Subject: please post to OMT-L: AMJ Special Research Forum Announcement
From: SHIPILOV Andrew <
Andrew.SHIPILOV@insead.edu>
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 12:10:46 +0200
To: <
pmdeh@ie.edu>
Academy of Management Journal Special Research Forum
RELATIONAL PLURALISM OF INDIVIDUALS, TEAMS AND ORGANIZATIONS
Guest Editors: Ranjay Gulati, Martin Kilduff, Stan Li, Andrew Shipilov,
Wenpin Tsai
An ancient paradox that has modern relevance is that individuals have
multiple selves from which unique identities are formed. From the time of
the ancient Greeks up to the present, debate has raged concerning whether to
place the emphasis on the plurality of selves or the unitary nature of
identity. The contribution of psychologist William James (1890: 294) was
particularly influential in asserting that a person had as many social
selves as they were other individuals who recognized the person and carried
an image of the person in their mind. The sociologist Georg Simmel (1955:
150) added further insight with his description of how individuals became
unique to the extent that they affiliated with many different
non-overlapping groups. It is from these influential psychological and
sociological sources that we derive the idea for this Special Research Forum.
We define relational pluralism as the extent to which a focal entity
(whether a person, a team, or an organization) derives its meaning and
possibility of action from relations with other entities. Because of the
division of labor, we necessarily have to enter into relations with other
entities to accomplish life's tasks (Durkheim, 1984). And this relational
pluralism brings the likelihood of innovation, but also of subversive
challenges to the status quo (Berger & Luckmann, 1967: 125).
In studying outcomes of relational pluralism such as innovation and shifts
in power, contributors to this special research forum should consider the
ways in which relationships between actors can be characterized as
multiplex, heterogenous, and overlapping. Multiplexity is the extent to
which actors are connected by more than one type of relationship (e.g.,
members of the same department who are also friends). Heterogeneity is the
extent to which actors form connections with others from quite different
backgrounds (e.g., different ethnicities or industries). Overlap is the
extent to which the focal actor's relationships are clustered in one group
or span across different groups.
Studies are already beginning to examine the phenomenon of relational
pluralism and its implications. At the individual level, work has focused on
how individuals develop multiple identities (Pratt & Rafaeli, 1997), but
this work did not directly examine how these identities shift depending on
the configuration of heterogeneous relations in organizational settings
(Mehra, Kilduff, & Brass, 1998). At the dyadic level, we know that the
extent to which people confirm to each other's identities affects
cooperation and performance at work (Milton & Westphal, 2005). But these
rich processes of identity confirmation have yet to be explored with respect
to conflicting identities deriving from heterogeneous relations. At the team
level, theories and empirical research have examined linkages between social
structures and team-level outcomes (Hansen, 1999; Oh, Chung, & Labianca,
2004; Roberson & Colquitt, 2005), but have not explored the origins and
consequences of multiple types of inter-team relations. At the firm level
there are conflicting arguments about the consequences of relational
pluralism, ranging from the recognition that multiplexity in relationships
(Baker and Faulkner, 2002) and competitive positions lead to lower
competition (Gimeno & Woo, 1996) to warnings that heterogeneous relations
can damage stock market value (Zuckerman, 1999).
Consequently, there is more work to be done to analyze the origins and
outcomes of relational pluralism. We are interested in work at different
levels and work that derives from psychological, sociological, economic and
other traditions. Relevant theoretical perspectives that explore relational
pluralism could include social identity theory, distinctiveness theory,
leader-member exchange theory, institutional theory, resource dependence
theory, relational demography, the resource based view of the firm, and
social network theory. Relevant methods could range from qualitative
(participant observation, interviews, case studies) to quantitative
(analysis of text, survey or archival data). We particularly welcome
combinations of methods (e.g., the use of diary data together with social
network analysis) in order to capture relevant phenomena such as the
emergence of multiplex relations.
Here is a sampling of possible topics:
* the dynamics of relational pluralism, including questions concerning
how heterogeneity in social structure is shaped by cognition, and how
individuals and organizations develop multiple identities in their struggle
for power and control;
* the emergence of hybrid organizational forms from heterogeneous
interdependencies;
* the origins of relational pluralism, including studies of the
evolution from relational singularity to relational plurality;
* the social contexts from which relational pluralism derives, including
studies of how these contexts promote or restrict the formation,
maintenance, and recombination of relationships;
* the consequences of relational pluralism, including how heterogeneity
and its management affect individual, organizational, and systemic outcomes;
* relational pluralism across levels (individual, team, organizational
unit), including questions of how relational pluralism at one level affects
the emergence of status and power at another;
* implications of relational pluralism for managerial practice and
public policy.
For this Special Research Forum, we seek submissions that capture the
richness of qualitative and quantitative data using rigorous methods that
contribute to theory development concerning relational pluralism, and that
open new areas for research. The range of questions we have posed are
illustrative rather than definitive, and we welcome submissions that
approach relational pluralism within and across organizations in ways that
have not previously been conceptualized.
TIMELINE
Submissions are due between September 1 and October 31, 2011.
More details about this special research forum can be found at:
http://journals.aomonline.org/amj/Research_Forums.html
Andrew V. Shipilov
Akzo Nobel Fellow of Strategic Management
Assistant Professor of Strategy
INSEAD
http://www.insead.edu/facultyresearch/faculty/profiles/ashipilov/