This article assesses the role of hybrid organizational forms in the coevolution of institutions and organizations. The hybrids the authors study combined elements of one basic plan with another; they developed because blending mechanisms between organizational forms were stronger than segregating mechanisms. The existence of hybrids allowed elements of one theory of thrift, embodied in one organizational form, to be slowly dismantled and elements of a new theory, embodied in a different organizational form, to be established gradually rather than abruptly. Thus, the presence of hybrid forms in this organizational population affected both the mode and pace of organizational and institutional coevolution.
Bodfish, H. M. (Ed.). (1931). History of building and loan in the United States. Chicago: U.S. Building and Loan League.
2.
California Commission of Building and Loan. (1890-1929). Report of the Commissioner of Building and Loan. Sacramento: Government of California.
3.
Carroll, G. (1985). Concentration and specialization: Dynamics of niche width in populations of organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 90, 1262-1283.
4.
Clark, H., & Chase, F. (1925). Elements of modern building and loan associations. New York: Macmillan.
5.
Dexter, S. (1889). A treatise on co-operative savings and loan associations. New York: D. Appleton and Company.
6.
DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147-160.
7.
Hamilton, G., & Biggart, N. (1988). Market, culture, and authority: A comparative analysis of management and organization in the Far East. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S52-S94.
8.
Hannan, M., & Freeman, J. (1989). Organizational ecology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
9.
Haveman, H. (1992). Between a rock and a hard place. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 48-75.
10.
Haveman, H., & Rao, H. (1997). Structuring a theory of moral sentiments: Institutional and organizational coevolution in the early thrift industry. American Journal of Sociology, 102, 1606-1651.
11.
Kendall, L. (1965). The savings and loan business. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
12.
March, J. (1981). Footnotes to organizational change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 563-577.
13.
Myers, R. H. (1921). The California guarantee stock plan. American Building Association News, 41, 552-555.
14.
Pfeffer, J., & Nowak, P. (1976). Joint ventures and interorganizational interdependence. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 398-418.
15.
Podolny, J., & Page, K. (1998). Network forms of organizations. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 57-76.
16.
Rasmusen, E. (1988). Mutual banks and stock banks. Journal of Law and Economics, 31, 395-421.
17.
Sørensen, J. (1999). The ecology of organizational demography. Industrial and Corporation Change, 8, 713-744.
18.
Stark, D. (1996). Recombinant property in Eastern European capitalism. American Journal of Sociology, 101, 993-1027.
19.
Teck, A. (1968). Mutual savings banks and savings and loan associations: Aspects of growth. New York: Columbia University Press.
20.
Usher, J., & Evans, M. (1996). Life and death along gasoline alley: Darwinian and Lamarckian processes in a differentiating population. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1428-1466.
21.
Westney, E. (1987). Imitation and innovation: The transfer of Western organizational patterns to Meiji Japan. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
22.
White, H. (1981). Where do markets come from?American Journal of Sociology, 87, 517-547.
23.
Winters, A. (1890, February 1). National building associations. Cooperative News, pp. 6-7.
24.
Wrigley, E. (1873). How to manage building associations. Philadelphia: James K. Simon.
