The process of growing in small firms: Exploring dialectic adjustments to nonroutine disruption

References

• Akemu, O., & Abdelnour, S. (2020). Confronting the digital: Doing ethnography in modern organizational settings. Organizational Research Methods, 23(2), 296–321. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428118791018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anand, P. (2021). Clubhouse CEO says the once-hot startup grew way too fast. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-10-14/what-happened-to-clubhouse-it-grew-way-too-fast-ceo-says?cmpid=BBD101421_MKT&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_term=211014&utm_campaign=markets&sref=XEKA5BB1
   Google Scholar
• Aoki, K. (2020). The roles of material artifacts in managing the learning–Performance Paradox: The Kaizen Case. Academy of Management Journal, 63(4), 1266–1299. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2017.0967
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Åstebro, T., Herz, H., Nanda, R., & Weber, R. A. (2014). Seeking the roots of entrepreneurship: Insights from behavioral economics. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 28(3), 49–70. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.28.3.49
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barroso-Castro, C., Domínguez-Cc, M., & Rodríguez-Serrano, M. Á. (2020). SME growth speed: The relationship with board capital. Journal of Small Business Management, 60(2), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2020.1717293
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bass, A. E., & Milosevic, I. (2018). The ethnographic method in CSR research: The role and importance of methodological fit. Business & Society, 57(1), 174–215. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650316648666
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benson, J. K. (1977). Organizations: A dialectical view. Administrative science quarterly, 22(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.2307/2391741
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birley, S., & Westhead, P. (1990). Growth and performance contrasts between ‘types’ of small firms. Strategic Management Journal, 11(7), 535–557. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250110705
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birley, S., & Westhead, P. (1994). A taxonomy of business start-up reasons and their impact on firm growth and size. Journal of Business Venturing, 9(1), 7–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-9026(94)90024-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brinckmann, J., Salomo, S., & Gemuenden, H. G. (2011). Financial management competence of founding teams and growth of new technology-based firms. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 35(2), 217–243. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00362.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coad, A., Daunfeldt, S. O., Hölzl, W., Johansson, D., & Nightingale, P. (2014). High-growth firms: Introduction to the special section. Industrial and Corporate Change, 23(1), 91–112.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coad, A., Frankish, J., Roberts, R. G., & Storey, D. J. (2013). Growth paths and survival chances: An application of Gamblers Ruin theory. Journal of Business Venturing, 28(5), 615–632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2012.06.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coates, J. (2007). Talk in a play frame: More on laughter and intimacy. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 29–49.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coen, C. A., & Maritan, C. A. (2011). Investing in capabilities: The dynamics of resource allocation. Organization Science, 22(1), 99–117. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0524
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coviello, N. E. (2019). Is a high-growth firm the same as a “scale-up”? 2019 Lazaridis Report. Lazaridis Institute for the Management of Technology Enterprises.
   Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. W. (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Cuganesan, S. (2021). Investigating how the Clock–Event time dialectic shapes the doing of time in organizational change. Organization studies, 43(5), 01708406211006252. https://doi.org/10.1177/01708406211006252
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahl, M. S., & Sorenson, O. (2012). Home sweet home: Entrepreneur’s location choices and the performance of their ventures. Management science, 58(6), 1059–1071. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1110.1476
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Keyser, B., Guiette, A., & Vandenbempt, K. (2021). On the dynamics of failure in organizational change: A dialectical perspective. Human Relations, 74(2), 234–257. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726719884115
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eggers, J. P., & Park, K. F. (2018). Incumbent adaptation to technological change: The past, present, and future of research on heterogeneous incumbent response. The Academy of Management Annals, 12(1), 357–389. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2016.0051
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Es-Sajjade, A., Pandza, K., & Volberda, H. (2021). Growing pains: Paradoxical tensions and vicious cycles in new venture growth. Strategic Organization, 19(1), 37–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127020929003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farjoun, M. (2017). Contradictions, dialectics, and paradoxes. In Ann Langley & Haridimos Tsoukas (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of process organization studies (pp. 87–109). Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Farjoun, M. (2019). Strategy and dialectics: Rejuvenating a long-standing relationship. Strategic Organization, 17(1), 133–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127018803255
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feldman, M. S. (2000). Organizational routines as a source of continuous change. Organization Science, 11(6), 611–629. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.11.6.611.12529
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Grodal, S., Anteby, M., & Holm, A. L. (2021). Achieving rigor in qualitative analysis: The role of active categorization in theory building. Academy of Management Review, 46(3), 591–612. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2018.0482
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haase, A., & Eberl, P. (2019). The challenges of routinizing for building resilient startups. Journal of Small Business Management, 57(sup2), 579–597. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12511
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hadjimichael, D., & Tsoukas, H. (2019). Toward a better understanding of tacit knowledge in organizations: Taking stock and moving forward. The Academy of Management Annals, 13(2), 672–703.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hait, A. (2021). The majority of U.S. businesses have fewer than five employees. https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2021/01/what-is-a-small-business.html
   Google Scholar
• Hargrave, T. J., & Van de Ven, A. H. (2017). Integrating dialectical and paradox perspectives on managing contradictions in organizations. Organization studies, 38(3–4), 319–339. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840616640843
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howard-Grenville, J., Nelson, A., Vough, H., & Zilber, T. B. (2021). From the editors—Achieving fit and avoiding misfit in qualitative research. Academy of Management Journal, 64(5), 1313–1323. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2021.4005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iborra, M., Safón, V., & Dolz, C. (2022). Does ambidexterity consistency benefit small and medium-sized enterprises’ resilience? Journal of Small Business Management, 60(5), 1–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2021.2014508
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jarzabkowski, P. (2020). Qualitative analysis boot camp V: Theoretical hunches and how to theorize from data. PDW presented at the 2020 Academy of Management Conference, Virtual.
   Google Scholar
• Jarzabkowski, P., Burke, G., & Spee, P. (2015). Constructing spaces for strategic work: A multimodal perspective. British Journal of Management, 26, S26–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12082
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jiao, K., Ling, Y., & Kellermanns, F. W. (2021). Does prior experience matter? A meta-analysis of the relationship between the prior experience of entrepreneurs and firm performance. Journal of Small Business Management, 1–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2021.1951280
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kor, Y. Y., & Mahoney, J. T. (2000). Penrose’s resource-based approach: The process and product of research creativity. Journal of Management Studies, 37(1), 109–139. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00174
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kudesia, R. S. (2019). Mindfulness as metacognitive practice. Academy of Management Review, 44(2), 405–423. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2015.0333
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langley, A., & Sloan, P. (2012). Organizational change and dialectic processes. In D. D. Boje, B. Burnes, & J. Hassard (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Organizational Change (pp. 261–275). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Law, J. (2004). After method: Mess in social science research. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Leitch, C., Hill, F., & Neergaard, H. (2010). Entrepreneurial and business growth and the quest for a “comprehensive theory”: Tilting at windmills? Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 34(2), 249–260. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00374.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levie, J., & Lichtenstein, B. B. (2010). A terminal assessment of stages theory: Introducing a dynamic states approach to entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and practice, 34(2), 317–350. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00377.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis, M. W., & Smith, W. K. (2022). Reflections on the 2021 decade award: Navigating Paradox is Paradoxical. Academy of Management Review, 47(4), 528–548. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2022.0251
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lillrank, P. (2003). The quality of standard, routine and nonroutine processes. Organization Studies, 24(2), 215–233. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840603024002344
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luger, J., Raisch, S., & Schimmer, M. (2018). Dynamic balancing of exploration and exploitation: The contingent benefits of ambidexterity. Organization Science, 29(3), 449–470. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2017.1189
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mantere, S., & Ketokivi, M. (2013). Reasoning in organization science. Academy of Management Review, 38(1), 70–89. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2011.0188
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKelvie, A., & Wiklund, J. (2010). Advancing firm growth research: A focus on growth mode instead of growth rate. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 34(2), 261–288. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00375.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milosevic, I., Bass, A. E., & Combs, G. M. (2018). The paradox of knowledge creation in a high-reliability organization: A case study. Journal of Management, 44(3), 1174–1201. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315599215
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Penrose, E. T. (1995). The theory of the growth of the firm (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.v. (Original work published 1959)
   Google Scholar
• Pratt, M. G., & Rafaeli, A. (2013). Artifacts and organizations: Understanding our “objective” reality. In A. Rafaeli, & M. G. Pratt (Eds.), Artifacts and organizations (pp. 295–304). Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Putnam, L. L. (2015). Unpacking the dialectic: Alternative views on the discourse–materiality relationship. Journal of Management Studies, 52(5), 706–716. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12115
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raisch, S., Hargrave, T. J., & Van De Ven, A. H. (2018). The learning spiral: A process perspective on paradox. Journal of Management Studies, 55(8), 1507–1526. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12397
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rawski, S. L., O’Leary-Kelly, A. M., & Breaux-Soignet, D. (2022). It’s all fun and games until someone gets hurt: An interactional framing theory of work social sexual behavior. Academy of Management Review, 47(4), 617–636.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ray, J. L., & Smith, A.D. (2012). Using photographs to research organizations: Evidence, considerations, and application in a field study. Organizational Research Methods, 15(2), 288–315. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428111431110
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sætre, A. S., & Van de Ven, A. (2021). Generating theory by abduction. Academy of Management Review, 46(4), 684–701. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2019.0233
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sapienza, H. J., Parhankangas, A., & Autio, E. (2004). Knowledge relatedness and post-spin-off growth. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(6), 809–829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2003.06.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schad, J., & Bansal, P. (2018). Seeing the forest and the trees: How a systems perspective informs paradox research. Journal of Management Studies, 55(8), 1490–1506. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12398
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schad, J., Lewis, M. W., Raisch, S., & Smith, W. K. (2016). Paradox research in management science: Looking back to move forward. The Academy of Management Annals, 10(1), 5–64. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2016.1162422
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shepherd, D. A., & Patzelt, H. (2020). A call for research on the scaling of organizations and the scaling of social impact. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 46(2), 255–268. https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258720950599
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheppard, M. (2020). The relationship between discretionary slack and growth in small firms. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 16(1), 195–219. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-018-0498-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shotter, J., & Tsoukas, H. (2011). Complex thought, simple talk: An ecological approach to language-based change in organizations. The Sage Handbook of Complexity and Management, 333–348.
   Google Scholar
• Stampfl, G., Prügl, R., & Osterloh, V. (2013). An explorative model of business model scalability. International Journal of Product Development, 18(3–4), 226–248. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPD.2013.055014
   Google Scholar
• Sternad, D., & Mödritscher, G. (2020). Entrepreneurial leaps: Growth processes in transition phases between dynamic states. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 46(4), 952–984. https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258720929890
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomas, G. H., & Douglas, E. J. (2022). Resource reconfiguration by surviving SMEs in a disrupted industry. Journal of Small Business Management, 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2021.2009489
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Timmermans, S., & Tavory, I. (2012). Theory construction in qualitative research: From grounded theory to abductive analysis. Sociological Theory, 30(3), 167–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735275112457914
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative inquiry, 16(10), 837–851. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410383121
   Web of Science ®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
• Tunberg, M., & Anderson, A. (2020). Growing a small firm; Experiences and managing difficult processes. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 16(4), 1445–1463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-020-00647-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaughan, D. (1996). The challenger launch decision: Risky technology, culture, and deviance at NASA. University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Waller, M. J., Gupta, N., & Giambatista, R. C. (2004). Effects of adaptive behaviors and shared mental models on control crew performance. Management science, 50(11), 1534–1544. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1040.0210
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weick, K. E. (1979). The social psychology of organizing (2nd ed.). Addison.
   Google Scholar
• Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations (Vol. 3). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Winograd, T., & Flores, F. (2008). Understanding computers and cognition: A new foundation for design. Addison- Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Wolcott, H. F. (1994). Transforming qualitative data: Description, analysis, and interpretation. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Wolcott, H. F. (2008). Ethnography: A way of seeing. AltaMira Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wright, M., & Stigliani, I. (2013). Entrepreneurship and growth. International Small Business Journal, 31(1), 3–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zahra, S. A. (2021). The resource-based view, resourcefulness, and resource management in startup firms: A proposed research agenda. Journal of Management, 47(7), 1841–1860. https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063211018505
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar