Purpose – To address some important ontological and epistemological concerns regarding the hybridity of organizations expressed in the topic’s call, by qualifying the hybridity of SOEs from the perspective of the Scientific State-Owned Enterprises and Shareholdings Theory – SSOESTh.
Design/methodology/approach – Considering administration an applied science (Simon 1948; Thompson 1956) adopted a societal level of analysis (Scott, 1998, Alford/ Friedland, 1985), a multidisciplinary, multilevel (Klein, Kozlowski, 2000), multi-paradigmatic approach anchored over functionalism with elements of structuralism and interpretivism (Burrel/Morgan 1989), Theory building was guided by Rueschemeyer’s (2009) focused theory frames, Lazarsfeld’s (1937) dimensionalizations and Wacker’s (1998) criteria and procedures. The object was defined through a scientific constitutive definition by differentiation, avoiding concept stretching (Sartori 1970), in a Gerring’s (2001) “min-max” strategy, attaining, through phenomenological reduction (Husserl 1907), an essentialist definition (Rueschmeyer 2009) and a universal conceptualization as a high level of abstraction category with logic and empirical properties: a) maximum extension, b) minimum intention, c) ex adverso, constituting its domain.
Findings – Different types of SOEs present different configurations of different types and levels of hybridity. The SSOESTh identifies the source of the main challenge presented by organizational hybridity and develops a correspondent administrative solution. This theory considers:
Shared public and private ownership by encompassing it in its frame’s dimensionalization of corporate governance;
Goal incongruence and different institutional logics, from a normative perspective, at the organizational level of analysis, by identifying legal and managerial devices, and from an administrative strategic perspective, at the societal level, by tying them, through iteration, to the dimensionalization of public governance;
Variety in the sources of financing as an inherent SOEs’ attribute and strategic tool;
Differentiated forms of economic and social control by acknowledging the need for mechanisms customized for the different organizational configurations.
Research Limitations/Implications – The SSOESTh offers ontological and epistemological stances essential for the adequate choice of research methods, and therefore, for the design of robust research strategies. It also offers foundations for an episteme that allows accumulation of knowledge and connecting points for different kinds of research.
Practical Implications – The elements offered by the SSOESTh are essential for the definition by societies/governments of SOEs’ missions, governances’ mechanisms and performance criteria, and therefore of modes of management, integration in the whole of the state/society, accountability mechanisms, and privatization criteria, some extensible/adaptable to other types of hybrids. They also provide tools to assure micro/macro levels integration.
Originality/value – SSOESTh’s contribution to the quest for a novel balance between public and private implications was attained by the development of specific administrative devices, guided by its unique set of ontological and epistemological stances and scientific formulations/explicitations. Inter Allia: a bachelardian disruption through an empirical conceptualization of SOEs, contrary to common sense and pre-scientific notions; new perspectives for the role of the state, and for the interaction between states and markets, which can be usefully applied to other types of hybrids.
Keywords – SOEs, State-Owned Enterprises Theory, Hybrid Organizations, Scientific State-Owned Enterprises & Shareholdings Theory, SSOESTh, Governances.
Paper type - Conceptual
