other core development processes of a technological innovation system and discuss how our framework informs recent work in innovation and transition studies.
Christian Binz - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the thorny road to technology Legitimation institutional work for potable water reuse in california
Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2016Co-Authors: Christian Binz, Sasha Harrislovett, Michael Kiparsky, David L Sedlak, Bernhard TrufferAbstract:Technological innovation that is incongruous with established social rules and practices is often confronted with strong skepticism and a lack of societal legitimacy. Yet, how the early actors in a new technological field create legitimacy for new products is not well researched. This paper addresses this gap by proposing an analytical framework for the early technology Legitimation phase that combines recent insights from innovation studies and institutional sociology. Both literatures agree that technology Legitimation depends on a complex alignment process in which the technology and its institutional context mutually shape each other. Innovation system studies recently proposed to explore these processes in more detail. So far, this literature has mainly treated legitimacy as an outcome of overall system maturation and has not ventured into assessing Legitimation as an active process. The framework we put forward in this paper conceptualizes technology Legitimation as being enacted by different actors in a technological innovation system through specific forms of institutional work. This framework is illustrated with a case study on potable water reuse, in this case the injection of treated wastewater into drinking water reservoirs — a technology most consumers confront with revulsion. California is among very few regions worldwide where this technology is becoming common practice. Interviews with 20 key stakeholders and content analysis of 124 newspaper articles reveal how technology proponents worked on legitimizing this controversial technology by engaging in system building and institutional work at various levels. We outline how the Legitimation process interrelates with other core development processes of a technological innovation system and discuss how our framework informs recent work in innovation and transition studies.
François-xavier De Vaujany - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Legitimation process in organizations and organizing: An ontological discussion
2018Co-Authors: François-xavier De VaujanyAbstract:Legitimacy and Legitimation are key topics of the management literature. In the 70s and 80s, legitimating mainly meant convincing and sticking to the rules of a dominant external stakeholder (with a stable set of preferences) that needed to be convinced. Today, other processes have emerged. They are more based on the crowd-based, community-grounded, value co-creation oriented, and take the shape of big emotional waves pushed by an infinite sum of small generosities. In short, they are more de-centered. If the bulk of institutional concepts are powerful to explain the first situation (which still remains present), the latter process dynamic requires some revisions and extensions which are detailed here. By means of three ontologies of Legitimation, I discuss three processes extending a discursive and judgmental view of Legitimation.
-
Legitimation process in organizations and organizing: An ontological discussion 1
2018Co-Authors: François-xavier De VaujanyAbstract:Legitimacy and Legitimation are key topics of the management literature. In the 70s and 80s, legitimating mainly meant convincing and sticking to the rules of a dominant external stakeholder (with a stable set of preferences) that needed to be convinced. Today, other processes have emerged. They are more based on the crowd-based, community-grounded, value co-creation oriented, and take the shape of big emotional waves pushed by an infinite sum of small generosities. In short, they are more de-centered. If the bulk of institutional concepts are powerful to explain the first situation (which still remains present), the latter process dynamic requires some revisions and extensions which are detailed here. By means of three ontologies of Legitimation, I discuss three processes extending a discursive and judgmental view of Legitimation.
-
Matters of visuality in Legitimation practices: dual iconographies in a meeting room
Organization, 2016Co-Authors: François-xavier De Vaujany, Emmanuelle VaastAbstract:Legitimacy and Legitimation practices are key constructs in the neo-institutional literature. So far, much scholarship has drawn on ideational and discursive approaches of Legitimation. Yet, the organizational world has become increasingly iconographical, and visuals seem to have been at the core of contemporary legitimacy claims. This research investigates the visual artifacts and practices embedded in the elaboration of legitimacy claims. Through an iconographic lens applied to practices unfolding in a meeting room, this research emphasizes the image-screen and image-object iconographies involved in the elaboration of Legitimation claims. Visual practices elicit symbolic spaces that organizational actors may then mobilize as worlds of justification and legitimization.