基于战略变革过程的认知合法性重构研究：悖论均衡视角

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 认知合法性缺失代表组织不再被顾客等利益相关者认同，属于重要的战略问题，需要通过调整战略定位等手段迎合顾客等的偏好，从而重新构建认知合法性解决。过程中存在各类组织模式和行动的转变，通过协调诸多矛盾关系实现，其中涉及众多悖论均衡问题。鉴于此，本研究将悖论均衡作为理论视角，采用单案例研究方法，探究组织基于战略变革过程如何重新构建认知合法性。研究发现，基于战略变革过程的认知合法性重构经历了认知合法性缺失、认知合法性组织内部建构和认知合法性组织外部共识化三个阶段，涉及识别认知合法性缺失问题、设定新合法性阈值、跨越新合法性阈值和推广新合法性阈值四个关键步骤；四个步骤基于“利益-责任”“利用式创新-探索式创新”和“竞争-合作”三对悖论之间存在的接续式引发关系，接续经历“隐匿—凸显—再隐匿”的状态变化实现；新需求促使悖论从隐匿状态变为凸显状态，包含着组织需要解决的发展问题，悖论从凸显状态重新回到隐匿状态，代表对应的发展问题被解决，主要通过融合、空间分离和业务分离等悖论均衡策略实现。

关键词: 悖论均衡, 认知合法性, 合法性阈值跨越, 战略变革, 案例研究

Abstract: The loss of cognitive legitimacy signifies an organization’s failure to be recognized by stakeholders such as customers, which constitutes a critical strategic issue. This requires rebuilding cognitive legitimacy by adjusting strategic positioning and other means to align with customer preferences. The process involves transformations in various organizational models and actions, achieved through the coordination of numerous conflicting relationships, which entails resolving multiple paradoxical equilibrium issues. Given this, this study adopts the paradoxical equilibrium as a theoretical lens and employs a single-case study approach to explore how organizations reconstruct cognitive legitimacy through strategic change processes. Research reveals that the reconstruction of cognitive legitimacy based on strategic change processes unfolds in three stages: cognitive legitimacy deficit, internal organizational construction of cognitive legitimacy, and external consensus-building of cognitive legitimacy. This involves four critical steps: identifying cognitive legitimacy deficits, establishing new legitimacy thresholds, crossing new legitimacy thresholds, and promoting new legitimacy thresholds; The four steps are based on the successive triggering relationship between the paradox of “profit-responsibility”, the paradox of “exploration-exploitation” and the paradox of “competition-cooperation”, whereby the succession is realized through the change of state “hidden-highlighted-hidden again”; Emerging demands propel paradoxes from latent to manifest states, revealing developmental challenges that organizations must address. Paradox’s transition back from manifest to latent states signifies the resolution of corresponding developmental issues-primarily achieved through paradox equilibrium strategies such as integration, spatial separation, and operational separation.

Key words: paradoxical equilibrium, cognitive legitimacy, legitimacy threshold crossing, strategic change, case study

曲廷琛, 林海芬, 高雨辰. 基于战略变革过程的认知合法性重构研究：悖论均衡视角[J]. 管理评论, 2026, 38(6): 270-288.

Qu Tingchen, Lin Haifen, Gao Yuchen. Research on Cognitive Legitimacy Reconstruction in the Process of Firm Strategic Change: The Perspective of Organizational Paradox Equilibrium[J]. Management Review, 2026, 38(6): 270-288.

参考文献

[1] Zimmerman M. A., Zeitz G. J. Beyond Survival: Achieving New Venture Growth by Building Legitimacy[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2002,27(3):414-431
[2] Suchman M. C. Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches[J]. The Academy of Management Review, 1995,20(3):571-610
[3] Scott W. R. Institutions and Organizations(2nd ed.)[M]. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2001
[4] 曾楚宏,朱仁宏,李孔岳. 基于战略视角的组织合法性研究[J]. 外国经济与管理, 2008,(2):9-15 Zeng C. H., Zhu R. H., Li K. Y. A Study on Organizational Legitimacy from a Strategic Perspective[J]. Foreign Economics & Management, 2008(2):9-15
[5] 徐天舒,李东. 右脑和左脑思维的互动：超大型企业战略变革的内部合法化进程——基于苏宁电器集团十年战略（2010-2020）制定过程的案例研究[J]. 南开管理评论, 2022,25(1):4-14 Xu T. S., Li D. The Interaction of Right Brain and Left Brain Thinking: The Internal Legalization Process of Strategic Change in Super Large Enterprises: A Case Study Based on the Formulation Process of Suning Electric Appliance Group’s Ten Year Strategy(2010-2020)[J]. Nankai Business Review, 2022,25(1):4-14
[6] Drori I., Honig B. A Process Model of Internal and External Legitimacy[J]. Organization Studies, 2013,34(3):345-376
[7] 魏江,王诗翔. 从“反应”到“前摄”:万向在美国的合法性战略演化(1994~2015)[J]. 管理世界, 2017,(8):136-153 Wei J., Wang S. X. From Reaction to Proaction: Legitimacy Strategy Evolution of WANXIANG in the United States (1994~2015)[J]. Journal of Management World, 2017,(8):136-153
[8] 程聪,谢洪明,池仁勇. 中国企业跨国并购的组织合法性聚焦:内部,外部,还是内部+外部?[J]. 管理世界, 2017,(4):158-173 Cheng C., Xie H. M., Chi R. Y. Organizational Legitimacy in Chinese Enterprises’ Cross-border M&A: Internal, External, or Internal + External?[J]. Journal of Management World, 2017,(4):158-173
[9] Smith W. K., Lewis M. W. Toward a Theory of Paradox: A Dynamic Equilibrium Model of Organizing[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2011,36(2):381-403
[10] Hu Y. M., Zhang H. R., Gao Y. C. In Search of Optimal Distinctiveness: Balancing Conformity and Differentiation via Organizational Learning[J]. Management and Organization Review, 2021,17（4）:690-725
[11] 林海芬,曲廷琛. 战略变革情境中的组织多层级悖论网构建——基于经典扎根理论的研究[J]. 管理科学学报, 2024,27(7):56-83 Lin H. F., Qu T. C. The Construction of Organizational Multi-level Paradox Network in the Context of Strategic Change: A Study Based on Classical Grounded Theory[J]. Journal of Management Sciences in China, 2024,27(7):56-83
[12] 赵晶,张书博,祝丽敏. 传承人合法性对家族企业战略变革的影响[J]. 中国工业经济, 2015,(8):130-144 Zhao J., Zhang S. B., Zhu L. M. The Impact of Successor Legitimacy on Strategic Change in Family Businesses[J]. China Industrial Economics, 2015,(8):130-144
[13] 田虹,刘雨湉. 数字化转型的合法性困境:企业社会责任“象征承诺”与“实质履行”的代理冲突[J]. 研究与发展管理, 2026，38（1）：52-63 Tian H., Liu Y. T. Legitimacy Dilemma of Digital Transformation: Agency Conflict between “Symbolic Commitment” and “Substantive Fulfillment” of Corporate Social Responsibility[J]. R&D Management, 2026，38（1）：52-63
[14] 黄诗淼,刘伟,林勇. 新兴市场跨国公司获取国际化多重合法性的机理及策略研究[J]. 研究与发展管理, 2025,37(2):176-189 Huang S. M., Liu W., Lin Y. Mechanism and Strategy of Emerging Market Multinational Enterprises Acquiring Multiple Legitimacies during Internationalization[J]. R&D Management, 2025, 37(2):176-189
[15] 丁奕文,周阳,周冬梅,等. 从“准入”到“扩张”:限制性市场中科技型民营企业的合法性跨越研究[J]. 管理评论, 2022,34(12):340-352 Ding Y. W., Zhou Y., Zhou D. M., et al. From “Access” to “Expansion”: A Multiple-case Study on the Legality of Technology-based Private Enterprises in Restricted Markets[J]. Management Review, 2022,34(12):340-352
[16] 李树文,唐存远,郑耀洲,等. 国有专精特新企业提升市场认知合法性的过程机制——基于佳木斯电机2000~2024年的探索性案例研究[J]. 南开管理评论, 2025,28(10):63-75 Li S. W., Tang C. Y., Zheng Y. Z., et al. The Process Mechanism of State-owned SRDI Enterprises Enhancing Cognitive Legitimacy: An Exploratory Case Study Based on Jiamusi Electric Machine from 2000 to 2024[J]. Nankai Business Review, 2025,28(10):63-75
[17] 周文辉,朱赛,蔡佳丽. 基于数字平台的创业企业如何应对独特性与合法性悖论[J]. 南开管理评论, 2025,28(8):88-98 Zhou W. H., Zhu S., Cai J. L. How to Deal with the Paradox of Uniqueness and Legitimacy for Digital Platform-based Entrepreneurial Enterprises[J]. Nankai Business Review, 2025,28(8):88-98
[18] 姜忠辉,李玉昭,罗均梅. 大型企业如何获得社会创业项目合法性——跨案例研究[J]. 管理案例研究与评论, 2022,15(4):402-416 Jiang Z. H., Li Y. Z., Luo J. M. How can Large Enterprises Acquire the Legitimacy of Social Entrepreneurial Projects: A Cross-Case Study[J]. Journal of Management Case Studies, 2022,15(4):402-416
[19] Aldrich H. E., Fiol C. M. Fools Rush in? The Institutional Context of Industry Creation[J]. Academy of Management Review,1994,19(4):645-670
[20] Zott C., Huy Q. N. How Entrepreneurs Use Symbolic Management to Acquire Resources[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2007,52(1):70-105
[21] 陈衍泰,厉婧,程聪,等. 海外创新生态系统的组织合法性动态获取研究——以“一带一路”海外园区领军企业为例[J]. 管理世界, 2021,37(8):161-180 Chen Y. T., Li J., Cheng C., et al. Legitimizing EMNEs’ Innovation Ecosystems Overseas: Evidence from an Industrial Park under the Belt&Road Initiative[J]. Journal of Management World, 2021,37(8):161-180
[22] Fisher G., Kotha S., Lahiri A. Changing with the Times: An Integrated View of Identity, Legitimacy, and New Venture Life Cycles[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2016,41(3):383-409
[23] 彭长桂,吕源. 组织正当性的话语构建:谷歌和苹果框架策略的案例分析[J]. 管理世界, 2014,(2):152-169 Peng C. G., Lv Y. Discourse Construction of Organizational Legitimacy: A Case Study of Google and Apple’s Framing Strategies[J]. Journal of Management World, 2014,(2):152-169
[24] 何霞,苏晓华. 环境动态性下新创企业战略联盟与组织合法性研究——基于组织学习视角[J]. 科研管理, 2016,37(2):90-97 He X., Su X. H. The Relationship between Strategy Alliance of New Ventures and Organizational Legitimacy under Environmental Dynamism from the Perspective of Organizational Learning[J]. Science Research Management, 2016,37(2):90-97
[25] Überbacher F. Legitimation of New Ventures: A Review and Research Programme[J]. Journal of Management Studies, 2014,51(4):667-698
[26] Poole M. S., van de Ven A. H. Using Paradox to Build Management and Organization Theories[J]. Academy of Management Review, 1989,14(4):562-578
[27] Lewis M. W. Exploring Paradox: Toward a More Comprehensive Guide[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2000,25(4):760-776
[28] Hoffmann W., Lavie D., Reuer J. J., et al. The Interplay of Competition and Cooperation[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2018,39(12):3033-3052
[29] Fairhurst G. T. Reflections: Return Paradox to the Wild? Paradox Interventions and Their Implications[J]. Journal of Change Management, 2019,19(1):6-22
[30] Jarzabkowski P., Sillince J. A Rhetoric-in-context Approach to Building Commitment to Multiple Strategic Goals[J]. Organization Studies, 2007,28(11):1639-1665
[31] 刘意,肖静华,盛君叶. 组织冲突、权力转移与企业数字化转型——索菲亚2014年—2021年纵向案例研究[J]. 管理科学学报, 2023,26(11):39-57 Liu Y., Xiao J. H., Sheng J. Y. Organizational Conflict, Power Transitions and Digital Transformation: A Longitudinal Case Study Based on Sophia 2014-2021[J]. Journal of Management Sciences in China, 2023,26(11):39-57
[32] 谢里,陈宇. 节能技术创新有助于降低能源消费吗?——“杰文斯悖论”的再检验[J]. 管理科学学报, 2021,24(12):77-91 Xie L., Chen Y. Can Energy-saving Innovation Help Reduce Energy Consumption?: Re-examination of the Jevons’ Paradox[J]. Journal of Management Sciences in China, 2021,24(12):77-91
[33] Kan M. M., Parry K. W. Identifying Paradox: A Grounded Theory of Leadership in Overcoming Resistance to Change[J]. The Leadership Quarterly, 2004,15(4):467-491
[34] 林海芬,曲廷琛. 组织悖论视角下战略变革方向塑造过程探究[J]. 科研管理, 2023,44(6):40-50 Lin H. F., Qu T. C. Research on the Formation Process of Strategic Change Directions from the Perspective of Organizational Paradox[J]. Science Research Management, 2023,44(6):40-50
[35] 曲廷琛,林海芬. 多层级悖论均衡对企业战略升级的影响机制[J]. 科技管理研究, 2023,43(8):183-192 Qu T. C., Lin H. F. Influence Mechanism of Multi-level Paradoxical Equilibrium on Firms Strategy Upgrading[J]. Science and Technology Management Research, 2023,43(8):183-192
[36] Smets M., Moss-Cowan A., Athanasopoulou A., et al. From Taking to Making Paradox: A Multi-level Perspective on how CEOs Balance Nested Paradoxes[J]. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2019,2019(1):18917
[37] O’Neil I., Ucbasaran D. Balancing “What Matters to Me” with “What Matters to Them”: Exploring the Legitimation Process of Environmental Entrepreneurs[J]. Journal of Business Venturing, 2016,31(2):133-152
[38] 宋华,于亢亢,冯云霞. 制度创业:制度压力和组织合法性间的桥梁——对特变的案例研究[J]. 管理案例研究与评论, 2013,6(3):165-177 Song H., Yu K. K., Feng Y. X. Institutional Entrepreneurship: A Bridge between Institutional Forces and Organizational Legitimacies? A Case Study of TBEA[J]. Journal of Management Case Studies, 2013,6(3):165-177
[39] Eisenhardt K. M. Building Theories from Case Study Research[J]. Academy of Management Review, 1989,14(4):532-550
[40] 毛基业,陈诚. 案例研究的理论构建:艾森哈特的新洞见——第十届“中国企业管理案例与质性研究论坛(2016)”会议综述[J]. 管理世界, 2017,(2):135-141 Mao J. Y., Chen C. Theoretical Construction of Case Studies: Eisenhardt’s New Insights—A Summary of the 10th “China Enterprise Management Case and Qualitative Research Forum (2016)” Conference[J]. Journal of Management World, 2017,(2):135-141
[41] van de Ven A. H., Huber G. P. Longitudinal Field Research Methods for Studying Processes of Organizational Change[J]. Organization Science, 1990,1(3):213-219
[42] Weick K. E. The Collapse of Sensemaking in Organizations: The Mann Gulch Disaster[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1993,38(4):628-652
[43] 李亮,刘洋,冯永春. 管理案例研究:方法与应用[M]. 北京: 北京大学出版社, 2020 Li L., Liu Y., Feng Y. C. Management Case Studies: Methods and Applications[M]. Beijing: Peking University Press, 2020
[44] Eisenhardt K. M., Graebner M. E. Theory Building from Cases: Opportunities and Challenges[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2007,50(1):25-32
[45] Yin R. K. Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods[M]. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2017