Drawing on literature about isomorphism within institutional fields, this study investigates the dynamics of institutional fields in their nascent and growth stages, focusing on legitimacy differences between central and non-central field positions. Specifically, in the context of a global digital field, we analyze how the cross-border legitimacy gap between a leader country (central position) and a follower country (non-central position) influences the digital renaming strategies of firms in the follower country, as well as audience reactions. In the nascent stage, where field uncertainty is high, this legitimacy difference intensifies uncertainty in the follower country, discouraging firms from adopting digital names. In contrast, during the growth stage, as uncertainty about the future of the digital field lessens, the legitimacy difference offers an opportunity for arbitrage, motivating firms to embrace digital renaming. This renaming strategy attracts greater investment from institutional investors in the growth stage compared to the nascent stage. Our empirical analysis, based on the digital renaming of publicly listed Chinese firms from 2012 to 2018, supports these findings. This study advances the field isomorphism literature by highlighting the impact of legitimacy differences between field positions and the distinctive features of the growth stage.
AggarwalReenaKlapperLeoraWysockiPeter D. (2005). Portfolio preferences of foreign institutional investors. Journal of Banking & Finance, 29, 2919–2946.
2.
BartlettChristopher A.GhoshalSumantra (2000). Going global: Lessons from late movers. Harvard Business Review, 78(2), 132–142.
3.
BasultoDominic (2015). Can China’s Xiaomi challenge Apple as the smartphone innovation leader?Washington Post, 2January2015.
4.
BellR. GregFilatotchevIgorRasheedAbdul A. (2012). The liability of foreignness in capital markets: Sources and remedies. Journal of International Business Studies, 43, 107–122.
5.
Ben-RephaelAziDaZhiIsraelsenRyan D. (2017). It depends on where you search: Institutional investor attention and underreaction to news. Review of Financial Studies, 30, 3009–3047.
6.
BeunzaDanielHardieIainMacKenzieDonald (2006). A price is a social thing: Towards a material sociology of arbitrage. Organization Studies, 27, 721–745.
7.
Bjork-JamesCarwil (2020). Unarmed militancy: Tactical victories, subjectivity, and legitimacy in Bolivian street protest. American Anthropologist, 122, 514–527.
8.
BoddewynJ. (1967). The names of U.S. industrial corporations: A study in change. Names, 15, 39–52.
9.
BrandtnerChristofPowellWalter W.HorvathAaron (2024). From iron cage to glass house: Repurposing of bureaucratic management and the turn to openness. Organization Studies, 45, 193–221.
10.
ChengJoseph L. C.KesnerIdalene F. (1997). Organizational slack and response to environmental shifts: The impact of resource allocation patterns. Journal of Management, 23, 1–18.
11.
ChiTailanLiJingTrigeorgisLenos G.TsekrekosAndrianos E. (2019). Real options theory in international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 50, 525–553.
12.
CloughertyJoseph A.ZhangNan (2021). Foreign investor reactions to risk and uncertainty in antitrust: U.S. merger policy investigations and the deterrence of foreign acquirer presence. Journal of International Business Studies, 52, 454–478.
13.
CohenJacob (2013). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York, NY: Routledge.
14.
ConnellyBrian L.HaynesKatalin TakacsTihanyiLaszloGamacheDaniel L.DeversCynthia E. (2016). Minding the gap: Antecedents and consequences of top management-to-worker pay dispersion. Journal of Management, 42, 862–885.
15.
CooperMichael J.DimitrovOrlinRauP. Raghavendra (2001). A rose. com by any other name. Journal of Finance, 56, 2371–2388.
16.
CooperMichael J.GulenHuseyinRauP. Raghavendra (2005). Changing names with style: Mutual fund name changes and their effects on fund flows. Journal of Finance, 60, 2825–2858.
17.
CovrigVicentiuLauSie TingNgLilian (2006). Do domestic and foreign fund managers have similar preferences for stock characteristics? A cross-country analysis. Journal of International Business Studies, 37, 407–429.
18.
DaZhiEngelbergJosephGaoPengjie (2011). In search of attention. Journal of Finance, 66, 1461–1499.
19.
DeephouseDavid L. (1996). Does isomorphism legitimate?Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1024–1039.
20.
DiMaggioPaul J.PowellWalter W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160.
21.
ErramilliM. KrishnaAgarwalSanjeevKimSeong-Soo (1997). Are firm-specific advantages location-specific too?Journal of International Business Studies, 28, 735–757.
22.
FissPeer C.ZajacEdward J. (2004). The diffusion of ideas over contested terrain: The (non) adoption of a shareholder value orientation among German firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49, 501–534.
23.
FungHung-GayYauJotZhangGaiyan (2011). Reported trade figure discrepancy, regulatory arbitrage, and round-tripping: Evidence from the China–Hong Kong trade data. Journal of International Business Studies, 42, 152–176.
24.
GaleAlastair (2023). China, U.S. test intelligent-drone swarms in race for military AI dominance. The Wall Street Journal, 19August2023.
25.
GanYingQiuBuhui (2019). Escape from the USA: Government debt-to-GDP ratio, country tax competitiveness, and US-OECD cross-border M&As. Journal of International Business Studies, 50, 1156–1183.
26.
GlynnMary AnnAbzugRikki (2002). Institutionalizing identity: Symbolic isomorphism and organizational names. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 267–280.
27.
GoodspeedTylerHassettKevin (2022). The 2017 tax reform delivered as promised. WSJ Opinion, 8May2022.
28.
GorbataiAndreeaDiounCyrusLashleyKisha (2021). Making space for emotions: Empathy, contagion, and legitimacy’s double-edged sword. Organization Science, 32, 42–63.
29.
GranqvistNinaGrodalStineWoolleyJennifer L. (2013). Hedging your bets: Explaining executives’ market labeling strategies in nanotechnology. Organization Science, 24, 395–413.
30.
GranqvistNinaRitvalaTiina (2016). Beyond prototypes: Drivers of market categorization in functional foods and nanotechnology. Journal of Management Studies, 53, 210–237.
31.
GreenwoodRoystonRaynardMiaKodeihFarahMicelottaEvelyn R.LounsburyMichael (2011). Institutional complexity and organizational responses. Academy of Management Annals, 5, 317–371.
32.
GreenwoodRoystonSuddabyRoy (2006). Institutional entrepreneurship in mature fields: The big five accounting firms. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 27–48.
33.
GrodalStine (2018). Field expansion and contraction: How communities shape social and symbolic boundaries. Administrative Science Quarterly, 63, 783–818.
34.
HannanMichael T.PólosLászlóCarrollGlenn R. (2012). Logics of organization theory: Audiences, codes, and ecologies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
35.
HeugensPursey P. M. A. R.LanderMichel W. (2009). Structure! Agency! (and other quarrels): A meta-analysis of institutional theories of organization. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 61–85.
36.
HoffmanAndrew J. (1999). Institutional evolution and change: Environmentalism and the US chemical industry. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 351–371.
37.
JacobDimitrySvystunovaLiudmylaRao-NicholsonRekha (2022). MNE post-entry institutional strategies in emerging markets: An organizational field position perspective. European Management Review, 19, 53–74.
38.
JohnsonCathrynDowdTimothy J.RidgewayCecilia L. (2006). Legitimacy as a social process. Annual Review of Sociology, 32, 53–78.
39.
JohnsonRichard A.SchnatterlyKarenJohnsonScott G.ChiuShih-Chi (2010). Institutional investors and institutional environment: A comparative analysis and review. Journal of Management Studies, 47, 1590–1613.
40.
KangJun-KooShivdasaniAnil (1995). Firm performance, corporate governance, and top executive turnover in Japan. Journal of Financial Economics, 38, 29–58.
41.
KennedyMark ThomasFissPeer Christian (2009). Institutionalization, framing, and diffusion: The logic of TQM adoption and implementation decisions among U.S. hospitals. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 897–918.
42.
LeblebiciHuseyinSalancikGerald R.CopayAnneKingTom (1991). Institutional change and the transformation of interorganizational fields: An organizational history of the U.S. radio broadcasting industry. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 333–363.
43.
LeeKeunLimChaisung (2001). Technological regimes, catching-up and leapfrogging: Findings from the Korean industries. Research Policy, 30, 459–483.
44.
LeePeggy M. (2001). What’s in a name.com? The effects of ‘. com’ name changes on stock prices and trading activity. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 793–804.
45.
LiJingXiaJunZajacEdward J. (2018). On the duality of political and economic stakeholder influence on firm innovation performance: Theory and evidence from Chinese firms. Strategic Management Journal, 39, 193–216.
46.
LiangHaoRenBingSunSunny Li (2015). An anatomy of state control in the globalization of state-owned enterprises. Journal of International Business Studies, 46, 223–240.
47.
LiuYunhanKimDohoon (2022). Why did Uber China fail in China? Lessons from business model analysis. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 8, 90.
48.
LongJ. ScottFreeseJeremy (2014). Regression models for categorical dependent variables using Stata (3rd edition). College Station, TX: Stata Press.
49.
LundholmRussellRahmanNafisRogoRafael (2018). The foreign investor bias and its linguistic origins. Management Science, 64, 4433–4450.
50.
LuoXiaowei RoseWangDanqingZhangJianjun (2017). Whose call to answer: Institutional complexity and firms’ CSR reporting. Academy of Management Journal, 60, 321–344.
51.
LuoYadongTungRosalie L. (2007). International expansion of emerging market enterprises: A springboard perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 38, 481–498.
52.
LuoYadongTungRosalie L. (2018). A general theory of springboard MNEs. Journal of International Business Studies, 49, 129–152.
53.
MaddenNormandy (2011). What will Facebook find if it ventures into China?AdAge, 13June2011.
54.
MarquisChristopherTilcsikAndrás (2016). Institutional equivalence: How industry and community peers influence corporate philanthropy. Organization Science, 27, 1325–1341.
55.
McDonaldRobertSiegelDaniel (1986). The value of waiting to invest. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 101, 707–727.
56.
McGeeRobert W.YuanXiaoli (2012). Corporate governance and the timeliness of financial reporting: A comparative study of the People’s Republic of China, the USA and the European Union. Journal of Asia Business Studies, 6, 5–16.
57.
MeltzerJoshua P. (2020). Cybersecurity, digital trade, and data flows: Re-thinking a role for international trade rules. Global Economy & Development WP, 132. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
58.
MiaoYuzheSongJaeyongLeeKeunJinChuyue (2018). Technological catch-up by east asian firms: Trends, issues, and future research agenda. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 35, 639–669.
59.
NaumovskaIvanaGabaVibhaGreveHenrich R. (2021). The diffusion of differences: A review and reorientation of 20 years of diffusion research. Academy of Management Annals, 15, 377–405.
60.
NavisChadGlynnMary Ann (2010). How new market categories emerge: Temporal dynamics of legitimacy, identity, and entrepreneurship in satellite radio, 1990–2005. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55, 439–471.
61.
NguyenHangCalantoneRogerKrishnanRanjani (2020). Influence of social media emotional word of mouth on institutional investors’ decisions and firm value. Management Science, 66, 887–910.
62.
OxleyJoanne E.YeungBernard (2001). E-commerce readiness: Institutional environment and international competitiveness. Journal of International Business Studies, 32, 705–723.
63.
PengMike W.AhlstromDavidCarraherShawn M.ShiWeilei (2017). An institution-based view of global IPR history. Journal of International Business Studies, 48, 893–907.
64.
RamalingegowdaSanthoshYuYong (2012). Institutional ownership and conservatism. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 53, 98–114.
65.
SandersWM. GerardTuschkeAnja (2007). The adoption of institutionally contested organizational practices: The emergence of stock option pay in Germany. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 33–56.
66.
SantosFilipe M.EisenhardtKathleen M. (2009). Constructing markets and shaping boundaries: Entrepreneurial power in nascent fields. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 643–671.
67.
SchaeferRichard J. (1995). National information infrastructure policy: A theoretical and normative approach. Internet Research, 5(2), 4–13.
68.
SchnatterlyKarenGangloffK. AshleyTuschkeAnja (2018). CEO wrongdoing: A review of pressure, opportunity, and rationalization. Journal of Management, 44, 2405–2432.
69.
SchnatterlyKarenJohnsonScott G. (2014). Independent boards and the institutional investors that prefer them: Drivers of institutional investor heterogeneity in governance preferences. Strategic Management Journal, 35, 1552–1563.
70.
SeoMyeong-GuCreedW. E. Douglas (2002). Institutional contradictions, praxis, and institutional change: A dialectical perspective. Academy of Management Review, 27, 222–247.
71.
ShanockLinda RhoadesBaranBenjamin E.GentryWilliam A.PattisonStacy CleverHeggestadEric D. (2010). Polynomial regression with response surface analysis: A powerful approach for examining moderation and overcoming limitations of difference scores. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 543–554.
72.
ShenXiaobai (2016). Alibaba: The company that made eBay a dwarf. The Business & Management Collection. https://doi.org/10.69645/UXTF6898
73.
ShipilovAndrew V.GreveHenrich R.RowleyTimothy J. (2010). When do interlocks matter? Institutional logics and the diffusion of multiple corporate governance practices. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 846–864.
74.
SturgeonTimothy J. (2021). Upgrading strategies for the digital economy. Global Strategy Journal, 11, 34–57.
75.
SuchmanMark C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20, 571–610.
76.
SwisherKara (2000). Dot-com bubble has burst; will things worsen in 2001?The Wall Street Journal, 18December2000.
77.
TanDavid (2016). Making the news: Heterogeneous media coverage and corporate litigation. Strategic Management Journal, 37, 1341–1353.
78.
TanDanchiMeyerKlaus E. (2011). Country-of-origin and industry FDI agglomeration of foreign investors in an emerging economy. Journal of International Business Studies, 42, 504–520.
TolbertPamela S.ZuckerLynne G. (1983). Institutional sources of change in the formal structure of organizations: The diffusion of civil service reform, 1880–1935. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, 22–39.
81.
TolbertPamela S.ZuckerLynne G. (1996). The institutionalization of institutional theory. London: Sage.
WeickKarl E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. London: Sage.
84.
WestphalJames D.GulatiRanjayShortellStephen M. (1997). Customization or conformity? An institutional and network perspective on the content and consequences of TQM adoption. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 366–394.
85.
XiaJunMaXufeiLuJane W.YiuDaphne W. (2014). Outward foreign direct investment by emerging market firms: A resource dependence logic. Strategic Management Journal, 35, 1343–1363.
86.
ZietsmaCharleneGroenewegenPeterLogueDanielle M.HiningsC. Robert (2017). Field or fields? Building the scaffolding for cumulation of research on institutional fields. Academy of Management Annals, 11, 391–450.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
