As you know, this distinction is awarded to scholars who have made pioneering and lasting contributions both to the advancement
of knowledge in the Social Sciences, dealing with organization, organizing, the organized, and organization-society relationships,
and to EGOS as an intellectual community and scholarly association. Mike has made extraordinary contributions on both counts.
Looking across his remarkable career, what strikes me most is not only the scope of his accomplishments, but also a recurring
pattern. Again and again, Mike has been a builder: a builder of ideas, of communities and conversations, of scholarly institutions
– and a builder of people.
Let me begin with Mike’s scholarly contributions. Over more than three decades, Mike has helped shape some of the most important
intellectual conversations in organization studies. His scholarship has fundamentally influenced how we think about institutions,
entrepreneurship, culture, markets, professions, social movements, and innovation. Few scholars have left such a broad imprint
across so many domains while maintaining such a distinctive intellectual voice.
Looking across his body of work, one theme stands out: Mike has consistently expanded our understanding of how institutions
matter. At a time when institutional theory was often criticized for portraying organizations as overly constrained by taken-for-granted
rules and structures, Mike helped bring institutions back to life. Through his work, institutions became not merely frameworks
that shape behavior, but dynamic systems of meaning, practice, conflict, and possibility.
Perhaps nowhere is this influence more visible than in the development of the institutional logics perspective. Together with
his collaborators, Mike helped transform logics from a promising theoretical idea into one of the most influential research
programs in contemporary organization studies. He provided generations of scholars with a powerful vocabulary for understanding
how multiple value systems coexist, collide, and interact within organizations and fields.
At the same time, Mike played a foundational role in establishing another stream of research: cultural entrepreneurship. Long
before narratives, meaning-making, legitimacy, and symbolic action became mainstream concerns in entrepreneurship research,
Mike’s work demonstrated that entrepreneurship is not simply an economic process: it is also a cultural accomplishment. New
ventures succeed not only because they mobilize resources, but because they create compelling stories, construct identities,
and persuade audiences that new possibilities deserve to exist. This insight fundamentally reshaped how many of us understand
entrepreneurship and innovation today.
What is remarkable, however, is that Mike never confined himself to a single domain. His work ranges from the recycling movement
and mutual funds to nanotechnology, social entrepreneurship, professions, markets, communities, and emerging technologies.
And yet, across all this diversity, a coherent intellectual project remains firmly visible.
Few scholars can claim to have produced influential concepts. Fewer still can claim to have created enduring conversations.
Mike has done both.
His influence extends far beyond any single discipline or scholarly community. His work is read and cited across organization
and management theory, sociology, entrepreneurship, and innovation studies. It has shaped research agendas around the globe,
and the many recognitions Mike has received throughout his career are evidence of a scholarly contribution that is not only
substantial, but lasting. And perhaps that is the most important point. Mike’s work has not simply generated findings. It
has expanded what our field is able to see, what questions we are able to ask, and what possibilities we are able to imagine.
But then scholarship alone is not what makes Mike so deserving of this recognition. A second dimension I would like to emphasize
is his contribution to our scholarly community.
Mike has long been one of our great community builders.