Does improvisation lead to outcome deviation? A conceptual framework of improvisation, its antecedents and outcome deviation

Management and organization literature has extensively noticed the crucial role that improvisation assumes in organizations, both as a learning process (Miner, Bassoff & Moorman, 2001), a creative process (Fisher & Amabile, 2008), a capability (Vera & Crossan, 2005), and a personal disposition (Hmielesky & Corbett, 2006; 2008). My dissertation aims to contribute to the existing literature on improvisation, addressing two general research questions: 1) How does improvisation unfold at an individual level? 2) What are the potential antecedents and consequences of individual proclivity to improvise? This dissertation is based on a mixed methodology that allowed me to deal with these two general research questions and enabled a constant interaction between the theoretical framework and the empirical results. The selected empirical field is haute cuisine and the respondents are the executive chefs of the restaurants awarded by Michelin Guide in 2010 in Italy. The qualitative section of the dissertation is based on the analysis of 26 inductive case studies and offers a multifaceted contribution. First, I describe how improvisation works both as a learning and creative process. Second, I introduce a new categorization of individual improvisational scenarios (demanded creative improvisation, problem solving improvisation, and pure creative improvisation). Third, I describe the differences between improvisation and other creative processes detected in the field (experimentation, brainstorming, trial and error through analytical procedure, trial and error, and imagination). The quantitative inquiry is founded on a Structural Equation Model, which allowed me to test simultaneously the relationships between proclivity to improvise and its antecedents and consequences. In particular, using a newly developed scale to measure individual proclivity to improvise, I test the positive influence of industry experience, self-efficacy, and age on proclivity to improvise and the negative impact of proclivity to improvise on outcome deviation. Theoretical contributions and practical implications of the results are discussed.

Institutional Complexity and Technology Transfer: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis

This Doctoral Thesis unfolds into a collection of three distinct papers that share an interest in institutional theory and technology transfer. Taking into account that organizations are increasingly exposed to a multiplicity of demands and pressures, we aim to analyze what renders this situation of institutional complexity more or less difficult to manage for organizations, and what makes organizations more or less successful in responding to it. The three studies offer a novel contribution both theoretically and empirically. In particular, the first paper “The dimensions of organizational fields for understanding institutional complexity: A theoretical framework” is a theoretical contribution that tries to better understand the relationship between institutional complexity and fields by providing a framework. The second article “Beyond institutional complexity: The case of different organizational successes in confronting multiple institutional logics” is an empirical study which aims to explore the strategies that allow organizations facing multiple logics to respond more successfully to them. The third work “ How external support may mitigate the barriers to university-industry collaboration” is oriented towards practitioners and presents a case study about technology transfer in Italy.