Hybridity in Practice: Frontline Employees and the Everyday Navigation of Competing Institutional Logics

Wenpei You

Nonprofit Management and Leadership2026https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.70049article
AJG 1ABDC B
Weight
0.50

What the paper says

ABSTRACT Hybrid organizations routinely confront tensions between competing institutional logics, yet we know little about why frontline employees facing similar tensions respond differently over time. Drawing on an inductive case study of Grameen Bank China, this study examines how frontline employees' adherence to social and commercial logics evolves and shapes their responses to institutional complexity. The analysis identifies four response trajectories: tight coupling, decoupling, recoupling, and failed recoupling, and theorizes the mechanisms generating them. Frontline employees typically begin with dual familiarity with competing logics, but this state proves unstable under sustained social‐commercial tensions. Tight coupling emerges through experiential anchoring, whereby successful full‐cycle enactment and witnessed outcomes stabilize identification with the social logic. In its absence, adherence erodes, often before visible decoupling occurs. This study further identifies grounded aura as a peer‐based mechanism supporting recoupling, and a substitution effect through which commercial identification forecloses it. This study advances institutional complexity research by developing a dynamic process model of individual‐level hybridity.

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.70049

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{wenpei2026,
  title        = {{Hybridity in Practice: Frontline Employees and the Everyday Navigation of Competing Institutional Logics}},
  author       = {Wenpei You},
  journal      = {Nonprofit Management and Leadership},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.70049},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Hybridity in Practice: Frontline Employees and the Everyday Navigation of Competing Institutional Logics

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.