组织对透明度决定因素的回应

IF 4.1 3区 管理学 Q2 BUSINESS
Pavel Král, Andrew Schnackenberg
{"title":"组织对透明度决定因素的回应","authors":"Pavel Král, Andrew Schnackenberg","doi":"10.1108/md-07-2023-1244","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>Despite considerable evidence of the benefits of organizational transparency, policies to enhance transparency often fail or are met with resistance and unexpected results. In part, this is due to a lack of knowledge about the drivers of organizational transparency and their interrelationships. This study examines the interplay among the forces that influence organizational transparency, and thus answers numerous calls for developing a deeper theoretical understanding of the determinants of organizational transparency. We propose three forces that influence organizational transparency and theorize how they combine in nonlinear ways to form five archetypical transparency regimes that organizations operate within. We then discuss contingencies to organizational transparency within each regime.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>We employ configurational theorizing to capture the complexity of transparency and the nonlinear relationships among the forces of transparency.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>We propose three forces that influence organizational transparency: institutional, societal, and leadership. We identify configurations of the three forces that yield five archetypical transparency regimes. We then discuss contingencies for cultivating organizational transparency within each regime. Vanguard transparency and pioneering transparency represent the desired regimes for fostering organizational transparency. In contrast, hollow transparency and deceptive transparency reveal a combination of determinants that cultivate less desirable forms of organizational transparency. Paradoxical transparency represents a regime in which socially desirable outcomes are associated with undesirable consequences for an organization.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Research limitations/implications</h3>\n<p>This paper is among the first to theorize the drivers of organizational transparency and to discuss the limits and boundaries of organizational responses to transparency determinants.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Practical implications</h3>\n<p>Despite the many benefits of transparency, we explain why efforts to enhance organizational transparency often fail or are met with mixed results. By considering the three forces, managers and policymakers can avoid unexpected and undesired organizational responses to transparency regimes.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Social implications</h3>\n<p>We propose five transparency regimes that place a spotlight on social contingencies to enhance transparency.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>This study offers an integrative theory of organizational responses to transparency determinants and develops its theoretical foundations. The model integrates the fragmented empirical findings from previous studies on the determinants of transparency and draws attention to overlooked institutional, societal, and leadership forces that influence organizational transparency.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":18046,"journal":{"name":"Management Decision","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Organizational responses to transparency determinants\",\"authors\":\"Pavel Král, Andrew Schnackenberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/md-07-2023-1244\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3>Purpose</h3>\\n<p>Despite considerable evidence of the benefits of organizational transparency, policies to enhance transparency often fail or are met with resistance and unexpected results. In part, this is due to a lack of knowledge about the drivers of organizational transparency and their interrelationships. This study examines the interplay among the forces that influence organizational transparency, and thus answers numerous calls for developing a deeper theoretical understanding of the determinants of organizational transparency. We propose three forces that influence organizational transparency and theorize how they combine in nonlinear ways to form five archetypical transparency regimes that organizations operate within. We then discuss contingencies to organizational transparency within each regime.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\\n<p>We employ configurational theorizing to capture the complexity of transparency and the nonlinear relationships among the forces of transparency.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Findings</h3>\\n<p>We propose three forces that influence organizational transparency: institutional, societal, and leadership. We identify configurations of the three forces that yield five archetypical transparency regimes. We then discuss contingencies for cultivating organizational transparency within each regime. Vanguard transparency and pioneering transparency represent the desired regimes for fostering organizational transparency. In contrast, hollow transparency and deceptive transparency reveal a combination of determinants that cultivate less desirable forms of organizational transparency. Paradoxical transparency represents a regime in which socially desirable outcomes are associated with undesirable consequences for an organization.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Research limitations/implications</h3>\\n<p>This paper is among the first to theorize the drivers of organizational transparency and to discuss the limits and boundaries of organizational responses to transparency determinants.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Practical implications</h3>\\n<p>Despite the many benefits of transparency, we explain why efforts to enhance organizational transparency often fail or are met with mixed results. By considering the three forces, managers and policymakers can avoid unexpected and undesired organizational responses to transparency regimes.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Social implications</h3>\\n<p>We propose five transparency regimes that place a spotlight on social contingencies to enhance transparency.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\\n<p>This study offers an integrative theory of organizational responses to transparency determinants and develops its theoretical foundations. The model integrates the fragmented empirical findings from previous studies on the determinants of transparency and draws attention to overlooked institutional, societal, and leadership forces that influence organizational transparency.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\",\"PeriodicalId\":18046,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Management Decision\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Management Decision\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/md-07-2023-1244\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Management Decision","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/md-07-2023-1244","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的尽管有大量证据表明组织透明度的益处,但提高透明度的政策往往失败,或遇到阻力和意想不到的结果。部分原因在于对组织透明度的驱动因素及其相互关系缺乏了解。本研究探讨了影响组织透明度的各种力量之间的相互作用,从而回应了众多关于从理论上深入理解组织透明度决定因素的呼吁。我们提出了影响组织透明度的三种力量,并从理论上阐述了这些力量如何以非线性方式结合在一起,形成组织运作的五种典型透明度制度。研究结果我们提出了影响组织透明度的三种力量:制度力量、社会力量和领导力量。我们确定了产生五种典型透明度制度的三种力量的配置。然后,我们讨论了在每种体制下培养组织透明度的应急措施。先锋透明和开拓透明是培养组织透明度的理想机制。与此相反,空洞透明和欺骗性透明则揭示了培养不太理想的组织透明度的各种决定因素。研究局限/启示本文首次从理论上阐述了组织透明度的驱动因素,并讨论了组织对透明度决定因素的反应的局限和界限。实践意义尽管透明度有很多好处,但我们解释了为什么提高组织透明度的努力经常失败或结果好坏参半。通过考虑这三种力量,管理者和政策制定者可以避免对透明度制度做出意想不到的、不受欢迎的组织反应。社会影响我们提出了五种透明度制度,强调了提高透明度的社会偶然性。该模型整合了以往关于透明度决定因素的零散实证研究结果,并提请人们注意被忽视的影响组织透明度的制度、社会和领导力量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Organizational responses to transparency determinants

Purpose

Despite considerable evidence of the benefits of organizational transparency, policies to enhance transparency often fail or are met with resistance and unexpected results. In part, this is due to a lack of knowledge about the drivers of organizational transparency and their interrelationships. This study examines the interplay among the forces that influence organizational transparency, and thus answers numerous calls for developing a deeper theoretical understanding of the determinants of organizational transparency. We propose three forces that influence organizational transparency and theorize how they combine in nonlinear ways to form five archetypical transparency regimes that organizations operate within. We then discuss contingencies to organizational transparency within each regime.

Design/methodology/approach

We employ configurational theorizing to capture the complexity of transparency and the nonlinear relationships among the forces of transparency.

Findings

We propose three forces that influence organizational transparency: institutional, societal, and leadership. We identify configurations of the three forces that yield five archetypical transparency regimes. We then discuss contingencies for cultivating organizational transparency within each regime. Vanguard transparency and pioneering transparency represent the desired regimes for fostering organizational transparency. In contrast, hollow transparency and deceptive transparency reveal a combination of determinants that cultivate less desirable forms of organizational transparency. Paradoxical transparency represents a regime in which socially desirable outcomes are associated with undesirable consequences for an organization.

Research limitations/implications

This paper is among the first to theorize the drivers of organizational transparency and to discuss the limits and boundaries of organizational responses to transparency determinants.

Practical implications

Despite the many benefits of transparency, we explain why efforts to enhance organizational transparency often fail or are met with mixed results. By considering the three forces, managers and policymakers can avoid unexpected and undesired organizational responses to transparency regimes.

Social implications

We propose five transparency regimes that place a spotlight on social contingencies to enhance transparency.

Originality/value

This study offers an integrative theory of organizational responses to transparency determinants and develops its theoretical foundations. The model integrates the fragmented empirical findings from previous studies on the determinants of transparency and draws attention to overlooked institutional, societal, and leadership forces that influence organizational transparency.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
8.70%
发文量
126
期刊介绍: ■In-depth studies of major issues ■Operations management ■Financial management ■Motivation ■Entrepreneurship ■Problem solving and proactivity ■Serious management argument ■Strategy and policy issues ■Tactics for turning around company crises Management Decision, considered by many to be the best publication in its field, consistently offers thoughtful and provocative insights into current management practice. As such, its high calibre contributions from leading management philosophers and practitioners make it an invaluable resource in the aggressive and demanding trading climate of the Twenty-First Century.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信