The environment of industrial markets is highly institutionalized, and research has documented different types of institutional work conducted by firms. However, the way in which individuals within organizations perceive and conduct such work is not well-understood. In this paper, we adopt the “inhabited institutions” approach to study how business-to-business managers experience the institutional work conducted by their companies as a strategic orientation. In-depth interviews with 34 managers reveal that institutional orientation is composed of three dimensions: the key institutional customers concept, institutional embeddedness, and market legitimacy. In addition, our study uncovers the relationships among these dimensions. The article concludes with the theoretical implications of the research as well as with a discussion regarding how a culture of institutional work, i.e., institutional orientation, can be instrumental in enhancing the performance of BtoB firms.

Introduction

An important body of research suggests that business-to-business markets have become increasingly institutionalized and complex (Auh & Menguc, 2009; Bello, Lohtia, & Sangtani, 2004; Nyström, Ramstrom, & Tornroos, 2017; Yang & Su, 2014). Keillor, Pettijohn, and Bashaw (2000) demonstrate that industrial firms experience higher levels of politically-based barriers in their global operations than business-toconsumer firms do. The institutional environment refers to political institutions such as the structure of policy making and regulation, economic institutions such as the structure of markets and the terms of access to these markets and socio-cultural institutions such as informal norms (Henisz & Delios, 2002). For instance, Bengtson, Pahlberg, and Pourmand (2009) show the importance of interactions with political actors for small European firms. In the same vein, Li, Li, and Cai (2014) demonstrate the moderating effect of a firm’s home-country’s institutional culture in the relationship between a firm’s early marketing entry and other firms’ behaviors and performance. From the institutional perspective, markets are supported by three institutional pillars: a cognitive pillar, a normative pillar and a regulatory pillar (Scott, 2013). To thrive in this environment, organizations must embrace a broader marketing strategy that integrates these different institutions and thus includes all of the actors who can influence the way in which a market evolves (Kotler, 1986; Yang & Wang, 2013). In institutional theory, this expanded marketing refers to institutional work, i.e., the intentional actions of individual and collective actors in the creation, maintenance and change of institutions (Lawrence & Suddaby, 2006).