Legitimizing Organizations via Research: Facilitating Possibilities through the Study of Relational, Emergent, Transformative, and Change-Oriented Organizations (RETCOs)

References

• Anteby, M. (2013). Relaxing the taboo on telling our own stories: Upholding professional distance and personal involvement. Organization Science, 24(4), 1277–1290. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1120.0777
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bierria, A (2017). Pursuing a radical anti-violence agenda inside/outside a non-profit structure. In Incite (Ed.), The revolution will not be funded (pp. 151–164). Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Billis, D. (Ed.). (2010). Hybrid organizations and the third sector. Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Bouckaert, G. (2022). The neo-Weberian state: From ideal type model to reality? UCL Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose, Working Paper Series (IIPP WP 2022-10). https://www.ucl.ac.uk/bartlett/public-purpose/wp2022-10.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, K. K. (2009). Enabling creative chaos: The organization behind the Burning Man event. University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, K. K. (2022). Learning how to be a Scyborg: How prefigurative organizations can promote capacity to decolonialize organizations. Voluntary Sector Review, 13(1), 117–133. https://doi.org/10.1332/204080521X16346541850357
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, K. K., & Chen, V.T. (Eds.). (2021). Organizational imaginaries: Tempering capitalism and tending to communities through cooperatives and collectivist democracy. Research in the sociology of organizations (pp. 72). Emerald Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, K. K., & Moskop, M. (2020). School choice’s idealized premises and unfulfilled promises: How school markets simulate options, encourage decoupling and deception, and deepen disadvantages. Sociology Compass, 14(3). https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12766
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clampitt, P., Williams, M. L., & Dekoch, R. (2001). Embracing uncertainty: The executive’s challenge. Journal of Change Management, 2(3), 212–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/738552753
   Google Scholar
• Coule, T. M., Dodge, J., & Eikenberry, A. M. (2022a). NVSQ Symposium on critical nonprofit studies. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 51(3), 473–477.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coule, T. M., Dodge, J., & Eikenberry, A. M. (2022b). Toward a typology of critical nonprofit studies: A literature review. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 51(3), 478–506. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764020919807
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox, A. B. (2021). Powered down: The micro-foundations of organizational attempts to redistribute power. American Journal of Sociology, 127(2), 285–336.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cunliffe, A. (2022). Must I grow a pair of balls to theorize about theory in organization and management studies? Organization Theory, 3(3), 263178772211092. https://doi.org/10.1177/26317877221109277
   Google Scholar
• Dale, R., & Robertson, S. (2004). Interview with Boaventura de Sousa Santos. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 2(2), 147–160.
   Google Scholar
• Dean, J., & Wiley, K. (2022). Critical theory, qualitative methods and the non-profit and voluntary sector: an introduction to the special issue. Voluntary Sector Review, 13(1), 11–17. https://doi.org/10.1332/204080521X16417596703081
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dees, G., Anderson, B. B., & Wei-Skillern, J. (2004). Scaling social impact: Strategies for spreading social innovations. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 1(4), 24–33.
   Google Scholar
• D’Ignazio, C., & Klein, L. F. (2020). Data feminism. MIT press.
   Google Scholar
• Ding, F., Lu, J., & Riccucci, N. M. (2021). How bureaucratic representation affects public organizational performance: A meta‐analysis. Public Administration Review, 81(6), 1003–1018. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13361
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dodge, J., Eikenberry, A. M., & Coule, T. M. (2022). Illustrating the value of critical methodologies through third-sector gender studies: A case for pluralism. Voluntas, 33(6), 1140–1147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-021-00425-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunning, C. (2022). Nonprofit neighborhoods: An urban history of inequality and the American state. University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eikenberry, A. M. (2009). Giving circles: Philanthropy, voluntary association, and democracy. Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Feit, M. E., & Sandberg, B. (2022). The dissonance of “doing good”: Fostering critical pedagogy to challenge the selective tradition of nonprofit management education. Public Integrity, 24(4–5), 486–503. https://doi.org/10.1080/10999922.2022.2034341
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glynn, M. A., & Abzug, R. (2002). Institutionalizing identity: Symbolic isomorphism and organizational names. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 267–280. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069296
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hannan, M. T., Laszlo, P., & Carroll, G. R. (2002). Structural inertia and organizational change revisited III: The evolution of organizational inertia. Research Papers Series, 29.
   Google Scholar
• Hasenfeld, Y. (2015). What exactly is human services management? Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance, 39(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/23303131.2015.1007773
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hernes, T. (2007). Understanding organization as process: Theory for a tangled world. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hurwitz, H. M. (2020). Are we the 99%? The occupy movement, feminism, and intersectionality. Temple University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Iannello, K. P. (1992). Decisions without hierarchy: Feminist interventions in organization theory and practice. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• INCITE! Women of Color Against Violence. (2017). The revolution will not be funded: Beyond the non-profit industrial complex. Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, J. M. (1981). Program enterprise and official cooptation in the battered women’s shelter movement. American Behavioral Scientist, 24(6), 827–842. https://doi.org/10.1177/000276428102400608
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jerolmack, C., & Khan, S. (2014). Talk is cheap: Ethnography and the attitudinal fallacy. Sociological Methods & Research, 43(2), 178–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124114523396
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaboolian, L. (1998). The new public management: Challenging the boundaries of the management vs. administration debate. Public Administration Review, 58(3), 189–193. https://doi.org/10.2307/976558
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kara, H. (2015). Creative research methods in the social sciences: A practical guide. Policy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kettl, D. (1997). The global revolution in public management: driving themes, missing links. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 16(3), 446–462. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6688(199722)16:3<446::AID-PAM5>3.0.CO;2-H
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khan, S. (2012). The sociology of elites. Annual Review of Sociology, 38, 361–377.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krause, M. (2021). Model cases: On canonical research objects and sites. University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, J., Park, Y. J., & Gong, X. (2023). How do government grants affect nonprofit financial effectiveness? The mediation role of process accountability. Administration & Society, 55(1), 122–157. https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997221112824
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liboron, M., & Lepawsky, J. (2022). Discard studies: Wasting, systems, and power. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Love, T. R. (2018). Indigenous organization studies: Exploring management, business and community. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Love, T. R. (2019). Indigenous knowledges, priorities and processes in qualitative organization and management research: State of the field. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, 15(1), 6–20. https://doi.org/10.1108/QROM-07-2018-1669
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mandiberg, J. M. (2012). The failure of social inclusion: An alternative approach through community development. Psychiatric Services, 63(5), 458–460. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.201100367
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mandiberg, J. M., & Edwards, M. (2013). Collective identity formation in the mental health clubhouse community. International Journal of Self-Help and Self-Care, 7(1), 9–39.
   Google Scholar
• Mandiberg, J. M., Livingston, J. P. H., & Silva, J. (2019). Social innovation and social work practice. In M. Nandan, T. Bent-Goodley, & G. Mandayam (Eds.). Social work entrepreneurship, intrapreneurship and social value creation: Relevance for contemporary social work practice (pp.47–69). NASW Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mandiberg, J. M., Kim, S. M., & Hattori, T. (2020). Fukakujitsusei to hi eiri kanri (Uncertainty and nonprofit management). In Hiro Tarumi & Atsuko Hattori (Eds.). Gendai no kōkyō kanri (Modern public management). Minerva Shobo.
   Google Scholar
• Matthews, N. (1995). Feminist clashed with the state: Tactical choices by state-funded rape crisis centers. In M. M. Feree & P. Y. Martin (Eds.), Feminist organizations: Harvest of the new women’s movement (pp. 234–247). Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Meyer, S. J., Dale, E. J., & Willis, K. K. (2022). “Where my gays at?” The status of LGBTQ people and queer theory in nonprofit research. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 51(3), 566–586. https://doi.org/10.1177/08997640211021497
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mirabella, R., Nguyễn, K., & Feit, M. E. (2022). Critical pedagogy and nonprofit management education: Refocusing our classrooms toward transformation and liberation. In W. A. Brown & M. Hale (Eds.), Preparing leaders of nonprofit organizations (pp. 174–194). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Mohr, L. B. (1982). Explaining of metrics. Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Morgen, S. (1995). ‘It was the best of times, it was the worst of times’: Emotional discourse in the work cultures of feminist health clinics. In M. M. Feree & P. Y. Martin (Eds.), Feminist organizations: Harvest of the new women’s movement (pp. 234–247). Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, A. (2011). Body and soul: The Black Panther Party and the fight against medical discrimination. University of Minnesota.
   Google Scholar
• Nickels, A. E., & Leach, K. A. (2021). Toward a more just nonprofit sector: Leveraging a critical approach to disrupt and dismantle white masculine space. Public Integrity, 23(5), 515–530. https://doi.org/10.1080/10999922.2020.1870833
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niederman, F., & March, S. T. (2018). An exposition of process theory and critique of Mohr’s (1982) conceptualization thereof. Philosophy of Management, 17(3), 321–331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40926-017-0082-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne, S. P. (2010). The new public governance? Emerging perspectives on the theory and practice of public governance. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Perrow, C. (1986). Complex organizational behavior. Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, P. S., & Wernstedt, K. (2019). Decision biases and heuristics among emergency managers: Just like the public they manage for? The American Review of Public Administration, 49(3), 292–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074018799490
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rothschild-Whitt, J. (1979). The collectivist organization: An alternative to rational-bureaucratic models. American Sociological Review, 44(4), 509–527. https://doi.org/10.2307/2094585
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rothschild, J., & Whitt, J. A. (1986). The cooperative workplace: Potentials and dilemmas of organizational democracy and participation. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schechter, S. (1982). Women and male violence: The visions and struggles of the Battered women’s movement. South End Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schlappa, H., & Imani, Y. (2018). Who is in the lead? New perspectives on leading service co-production. In T. Brandsen, T. Steen, & Verschuere (Eds.), Co-production and co-creationi engaging citizens in public services (pp. 99–108). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Schwoerer, K., Keppeler, F., Mussagulova, A., & Puello, S. (2022). CO‐DESIGN‐ing a more context‐based, pluralistic, and participatory future for public administration. Public Administration, 100(1), 72–97. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12828
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seidel, D. (2009). Review of book [Understanding organization as process: Theory for a tangled world, by T. Hernes]. Organization Studies, 30(01), 124–128.
   Google Scholar
• Simpson, A. (2014). Mohawk Interruptus: Political life across the borders of settler states. Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Small, M., & Calarco, J. (2022). Qualitative literacy: A guide to evaluating ethnographic and interview research. University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, L. T. (2023). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples (3rd ed.). Zed.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, S. R., & Lipsky, M. (1993). Nonprofits for hire: The welfare state in the age of contracting. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Spicer, J., & Kay, T. (2022). Another organization is possible: New directions in research on alternative enterprise. Sociology Compass, 16(3), e12963. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12963
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swidler, A. (1979). Organizations without authority: Dilemmas of social control in free schools. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tavory, I., & Timmermans, S. (2014). Abductive analysis: Theorizing qualitative research. University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, R. C. (1979). Alternative services: The case of free clinics. International Journal of Health Services: Planning, Administration, Evaluation, 9(2), 227–253. https://doi.org/10.2190/YXEH-7V94-0MAK-UWE9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torfing, J., Andersen, L. B., Greve, C., & Klausen, K. K. (2020). Public governance paradigms: Competing and co-existing. Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Tsoukas, H., & Chia, R. (2002). On organizational becoming: Rethinking organizational change. Organization Science, 13(5), 567–582. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.13.5.567.7810
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vestrum, I. (2014). The embedding process of community ventures: Creating a music festival in a rural community. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 26(7–8), 619–644. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2014.971076
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weick, K. E. (1993). Organizational redesign as improvisation. In G. P. Huber & W. H. Glick (Eds.), Organizational Change and Redesign (pp. 346–379). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), 409–421. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1050.0133
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wigginton, B., & Lafrance, M. N. (2019). Learning critical feminist research: A brief introduction to feminist epistemologies and methodologies. Feminism & Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959353519866058
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zohar, A., & Borkman, T. J. (1997). Emergent order and self-organization: A case study of Alcoholics Anonymous. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 26(4), 527–552. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764097264008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar