The Life of a Project:
Accomplishing Legitimacy in
Sustained Innovation
Renee Rottner
Why this study?
• Sustained innovation is key to R&D projects of
high scientific, economic, and political impact:
– Pharmaceuticals, sustainable energy, aircraft
design, military systems, basic research
– Long development times, iterative innovation
• Little is known about how innovation is sustained
– It is fragile (Cheng & Van de Ven, 1996; Dougherty
& Hardy, 1996 Jelinek & Schoonhoven, 1993)
– Legitimacy is important (Arndt & Bigelow, 2000)
Definitions
Innovation: The creation and development of a new combination of
materials or forces. (Schumpeter, 1934)
Sustained innovation: management of multiple innovation efforts in
coordination with past and future efforts (Bartel & Garud, 2009; Dougherty &
Hardy, 1995)
A longitudinal process involving…
Legitimacy: perception that actions of an entity are appropriate or
‘right’ within some social system, assessed by stakeholders who
have varying interests and criteria (Suchman, 1995; Reuf & Scott, 1998;
Elsbach & Sutton, 1992; Zelditch, 2001)
not a resource but a relation between power holders
Research Question
How is legitimacy accomplished in an
innovation project over time?
Context:
An innovation project at NASA, 1972-2003
Method:
Inductive, grounded theory building
What do we know about legitimacy?
Institutional Theory
Interactionist
Sociology
Level of
analysis
Organizational fields
Individuals
Conception
of legitimacy
Characteristic of entity
Relationship
between entities
Empirical
focus
Outcome
Process
Analytical
focus
Typologies (e.g., pragmatic,
moral, cognitive legitimacy)
Strategies
Sources of
legitimacy
Components of institutions
(cognitive, normative, regulative)
“Gatekeepers of
resources” *
Deephouse, 1996; DiMaggio & Powell, 1993;
Suchman, 1995; Ruef & Scott, 1998; Human
& Provan, 2000
Fine, 1984; Strauss, 1978,
1982*, 1993
Blending the perspectives
Inhabited Institutions
• Actions are embedded in organizations
(Barley, 2008; Bechky,
2009; Hallett, Schulman & Fine, 2009; Hallett & Ventresca, 2006)
• Limited focus on legitimacy (Creed et al., 2002; Scully & Creed, 1997)
• Limited empirical work (Binder, 2007; Hallett, 2010)
• Not focused on innovation
Need for building theory on legitimacy
• Structuring of legitimacy (Barley, 2008)
• Sequencing of legitimacy (Deephouse & Suchman, 2008
Suchman, 1995)
• Creating and restoring legitimacy (Powell & Colyvas, 2008)
• Across audiences (Suddaby, Hinnings & Greenwood, 2002)
“Selling it”: Strategies for legitimacy
Creating shared meaning & managing stakeholders
•
•
•
•
•
Storytelling (Lounsbury & Glynn, 2001)
Issue selling (Dutton & Ashford, 1993; Dutton et al., 2001; Howard-Grenville, 2007)
Discourse (Phillips, Lawrence & Hardy, 2004)
Rhetoric (Creed, Scully & Austin, 2002; Suddaby & Greenwood, 2005)
Impression management (Bansal & Clelland, 2004; Elsbach, 1994; Elsbach &
Sutton, 1992)
• Consensus of stakeholders (Neilson & Rao, 1987)
• Framing (Rao, Morrill & Zald, 2000; Swaminathan and Wade, 2001; Dowell,
Swaminathan & Wade, 2002; Fiss & Zajac, 2006; Kennedy & Fiss, 2009)
Technology also carries meaning (Orlikowski & Scott, 2009; Carlile, 2002;
Suchman, 2007)
Research Design
“Our biggest challenge was figuring out what to
worry about and when to stop worrying about it.”
—Deputy project scientist
WHO IS
DOING
WHAT
TO
WHOM
BY WHAT
CRITERIA
Actors
Strategies
Audience(s) Rules/norms
• Project team
• Power
holders
• Rhetorical
• Material
• Resource
providers
• Multi-level
• Shifting
•
•
•
•
Technical
Scientific
Political
Economic
Rhetorical vs. Material
Rhetorical strategy:
Material strategy:
Persuasion
through
language
Persuasion
through
structure or
non-verbal
actions
(Orlikowski & Scott, 2009; Latour, 2005)
Audience
/ Criteria
Rhetorical
Strategy
Material
Strategy
NASA HQ
Buildable?
Write project
proposals
Run
tests
erawdraH emoS ,retaL
Congress
Affordable?
Mention reuse
of military tech
Show
prototypes
8991 ~
92-83
Academics
Usable?
Publish articles
on theory
Build
data
centers
”1
Data: Longitudinal, multi-level, process
Actors/Period ‘71-’83 ‘84-’89 ‘89-’96 ‘96-’03
Scientists
3
5
4
5
Engineers
2
3
2
6
1
1
2
Contractors
Headquarters
2
3
3
2
Ext. Advisors
3
3
4
5
Feasibility
Studies,
Decadal
Surveys,
Budgets
Meeting
Minutes,
Decadal
Surveys,
Budgets,
Meeting
Minutes,
Decadal
Surveys,
Budgets,
Diaries
Meeting
Minutes,
Decadal
Surveys,
Budgets,
Diaries
#’s: people interviewed
850 pages of interview
transcripts
20,000 pages of archival
documents
“Orphan moment”
Bigger is not better
33 inches
HQ: buildable? 
Congress: affordable?
Academics: usable?


Analysis steps
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Longitudinal in-depth case history
Identify critical events in timeline
Examine actions before/after events
Code the data for strategies
Compare strategies of legitimacy over
time
Contributions to Theory
• Legitimacy as:
– a process (not an outcome)
– at multiple levels
– over time
• Foundation for identifying and
measuring legitimation strategies
• Framework for sustaining innovation
over time
Questions
Additional Slides
• Temporal analyses of strategies
• Legitimation Processes (Strauss, 1982)
• Social movement theory
Temporal analyses of strategies
TIMELINES
Political criteria
Economic criteria
Scientific criteria
Technical criteria
A.
Event depth
(major event or
critical juncture
in one period)
B.
Event breadth
(one event that
spans multiple
criteria in one period)
C.
Frame depth
(one event that spans
multiple periods)
D.
Frame breadth
(multiple events
that span multiple
criteria in one period)
E.
Diachronic
(one criteria that
spans multiple
periods)
Legitimation Processes (Strauss, 1982)
•
•
•
•
•
•
Discovering and claiming worth
Distancing
Theorizing
Standard setting, embodying, evaluating
Boundary setting, boundary challenging
Claiming, distancing, theorizing,
standard and boundary setting
Social movement theory
Actions and resources are embedded in
organizations and stakeholders
Framing (Snow et al., 1986; Snow & Benford, 1988)
– Diagnostic framing (what is the problem)
– Prognostic framing (what is the solution)
– Motivational framing (why should we do it)
Resource mobilization theory
– Resources matter, they are variable and come
from a variety of sources (McCarthy & Zald, 1977, 2002)
Making the invisible visible
“Innovation was not simply suppressed
it was unseen. It was ignored and
invisible [by those] that could not
understand its role.”
—Dougherty & Hardy (1995:___)
Bigger
is better
Making meaning material