Which of the following describes the three types of organizational isomorphism?

Scientific evidence indicates that climate change related to carbon emissions is a global problem and 43% of the CO2 emissions due to fuel combustion are related to coal combustion. However, coal is used to meet most of the growing energy demands of developing countries where energy-intensive industrial production is expanding. The challenges of adapting to climate change are particularly acute for China. In 2008, the China Meteorological Administration stated that over the past century, the average temperature of the earth's surface in China has risen by 1.1 °C. Between 1986 and 2007, China experienced 21 warm winters1. Carbon management by industrial firms plays an important role in the adaptation process but management is challenged by many carbon management-related pressures (Cadez and Czerny, 2015). Studies have shown that firms within a specific field will respond to isomorphic pressures (Dimaggio and Powell, 2000), which can be described as three types comprising coercive, mimetic, and normative isomorphic processes (Dimaggio and Powell, 1983). These multi-faceted isomorphic pressures include those derived from regulatory and market competition (Huang et al., 2016; Hazen et al., 2017), communities, and non-governmental organizations (Zhu et al., 2007). Furthermore, the associations between mimetic pressures and coercive and normative pressures have been explored previously (Liu, 2009).

Firms may model themselves on other firms. For example, they may emulate the low carbon activities or carbon management systems of other firms. Previous researchers have grounded discussions of this phenomenon mainly in institutional theory. However, some criticisms of this theory have been discussed. For example, Greenwood and Hinings (1996) indicated that the theory says nothing about why some organizations adopt radical change whereas others do not when facing the same institutional pressures. Integrating the internal dynamics within organizations could partly avoid this deficiency. Recent studies (Colwell and Joshi, 2013; Dubey et al., 2017) have attempted to integrate institutional theory with factors such as top management commitment and organizational culture. Another criticism is that institutional theory does not focus on organizational performance and competitive advantage (Jonsson and Regnér, 2009), but Oliver integrated it with a resource-based view (Oliver, 1997a) and contingency theory (Oliver, 1997b). Firms may react by exhibiting a variety of behaviors when faced with isomorphic pressures and other factors. The difficulty of assessing these pressures involves determining whether they are effective at inducing predictable firm responses. Thus, it is important to explore the relationships between isomorphic pressures and the carbon management behavior of firms, as well as the key factors involved, such as firm size and ownership, which can lead more firms to improve their carbon management behavior.

However, until recently, few studies have empirically explored the relationships between isomorphic pressures and the carbon management imitation behavior of firms. Thus, in the present study, we explored the relationships between isomorphic pressures and the carbon management imitation behavior of firms. In particular, what are the strongest or weakest isomorphic pressures in China? What is the relationship among these different types of pressure? What are the different carbon management imitation behaviors exhibited by firms? Answering these questions may facilitate decision making to promote carbon management by firms.

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we review previous research in this area. In Section 3, we describe the theoretical framework. In Section 4, we explain the empirical study. The results and discussion are presented in Section 5. We give our conclusions and policy analysis in Section 6.

Literature review

Interesting research has begun to emerge recently regarding isomorphic pressures (Dubey et al., 2015). The concept of isomorphism describes the phenomenon where management behaviors and processes are similar across different organizations (Hawley, 1968). The three isomorphic pressures comprise coercive pressures, mimetic pressures, and normative pressures (Dimaggio and Powell, 2000). Organizations are susceptible to mimetic, normative, and coercive pressures. In particular, governmental

Theoretical framework

Studies suggest that the behaviors of firms may be contrary to rational decision making (Kauppi, 2013). However, the use of institutional theory to explore the isomorphism within organizations can provide alternative explanations regarding the adoption of carbon management strategies. The three isomorphic pressures comprise coercive pressures, mimetic pressures, and normative pressures (Dimaggio and Powell, 2000).

Coercive isomorphic pressures are derived from the pressures exerted on firms by

Research site

The research site considered in the present study was Chongqing (Fig. 2), which is a major city in Southwest China. Administratively, it is one of China's four directly controlled municipalities, where the others are Beijing, Shanghai, and Tianjin. Chongqing is the economic center of the upstream Yangtze basin and a major manufacturing center. In 1978, the city consumed 889.21 × 104 t of standard coal, whereas it consumed 9195.25 × 104 t of standard coal in 2014 (Cao and Tang, 2015). In

The answers given by the interviewees regarding isomorphic pressures on carbon management are presented in Table 6. The interviewees felt that pressures from competitors were the strongest, followed by the pressures from government, whereas pressures from standards and professionalization were weakest. In order to promote low carbon development, Chinese governments have implemented some carbon management-related rules, such as low carbon city plans, national low carbon development plans, and

Conclusions with suggestions

According to the present study, isomorphic pressures comprised coercive, mimetic, and normative pressures. The answers given by the interviewees regarding the isomorphic pressures on carbon management indicated that pressures from competitors were strongest, followed by the pressures from government. Pressures from standards were weakest. The results also indicated that firms often adopted low-cost carbon management imitation behaviors, e.g., establishing low-carbon behavior rules and

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (41671515; 41301612) and Tianjin University (2018XRX-0030).

Cited by (11)

• Does a firm's low-carbon awareness promote low-carbon behaviors? Empirical evidence from China

  2020, Journal of Cleaner Production

  In line with extant studies (Clarkson et al., 2008; Plumlee et al., 2015), we separate low-carbon behaviors into soft low-carbon behaviors and hard low-carbon behaviors. Specifically, we measure soft low-carbon behaviors based on five items, drawing on the contributions of previous studies (Clarkson et al., 2008; Lin and Yu, 2014; Jiang and Wong, 2016; Jiang et al., 2017; Liu et al., 2018). Items are shown in Table 2.

Recommended articles (6)