Tuesday, February 19, 2019

MOS WORKSHOP - Srividya Jandhyala and Himanshu Bhatt - Tuesday, March 12th 2019

The Management Department & The Research Center
Srividya Jandhyala and Himanshu Bhatt
will present their paper

Tuesday, March 12th 2019
   Room N517 – 9:15 a.m in Cergy
4:15 p.m in Singapore

Theme: Political Risk Reversal: Hold-up of governments by firms in 
infrastructure projects ”

Abstract: A central idea in the literature on political risk is that governments opportunistically appropriate returns from firms’ investments. In contrast, we argue that firms are also opportunistic in their interactions with the State. Firms take initially disadvantageous position (vis-à-vis the host government), with the expectation that they can influence government actions ex-post to obtain more favorable investment terms. We illustrate this using the case of aggressive bidding in infrastructure projects and develop a detailed case study of an airport project in India. We extend the analysis to identify institutional characteristics that moderate the effectiveness of aggressive bidding in generating ex-post gains for the firm.

Monday, January 21, 2019

Department Seminar Series - DANIEL BLAKE IE MADRID - Tuesday, February 19th 2019

The Management Department
Department Seminar Series

Daniel blake

Tuesday, February 19th 2019
   Room LE CLUB  at 10:00  am

Theme:  “Additive vs adaptive nonmarket strategies: How business associations affect firms’ willingness to outsource”

  Abstract: Firms can pursue different forms of nonmarket strategies in response to institutional challenges. On the one hand firms can employ adaptive strategies by selecting governance modes that avoid the market. On the other, they can pursue additive strategies and develop institutional supplements or substitutes. In this study we investigate whether or not the pursuit of an additive nonmarket strategy dampens the need for an adaptive strategy and thereby enables firms to transact more easily in the market.  We argue that when firms do participate in the additive nonmarket strategy of participating in a business association, they will be more willing to consent to market governance and outsource a part of their operations. Through quantitative analysis of firm survey data from the World Bank, we find that firms that are members of a business association are more likely to outsource operations and that this relationship is strongest in contexts where judicial institutions provide weak enforcement of market agreements.


The Management Department & The Research Center


Arijit Chatterjee, Anjan Ghosh, & BERNARD LECA

will present their paper

Tuesday, January 29th 2019
   Room N231 – 9:15 a.m. in Cergy
4:15 p.m. in Singapore

Scaling up Good Ideas: Institutional Work from the Margins

Grand challenges – lack of drinking water, marine pollution, food scarcity, gender disparities, or resource depletion – have been around for a long time. We know from available evidence that rules and laws, routines, scripts and schema, norms and habits make this stability possible (Banerjee & Iyer, 2005; Milanović, 2010; Nunn, 2008). In other words, institutional arrangements lead to the reproduction and survival of these enduring social ills (Deaton & Dreze, 2009; DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Meyer & Rowan, 1977). Governments and multilateral agencies have taken initiatives, NGOs have proliferated (Boli & Thomas, 1999) but these acute and widespread problems persist.
Upward scale shifts (McAdam, Tarrow, & Tilly, 2001) – contentious actions that diffuse vertically – can surface issues from small to large arenas. However, unlike social movements, some problems do not necessarily need confrontation but quiet constructive problem-solving that requires tenacity and the ability to work within the system. Many grand challenges do not require us to contest the already enshrined rights but to engage with the existing system and ensure their effective implementation on the ground. Structure, therefore, is not simply an exogenous restraining force. It is also a resource to be deployed to enlarge the catchment area and address grand challenges – enabling one’s own path without confronting existing institutions (Djelic & Quack, 2007; Garud & Karnøe, 2001).
What practices enable organizations to achieve large scale change? We explore this question in an inductive study of the Child In Need Institute (CINI), a non-profit organization working to eradicate child malnutrition in India. Relying on forty years of archival data, semi-structured interviews and field notes, we derive a theory of scaling up ideas from the margins. We make three contributions: we develop a set of transferable practices (creative disruption ® linking ® imbrication) for addressing grand challenges; we find how marginal actors can engage in long-term and large-scale institutional work; and we show how impact and reach was achieved by constructing a dense network.

Thursday, December 6, 2018

Department Seminar Series - ROXANA BARBULESCU - HEC PARIS - Tuesday, January 22nd 2019

The Management Department
Department Seminar Series


Tuesday, January 22nd 2019
   Room LE CLUB  at 10:00  am

Theme:  “Outrunning the past? Prior employer status and job matching in the MBA labor market”

   Abstract: How external candidates are matched to jobs has important implications for job segregation and income inequality. Existing studies have found the status of prior affiliations to stratify opportunities in the labor market, meaning that individuals with past high status affiliations fare better in subsequent career outcomes. However, possibly because existing studies are limited to one industry, we currently ignore if alternative attainment routes may be open to job seekers who lack such high status affiliations. In this paper we seek to fill this gap by taking a view of job matching as a two-sided process comprised of sequential decisions by applicants and employers. While future employers may use candidates’ prior employer affiliations to evaluate candidates, candidates will also anticipate employers’ behaviors and consider their prior affiliations when evaluating their chances of success in different jobs. We test our hypotheses in the context of job searches of MBA students from a large international business school. Using longitudinal survey and archival data on three cohorts (836 individuals) and Fortune and Vault industry rankings of their prior employers (2586 distinct firms), we investigate the relative probabilities of individuals coming from higher- vs. lower-ranked backgrounds to apply to, get offer from, and accept offers in the main job domains in this setting. The results suggest the existence of alternative routes for attainment, such that lower-ranked job seekers recover some of their initial difference in income relative to the higher-ranked job seekers in their post-MBA jobs. Furthermore, we find that this stems from a final allocation of jobs across higher- vs. lower-ranked candidates that is driven primarily by the job seekers’ application decisions and only secondarily by employers’ offers decisions. Lower-ranked job seekers tend to move more across domains, such that they are disproportionately more likely to apply to – and sometimes even to receive offers in – positions in job domains different than their prior background, albeit with some important limitations. Our findings have implications for research on status and attainment, distribution of human capital resources among firms, and the conceptualization of relative status hierarchies in labor markets.

Wednesday, October 31, 2018

Department Seminar Series - FELIPE CSASZAR - UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN - Tuesday, November 13th 2018

The Management Department
Department Seminar Series

Tuesday, November 13th 2018

   Room LE CLUB  at 10:00  am

Theme“Organizing for Disruptive Innovation: Untangling the Cognitive and Structural Antecedents of Adoption and Implementation”

   Abstract: This paper studies how cognitive and structural antecedents affect adaptation to disruptive innovations.  We do so by analyzing how video game firms adapted to the introduction of the "free-to-play" business model around the period of disruption (2012-2015).  Our dataset (which contains 461 firms, collectively employing 83,157 individuals) allows us to characterize each firm's organizational structure and each employee's experience profile; it also captures the performance of firms along both S-curves (that is, firms that do and do not adopt the innovation).  We show that cognitive and structural antecedents affect adoption, implementation under the existing S-curve, and implementation under the new S-curve in different and often opposite ways.  We also point out conditions under which cognitive and structural antecedents can compensate for each other.  Overall, our study contributes to a better understanding of how firms should organize to face disruptive innovations.

Saturday, October 27, 2018

The Pan-Industrial Revolution: How New Manufacturing Titans Will Transform the World

J'ai trouvé ce nouvel ouvrage de Richard D'Aveni (auteur de Hypercompetition, 1994) particulièrement intéressant. Richard présente une analyse économique et stratégique d'un écosystème technologique construit autour des technologies additives, plus connues sous le nom d'imprimante 3D. Dans son analyse, il compare les approches traditionnelles de production des biens avec ces écosystèmes émergents autour des imprimantes 3D. Le titre de son ouvrage contient le mot "Révolution" et, en effet, il démontre que nous sommes très probablement au seuil d'une nouvelle révolution industrielle. Une combinaison d'économies de variété, d'échelle et d'intégration associée avec le phénomène de plateforme industrielle rend ce type écosystème particulièrement compétitif. J'ai été particulièrement surpris par les déjà très nombreuses adoptions de ces technologies par de grandes entreprises industrielles.

Monday, October 15, 2018

Department Seminar Series - SARAH KAPLAN - University of toronto

The Management Department
Department Seminar Series
University of toronto

 Tuesday, October 23rd 2018

   Room LE CLUB  at 10:00  am


  Abstract: Increasing attention – both in the scholarly literature and in the world of policy makers and practitioners – is being paid to the challenges facing female entrepreneurs. What was once assumed to be a merit-based system for encouraging and rewarding entrepreneurs is now understood to operate in gendered ways that in many cases disadvantage female founders. These effects occur across the entire pipeline, beginning with the dearth of women seeking to start high growth companies, to the lack of funding opportunities and mentorship. There are substantial differences in the number of startups led by women, their levels of relevant experience and the amount of funding – both debt and equity – they seek and receive. Some have argued that women tend to found lower potential startups. Yet, even controlling for quality, we see many implicit biases in how female founders are treated. One important approach to redressing inequalities might be through the use of accelerators. Entrepreneurship accelerators are proliferating in both developed and developing economies as different cities, regions and sectors seek to increase economic growth and employment. Accelerators are designed to give a boost to startups by providing in a concentrated way the mentorship, networks, training and financing required to be successful. The presence of accelerators could have the potential to solve some of the challenges female entrepreneurs face, however preliminary evidence suggests that they, for the most part, seem to be perpetuating the gendered dynamics that exist in the entrepreneurial system. On the other hand, there is no systematic research on how accelerators do or might address the gendered dynamics of entrepreneurship. Because accelerators are seen as such an important policy tool for increasing entrepreneurial success, it is imperative that we develop and analyze systematic data on accelerators and their effects, particularly on female founders. In this study, we will draw on what is known to date on female entrepreneurs and more broadly on the research on gender in organizations and the economy to understand the dynamics of acceleration in entrepreneurship. Using a longitudinal database of over 3,000 ventures in nearly 50 accelerators, we trace the effects of selection into the accelerator and the acceleration process on outcomes for women-only, women-led, and male-only venture teams. We couple survey data with interviews of accelerators to understand whether and when acceleration can be a tool for mitigating gender bias in female entrepreneurship.