Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Institutional entrepreneurship, governance, and poverty: Insights from emergency medical response servicesin India

  • Published:
Asia Pacific Journal of Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We present an in-depth case study of GVK Emergency Management and Research Institute, an Indian public–private partnership (PPP), which successfully brought emergency medical response to remote and urban settings. Drawing insights from the case, we investigate how the organization established itself through institutional entrepreneurship using a process conceptualized as opportunity framing, entrenchment, and propagation. The case and context highlight the need for innovation in organizational design and governance modes to create a new opportunity that connects state actors, private healthcare providers, and the public at large. We consider the role of open innovation and novel business models in creating these service platforms. The implications of our findings for the literature on PPPs, institutional entrepreneurship, inclusive and open innovation, and organizational design in base of the pyramid contexts are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Though we call it PPP, the contracts between EMRI and the State governments call the relationship “Public–Private Not-for-Profit Partnership.”

References

  • Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. 2012. Why nations fail: The origins of power, prosperity and poverty. London: Profile.

  • Ahlstrom, D. 2010. Innovation and growth: How business contributes to society. Academy of Management Perspectives, 24(3): 10–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahlstrom, D., & Ding, Z. 2014. Entrepreneurship in China: An overview. International Small Business Journal, 32(6): 1–9.

  • Ahlstrom, D., Young, M. N., Chan, E. S., & Bruton, G. D. 2004. Facing constraints to growth? Overseas Chinese entrepreneurs and traditional business practices in East Asia. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 21(3): 263–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahlstrom, D., Bruton, G. D., & Yeh, K. S. 2008. Private firms in China: Building legitimacy in an emerging economy. Journal of World Business, 43(4): 385–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexy, O., & George, G. 2013. Category divergence, straddling, and currency: Open innovation and the legitimation of illegitimate categories. Journal of Management Studies, 50: 173–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexy, O., George, G., & Salter, A. 2013. Cui bono? Selective revealing of knowledge and its implications for innovative activity. Academy of Management Review, 38(2): 270–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amit, R., & Zott, C. 2001. Value creation in e-business. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6–7): 493–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ansari, S., Munir, K., & Gregg, T. 2012. Impact at the ‘Bottom of the Pyramid’: The role of social capital in capability development and community empowerment. Journal of Management Studies, 49(4): 813–842.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R. A., & Ensley, M. D. 2006. Opportunity recognition as the detection of meaningful patterns: Evidence from comparisons of novice and experienced entrepreneurs. Management Science, 52(9): 1331–1344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bock, A., Opsahl, T., George, G., & Gann, D. M. 2012. The effects of culture and structure on strategic flexibility during business model innovation. Journal of Management Studies, 49(2): 279–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruton, G. D., Ahlstrom, D., & Wan, J. C. C. 2001. Turnaround success of large and midsize Chinese owned firms: Evidence from Hong Kong and Thailand. Journal of World Business, 36(2): 146–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruton, G. D., Ahlstrom, D., & Obloj, K. 2008. Entrepreneurship in emerging economies: Where are we today and where should the research go in the future. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 32(1): 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruton, G. D., Ketchen, D., & Ireland, D. 2013. Entrepreneurship as a solution to poverty. Journal of Business Venturing, 28: 683–689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H. W. 2003. Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

  • Chesbrough, H. 2006. Open business models. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

  • Chesbrough, H. 2011. Bringing open innovation to services. MIT Sloan Management Review, 52(2): 85–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Comim, F., Qizilbash, M., & Alkire, S. (Eds.). 2008. The capability approach: Concepts, measures and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Companys, Y. E., & McMullen, J. S. 2007. Strategic entrepreneurs at work: The nature, discovery, and exploitation of entrepreneurial opportunities. Small Business Economics, 28(4): 301–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dacin, M. T., Dacin, P. A., & Tracey, P. 2011. Social entrepreneurship: A critique and future directions. Organization Science, 22(5): 1203–1213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahlander, L., & Gann, D. M. 2010. How open is innovation?. Research Policy, 39(6): 699–709.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Di Domenico, M., Haugh, H., & Tracey, P. 2010. Social bricolage: Theorizing social value creation in social enterprises. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 34(4): 681–703.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J. 1988. Interest and agency in institutional theory. In L. G. Zucker (Ed.). Institutional patterns and organizations: Culture and environment, 1: 3–22. Cambridge: Ballinger.

  • Dorado, S. 2005. Institutional entrepreneurship, partaking and convening. Organization Studies, 26: 383–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fligstein, N. 1997. Social skill and institutional theory. American Behavioral Scientist, 40(4): 397–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garud, R., & Ahlstrom, D. 1997. Technology assessment: A socio-cognitive perspective. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 14: 25–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garud, R., Jain, S., & Kumaraswamy, A. 2002. Institutional entrepreneurship in the sponsorship of common technological standards: The case of Sun Microsystems and Java. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 196–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • George, G., & Bock, A. J. 2011. The business model in practice and its implications for entrepreneurship research. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 35(1): 83–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • George, G., & Bock, A. J. 2012. Models of opportunity: How entrepreneurs design firms to achieve the unexpected. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • George, G., McGahan, A. M., & Prabhu, J. 2012. Innovation for inclusive growth: Towards a theoretical framework and a research agenda. Journal of Management Studies, 49(4): 661–683.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, R., & Suddaby, R. 2006. Institutional entrepreneurship in mature fields: The big five accounting firms. Academy of Management Journal, 49: 27–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, R., Hinings, C. R., & Suddaby, R. 2002. Theorizing change: The role of professional associations in the transformation of institutionalized fields. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1): 58–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, D., & Durand, R. 2008. Social issues in the study of management. European Management Review, 5(3): 137–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, J., Matos, S., Sheehan, L., & Silvestre, B. 2012. Entrepreneurship and innovation at the base of the pyramid: A recipe for inclusive growth or social exclusion?. Journal of Management Studies, 49(4): 785–812.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halme, M., Lindeman, S., & Linna, P. 2012. Innovation for inclusive business: Intrapreneurial bricolage in multinational corporations. Journal of Management Studies, 49(4): 743–784.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hargadon, A., & Sutton, R. I. 1997. Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42: 716–749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, O. 2003. Incomplete contracts and public ownership: Remarks, and an application to public private partnerships. Economic Journal, 113(486): C69–C76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heath, C., & Staudenmayer, N. 2000. Coordination neglect: How lay theories of organizing complicate coordination in organizations. Research in Organization Behavior, 22: 153–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinings, C. R., & Greenwood, R. 2002. Disconnects and consequences in organization theory?. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(3): 411–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch, P. M. 1975. Organizational effectiveness and the institutional environment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 20(3): 327–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmstrom, B., & Milgrom, P. 1994. The firm as an incentive system. American Economic Review, 84(4): 972–991.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jain, S., & George, G. 2007. Technology transfer offices as institutional entrepreneurs: The case of Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation and human embryonic stem cells. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4): 535–567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joshipura, M., Shah, H., Patel, P. R., & Divatia, P. A. 2004. Trauma care systems in India—An overview. Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine, 8(2): 93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khaire, M., & Wadhwani, R. D. 2010. Changing landscapes: The construction of meaning and value in a new market category—Modern Indian art. Academy of Management Journal, 53(6): 1281–1304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khavul, S., & Bruton, G. D. 2013. Harnessing innovation for change: Sustainability and poverty in developing countries. Journal of Management Studies, 50: 285–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirzner, I. M. 1997. Entrepreneurial discovery and the competitive market process: An Austrian approach. Journal of Economic Literature, 35(1): 60–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kistruck, G., Beamish, P., Qureshi, I., & Sutter, C. 2013. Social intermediation in base of the pyramid markets. Journal of Management Studies, 50: 31–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kivleniece, I., & Quelin, B. V. 2012. Creating and capturing value in public-private ties: A private actor’s perspective. Academy of Management Review, 37(2): 272–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotha, R., George, G., & Srikanth, K. 2013. Bridging the mutual knowledge gap: Coordination and the commercialization of university science. Academy of Management Journal, 56: 498–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lahariya, C., Khandekar, H., Prasuna, J. G., & Meenakshi, P. S. K. 2007. A critical review of National Rural Health Mission in India. Internet Journal of Health, 6(1): 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laursen, K., & Salter, A. 2006. Open for innovation: The role of openness in explaining innovation performance among UK manufacturing firms. Strategic Management Journal, 27: 131–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, J. 2009. Boulevard of broken dreams: Why public efforts to boost entrepreneurship and venture capital have failed—and what to do about it. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

  • London, T., & Hart, S. L. 2004. Reinventing strategies for emerging markets: Beyond the transnational model. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(5): 350–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maguire, S., Hardy, C., & Lawrence, T. 2004. Institutional entrepreneurship in emerging fields: HIV/AIDS treatment advocacy in Canada. Academy of Management Journal, 47: 657–679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney, J. T., McGahan, A. M., & Pitelis, C. N. 2009. Perspective—The interdependence of private and public interests. Organization Science, 20(6): 1034–1052.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mair, J., Marti, I., & Ventresca, M. 2012. Building inclusive markets in rural Bangladesh: How intermediaries work institutional voids. Academy of Management Journal, 55: 819–850.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. 2003. Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2): 268–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, G. A., Corredoira, R., & Kruse, G. 2009. Public-private institutions as catalysts of upgrading in emerging markets. Academy of Management Journal, 52: 1270–1296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMullen, J. S., & Shepherd, D. A. 2006. Entrepreneurial action and the role of uncertainty in the theory of the entrepreneur. Academy of Management Review, 31(1): 132–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. 1977. Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2): 340–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohan, D. 2002. Road safety in less-motorized environments: Future concerns. International Journal of Epidemiology, 31(3): 527–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mokyr, J. 1992. The lever of riches: Technological creativity and economic progress. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Munir, K., & Phillips, N. 2005. The birth of the “Kodak moment”: Institutional entrepreneurship and the adoption of new technologies. Organization Studies, 26: 1665–1687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naudé, W. 2011. Entrepreneurship is not a binding constraint on growth and development in the poorest countries. World Development, 39(1): 33–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • North, D. C. 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Parikh, P., Chaturvedi, S., & George, G. 2012. The effects of energy provision on individual aspiration in slum communities. Energy Policy, 50: 477–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peden, M. 2004. World report on road traffic injury prevention. Geneva: The World Health Organization.

  • Perkins, D. H., Radelet, S., Lindauer, D. L., & Block, S. A. 2013. Economics of development, 7th ed. New York: W. W. Norton.

  • Powell, W. W., White, D. R., Koput, K. W., & Owen-Smith, J. 2005. Network dynamics and field evolution: The growth of interorganizational collaboration in the life sciences. American Journal of Sociology, 110(4): 1132–1205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C. K. 2007. The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid: Eradicating poverty through profits. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Wharton School Publishing.

  • Prahalad, C. K., & Mashelkar, R. A. 2010. Innovation’s Holy Grail. Harvard Business Review, 88(7–8): 132–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rangan, S., Samii, R., & Van Wassenhove, L. N. 2006. Constructive partnerships: When alliances between private firms and public actors can enable creative strategies. Academy of Management Review, 31(3): 738–751.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rangarajan, L. 1992. Kautilya: The Arthashastra. Basu Mudran: Penguin Books India.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robeyns, I. 2005. The capability approach: A theoretical survey. Journal of Human Development, 6(1): 93–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roxas, S. K., & Ungson, G. R. 2011. From alleviation to eradication: A reassessment of modernization, market-based, and communitarian solutions to global poverty. Poverty and Public Policy, 3(2): 254–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santos, F. M., & Eisenhardt, K. M. 2009. Constructing markets and shaping boundaries: Entrepreneurial power in nascent fields. Academy of Management Journal, 52(4): 643–671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sasser, S., Varghese, M., Kellermannm, A., & Lormand, J. D. 2005. Prehospital trauma care systems. Geneva: The World Health Organization.

  • Selznick, P. 1996. Institutionalism old and new. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: 270–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. 1992. Inequality Re-examined. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, D. A., McMullen, J. S., & Jennings, P. D. 2007. The formation of opportunity beliefs: Overcoming ignorance and reducing doubt. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 1(1–2): 75–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tracey, P., Phillips, N., & Jarvis, O. 2011. Bridging institutional entrepreneurship and the creation of new organizational forms: A multilevel model. Organization Science, 22(1): 60–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsoukas, H. 1989. The validity of idiographic research explanations. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 551–561.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsui, A. S. 2006. Contextualization in Chinese management research. Management and Organization Review, 2(1): 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven, A. H., & Garud, R. 1994. The coevolution of technical and institutional events in the development of an innovation. In J.A.C. Baum & J.V. Singh (Eds.). Evolutionary Dynamics of Organizations: 425–443. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Young, M. N., Ahlstrom, D., & Bruton, G. D. 2004. The globalization of corporate governance in East Asia: The transnational solution. Management International Review, 44(2): 31–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zott, C., Amit, R., & Massa, L. 2011. The business model: Recent developments and future research. Journal of Management, 37(4): 1019–1042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Gerard George and Chris Corbishley gratefully acknowledge the Economic and Social Research Council Professorial Fellowship and doctoral assistantship (RES-051-27-0321). The authors acknowledge the support of the Rajiv Gandhi Centre at Imperial College London and the support of the management team of EMRI. The authors would like to thank Rachel (Rae) Pinkham and Marc Ahlstrom of Burlington County College for their editorial assistance.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Imperial College London, London, UK

    Gerard George, Christopher Corbishley & Rahul Bansal

  2. School of Management, University of Bath, Bath, UK

    Rekha Rao-Nicholson

Authors
  1. Gerard George
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rekha Rao-Nicholson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christopher Corbishley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rahul Bansal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gerard George.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

George, G., Rao-Nicholson, R., Corbishley, C. et al. Institutional entrepreneurship, governance, and poverty: Insights from emergency medical response servicesin India. Asia Pac J Manag 32, 39–65 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-014-9377-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-014-9377-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation