Michael E. Johnson-Cramer

Decision Theory as Practice: Crafting Rationality in Organizations

This paper explores the underlying practices whereby rationality — as defined in rational choice theory — is achieved within organizations. The qualitative coding of 58 case study reports produced by decision analysts, working in a wide range of settings, highlights how organizational actors can make decisions in accord with the axioms of rational choice theory. Our findings describe the emergence of ‘decision-analysis’ as a field and reveal the complex and fragile socio-technical infrastructure underlying the craft of rationality, the central role of calculability, and the various forms of bricolage that decision analysts deploy to make rational decisions happen. Overall, this research explores the social construction of rationality and identifies the practices sustaining the performativity of rational choice theory within organizations.

Managing Change through Networks and Values

Executives today must implement large-scale organizational change initiatives in evertighter time frames with fewer resources. Yet, anticipated performance outcomes often do not materialize as internal resistance slows or derails their change initiatives. A combined assessment of culture and informal structure can help identify barriers to change and facilitate change initiatives. Based on work with ten organizations, this article demonstrates how this approach can help drive change through people and values in certain network positions; diagnose cultural drivers of network fragmentation; identify dominant beliefs or paradigms impeding cultural change; and intervene with a balanced emphasis on instrumental and expressive relationships.

Strategy, stakeholders and managerial discretion

We begin by elaborating on the building blocks for understanding the dynamic interrelationships between stakeholder theory, managerial discretion and stakeholder orientation. We then provide a sketch of the dynamic between managerial discretion and stakeholder orientation and their likely interaction. We conclude by considering some future research directions motivated by this dynamic.

Stakeholder Orientation, Managerial Discretion and Nexus Rents

Building on prior research (Phillips et al. 2010), we make explicit the implied assumptions – both managerialist and determinist – in stakeholder research. We argue that three elements – managerial discretion, stakeholder orientation and nexus rent – interact in important and under-examined ways. A firm’s orientation toward its stakeholders determines how it will use the discretion accorded to it by external and internal circumstances. The interaction between these two factors affects a firm’s ability to create value in the short term and influences the level of discretion available to the firm in the long term. We argue that the interplay of discretion and orientation create a vicious (or virtuous) cycle, in which the firm either creates or destroys goodwill with stakeholders, thereby making it more or less likely that stakeholders will grant discretion in the future.

Refining normative stakeholder theory: insights from Judaism, Christianity, and Islam

Given the historical and ongoing influence of religion, religious faith traditions might provide a compelling and coherent normative core for stakeholder theory. This paper explores the three Abrahamic faith traditions – Judaism, Christianity, and Islam – and applies principles derived from these traditions to stakeholder theory. Our analysis of these faith traditions yields four elements of a common normative core that is germane to stakeholder theory: (1) the need to place community at the center of human activity, including business activity; (2) skepticism about economic power and its misapplication; (3) a tempering of our commitment to individual liberty as the highest normative good to be achieved by society; and (4) the dignity of the individual person and, with that, an obligation of reciprocity between the individual and society (including businesses). We then identify two current issues in stakeholder research, considering ways that the three faith traditions would advance discussion about them. We conclude by offering implications for future research.

Stakeholder Theory: Seeing the Field Through the Forest

Does stakeholder theory constitute an established academic field? Our answer is both “yes” and “no.” In the more than quarter-century since Freeman’s seminal contribution in 1984, this domain has acquired some of the administrative, social, and disciplinary trappings of an established field. Stakeholder research has coalesced around a unique intellectual position: that corporations must be understood within the context of their stakeholder relationships and that this understanding must grow out of the interplay between normative and social scientific insights. Yet, much of this domain remains an unexplored territory. In this article, the authors assess the progress to date toward field status and outline future directions for stakeholder research.