获得组织合法性的多种途径:信息可见度、组织倾听和跨部门伙伴关系

IF 4.1 3区 管理学 Q2 BUSINESS
Jiawei Sophia Fu , Rong Wang
{"title":"获得组织合法性的多种途径:信息可见度、组织倾听和跨部门伙伴关系","authors":"Jiawei Sophia Fu ,&nbsp;Rong Wang","doi":"10.1016/j.pubrev.2024.102484","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Given the critical role of legitimacy in attracting key resources for organizational survival and growth, organizational and strategic communication research has long sought to understand the mechanisms essential in improving organizational legitimacy. Guided by stakeholder research and configurational thinking, we examine three interconnected communication mechanisms for relationship management in organizational legitimation: (a) information visibility, (b) organizational listening, and (c) cross-sector partnerships. Based on survey and archival data from 44 U.S. nonprofit organizations, we employed a fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis to identify the pathways to high or low organizational legitimacy. Our results reveal the combinations of these factors can complement or substitute for one another to explain legitimacy. Specifically, high pragmatic legitimacy requires effective listening to stakeholders and collaborating with government agencies. By contrast, in low pragmatic legitimacy, organizations are often hindered by limited capacity for information visibility, ineffective listening to stakeholders, and no collaboration with corporate partners. These results suggest theoretical contributions to stakeholder research in public relations and organizational and strategic communication scholarship, as well as practical implications for improving organizational legitimacy for mission-driven organizations.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48263,"journal":{"name":"Public Relations Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0363811124000638/pdfft?md5=7d703b760601c045f02f7609fec0348c&pid=1-s2.0-S0363811124000638-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Multiple pathways to organizational legitimacy: Information visibility, organizational listening, and cross-sector partnerships\",\"authors\":\"Jiawei Sophia Fu ,&nbsp;Rong Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.pubrev.2024.102484\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Given the critical role of legitimacy in attracting key resources for organizational survival and growth, organizational and strategic communication research has long sought to understand the mechanisms essential in improving organizational legitimacy. Guided by stakeholder research and configurational thinking, we examine three interconnected communication mechanisms for relationship management in organizational legitimation: (a) information visibility, (b) organizational listening, and (c) cross-sector partnerships. Based on survey and archival data from 44 U.S. nonprofit organizations, we employed a fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis to identify the pathways to high or low organizational legitimacy. Our results reveal the combinations of these factors can complement or substitute for one another to explain legitimacy. Specifically, high pragmatic legitimacy requires effective listening to stakeholders and collaborating with government agencies. By contrast, in low pragmatic legitimacy, organizations are often hindered by limited capacity for information visibility, ineffective listening to stakeholders, and no collaboration with corporate partners. These results suggest theoretical contributions to stakeholder research in public relations and organizational and strategic communication scholarship, as well as practical implications for improving organizational legitimacy for mission-driven organizations.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48263,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Relations Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0363811124000638/pdfft?md5=7d703b760601c045f02f7609fec0348c&pid=1-s2.0-S0363811124000638-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Relations Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0363811124000638\",\"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":"Public Relations Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0363811124000638","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

鉴于合法性在吸引组织生存和发展所需的关键资源方面发挥着至关重要的作用,组织和战略传播研究长期以来一直致力于了解提高组织合法性的重要机制。在利益相关者研究和构型思维的指导下,我们研究了组织合法性关系管理中三个相互关联的传播机制:(a)信息可见性,(b)组织倾听,以及(c)跨部门伙伴关系。基于对 44 家美国非营利组织的调查和档案数据,我们采用了模糊集定性比较分析法来确定组织合法性高或低的途径。我们的结果表明,这些因素的组合可以相互补充或替代,从而解释合法性。具体来说,高务实合法性要求有效倾听利益相关者的意见并与政府机构合作。与此相反,在低实用主义合法性中,组织往往受到信息可见性能力有限、对利益相关者的倾听无效以及与企业合作伙伴缺乏合作等因素的阻碍。这些结果为公共关系、组织和战略传播学术中的利益相关者研究提供了理论上的贡献,同时也为改善使命驱动型组织的组织合法性提供了实践意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Multiple pathways to organizational legitimacy: Information visibility, organizational listening, and cross-sector partnerships

Given the critical role of legitimacy in attracting key resources for organizational survival and growth, organizational and strategic communication research has long sought to understand the mechanisms essential in improving organizational legitimacy. Guided by stakeholder research and configurational thinking, we examine three interconnected communication mechanisms for relationship management in organizational legitimation: (a) information visibility, (b) organizational listening, and (c) cross-sector partnerships. Based on survey and archival data from 44 U.S. nonprofit organizations, we employed a fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis to identify the pathways to high or low organizational legitimacy. Our results reveal the combinations of these factors can complement or substitute for one another to explain legitimacy. Specifically, high pragmatic legitimacy requires effective listening to stakeholders and collaborating with government agencies. By contrast, in low pragmatic legitimacy, organizations are often hindered by limited capacity for information visibility, ineffective listening to stakeholders, and no collaboration with corporate partners. These results suggest theoretical contributions to stakeholder research in public relations and organizational and strategic communication scholarship, as well as practical implications for improving organizational legitimacy for mission-driven organizations.

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
8.00
自引率
19.00%
发文量
90
期刊介绍: The Public Relations Review is the oldest journal devoted to articles that examine public relations in depth, and commentaries by specialists in the field. Most of the articles are based on empirical research undertaken by professionals and academics in the field. In addition to research articles and commentaries, The Review publishes invited research in brief, and book reviews in the fields of public relations, mass communications, organizational communications, public opinion formations, social science research and evaluation, marketing, management and public policy formation.
×
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