This article examines how a middle manager navigated tensions arising at the intersection of institutional translation and transformation. Drawing on a longitudinal real-time case study, this article explores how a middle manager of a newly created organizational unit managed a tension caused by stakeholder resistance. The study reveals that by shifting the audience’s sensemaking frame from structure to scale, the manager was able to facilitate organizational transformation. The findings reveal that, through the process of tactical sense giving, the manager was able to outgrow the power frame causing the tension and gained the acceptance from stakeholders. Through mechanisms of an altering sense-giving frame and renewed sense giving, the manager successfully navigated the tension and gained acceptance. With these insights, I contribute to the literature by offering a process model of tactical sense giving for middle managers to overcome the tension in the context of intersection of institutional translation and organizational transformation. Practically, the study provides actionable insights for change agents; when they encounter tensions arising from limiting frames, they should seek alternative frames that offer greater potential.
AljanovaN., ShaktiS., & BokebayevB. (2025). Leveraging the shift in the geocultural landscape towards internationalizing cultural entrepreneurship. FIIB Business Review. https://doi.org/10.1177.23197145251313833
2.
BalogunJ., & HaileyV. H. (2008). Exploring strategic change. Pearson Education.
3.
BalogunJ., & JohnsonG. (2004). Organizational restructuring and middle manager sensemaking. Academy of Management Journal, 47(4), 523–549.
4.
BambergerP. A. (2018). AMD: Clarifying what we are about and where we are going. Academy of Management Discoveries, 4(1), 1–10.
BettizaG., & DionigiF. (2015). How do religious norms diffuse? Institutional translation and international change in a post-secular world society. European Journal of International Relations, 21(3), 621–646.
7.
BurnesB. (2004). Managing change: A strategic approach to organisational dynamics. Pearson Education.
8.
ByR. T. (2005). Organisational change management: A critical review. Journal of Change Management, 5(4), 369–380.
9.
CarmineS., & SmithW. K. (2021). Organizational paradox. In GriffinR. W. (Ed.), Oxford bibliographies in management. Oxford University Press.
10.
ChangH. (2008). Autoethnography as method. Left Coast Press.
11.
ChatterjeeA., GhoshA., & LecaB. (2023). Double weaving: A bottom-up process of connecting locations and scales to mitigate grand challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 66(3), 797–828.
12.
Chun TieY., BirksM., & FrancisK. (2019). Grounded theory research: A design framework for novice researchers. SAGE Open Medicine, 7. https://doi.org/10.1177.2050312118822927
13.
Core Facilities. (2022). Nazarbayev University Core Facilities. https://sites.google.com/nu.edu.kz/core/home?authuser=0
14.
CornelissenJ. P., & WernerM. D. (2014). Putting framing in perspective: A review of framing and frame analysis across the management and organizational literature. Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 181–235.
15.
CummingsT. G., & WorleyC. G. (2016). Organization development & change. Cengage Learning.
16.
CunhaM. P., & PutnamL. L. (2019). Paradox theory and the paradox of success. Strategic Organization, 17(1), 95–106.
17.
CurrieG., & ProcterS. J. (2005). The antecedents of middle managers’ strategic contribution: The case of a professional bureaucracy. Journal of Management Studies, 42(7), 1325–1356.
18.
CresswellJ. W., & Plano ClarkV. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed method research (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
19.
DopsonS., & StewartR. (1990). What is happening to middle management?British Journal of Management, 1(1), 3–16.
20.
DuncanM. (2004). Autoethnography: Critical appreciation of an emerging art. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 3(4), 28–39.
21.
EdmondsonA. C., & McManusS. E. (2007). Methodological fit in management field research. Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1246–1264.
22.
EisenhardtK. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.
23.
ErridaA., & LotfiB. (2021). The determinants of organizational change management success: Literature review and case study. International Journal of Engineering Business Management, 13. https://doi.org/10.1177.18479790211016270
24.
FairhurstG. T., & PutnamL. L. (2014). Organizational discourse analysis. In PutnamL. L. & MumbyD. K. (Eds), The Sage handbook of organizational communication: Advances in theory, research, and methods (3rd ed., pp. 271–296). Sage Publications.
25.
FloydS. W., & WooldridgeB. (1992). Middle management involvement in strategy and its association with strategic type: A research note. Strategic Management Journal, 13(Suppl. 1), 153–167.
26.
FloydS. W., & WooldridgeB. (1997). Middle management’s strategic influence and organizational performance. Journal of Management Studies, 34(3), 465–485.
27.
FloydS. W., & WooldridgeB. (2000). Building strategy from the middle: Reconceptualizing strategy process. Sage Publications.
28.
FrenchJ. R. P. (1959). The bases of social power. In CartwrightD. (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150–167). University of Michigan Press.
29.
George JenniferM., & JonesG. R. (2012). Understanding and managing organizational behavior. Pearson Education Inc.
30.
GioiaD. A., & ChittipeddiK. (1991). Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation. Strategic Management Journal, 12(6), 433–448.
31.
GioiaD. A., CorleyK. G., & HamiltonA. L. (2013). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15–31.
32.
GondJ.-P., & BoxenbaumE. (2013). The glocalization of responsible investment: Contextualization work in France and Quebec. Journal of Business Ethics, 115, 707–721.
33.
GuthW. D., & MacMillanI. C. (1986). Strategy implementation versus middle management self‐interest. Strategic Management Journal, 7(4), 313–327.
34.
HarrisM. (1968). The rise of anthropological theory: A history of theories of culture. Crowell.
35.
HockbergerP., MeynS., NicklinC., TabariniD., TurpenP., & AugerJ. (2013). Best practices for core facilities: Handling external customers. Journal of Biomolecular Techniques: JBT, 24(2), 87.
36.
HockbergerP., WeissJ., RosenA., & OttA. (2018). Building a sustainable portfolio of core facilities: A case study. Journal of Biomolecular Techniques: JBT, 29(3), 79.
37.
HopeO. L. E. (2010). The politics of middle management sensemaking and sensegiving. Journal of Change Management, 10(2), 195–215.
38.
HuyQ. N. (2001). In praise of middle managers. Harvard Business Review, 79(8), 72–79.
39.
HuyQ. N. (2002). Emotional balancing of organizational continuity and radical change: The contribution of middle managers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(1), 31–69.
40.
IzraeliD. N. (1975). The middle manager and the tactics of power expansion: A case study. Sloan Management Review (Pre-1986), 16(2), 57.
41.
JayJ. (2013). Navigating paradox as a mechanism of change and innovation in hybrid organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 56(1), 137–159.
42.
JoossS., McDonnellA., & SkuzaA. (2024). Middle managers as key talent management stakeholders: Navigating paradoxes. European Management Review, 21(2), 459–476.
43.
JürgensA., TedeschiG., D’ErricoG., KilianK., ZawadzkiK., DanielO., LeibfriedA., PoschetG., LauL., & Helm-PetersenN. (2024). Navigating the frontier: Research infrastructures, core facilities and a new paradigm at European Universities. Cogent Education, 11(1), 2365613.
44.
KimW. C., & MauborgneR. A. (1991). Implementing global strategies: The role of procedural justice. Strategic Management Journal, 12(Suppl. 1), 125–143.
45.
KozinetsR. V. (2006). Netnography 2.0. In BelkR. W. (Ed.), Handbook of qualitative research methods in marketing. Edward Elgar Publishing.
46.
KraftA., SparrJ. L., & PeusC. (2015). The critical role of moderators in leader sensegiving: A literature review. Journal of Change Management, 15(4), 308–331.
47.
LangleyA. (1999). Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 691–710.
48.
LawrenceT. B. (2017). High-stakes institutional translation: Establishing North America’s first government-sanctioned supervised injection site. Academy of Management Journal, 60(5), 1771–1800.
49.
LockeK. (2011). Field research practice in management and organization studies: Reclaiming its tradition of discovery. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 613–652.
50.
LüscherL. S., LewisM., & IngramA. (2006). The social construction of organizational change paradoxes. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 19(4), 491–502.
51.
LüscherL. S., & LewisM. W. (2008). Organizational change and managerial sensemaking: Working through paradox. Academy of Management Journal, 51(2), 221–240.
52.
MackayD., & ZundelM. (2017). Recovering the divide: A review of strategy and tactics in business and management. International Journal of Management Reviews, 19(2), 175–194.
53.
MeyerC. B. (2006). Destructive dynamics of middle management intervention in postmerger processes. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42(4), 397–419.
54.
MichailovaS., PiekkariR., PlakoyiannakiE., RitvalaT., MihailovaI., & SalmiA. (2014). Breaking the silence about exiting fieldwork: A relational approach and its implications for theorizing. Academy of Management Review, 39(2), 138–161.
55.
NarayananV. K., ZaneL. J., & KemmererB. (2011). The cognitive perspective in strategy: An integrative review. Journal of Management, 37(1), 305–351.
PalinkasL. A., HorwitzS. M., GreenC. A., WisdomJ. P., DuanN., & HoagwoodK. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42, 533–544.
61.
PhanP. H., WrightM., UcbasaranD., & TanW. L. (2009). Corporate entrepreneurship: Current research and future directions. Journal of business Venturing, 24(3), 197–205.
62.
PhillipsJ., & KleinJ. D. (2023). Change management: From theory to practice. Tech Trends, 67(1), 189–197.
63.
PryorM. G., TanejaS., HumphreysJ., AndersonD., & SingletonL. (2008). Challenges facing change management theories and research. Delhi Business Review, 9(1), 1–20.
64.
RachmadY. E. (2022). Resilience to change theory. Valladolid Castillos Publicaciones Internacionales Edición Especial.
65.
RavasiD., & SchultzM. (2006). Responding to organizational identity threats: Exploring the role of organizational culture. Academy of Management Journal, 49(3), 433–458.
66.
ReineckeJ., & AnsariS. (2015). When times collide: Temporal brokerage at the intersection of markets and developments. Academy of Management Journal, 58(2), 618–648.
67.
RezvaniZ. (2017). Who is a middle manager: A literature review. Extremes, 1, 44.
68.
RouleauL. (2005). Micro‐practices of strategic sensemaking and sensegiving: How middle managers interpret and sell change every day. Journal of Management Studies, 42(7), 1413–1441.
69.
SandbergJ., & TsoukasH. (2015). Making sense of the sensemaking perspective: Its constituents, limitations, and opportunities for further development. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(Suppl. 1), S6–S32.
70.
SchatzmanL., & StraussA. (1973). Field research: Strategies for a natural sociology. Prentice-Hall.
71.
SchneiderA., BullingerB., & BrandlJ. (2021). Resourcing under tensions: How frontline employees create resources to balance paradoxical tensions. Organization Studies, 42(8), 1291–1317.
72.
ShroffA. (2024). Integrating innovation and virtue: Strategic responses of private organizations amidst environmental shocks. FIIB Business Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/23197145241304274.
73.
SimoninB. L. (1999). Ambiguity and the process of knowledge transfer in strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 20(7), 595–623.
74.
SmithW. K., & LewisM. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381–403.
75.
SplitterV., JarzabkowskiP., & SeidlD. (2023). Middle managers’ struggle over their subject position in open strategy processes. Journal of Management Studies, 60(7), 1884–1923.
76.
SpradleyB. W. (1980). Managing change creatively. JONA: The Journal of Nursing Administration, 10(5), 32–36.
77.
StensakerI., FalkenbergJ., & GrønhaugK. (2008). Implementation activities and organizational sensemaking. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 44(2), 162–185.
78.
SticklandF. (2002). The dynamics of change: Insights into organisational transition from the natural world. Routledge.
79.
StopfordJ. M., & Baden‐FullerC. W. (1994). Creating corporate entrepreneurship. Strategic Management Journal, 15(7), 521–536.
80.
StraussA., & CorbinJ. (1998). Basics of qualitative research techniques. Sage Publications.
81.
SuddabyR., BitektineA., & HaackP. (2017). Legitimacy. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 451–478.
82.
Van de VenA. H., & PooleM. S. (1988). Paradoxical requirements for a theory of organizational change. Paradox and Transformation: Toward a Theory of Change in Organization and Management, 19, 80.
83.
Van de VenA. H., & PooleM. S. (1995). Explaining development and change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 510–540.
84.
Van MaanenJ. (2011). Ethnography as work: Some rules of engagement. Journal of Management Studies, 48(1), 218–234.
85.
WaldmanD. A., PutnamL. L., Miron-SpektorE., & SiegelD. (2019). The role of paradox theory in decision making and management research. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 155, 1–6.
86.
WeiserA.-K., JarzabkowskiP., & LaamanenT. (2020). Completing the adaptive turn: An integrative view of strategy implementation. Academy of Management Annals, 14(2), 969–1031.
87.
YinR. K. (2003). Designing case studies. Qualitative Research Methods, 5(14), 359–386.
88.
YounglesonJ., & JacobsS. (2012). Academic intrepreneurship: Transition strategies for researchers, teachers and students. In Case studies in innovation for researchers, teachers and students (p. 85). Advance online publication.
