Detroit, we have a problem: A study of elite resistance and nonelite-led change

The hierarchical stratification of mature fields into powerful elites, who benefit more, and nonelites, who benefit less but often also profit from the status quo, is a core aspect of neoinstitutional theory, as is the enshrinement of the power and interests of elites in taken-for-granted institutional logics that drive field interactions. Increasingly, the entry of sizable foreign rivals as trade barriers have fallen has led to intensified rivalry in many commercial fields that has harmed both elites and nonelites but also exposed incumbent field members to alternative institutional logics.;My findings show that horizontal economic pressure from strong foreign challengers stimulates incumbent elites to resist the adoption of new logics associated with the strong challengers and to adhere to long-held institutional logics even when faced with significant political pressure for change. In turn, this study indicates that, when elites are locked in their ways, nonelites can play an essential role in promoting changes that ensure overall field welfare. However, when nonelites are long used to responding to elites, this requires that nonelites must first change their own logics and then take action to develop sufficient vertical economic leverage to move elites. Successful bottom-up change includes boundary spanning by nonelites and institutional entrepreneurs but also the ongoing engagement of many and diverse field members to create awareness of misaligned interests. Nonelites that have access to prestigious field forums are able to sustain awareness of the need for action.;In short, exogenous-triggered crises lead incumbent elites to more rigidly defend their logics, imperiling nonelites and elites alike. Field decline can be averted by bottom-up, nonelite-led change initiatives.;My research seeks to contribute to how globalization and competition changes elite and nonelite held institutional logics and power relationships in a hierarchically-structured commercial setting. I used an inductive case study design that combined multiple data types and sources to examine how interactions between incumbent elites and nonelites as categories of actors with elites represented by the Big Three, namely General Motors, Ford and Chrysler, and nonelites represented by auto parts suppliers in Ontario and Michigan. My focus in how relationships between elites and nonelites changed over the period 2000-2006 as a result of the co-location of Big Three and Toyota and Honda assembly plants.