Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Influence of Interorganizational Collaboration on Logic Conciliation and Tensions Within Hybrid Organizations: Insights from Social Enterprise–Corporate Collaborations

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

An increasing amount of research has examined the management of competing logics, and possible tensions arising between them, within “hybrid organizations.” However, the ways in which the relationships of hybrids with other organizations shape the conciliation of these logics and tensions have received limited attention so far. In this theoretical paper, we examine how hybrid organizations deal with interorganizational collaboration, in particular whether and how their hybridity can be maintained when they partner with “dominant-logic organizations.” Drawing on empirical literature on social enterprise–corporate collaborations, we develop a framework and several propositions on how competing logics and their balancing within hybrid organizations may be affected by interactions with organizations underpinned by one dominant logic. We suggest that influences will mostly depend on the type of collaboration pursued. A collaboration based on a lower level of engagement and interaction between the two partners is likely to give precedence to one logic over the other, reducing inter-logic tensions but possibly compromising organizational hybridity. By contrast, a collaboration featuring numerous interactions and mission compatibility may facilitate sustained hybridity if tensions are acknowledged and managed. Our propositions contribute to the literatures on hybrid organizations, interorganizational collaboration, and social enterprise.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Almandoz, J. (2014). Founding teams as carriers of competing logics: When institutional forces predict banks’ risk exposure. Administrative Science Quarterly, 59(3), 442–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • André, K., & Pache, A.-C. (2016). From caring entrepreneur to caring enterprise: Addressing the ethical challenges of scaling up social enterprises. Journal of Business Ethics, 133(4), 659–675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arya, B., & Salk, J. E. (2006). Cross-sector alliance learning and effectiveness of voluntary codes of corporate social responsibility. Business Ethics Quarterly, 16(2), 211–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashforth, B. E., & Reingen, P. H. (2014). Functions of dysfunction: Managing the dynamics of an organizational duality in a natural food cooperative. Administrative Science Quarterly, 59(3), 474–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Austin, J. E. (2000). Strategic collaboration between nonprofits and businesses. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 29(1), 69–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Austin, J., Leonard, H. B., Reficco, E., & Wei-Skillern, J. (2006). Social entrepreneurship: it is for corporations, too. In A. Nicholls (Ed.), Social entrepreneurship. New models of sustainable social change (pp. 169–204). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin, J. E., & Seitanidi, M. M. (2012). Collaborative value creation: A review of partnering between nonprofits and businesses: Part I. Value creation spectrum and collaboration stages. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41(5), 726–758.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barinaga, E. (2018). Coopted! mission drift in a social venture engaged in a cross-sectoral partnership. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations., 31, 437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Battilana, J., & Dorado, S. (2010). Building sustainable hybrid organizations: The case of commercial microfinance organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 53(6), 1419–1440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Battilana, J., & Lee, M. (2014). Advancing research on hybrid organizing: Insights from the study of social enterprises. The Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 397–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Battilana, J., Sengul, M., Pache, A.-C., & Model, J. (2015). Harnessing productive tensions in hybrid organizations: The case of work integration social enterprises. Academy of Management Journal, 58(6), 1658–1685.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger, I. E., Cunningham, P. H., & Drumwright, M. E. (2004). Social alliances: Company/nonprofit collaboration. California Management Review, 47(1), 58–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergman, B. (2017). Agents of change? An inter-organizational research agenda on hybrid new ventures. In A. C. Corbett & J. A. Katz (Eds.), Hybrid ventures (pp. 219–232). New York: Emerald.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Besharov, M. L., & Smith, W. K. (2014). Multiple institutional logics in organizations: Explaining their varied nature and implications. Academy of Management Review, 39(3), 364–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bezençon, V., & Blili, S. (2009). Fair trade managerial practices: Strategy, organisation and engagement. Journal of Business Ethics, 90(1), 95–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blundel, R. K., & Lyon, F. (2014). Towards a ‘long view’: Historical perspectives on the scaling and replication of social ventures. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 6(1), 80–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bode, I., Gardin, L., & Nyssens, M. (2011). Quasi-marketization in domiciliary care: Varied patterns, similar problems? International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 31(3), 225–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borys, B., & Jemison, D. B. (1989). Hybrid arrangements as strategic alliances: Theoretical issues in organizational combinations. Academy of Management Review, 14(2), 234–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandsen, T., van de Donk, W., & Putters, K. (2005). Griffins or chameleons? Hybridity as a permanent and inevitable characteristic of the third sector. International Journal of Public Administration, 28(9–10), 749–765.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Stone, M. M. (2006). The design and implementation of cross-sector collaborations: Propositions from the literature. Public Administration Review, 66, 44–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Child, J., & Faulkner, D. (1998). Strategies of co-operation. Managing alliances, networks, and joint ventures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, A., & Crane, A. (2018). Cross-sector partnerships for systemic change: Systematized literature review and agenda for further research. Journal of Business Ethics, 150(1), 303–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornforth, C. (2014). Understanding and combating mission drift in social enterprises. Social Enterprise Journal, 1, 3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crucke, S., & Knockaert, M. (2016). When stakeholder representation leads to faultlines. A study of board service performance in social enterprises. Journal of Management Studies, 53(5), 768–793.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dart, R. (2004). The legitimacy of social enterprise. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 14(4), 411–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, I. A., & Doherty, B. (2019). Balancing a hybrid business model: The search for equilibrium at cafédirect. Journal of Business Ethics, 157(4), 1043–1066.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Defourny, J., & Nyssens, M. (2008). Social enterprise in europe: Recent trends and developments. EMES Working Paper 08(01).

  • Dentoni, D., Bitzer, V., & Pascucci, S. (2016). Cross-sector partnerships and the co-creation of dynamic capabilities for stakeholder orientation. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(1), 35–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Di Domenico, M., Tracey, P., & Haugh, H. (2009). The dialectic of social exchange: Theorizing corporate-social enterprise collaboration. Organization Studies, 30(8), 887–907.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doherty, B., Haugh, H., & Lyon, F. (2014). Social enterprises as hybrid organizations. A review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 16(4), 417–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dufays, F., & Huybrechts, B. (2016). Where do hybrids come from? Entrepreneurial team heterogeneity as an avenue for the emergence of hybrid organizations. International Small Business Journal, 34(6), 777–796.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebrahim, A., Battilana, J., & Mair, J. (2014). The governance of social enterprises: Mission drift and accountability challenges in hybrid organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 34, 81–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Everett, J., & Jamal, T. B. (2004). Multistakeholder collaboration as symbolic marketplace and pedagogic practice. Journal of Management Inquiry, 13(1), 57–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillett, A., Loader, K., Doherty, B., & Scott, J. M. (2018). An examination of tensions in a hybrid collaboration: A longitudinal study of an empty homes project. Journal of Business Ethics., 157(4), 949–967.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grimes, M., Williams, T. A., & Zhao, E. Y. (2019). Anchors aweigh: The sources, variety, and challenges of mission drift. Academy of Management Review, 44(4), 819–845.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutiérrez, R., Márquez, P., & Reficco, E. (2016). Configuration and development of alliance portfolios: A comparison of same-sector and cross-sector partnerships. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(1), 55–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hermes, N., Lensink, R., & Meesters, A. (2011). Outreach and efficiency of microfinance institutions. World Development, 39(6), 938–948.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard, J., & Taylor, M. (2010). Hybridity in partnership working: managing tensions and opportunities. In D. Billis (Ed.), Hybrid organizations and the third sector (pp. 175–196). New York: Palgrave MacMillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hudon, M., & Sandberg, J. (2013). The ethical crisis in microfinance. Business Ethics Quarterly, 23(4), 561–589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huybrechts, B., & Haugh, H. (2018). The roles of networks in institutionalizing new hybrid organizational forms: Insights from the European renewable energy cooperative network. Organization Studies, 39(8), 1085–1108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huybrechts, B., & Nicholls, A. (2013). The role of legitimacy in social enterprise-corporate collaboration. Social Enterprise Journal, 9(2), 130–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huybrechts, B., Nicholls, A., & Edinger, K. (2017). Sacred alliance or pact with the devil? How and why social enterprises collaborate with mainstream businesses in the fair trade sector. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 29(7–8), 586–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jay, J. (2013). Navigating paradox as a mechanism of change and innovation in hybrid organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 56(1), 137–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, K., & van Dissel, H. G. (1996). Sustainable collaboration: Managing conflict and cooperation in interorganizational systems. MIS Quarterly, 20(3), 279–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laville, J.-L., Lemaître, A., & Nyssens, M. (2006). Public policies and social enterprises in Europe: the challenge of institutionalization. In M. Nyssens (Ed.), Social enterprise: At the crossroads of market, public policies and civil society. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, T. B., Hardy, C., & Phillips, N. (2002). Institutional effects of interorganizational collaboration: The emergence of proto-institutions. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 281–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Le Ber, M., & Branzei, O. (2010a). (Re)Forming strategic cross-sector partnerships relational processes of social innovation. Business & Society, 49(1), 140–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le Ber, M., & Branzei, O. (2010b). Towards a critical theory of value creation in cross-sector partnerships. Organization, 17(5), 599–629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le Ber, M., & Branzei, O. (2010c). Value frame fusion in cross sector interactions. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(1), 163–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le Pennec, M., & Raufflet, E. (2018). Value creation in inter-organizational collaboration: An empirical study. Journal of Business Ethics, 148(4), 817–834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M., & Battilana, J. (2013). How the zebra got its stripes: Imprinting of individuals and hybrid social ventures. Harvard Business School Organizational Behavior Unit Working Paper 14(5).

  • Litrico, J.-B., & Besharov, M. L. (2019). Unpacking variation in hybrid organizational forms: Changing models of social enterprise among nonprofits, 2000–2013. Journal of Business Ethics, 159(2), 343–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mair, J., Mayer, J., & Lutz, E. (2015). Navigating institutional plurality: Organizational governance in hybrid organizations. Organization Studies, 36(6), 713–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason, C., & Doherty, B. (2016). A fair trade-off? Paradoxes in the governance of fair-trade social enterprises. Journal of Business Ethics, 136(3), 451–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMullen, J. S. (2018). Organizational hybrids as biological hybrids: Insights for research on the relationship between social enterprise and the entrepreneurial ecosystem. Journal of Business Venturing, 33(5), 575–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMullin, C., & Skelcher, C. (2018). The impact of societal-level institutional logics on hybridity: Evidence from nonprofit organizations in England and France. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 29(5), 911–924.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mongelli, L., Rullani, F., Ramus, T., & Rimac, T. (2019). The bright side of hybridity: Exploring how social enterprises manage and leverage their hybrid nature. Journal of Business Ethics, 159(2), 301–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, M., Arenas, D., & Batista, J. M. (2015). Value creation in cross-sector collaborations: The roles of experience and alignment. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(1), 145–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls, A., & Huybrechts, B. (2016). Sustaining inter-organizational relationships across institutional logics and power asymmetries: The case of fair trade. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(4), 699–714.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Regan, K. M., & Oster, S. M. (2000). Nonprofit and for-profit partnerships: Rationale and challenges of cross-sector contracting. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 29(1), 120–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ometto, M. P., Gegenhuber, T., Winter, J., & Greenwood, R. (2019). From balancing missions to mission drift: The role of the institutional context, spaces, and compartmentalization in the scaling of social enterprises. Business & Society, 58(5), 1003–1046.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pache, A.-C., & Santos, F. (2010). When worlds collide: The internal dynamics of organizational responses to conflicting institutional demands. Academy of Management Review, 35(3), 455–476.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pache, A.-C., & Santos, F. (2013). Inside the hybrid organization: Selective coupling as a response to conflicting institutional logics. Academy of Management Journal, 56(4), 972–1001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramus, T., & Vaccaro, A. (2017). Stakeholders matter: How social enterprises address mission drift. Journal of Business Ethics, 143(2), 307–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramus, T., Vaccaro, A., & Brusoni, S. (2017). Institutional complexity in turbulent times: Formalization, collaboration, and the emergence of blended logics. Academy of Management Journal, 60(4), 1253–1284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raynolds, L. T. (2009). Mainstreaming fair trade coffee: From partnership to traceability. World Development, 37(6), 1083–1093.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seitanidi, M. M., & Crane, A. (2009). Implementing CSR through partnerships: Understanding the selection, design and institutionalisation of nonprofit-business partnerships. Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 413–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selsky, J. W., & Parker, B. (2005). Cross-sector partnerships to address social issues: Challenges to theory and practice. Journal of Management, 31(6), 849–873.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, D. A., Williams, T. A., & Zhao, E. Y. (2019). A framework for exploring the degree of hybridity in social entrepreneurship. Academy of Management Perspectives, 33(4), 491–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skelcher, C., & Smith, S. R. (2015). Theorizing hybridity: Institutional logics, complex organizations, and actor identities: The case of nonprofits. Public Administration, 93(2), 433–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, W. K., & Besharov, M. L. (2019). Bowing before dual gods: How structured flexibility sustains organizational hybridity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 64(1), 1–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, W. K., Gonin, M., & Besharov, M. L. (2013). Managing social-business tensions: A review and research agenda for social enterprise. Business Ethics Quarterly, 23(3), 407–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381–403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stadtler, L. (2018). Tightrope walking: Navigating competition in multi-company cross-sector social partnerships. Journal of Business Ethics, 148(2), 329–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornton, P. H., & Ocasio, W. (1999). Institutional logics and the historical contingency of power in organizations: Executive succession in the higher education publishing industry, 1958–1990. The American Journal of Sociology, 105(3), 801–843.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tracey, P., Phillips, N., & Haugh, H. (2005). Beyond philanthropy: Community enterprise as a basis for corporate citizenship. Journal of Business Ethics, 58(4), 327–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Hille, I., de Bakker, F. G. A., Ferguson, J. E., & Groenewegen, P. (2019). Navigating tensions in a cross-sector social partnership: How a convener drives change for sustainability. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(2), 317–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Tulder, R., Seitanidi, M. M., Crane, A., & Brammer, S. (2016). Enhancing the impact of cross-sector partnerships: Four impact loops for channeling partnership studies. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vickers, I., Lyon, F., Sepulveda, L., & McMullin, C. (2017). Public service innovation and multiple institutional logics: The case of hybrid social enterprise providers of health and wellbeing. Research Policy, 46(10), 1755–1768.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vurro, C., Dacin, T., & Perrini, F. (2010). Institutional antecedents of partnering for social change: How institutional logics shape cross-sector social partnerships. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(1), 39–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weidner, K., Weber, C., & Göbel, M. (2019). You scratch my back and I scratch yours: Investigating inter-partner legitimacy in relationships between social enterprises and their key partners. Business & Society, 58(3), 493–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wry, T., & York, J. G. (2017). An identity-based approach to social enterprise. Academy of Management Review, 42(3), 437–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CEB - CERMi, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium

    Claudia Savarese & Marek Hudon

  2. HEC Liège, Ecole de Gestion de l′Université de Liège, Liège, Belgium

    Claudia Savarese & Benjamin Huybrechts

  3. Entrepreneurship & Innovation Research Centre, Emlyon Business School, Ecully, France

    Benjamin Huybrechts

Authors
  1. Claudia Savarese
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Benjamin Huybrechts
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marek Hudon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Claudia Savarese or Marek Hudon.

Ethics declarations

Research Involving Human and Animal Rights

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Savarese, C., Huybrechts, B. & Hudon, M. The Influence of Interorganizational Collaboration on Logic Conciliation and Tensions Within Hybrid Organizations: Insights from Social Enterprise–Corporate Collaborations. J Bus Ethics 173, 709–721 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04557-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04557-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation