Strategic change initiatives disrupt established categories of stakeholder understanding and typically present a problem of justifying and legitimizing the change to stakeholders in order to gain their buy-in and support. While it has been suggested that the analogical or metaphorical framing of strategic changes is crucial in that it fosters understanding and creates legitimacy for the change, we set out to specify the conditions and uses of analogical and metaphorical framing in effecting support for strategic changes. Specifically, we argue that (a) analogies are more effective in the context of additive changes, whereas metaphors are more apt for substitutive changes, and that (b) relational analogies and metaphors are generally more effective in securing support for strategic changes, as opposed to analogies or metaphors that highlight common attributes. We also argue that the overall effectiveness of analogies and metaphors in the framing of a change is furthermore dependent on (c) the degree to which these frames are culturally familiar to stakeholders and (d) the extent to which they connect with the prior motivations of stakeholders.
AlbertS (1992) The algebra of change. Research in Organizational Behavior, 14, 179–229.
2.
BatesonG (1955/1972) Steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Ballantine.
3.
BergerPLLuckmannT (1967) The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Garden City, NY: Doubleday Anchor.
4.
BoltanskiLThévenotL (2006) On justification: Economies of worth. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
5.
BrummansBHJMPutnamLLGrayBHankeRLewickiRJWiethoffC (2008) Making sense of intractable multiparty conflict: A study of framing in four environmental disputes. Communication Monographs, 75, 25–51.
6.
ChiappeDKennedyJMChiappeP (2003) Aptness is more important than comprehensibility in preference for metaphors and similes. Poetics, 31, 51–68.
7.
CorleyKGGioiaDA (2004) Identity ambiguity and change in the wake of a corporate spin-off. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49, 173–208.
8.
CornelissenJP (2005) Beyond compare: Metaphor in organization theory. Academy of Management Review, 30, 751–764.
9.
CornelissenJP (2011) Sensemaking under pressure: The Influence of professional roles and social accountability on the creation of sense. Organization Science. DOI: 10.1287/orsc.1100.064010.1287/orsc.1100.0640.
10.
CornelissenJPClarkeJS (2010) Imagining and rationalizing opportunities: Inductive reasoning, and the creation and justification of new ventures. Academy of Management Review, 35, 539–557.
11.
CoulsonS (2001) Semantic leaps: Frame-shifting and conceptual blending in meaning construction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
12.
CreedWELangstraatJAScullyMA (2002) A picture of the frame: Frame analysis as technique and as politics. Organizational Research Methods, 5, 34–55.
13.
D’AunnoTSucciMAlexanderJA (2000) The role of institutional and market forces in divergent organizational change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 679–703.
14.
DiMaggioPPowellWW (1983) The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160.
15.
DouglasM (1986) How institutions think. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.
16.
DurandRRaoHMoninP (2007) Code and conduct in French cuisine: Impact of code changes on external evaluations. Strategic Management Journal, 28, 455–472.
17.
DuttonJEAshfordSJ (1993) Selling issues to top management. Academy of Management Review, 18, 397–428.
18.
EntmanRM (1993) Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58.
19.
EtzionDFerraroF (2010) The role of analogy in the institutionalization of sustainability reporting. Organization Science, 21, 1092–1107.
FauconnierGTurnerM (2002) The way we think. New York: Basic Books.
22.
FillmoreCJ (1975) An alternative to checklist theories of meaning. Berkeley Linguistics Society, 1, 123–131.
23.
FillmoreCJ (1982) Frame semantics. In: Linguistic Society of Korea (Ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm (pp. 111–137). Seoul: Hanshin.
24.
FissPCZajacEJ (2006) The symbolic management of strategic change: Sensegiving via framing and decoupling. Academy of Management Jounal, 49, 1173–1193.
25.
Fox-WolfgrammSJBoalKBHuntJG (1998) Organizational adaptation to institutional change: A comparative study of first-order change in prospector and defender banks. Administrative Science Quarterly43: 87–126.
26.
GavettiG (2011) Toward a behavioral theory of strategy. Organization Science. DOI: 10.1287/orsc.1110.064410.1287/orsc.1110.0644.
27.
GavettiGLevinthalDRivkinJ (2005) Strategy-making in novel and complex worlds: The power of analogy. Strategic Management Journal, 26, 691–712.
28.
GentnerD (1983) Structure mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155–170.
29.
GentnerDBowdleBWolffPBoronatC (2001) Metaphor is like analogy. In: GentnerDHolyoakKJKokinovBN (Eds.), The analogical mind: Perspectives from cognitive science (pp. 199–253). Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
30.
GioiaDA (1986) Symbols, scripts, and sensemaking: Creating meaning in the organizational experience. In: SimsHPJGioiaDA (Eds.), The thinking organization (pp. 49–74). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
31.
GioiaDAChittipeddiK (1991) Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 433–459.
32.
GioiaDAThomasJBClarkSMChittipeddiK (1994) Symbolism and strategic change in academia: The dynamics of sensemaking and influence. Organization Science, 5, 363–383.
33.
GlucksbergSMcGloneMSManfrediD (1997) Property attribution in metaphor comprehension. Journal of Memory & Language, 36, 50–67.
34.
GoffmanE (1974) Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Boston, MA: North Eastern University Press.
35.
GoffmanE (1981) Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
36.
GomezMBoutyI (2009) Unpacking knowing integration: A practice-based study in haute-cuisine. Document de Recherche, ESSEC. ISSN: 1291-9616.
37.
GreenS (2004) A rhetorical theory of diffusion. Academy of Management Review, 29, 653–669.
38.
GreenbergDN (1995) Blue versus gray: A metaphor constraining sensemaking around a restructuring. Group & Organization Management, 20, 183–209.
39.
GreenwoodRHiningsCR (1996) Understanding radical organizational change: Bringing together the old and the new institutionalism. Academy of Management Review, 21, 1022–1054.
40.
HannanMTFreemanJ (1989) Organizational ecology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
41.
HargadonAd DouglasY (2001) When innovations meet institutions: Edison and the design of the electric light. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, 476–501.
42.
HuyQN (2001) Time, temporal capability and planned change. Academy of Management Review, 26, 601–623.
43.
KahnemanDTverskyA (1979) Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263–291.
44.
KaplanS (2008) Framing contests: Strategy making under uncertainty. Organization Science, 19, 729–752.
45.
KraatzMSZajacEJ (1996) Exploring the limits of the new institutionalism: The causes and consequences of illegitimate organizational change. American Sociological Review, 61, 812–836.
46.
KelloggKC (2009) Operating room: Relational spaces and micro-institutional change in surgery. American Journal of Sociology, 115, 657–711.
47.
LakoffG (1987) Women, fire, and dangerous things. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
48.
LakoffGeorge (1993) The contemporary theory of metaphor. In: OrtonyAndrew (Ed.), Metaphor and thought, 2nd edition (pp. 202–251). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
49.
LakoffGJohnsonM (1980) Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
50.
LakoffGJohnsonM (1999) Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. New York: Basic Books.
51.
LandauMJMeierBPKeeferLA (2010) A metaphor-enriched social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 1045–1067.
52.
LandauMJSullivanDGreenbergJ (2009) Evidence that self-relevant motives and metaphoric framing interact to influence political and social attitudes. Psychological Science, 20, 1421–1427.
53.
LounsburyMGlynnMA (2001) Cultural entrepreneurship: Stories, legitimacy, and the acquisition of resources. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 545–564.
54.
MaitlisSLawrenceT (2007) Triggers and enablers of sensegiving in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 57–84.
55.
MinskyM (1975) A framework for representing knowledge. In: WinstonP. H. (Ed.), The psychology of computer vision (pp. 211–277). New York: McGraw-Hill.
56.
MitchellRKAgleBRWoodDJ (1997) Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the Principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22, 853–886.
57.
MorrisMSheldonOAmesDYoungM (2007) Metaphors and the market: Consequences and preconditions of agent and object metaphors in stock market commentary. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 102, 174–192.
OliverC (1991) Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16, 145–179.
60.
OliverPEJohnstonH (2000) What a good idea! Frame and ideology in social movement research. Mobilization, 5, 37–54.
61.
PatriottaGGondJ-PSchultzF (2011) Maintaining legitimacy: Controversies, orders of worth and public justifications. Journal of Management Studies. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00990.x10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00990.x.
62.
RaoHMoninPDurandR (2003) Institutional change in de Toqueville: Nouvelle cuisine as an identity movement in French gastronomy. American Journal of Sociology, 108, 795–843.
63.
ReddyMJ (1979) The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language. In: OrtonyA (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 284–297). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
64.
RindovaVPBecerraMContardoI (2004) Enacting competitive wars: Competitive activity, language games, and market consequences. Academy of Management Review, 29, 670–686.
65.
SnowDBenfordRD (1988) Ideology, frame resonance, and participant mobilization. International Social Movement Research, 1, 197–217.
66.
SonensheinS (2006) Crafting social issues at work. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 1158–1172.
67.
SonensheinS (2010) We’re changing or are we? Untangling the role of progressive, regressive and stability narratives during strategic change implementation. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 477–512.
68.
SteinbergMW (1998) Tilting the frame: Considerations on collective action framing from a discursive turn. Theory and Society, 27, 845-872.
69.
SteinbergMW (1999) The talk and back talk of collective action: A dialogic analysis of repertoires of discourse among nineteenth-century English cotton spinners. American Journal of Sociology, 105, 736–780.
70.
SuchmanMC (1995) Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20, 571–611.
71.
SuddabyR (2010) Challenges for institutional theory. Journal of Management Inquiry, 19, 14–20.
SwidlerA (1986) Culture in action: Symbols and strategies. American Sociological Review, 51, 273–286.
74.
TannenD (1979) What’s in a frame? Surface evidence for underlying expectations. In: FreedleRO (Ed.), New directions in discourse processing (pp. 137–181). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
75.
TsoukasH (1993) Analogical reasoning and knowledge generation in organization theory. Organization Studies, 14, 323–346.
76.
TurnerM (2001) Cognitive dimensions of social science: The way we think about politics, economics, law, and society. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
77.
WeberKGlynnMA (2006) Making sense with institutions: Context, thought and action in Karl Weick’s theory. Organization Studies, 27, 1639–1660.
78.
WeberKHeinzeKLDeSouceyM (2008) Forage for thought: Mobilizing codes in the movement for grass-fed meat and dairy products. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53, 529–567.
79.
WeickKE (1995) Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
80.
WeickKESutcliffeKMObstfeldD (2005) Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16, 409–421.
81.
ZajacEJWestphalJD (1995) Accounting for the explanations of CEO compensation: Substance and symbolism. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 283–308.
82.
ZilberTB (2002) Institutionalization as an interplay between actions, meanings and actors: The case of a rape crisis center in Israel. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 234–254.
