New ventures, being heavily subjected to liabilities of newness, are seen to engage in
legitimacy strategies to overcome these liabilities. Building on an adapted theoretical
framework of organizational legitimacy, self-reported weekly diaries of twelve
entrepreneurs were analysed to identify strategies used by new ventures to create
legitimacy. New ventures appear to prefer pragmatically related strategies over moral and
cognitive ones, and adopt malleability with respect to moral strategies. The novelty of
the venture technology increases the focus on conformity strategies, whereas more
established technologies use manipulative strategies to gain legitimacy. New ventures also
appear to engage strongly in moral selection strategies in terms of goal formulation.
AndersonA.R.ParkJ.JackS.
(2007), ‘Entrepreneurial social capital – conceptualizing
social capital in new high-tech firms’, International Small
Business Journal, Vol 25, No 3, pp
245–272.
4.
AshforthB.E.GibbsB.W.
(1990), ‘The double-edge of organizational
legitimation’, Organization Science, Vol
1, No 2, pp
177–194.
5.
BarretoI.Baden-FullerC.
(2006), ‘To conform or to perform? Mimetic behaviour,
legitimacy-based groups and performance consequences’, Journal
of Management Studies, Vol 43, No 7, pp
1559–1581.
6.
BirdB.SchjoedtL.BaumJ.R.
(2012), ‘Entrepreneurs' behavior: Elucidation and
measurement’, [editor's introduction], Entrepreneurship Theory
and Practice, Vol 36, No 5, pp
889–913.
7.
BolgerN.DavisA.RafaeliE.
(2003), ‘Diary methods: Capturing life as it is
lived’, Annual Review of Psychology, Vol
54, No 1, pp
579–616.
8.
CassarG.CraigJ.
(2009), ‘An investigation of hindsight bias in nascent
venture activity’, Journal of Business Venturing,
Vol 24, No 2, pp
149–164.
9.
ClarkeJ.
(2011), ‘Revitalizing entrepreneurship: How visual symbols
are used in entrepreneurial performances’, Journal of Management
Studies, Vol 48, No 6, pp
1365–1391.
10.
CornelissenJ.P.ClarkeJ.S.
(2010), ‘Imagining and rationalizing opportunities:
Inductive reasoning and the creation and justification of new ventures’,
Academy of Management Review, Vol 35, No
4, pp 539–557.
11.
DavidssonP.
(2006), ‘Nascent entrepreneurship: Empirical studies and
developments’, Foundations and Trends in
Entrepreneurship, Vol 2, No 1, pp
1–76.
12.
De ClercqD.VoronovM.
(2009), ‘Toward a practice perspective of entrepreneurship:
Entrepreneurial legitimacy as habitus’, International Small
Business Journal, Vol 27, No 4, pp
395–419.
13.
DiMaggioP.J.PowellW.W.
(1983), ‘The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism
and collective rationality in organizational fields’, American
Sociological Review, Vol 48, No 2, pp
147–160.
14.
DonnellonA.OllilaS.Williams-MiddletonK.
(2014), ‘Constructing entrepreneurial identity in
entrepreneurship education’, International Journal of Management
Education, Vol 12, No 3, pp
490–499.
15.
DowlingJ.PfefferJ.
(1975), ‘Organizational legitimacy: Social values and
organizational behavior’, Pacific Sociological Review,
Vol 18, No 1, pp
122–136.
16.
DroriI.HonigB.
(2013), ‘A process model of internal and external
legitimacy’, Organization Studies, Vol
34, No 3, pp
345–376.
FreemanJ.CarrollG.R.HannanM.T.
(1983), ‘The liability of newness: Age dependence in
organizational death rates’, American Sociological
Review, Vol 48, No 5, pp
692–710.
19.
HargadonA.B.DouglasY.
(2001), ‘When innovations meet institutions: Edison and the
design of the electric light’, Administrative Science
Quarterly, Vol 46, No 3, pp
476–501.
20.
HaynieJ.M.ShepherdD.A.PatzeltH.
(2012), ‘Cognitive adaptability and an entrepreneurial task:
The role of metacognitive ability and feedback’,
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol 36,
No 2, pp 237–265.
21.
HonigB.KarlssonT.HäggG.
(2013), ‘The blessing of necessity and advantages of
newness’, Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence and
Growth, Vol 15, pp
63–94.
22.
KampradI.TorekullB.
(1998), Historien om IKEA: Ingvar Kamprad berättar för Bertil
Torekull:[om ledarskapet, framtiden, det ryska ä ventyret, pengarna, knepen och” den
goda kapitalismen”] [in Swedish], Wahlström &
Widstrand, Stokholm.
23.
LandauD.DroriI.TerjesenS.
(2014), ‘Multiple legitimacy narratives and planned
organizational change’, Human Relations, Vol
67, No 11, pp
1321–1345.
24.
LarsonA.StarrJ.A.
(1993), ‘A network model of organization
formation’, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice,
Vol 17, No 2, pp
5–15.
25.
LounsburyM.GlynnM.A.
(2001), ‘Cultural entrepreneurship: Stories, legitimacy, and
the acquisition of resources’, Strategic Management
Journal, Vol 22, No 6/7, pp
545–564.
26.
MeyerJ.W.RowanB.
(1977), ‘Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure
as myth and ceremony’, American Journal of Sociology,
Vol 83, No 2, pp
340–363.
27.
MoseyS.WrightM.
(2007), ‘From human capital to social capital: A
longitudinal study of technology-based academic entrepreneurs’,
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol 31,
No 6, pp 909–935.
28.
NavisC.GlynnM.A.
(2011), ‘Legitimate distinctiveness and the entrepreneurial
identity: Influence on investor judgments of new venture plausibility’,
Academy of Management Review, Vol 36, No
3, pp 479–499.
29.
OhlyS.SonnentagS.NiessenC.ZapfD.
(2010), ‘Diary studies in organizational
research’, Journal of Personnel Psychology, Vol
9, No 2, pp
79–93.
30.
OliverC.
(1991), ‘Strategic responses to institutional
processes’, Academy of Management Review, Vol
16, No 1, pp
145–179.
31.
PalmåsK.Von BuschO.
(2006), Abstract Hacktivism – The Making of a Hacker
Culture, Mute Publishing,
London.
32.
PolitisD.
(2008), ‘Does prior start-up experience matter for
entrepreneurs' learning? A comparison between novice and habitual
entrepreneurs’, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise
Development, Vol 15, No 3, pp
472–489.
33.
SarasvathyS.D.(2008),
Effectuation: Elements of Entrepreneurial Expertise,
Edward Elgar,
Cheltenham.
34.
ScottW.R.
(2014), Institutions and Organizations: Ideas, Interests and
Identities, Sage, Thousand
Oaks, CA.
35.
ShepherdD.A.DouglasE.J.ShanleyM.
(2000), ‘New venture survival: Ignorance, external shocks,
and risk reduction strategies’, Journal of Business
Venturing, Vol 15, No 5/6, pp
393–410.
36.
ShepherdD.A.HaynieJ.M.
(2009), ‘Birds of a feather don't always flock together:
Identity management in entrepreneurship’, Journal of Business
Venturing, Vol 24, No 4, pp
316–337.
37.
SinghJ.V.TuckerD.J.HouseR.J.
(1986), ‘Organizational legitimacy and the liability of
newness’, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol
31, No 2, pp
171–193.
38.
StarrJ.A.MacmillanI.C.
(1990), ‘Resource cooptation via social contracting:
Resource acquisition strategies for new ventures’, Strategic
Management Journal, Vol 11, No 5, pp
79–92.
39.
StinchcombeA.J.
(1965), ‘Social structure and social
organization’, in MarchJ.G.,
ed, Handbook of Organizations, Rand
McNally, Chicago, IL.
40.
StoneA.A.ShiffmanS.
(2002), Capturing momentary, self-report data: A proposal
for reporting guidelines', Annals of Behavioral
Medicine, Vol 24, No 3, pp
236–243.
41.
SuchmanM.C.
(1995), ‘Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional
approaches’, Academy of Management Review, Vol
20, No 3, pp
571–610.
42.
SuddabyR.RoystonG.
(2005), ‘Rhetorical strategies of
legitimacy’, Administrative Science Quarterly,
Vol 50, No 1, pp
35–67.
43.
TornikoskiE.T.NewbertS.L.
(2007), ‘Exploring the determinants of organizational
emergence: A legitimacy perspective’, Journal of Business
Venturing, Vol 22, No 2, pp
311–335.
44.
Williams-MiddletonK.
(2013), ‘Becoming entrepreneurial: Gaining legitimacy in the
nascent phase’, International Journal of Entrepreneurial
Behaviour and Research, Vol 19, No 4, pp
404–424.
45.
ZaheerS.AlbertS.ZaheerA.
(1999), ‘Time scales and organizational
theory’, Academy of Management Review, Vol
24, No 4, pp
725–741.
46.
ZimmermanM.A.ZeitzG.J.
(2002), ‘Beyond survival: Achieving new venture growth by
building legitimacy’, Academy of Management Review,
Vol 27, No 3, pp
414–431.
47.
ZottC.HuyQ.N.
(2007), ‘How entrepreneurs use symbolic management to
acquire resources’, Administrative Science Quarterly,
Vol 52, No 1, pp
70–105.
