December issue, answers to readers' questions, and "What is an ASQ paper?"
Our December issue overview; responses to questions on our data/methods transparency policy, reviewing, and submitting; and associate editor Greta Hsu shares thoughts on an exemplar paper.
ASQ December Issue, 2024
In a moment when the U.S. anticipates a major change in administration and policy, the December 2024 issue has several thought-provoking articles that explore the role of the state and the impact of policy. You can also find a review of the most recent book by Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson, winners of the 2024 Nobel Prize in Economics, and related book reviews about the history of anti-government ideology, innovation in government, technology, and a biography of Milton Friedman. If you are looking for a break from these heavy topics, in addition to articles on state-led destigmatization in China and the gendered impact of entrepreneurship policy in Mexico, you can read about the contingent effects of organizational rankings, race and gender in hiring and turnover, and learning from ambiguous experience, along with book reviews about the world of global art, groups, and the social construction of markets. Together, these articles and reviews deepen our understanding of the state, category stigma, competition, inequality, and inferential learning.
From Foe to Friend: Exploring State-Led Destigmatization
Milo Shaoqing Wang and Christopher W. J. Steele
How do state actors reverse course when a previously stigmatized category is seen as necessary for an economy’s development? In a fascinating longitudinal case study, Wang and Steele examine the revival of private business in China, a move that fundamentally challenged state ideology. A grounded process model shows how the public gradually came to accept the category through front and backstage actions of state and category members. The findings reveal that states—even authoritarian ones— cannot rely solely on coercion and have internal divisions and regional variation that shape the moral and pragmatic values of a category.
Falling Fortunes: The Contingent and Asymmetric Effect of Rankings on Organizational Outcomes
Wyatt Y. Lee
From hospitals to universities, organizational rankings are everywhere. But when do rankings matter? By examining Fortune 500 rankings and a natural experiment, this study finds four contextual and organizational factors that shape the relevance and information value of rankings: the direction of the change in rank, the amount of other information about the firm available, the level of audience sophistication, and the organization’s previous ranking position. The author shows that the effects of organizational rankings are asymmetric and contingent, as falls matter more than rises and the amount of substitutable and audience knowledge matters.
This Is Why I Leave: Race and Voluntary Departure
Adina D. Sterling
Labor market mobility has significant consequences for individual careers. Much is known about what explains who is hired and promoted, but why do employees leave jobs? This study uses a U.S. cohort sample to examine how resources associated with race influence voluntary departures. Sterling finds that Black workers are more likely to quit due to resource constraints (such as lack of transportation), whereas White workers are more likely to quit due to resource availability (such as to start a new business). The findings have important implications for understanding race, inequality, and voluntary turnover.
Blog post is here.
The Dynamics of Inferential Interpretation in Experiential Learning: Deciphering Hidden Goals from Ambiguous Experience
Bryan Spencer and Claus Rerup
How does a group learn when the goals of other actors in its environment are deliberately hidden? The rise of decentralized organizational structures has created ambiguous experiences, making interpretation more challenging and allowing sets of actors to conceal their actions and motives. Studying two groups in an online cryptocurrency investment community, Spencer and Rerup explain how one group learned to make collective and accurate inferences in the face of coordinated market-manipulation fraud committed by the other group. The findings highlight a dynamic process by which inferences can be drawn from ambiguous experience.
Blog post is here.
Cultural Norms and the Gendered Impact of Entrepreneurship Policy in Mexico
Grady W. Raines, Peter S. Polhill, Shon R. Hiatt, and Ryan S. Coles
Policies reducing barriers to entrepreneurship can help underrepresented groups, but this study shows that a lack of normative and cognitive support can actually undermine the goals of such policies. The authors look at changes in the entrepreneurial gap between men and women in Mexico after a policy change intended to lower barriers to entry. They find that the policy increased the rate of men’s but not women’s entry into entrepreneurship, and it also led women to take on new, unpaid roles in new ventures. They explain the variation by detailing how areas with a strong patriarchy can interact with such policies.
Blog post is here.
Who Shortlists? Evidence on Gender Disparities in Hiring Outcomes
Almasa Sarabi and Nico Lehmann
Hiring practices are a known source of gender disparities in the workplace. Investigating a multinational firm’s adoption of a new hiring process that transferred the task of shortlisting from hiring managers to HR departments, the authors find that the number of women hired increased after the new process. They find evidence suggesting a differential evaluation mechanism, as the HR professionals spent more time on and had higher expert knowledge for creating a shortlist, compared to the managers. The study provides valuable new insights about potential mechanisms for understanding and reducing gender disparities in hiring decisions.
Book Reviews
Jason Davis. Digital Relationships: Network Agency Theory and Big Tech
David Obstfeld
Gary Alan Fine and Tim Hallett. Group Life: An Invitation to Local Sociology
Timothy R. Hannigan
Sophie Mützel. Making Sense: Markets from Stories in New Breast Cancer Therapeutics
Mia Chang-Zunino
Larissa Buchholz. The Global Rules of Art: The Emergence and Divisions of a Cultural World Economy
Paul DiMaggio
Jennifer Burns. Milton Friedman: The Last Conservative
Andrew J. Hoffman
ASQ articles have often been featured on Henrich Greve’s blog site Organizational Musings.
Our student-run ASQ Blog features interviews with ASQ authors that offer insights into the research and writing process.
The latest published post features an interview by Inara S. Tareque and Shiying Wang with Wei Xia, H. Kevin Steensma, and Xiaoou Bai about their 2023 paper “When Do Collaborative First Moves Diminish Nationality-Based Homophilic Preferences? An Examination Of Chinese Venture Capital Investment Syndicates.”
ASQ Us, and We Will Respond
In our first issue, we busted some common myths about the journal. As we go forward, we want to tackle your burning questions. Here are answers to some of the questions we’ve recently received.
Please keep sending questions to us—just drop a note in the Substack chat.
1. I'm worried about submitting my paper to ASQ with the new data and transparency policy because I have data I've spent many years collecting and do not want to make it public. How would you handle this?
Authors may have reasons why sharing (quantitative) data and code is not possible, and this is explicitly a part of the policy. In fact, we offer some examples in the policy of why authors might need to do something differently. For example, authors might propose a reasonable delay in the public posting of data to have more time to benefit from their data collection effort. We also recognize that ethical or legal considerations might prohibit the dissemination of data.
Ultimately, we hope to uphold the principles of transparency, but the specific approach to achieving it may vary depending on the unique characteristics of each paper and dataset. Recognizing this, the final plan will be determined in conversation with the handling editor, who will work with the author to ensure the transparency policy is met in a way that is both feasible and appropriate for your case.
You can check our data and methods transparency policy here.
2. I'm new to reviewing. What are you expecting from a review?
Reviewing is meant to be developmental at ASQ, and reviewers help the handling editor by providing clear, prioritized feedback on the manuscript's strengths and weaknesses. This guidance enables the editor to make informed decisions and offers authors constructive advice on advancing their work.
You can learn more about writing effective developmental reviews, ASQ’s standards for a theoretical contribution, ways to communicate with the handling editor, and some practicalities on reviewing in our FAQs for reviewers.
3. What are some common problems you see in submissions?
A common problem in ASQ submissions is a lack of fit with the journal’s focus, which often leads to a desk rejection. ASQ seeks manuscripts that build on, challenge, and extend ongoing discussions—that have the potential to alter the nature of the theoretical conversations they engage with.
Another common concern is when authors attempt to “shock and awe” by including excessive details, hoping to impress reviewers. This leads to unfocused, lengthy papers that dilute the main insights. ASQ encourages authors to streamline content and focus on the strongest contributions.
Learn more about what to keep in mind when submitting in our FAQs for authors.
What's an ASQ paper?
ASQ publishes articles that significantly advance our understanding of management in a variety of ways. This heterogeneity can sometimes prevent readers from appreciating what distinguishes an ASQ paper. We have asked our associate editors to identify and share exemplar papers that represent what we look for in ASQ papers. We hope to share one response to this prompt in each newsletter. Up first is associate editor Greta Hsu, who selected the following paper and provided a nice overview of its characteristics and fit with ASQ.
Naumovska, I., & Lavie, D. (2021). When an industry peer is accused of financial misconduct: Stigma versus competition effects on non-accused firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 66(4), 1130-1172.
In this paper, Naumovska and Lavie add important nuance to our understanding of how stigma can impact firms indirectly associated with wrongdoing by introducing the idea of a "competition effect," where non-accused firms can benefit competitively if stakeholders shift support toward them as less risky alternatives. The authors demonstrate that both stigma by association and competition effects exist, with the extent of product market overlap with an accused peer determining which effect will be stronger for a non-accused firm. In doing so, they nicely integrate ideas seemingly in tension from research on stigma with research on competitive dynamics—using insights from the categories literature to help bridge the two.
This is a great example of a paper that builds upon and extends existing research in meaningful ways, as well as connects ideas from multiple literatures within organizational theory and strategy. It exemplifies what ASQ is known for: it’s an interesting, theoretically novel, broadly relevant, well-constructed study.
To stay informed, follow us on LinkedIn and subscribe to our newsletter on Substack for all the latest ASQ announcements and information.
Christine Beckman, University of California, Santa Barbara