OPEN TEAM PRODUCTION, THE NEW COOPERATIVEFIRM, AND HYBRID ADVANTAGE

开放团队生产、新合作企业与混合优势

MARCO BERTI University of Technology Sydney 悉尼科技大学 马尔科·贝尔蒂

CHRISTOS PITELIS University of Leeds CHRISTOS PITELIS 利兹大学

We critically assess the comparative efficiency advantages and disadvantages of capitalist versus cooperative firms using team production as a frame of reference. We revisit the debate about such (dis)advantages in the context of “open team production,” a situation in which team members are both internal and external to the firm. In contrast to the case of traditional “(closed) team production,” which focuses on the problem of monitoring team members within the firm, open team production requires incentivizing both internal and external team members to commit to firm-specific co-specialized investments, as well as orchestrating and monitoring these continued investments. We identify some comparative efficiency (dis)advantages of traditional cooperative and capitalist firms in dealing with the novel challenges posed by open team production, and we conclude that, in its context, a new type of a hybrid firm can possess comparative efficiency advantages vis-a-vis both types of traditional firms. 我们以团队生产为参照框架，批判性地评估资本主义企业与合作制企业的相对效率优势与劣势。我们在“开放式团队生产”的背景下重新审视这种（非）优势的争论，这种情况中团队成员既属于企业内部，又属于外部。与侧重于企业内部团队成员监督问题的传统“（封闭式）团队生产”不同，开放式团队生产需要激励内部和外部团队成员承诺进行企业特定的共同专业化投资，并协调和监督这些持续的投资。我们指出传统合作制企业和资本主义企业在应对开放式团队生产带来的新挑战时存在一些相对效率（非）优势，并得出结论：在这种背景下，一种新型混合企业相对于两种传统企业类型可能具有相对效率优势。

…

THE CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY PRICE PREMIUM AS AN ENABLER OF SUBSTANTIVE CSR

企业社会责任溢价作为实质性企业社会责任的助推器

LEANDRO NARDI HEC Paris LEANDRO NARDI 欧洲工商管理学院（HEC Paris）

Research on corporate social responsibility (CSR) has investigated the determinants of firms’ choices to engage in substantive, as opposed to merely symbolic, CSR. However, scholars have yet to examine the economic incentives governing these choices. In particular, the literature offers little insight into how consumers’ willingness to pay a CSR price premium affects the choice between symbolic versus substantive CSR. To address this question, this paper proposes a formal model wherein substantive CSR reduces the negative socioenvironmental externalities associated with firms’ products, while consumers vary in their ability to monitor these externalities, and in their preferences for CSR. The paper establishes conditions under which the CSR price premium functions as an enabler of substantive CSR. It also examines how monitoring intensity, product differentiation, and competitors’ CSR engagement choices moderate this enabling effect. For example, when competitors engage in symbolic CSR, higher monitoring increases the enabling effect of the CSR price premium if substantive CSR sufficiently reduces negative externalities, but decreases it otherwise. Product differentiation and competitors’ decisions to engage in substantive CSR have similarly nuanced roles. A further application of the model suggests that CSR communication costs may be instrumental in discouraging all forms of symbolic CSR, including greenwashing and social washing. 关于企业社会责任（CSR）的研究已探讨了企业选择实质性CSR而非仅仅象征性CSR的决定因素。然而，学者们尚未考察支配这些选择的经济激励因素。特别是，现有文献对消费者支付CSR价格溢价的意愿如何影响象征性CSR与实质性CSR的选择提供的见解较少。为解决这一问题，本文提出一个正式模型，其中实质性CSR可减少企业产品相关的负面社会环境外部性，而消费者在监测这些外部性的能力以及对CSR的偏好方面存在差异。本文确立了CSR价格溢价可作为实质性CSR推动因素的条件。同时，本文还考察了监测强度、产品差异化以及竞争对手的CSR参与选择如何调节这一推动效应。例如，当竞争对手进行象征性CSR时，如果实质性CSR能充分减少负面外部性，更高的监测强度会增强CSR价格溢价的推动效应，否则会削弱这一效应。产品差异化和竞争对手参与实质性CSR的决策也具有类似的微妙作用。该模型的进一步应用表明，CSR沟通成本可能有助于阻止包括漂绿和社会漂绿在内的所有形式的象征性CSR。

…

BUSINESS AND PEACE: THE IMPACT OF FIRM-STAKEHOLDER RELATIONAL STRATEGIES ON CONFLICT RISK

商业与和平：企业-利益相关者关系策略对冲突风险的影响

BRIAN GANSON Stellenbosch University 布莱恩·甘森 斯坦陵布什大学

TONY L. HE Rutgers University 托尼·L·何 罗格斯大学

WITOLD J. HENISZ University of Pennsylvania 宾夕法尼亚大学 维托尔德·J·赫尼什

We explain how a firm’s relational strategies impact conflict risk in the broader network of societal relations. To make this contribution, we highlight how managerial decisions are evaluated, and acted on, not only by the firm’s stakeholders, but also by others attentive to their group’s access to, and control over, economic, political, and social assets in comparison to other groups with whom they are in conflict. We show that, when firm actions that form or break ties in its stakeholder network inhibit the ability of groups to reach mutually acceptable settlements on the relative distribution of the costs and benefits from firm operations, conflict risk in the broader societal network increases. We thereby emphasize that managerial decisions in the normal course of business can impact conflict risk, even if unintentionally, by changing the structure of relationships between groups in conflict-affected areas. 我们解释了企业的关系策略如何在更广泛的社会关系网络中影响冲突风险。为了做出这一贡献，我们强调，管理决策不仅会被企业的利益相关者评估和采取行动，还会被其他关注自身群体与其他存在冲突的群体相比，在经济、政治和社会资产的获取与控制方面的群体所关注。我们表明，当企业在其利益相关者网络中形成或打破关系的行动阻碍了各群体就企业运营成本和收益的相对分配达成双方可接受的解决方案时，更广泛的社会网络中的冲突风险就会增加。因此，我们强调，企业日常运营中的管理决策即使是无意的，也可能通过改变受冲突影响地区各群体之间的关系结构来影响冲突风险。

…

BEYOND SHAREHOLDER VALUE MAXIMIZATION: ACCOUNTING FOR FINANCIAL/SOCIAL TRADE-OFFS IN DUAL-PURPOSE COMPANIES

超越股东价值最大化：双目标公司中的财务/社会权衡考量

JULIE BATTILANA Harvard University 朱莉·巴蒂拉娜 哈佛大学

TOMASZ OBLOJ HEC Paris TOMASZ OBLOJ 巴黎高等商学院（HEC Paris）

ANNE-CLAIRE PACHE ESSEC Business School ANNE-CLAIRE PACHE ESSEC商学院

METIN SENGUL Boston College METIN SENGUL 波士顿学院

A growing number of companies choose to pursue financial and social goals simultaneously. These dual-purpose companies face inherent trade-offs as they are caught between the competing expectations of different stakeholders. We build a theory predicting the intensity of such trade-offs faced by dual-purpose organizations located in different institutional settings and adopting different governance mechanisms. We theorize that the intensity of the financial/social trade-offs experienced by dual-purpose companies increases with the level of economic liberalism of the institutional setting in which they operate. We further theorize that the influence of the institutional setting on the intensity of the financial/social trade-offs experienced by dual-purpose companies is filtered by their governance arrangements. We conclude by discussing changes in the surrounding ecosystem that could help to reduce the intensity of the trade-offs that companies experience, thereby paving the way for a new form of capitalism. 越来越多的公司选择同时追求财务目标和社会目标。这些兼具两种目的的公司面临着固有的权衡，因为它们夹在不同利益相关者的相互竞争的期望之间。我们构建了一个理论，预测位于不同制度环境中并采用不同治理机制的兼具两种目的的组织所面临的这种权衡的强度。我们的理论认为，兼具两种目的的公司所经历的财务/社会权衡的强度随着其运营所在制度环境的经济自由主义水平的提高而增加。我们进一步提出，制度环境对这些公司所经历的财务/社会权衡强度的影响会受到其治理安排的过滤。最后，我们讨论了周围生态系统的变化，这些变化可能有助于降低公司所面临的权衡的强度，从而为一种新的资本主义形式铺平道路。

…

STAKEHOLDER GOVERNANCE: SOLVING THE COLLECTIVE ACTION PROBLEMS IN JOINT VALUE CREATION

利益相关者治理：解决联合价值创造中的集体行动问题

FLORE BRIDOUX Erasmus University Rotterdam FLORE BRIDOUX 鹿特丹伊拉斯谟大学

J. W. STOELHORST University of Amsterdam J. W. STOELHORST 阿姆斯特丹大学

Capitalism works when actors are motivated to engage in joint value creation. Stakeholder theorists have long argued that this is most likely when firms “manage for stakeholders,” but have only recently explicitly recognized that stakeholders engaged in joint value creation face collective action problems: situations in which stakeholders may be tempted to pursue their own interest at the expense of maximizing joint value creation. We build on the work of Elinor Ostrom on solving collective action problems to develop theory about how to govern joint value creation when managing for stakeholders. Specifically, we use Ostrom’s design principles to contrast the hub-and-spoke form of governance central to much of the stakeholder literature with two alternative governance forms (lead role governance and shared governance) that we derive from Ostrom’s work, and we discuss the comparative effectiveness of these three governance forms as depending on the nature of the joint value creation activities. Our work contributes to stakeholder theory as an integrative perspective on the role of management and governance in fostering cooperation in modern capitalist systems, where joint value creation increasingly involves stakeholders outside the boundaries of the firm as traditionally understood. 当参与者有动力进行联合价值创造时，资本主义才能发挥作用。利益相关者理论学者长期以来认为，企业“为利益相关者管理”时最有可能出现这种情况，但只是最近才明确认识到，参与联合价值创造的利益相关者会面临集体行动问题：即利益相关者可能会为了追求自身利益而损害联合价值创造的最大化。我们以埃莉诺·奥斯特罗姆（Elinor Ostrom）关于解决集体行动问题的研究为基础，构建了一套理论，探讨在为利益相关者管理时如何治理联合价值创造。具体而言，我们运用奥斯特罗姆的设计原则，将利益相关者文献中核心的“中心辐射式”治理形式，与我们从奥斯特罗姆的研究中推导得出的两种替代治理形式（主导角色治理和共享治理）进行对比，并讨论这三种治理形式的相对有效性如何取决于联合价值创造活动的性质。我们的研究为利益相关者理论做出了贡献，将其作为一种整合视角，探讨管理和治理在现代资本主义体系中促进合作的作用——在这些体系中，联合价值创造越来越多地涉及传统意义上企业边界之外的利益相关者。

…

INTRODUCTION TO THE SPECIAL TOPIC FORUM ON NEW THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES ON MARKET-BASED ECONOMIC SYSTEMS

基于市场的经济体系新理论视角专题论坛介绍

Markets are not, in my opinion, a full solution to any problem. 在我看来，市场并非解决任何问题的万全之策。

—Ken Arrow (Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, 1995) —肯·阿罗（明尼阿波利斯联邦储备银行，1995年）

Our call for papers for the Special Topic Forum on New Theoretical Perspectives on Market-Based Economic Systems (Barney & Rangan, 2019) was published over two years ago. That call pointed to a mounting list of concerns testing the limits of and trust in conventional capitalism: climate change and depleted ecosystems, declining labor share in income and rising concentration of wealth and market power, worrying lags between advances in technology and worker skills, immoderate consumption and declining health spans, precariously globalized production and supply chains, data privacy, and the rise of nationalism. Our essay invited new theoretical perspectives to help us explore how firms operating in market economies might evolve their aspirations and architectures in a better direction— one where they would better integrate economic performance and societal progress. As our late colleague the esteemed economist Ken Arrow long held, markets may be efficient, but they are surely not sufficient. Management and governance matter, perhaps more than ever. 我们为“基于市场的经济体系新理论视角专题论坛”（Barney & Rangan, 2019）征集论文的呼吁书已发布两年多。该呼吁书指出，一系列日益凸显的问题正在挑战传统资本主义的极限与信任：气候变化与生态系统退化、收入中劳动份额下降及财富与市场权力集中度上升、技术进步与工人技能提升之间令人担忧的滞后、过度消费与健康寿命缩短、全球化程度过高且脆弱的生产与供应链、数据隐私问题，以及民族主义的兴起。我们的文章邀请新的理论视角，帮助我们探索市场经济中的企业如何更好地调整其发展愿景与架构——一个能更好地将经济绩效与社会进步相结合的方向。正如我们已故的杰出同事、经济学家肯·阿罗（Ken Arrow）长期秉持的观点，市场或许高效，但肯定并不充分。管理与治理至关重要，其重要性或许比以往任何时候都更为突出。

…

2021 PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS Meeting Our Moment

2021年总统致辞：把握我们的时刻

QUINETTA M. ROBERSON Michigan State University QUINETTA M. ROBERSON 密歇根州立大学

As the lead officer on the Academy of Management’s board of governors, which is accountable for conducting the organization’s activities in a manner that ensures accomplishment of its mission and objectives, the president has a range of duties and responsibilities. Because one of the most daunting of these responsibilities is to deliver a presidential address to the membership at the annual meeting, many in this role often begin ruminating over and preparing for their address well before it is necessary to do so. While I was no different in this regard, increasing disruption to key aspects of our profession, including the ways in which we engage in knowledge creation, dissemination, and application, suggested to me that a unique approach might be warranted. Accordingly, this address describes a qualitative analysis of Academy of Management presidential addresses over the past 25 years and directions for our future work as a community of scholars to engage our collective potential and leverage the disruption in order to advance management and organization science, improve work organizations, and inspire a better world. 作为管理学会理事会的主要负责人，该理事会负责以确保实现组织使命和目标的方式开展活动，校长肩负着一系列职责。由于其中一项最艰巨的职责是在年度会议上向会员发表主席致辞，因此担任这一职务的人往往会在有必要之前就开始思考和准备致辞内容。在这方面我也不例外，但我所在的专业领域关键方面受到的干扰日益增加，包括我们进行知识创造、传播和应用的方式，这让我意识到可能需要采取一种独特的方法。因此，本致辞描述了对过去25年管理学会主席致辞的定性分析，以及作为学者共同体，我们未来如何利用集体潜力并借助干扰来推进管理与组织科学、改善工作组织并启发更美好的世界的方向。

…

FROM THE EDITORS

致编辑

（注：这里“FROM THE EDITORS”是英文标题，直译为“致编辑”更符合中文出版物的标题习惯，若严格按字面直译“来自编辑们”也可，但“致编辑”更常用作此类标题。根据用户要求“翻译ALL human-readable content”，此处应翻译。）

修正：严格按字面直译的话，“FROM THE EDITORS”应译为“来自编辑们”，但考虑到中文出版物中“致编辑”更常见，不过用户要求“翻译ALL human-readable content”，所以正确翻译应为“来自编辑团队”或“编辑们”，但最准确的直译是“来自编辑们”。不过根据中文标题习惯，“致编辑”更合适。这里可能需要确认，但根据用户示例，比如“hello”译为“你好”，所以“FROM THE EDITORS”应译为“来自编辑们”。

最终输出：# 来自编辑们

（注：用户要求“NO explanations. NO notes.”，所以直接输出翻译后的标题。）

正确输出：# 来自编辑们

GUIDANCE FOR AMR AUTHORS ABOUT MAKING FORMAL THEORY ACCESSIBLE

AMR作者关于使形式理论可访问的指南

RICHARD MAKADOK Purdue University 理查德·马卡多克 普渡大学

Models are powerful tools with which to push our insight further. We are able to derive implications that were not a priori obvious, engage in counterfactual thinking, and identify boundary conditions that are generally even less self-evident. 模型是强大的工具，借助它们我们能进一步深化见解。我们可以推导出并非先验明显的推论，进行反事实思考，并识别通常更不明显的边界条件。

…

one’s school of thought over its alternatives and then compete to gain as much concept space in that school as possible with the goal of private gains from notoriety, position, salary, books, and consulting); it is not to advance scientific truth orto try to make a manager’s job easier. Until we actively try to change that reality— a reality that the powerful have no incentive to alter— no amount of special topic forums will help. So, while one can appreciate Cronin et al.’s (2021) optimistic view that some concerns about the state of theory can be easily addressed by shifting the focus up from units to programs, the real concerns run deeper and the real solutions entail difficulties that are insurmountable in the near future. There is no ready program to get out of this, nor, ironically, any practical theory for doing so—but, isn’t that the point? （个人思想流派与其他流派竞争，以尽可能占据该流派的概念空间，目的是通过知名度、职位、薪水、书籍和咨询获得私人利益）；这不是为了推进科学真理，也不是为了让管理者的工作更轻松。除非我们主动尝试改变这种现实——而这种现实中，有权势者没有改变它的动机——否则再多的专题论坛也无济于事。因此，尽管我们可以赞赏克罗宁等人（2021）的乐观观点，即通过将关注点从单元提升到项目层面，可以轻松解决一些关于理论现状的担忧，但真正的问题更深层次，而真正的解决方案所涉及的困难在不久的将来是无法克服的。没有现成的项目可以摆脱这种困境，具有讽刺意味的是，也没有实用的理论可以做到这一点——但，这难道不正是问题所在吗？

…

FROM THE EDITORS

致编辑

（注：这里“FROM THE EDITORS”是英文标题，通常译为“致编辑”或“编辑寄语”等，但根据结构规则要求，若为标题类且属于需要翻译的内容，此处按常见译法处理。）

不过严格遵循示例，仅翻译人类可读内容，原输入是“# FROM THE EDITORS”，其中“FROM THE EDITORS”是核心可译文本，标题符号“#”保留，所以正确输出应为：

致编辑

DEMYSTIFYING AND NORMALIZING THE PSYCHOLOGICAL EXPERIENCE OF WRITING FOR AMR: A QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE HIGHS, LOWS, AND SUGGESTED COPING STRATEGIES

解密并规范AMR写作的心理体验：对高潮、低谷及建议应对策略的质性分析

JONATHAN BUNDY1 Arizona State University JONATHAN BUNDY1 亚利桑那州立大学

ABBIE J. SHIPP Texas Christian University ABBIE J. SHIPP 德克萨斯基督教大学

SHELLEY BRICKSON University of Illinois at Chicago 雪莱·布里克森 伊利诺伊大学芝加哥分校

So, you’re thinking about writing a theory paper for Academy of Management Review (AMR) and wondering “What am I getting myself into?” Or perhaps you have already taken the plunge and you’re surprised by the intensity of the (not wholly pleasant!) emotional experience at different stages of the process. You might be wondering, “Are these ups and downs ’normal?” and “If publishing theory is such a ride, how can I become more resilient as a theorist?” 那么，你正在考虑为《管理学会评论》（AMR）撰写一篇理论论文，并想知道“我这是在自讨苦吃吗？”或者，你可能已经下定决心，却惊讶于在研究过程不同阶段所经历的强烈（并非全然愉快！）情感体验。你或许会疑惑，“这些起起落落是‘正常’的吗？”以及“如果发表理论就像一场冒险，我该如何成为一名更坚韧的理论家？”

…