Vol.:(0123456789) Journal of Business Ethics https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-026-06281-0 ORIGINAL PAPER Bridging Different Institutional Logics: The Role of Institutional Work in Translating Sustainable Product‑Service Systems Across Contexts Rıfgı Buğra Bağcı1   · Jawwad Z. Raja2   · Ismail Gölgeci3,4  Received: 22 January 2025 / Accepted: 17 February 2026 © The Author(s) 2026 Abstract Product-service systems (PSS) are increasingly adopted by firms seeking to pursue environmental and social responsibili- ties alongside commercial goals, often with near-term trade-offs. Yet, their implementation across diverse national contexts is often fraught with tensions between competing institutional logics, constraining the scalability and robustness of PSS strategies. While institutional theory highlights how logics guide organizational behavior, less is understood about how firms transfer global sustainability logics across organizational and national boundaries and translate them into locally viable practices in differing institutional environments. This study addresses this gap through a comparative qualitative case study of a global heating system provider, drawing on 43 in-depth interviews and complementary field data from its headquarters in Japan and its subsidiary and customers in Türkiye. We identify three institutional logics—sustainability, state, and com- mercial—that jointly influence PSS adoption but interact differently across contexts. Our findings reveal three mechanisms of institutional work that underpin the transfer and translation of logics: strategic creation of sustainability practices, tight and loose coupling of logics under varying institutional conditions, and negotiation of disruption trade-offs between environ- mental and profitability priorities. We develop a conceptual model that specifies the mechanisms through which sustainability logics are transferred across organizational and national boundaries and translated into locally enacted practices, leading to either tight, incremental, or symbolic integration of PSS strategies. Theoretically, this research advances institutional theory by demonstrating that institutional logics are not fixed determinants of behavior but resources that actors actively interpret, recombine, and sometimes only nominally adopt when transferring them across contexts. Practically, it provides guidance for managers and policymakers on designing harmonization strategies, aligning incentives, and overcoming infrastructural barriers to enable substantive sustainability transitions. Keywords  Product-service systems · Institutional logics · Institutional work · Sustainability Introduction Amid the daunting challenges of climate change, resource scarcity, and geopolitical uncertainty, firms increasingly grapple with simultaneously enhancing product and produc- tion sustainability while catering to diverse and complex customer demands (Jiang et al., 2023; Yang et al., 2019). As such, original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) face ten- sions in balancing profit, environmental conservation, and social responsibility considerations—core principles of ethi- cal business conduct (Dahlmann & Grosvold, 2017; Glavas & Mish, 2015)—under customer demand for advanced solu- tions to increasingly complex problems (Hahn et al., 2015; Financial Times, 2023). These tensions are compounded by differences in the interpretation and applications of these considerations across different institutional environments * Jawwad Z. Raja jr.om@cbs.dk Rıfgı Buğra Bağcı bugra.bagci@izu.edu.tr Ismail Gölgeci ismail.golgeci@auckland.ac.nz; igolgeci@uwasa.fi 1 Istanbul Sabahattin Zaim University, Halkali Cad. No: 281, 34303 Kucukcekmece, Istanbul, Turkey 2 Copenhagen Business School, Solbjerg Plads 3, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark 3 Information Systems and Operations Management, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand 4 International Business and Marketing Strategies, University of Vaasa, Vaasa, Finland http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7273-1046 http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8123-5781 http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6853-3255 http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1007/s10551-026-06281-0&domain=pdf R. B. Bağcı et al. (Seo & Creed, 2002). To address this, OEMs increasingly integrate services into their offerings, forming product-ser- vice systems (PSS) that help solve complex problems cus- tomers face, enhance profitability, and reduce environmental impact (Kühl et al., 2023; Vezzoli et al., 2017). PSS aim to meet complex client needs holistically, cost-effectively, and sustainably, in line with servitization principles (Doni et al., 2019), which emphasize shifting from product-centric busi- ness models to integrated solutions that combine products and services to deliver higher value and long-term customer relationships. Strategically designed PSS often reduce the ecological footprint, facilitate sustainable materials, foster innovative designs, and enhance circular economy practices (Doni et al., 2019; Kohtamäki et al., 2023; Paiola et al., 2021). Nonetheless, their adoption and implementation are profoundly influenced by differing institutional logics (Dahl- mann & Grosvold, 2017; Yin & Jamali, 2021), defined as the socially constructed values, norms, rules, and practices shaping organizations and societies (Reay & Hinings, 2009; Thornton et al., 2012). However, a significant gap exists in understanding the process of delivering PSS across different institutional log- ics. PSS are often framed in the literature as mechanisms to pursue environmental goals alongside economic goals, emphasizing performance delivery over ownership and reducing material consumption through integrated solu- tions (Kohtamäki et al., 2023; Kühl et al., 2023). However, their application varies widely across national contexts due to differing institutional logics (Dahlmann & Gros- vold, 2017; Yin & Jamali, 2021). These logics influence the design, adoption, and implementation of PSS and their acceptance by local stakeholders, who operate under dis- tinct cultural, economic, and regulatory conditions. Never- theless, the processes through which competing logics are managed, bridged, and adapted remain critically underex- plored, leaving an important gap in the broader discussion of firms’ sustainability transitions. While many firms have adopted sustainable business models and invested substan- tial effort, they often face persistent challenges in aligning these models with coordinated activities that effectively balance environmental, economic, and social goals (López- Cabarcos et al., 2025; Visnjic et al., 2025). Although PSS emphasizes circularity, total cost of ownership (TCO), and resource efficiency, their implementation can be hindered by different supplier practices and market conditions across different institutional logics (Diebel et al., 2024; Kok et al., 2019; Zampone et al., 2023). Despite PSS’ potential to drive sustainability transitions, the literature has yet to fully address differences in institutional logics that impede their successful implementation and how businesses enact their agency to bridge different institutional logics, i.e., juggling between, synthesizing, and strategically steering diverse and often competing logics, namely commercial, state, and sus- tainability logics, in the pursuit of sustainable PSS adoption. The complexity of PSS, compounded by differences in institutional logics, requires balancing sustainability, com- petitiveness, and profitability while managing multiple interdependencies and conflicting objectives. To this end, institutional work, the deliberate actions taken by individuals and organizations to create, maintain, or disrupt institutional structures (Greenwood et al., 2018; Lawrence & Suddaby, 2006), is pivotal in understanding how businesses respond to these pressures and how PSS evolve. Institutional work as a manifestation of organizational agency provides a useful lens for examining how businesses actively shape, main- tain, and transform institutions, contrasting with traditional institutional theory, which focuses on how institutions influ- ence actions (Lawrence & Suddaby, 2006). This concept is critical when actors encounter competing institutional log- ics (Thornton & Ocasio, 1999). Effectively bridging these diverse institutional logics requires understanding and man- aging their interactions, conflicts, and synergies (Greenwood et al., 2011; Seo & Creed, 2002). Accordingly, understand- ing how firms respond to these challenges through institu- tional work, particularly across heterogeneous institutional environments, and bridging conflicting institutional logics would offer valuable insights into building robust, scal- able, and context-sensitive PSS models that can meet both environmental and economic objectives across institutional logics. In this study, we explore how institutional logics influ- ence the adoption and implementation of PSS and examine the role of institutional work in bridging these competing logics to translate PSS across country contexts and facilitate sustainability transitions. We address the following research questions: How do different institutional logics influence the adoption of PSS? How are PSS transferred and translated across contexts, and how does institutional work shape these processes? In so doing, we rely on rich qualitative data from a large Japanese OEM, its Turkish subsidiary, and its key customers. We triangulate different data sources to iden- tify and examine the interplay of three specific institutional logics—state, commercial, and sustainability—and corre- sponding institutional work in developing and delivering PSS. These logics reflect broader ethical debates around managing tensions between short-term economic gains and long-term societal and ecological well-being (Dahlmann & Grosvold, 2017; Pesterfield & Rogerson, 2023; Yang et al., 2019; Yin & Jamali, 2021). To this end, our study advances the literature by outlining three distinct logics that shape PSS and ensuing institutional work undertaken by managers in transferring and translating PSS across institutional con- texts. It bridges important research gaps by examining how firms operating in different countries adopt and implement Bridging Different Institutional Logics: The Role of Institutional Work in Translating… PSS while managing competing objectives of sustainability, competitiveness, and profitability. Accordingly, this study makes three key contributions. First, it examines how varying institutional logics, character- ized by distinct cultural, regulatory, and economic norms, impact the adoption and implementation of PSS. Second, it sheds light on the pivotal role of institutional work as a dynamic process in implementing PSS and enabling organi- zations to create, maintain, or disrupt institutional structures, offering a nuanced perspective on how actors influence and respond to institutional logics. Finally, our study presents a model that illustrates the interplay of institutional work when PSS are transferred and translated across different institutional logics embedded in different countries, offering a nuanced understanding of the institutional work involved. It advances research on PSS—typically examined in single- country environments and rarely expanded to international contexts (Gölgeci et al., 2021)—and links its applications across national boundaries. Beyond its theoretical contributions, this study also car- ries important policy implications. As institutional logics influence the diffusion and acceptance of sustainable busi- ness models, policymakers play a pivotal role in either ena- bling or constraining such transitions. Building on regula- tory governance work on responsible innovation and global sustainability governance (Voegtlin & Scherer, 2017) and on corporate accountability beyond reputation-only approaches (Carroll & Olegario, 2020), our findings indicate that scal- ing PSS can be more effective when hard-law mandates are paired with orchestrated soft-law, multi-stakeholder stand- ards that create forums and incentives for the institutional work required to translate global sustainability logics locally. We extend these streams by showing how the interaction of sustainability, state, and commercial logics conditions tight, loose, or symbolic PSS integration across borders, refining accountability frameworks that emphasize the interplay of legal rules, transparency, and reputational discipline. Our findings showcase how competing institutional logics can impede the effective scaling of PSS across borders. Our study indicates that policymakers can design more coherent regulatory frameworks vis-à-vis institutional work that firms engage in to bridge institutional logics and promote cross- sector dialog toward sustainable PSS. The remainder of the paper proceeds as follows: First, we provide the theoretical underpinnings, followed by a section outlining the adopted research approach. Then, we present the findings detailing the institutional logics at play across contexts and how these are transferred and translated through institutional work mechanisms. Based on our find- ings, we propose a theoretical model. Finally, the discussion and conclusion sections provide theoretical contributions, managerial implications, and directions for future research. Theoretical Background Sustainability and Product‑Service Systems (PSS) The concept of sustainability is inherently multidimensional and sometimes ambiguous, encompassing ecological, social, and economic considerations that are not always aligned (Du Pisani, 2006). While early work linked sustainability to the long-term management of natural resources, the idea gained global prominence through the Brundtland Report’s defini- tion of sustainable development and subsequent formula- tions (WCED, 1987), such as the triple bottom line, which emphasize balancing environmental, social, and economic goals (Borland & Lindgreen, 2013; Porritt, 2012). Since its formal introduction, sustainable development has become a guiding concept in environmental research and policy (Alva- rado-Herrera et al., 2017; Gore, 2015). However, despite broad agreement on its long-term, multidimensional charac- ter, scholars remain divided on how firms should implement sustainability (Adolph & Beckmann, 2024). Against this backdrop, businesses face intensifying envi- ronmental challenges, evolving societal expectations, and regulatory pressures to adopt greener practices (Jiang et al., 2023; Yang et al., 2019). Climate change, resource depletion, and the mounting problem of electronic waste (Vezzoli et al., 2017) heighten the need not only for cleaner technologies but also for business models that integrate environmental, social, and economic value (Hahn et al., 2015). Sustainable business model and “business case” research offer one such design lens, clarifying how value creation, delivery, and cap- ture can be reconfigured at the network level (Evans et al., 2017; Schaltegger et al., 2016; Schaltegger & Burritt, 2018). PSS emerged as a response to the environmental and social limitations of conventional product-based models (Roy, 2000; Tukker, 2004). In sustainable business model terms, PSS is a canonical pathway: the integration of prod- ucts and services into service-intensive offerings, lifecycle responsibilities, and partner collaboration (Evans et al., 2017; Rabetino et al., 2024). These architectures can reduce waste, extend product lifecycles, and enable environmen- tally and socio-ethically sound solutions while remaining commercially viable (Kohtamäki et al., 2023; Kühl et al., 2023). Evidence on the profitability of sustainability is nuanced: meta-analytic work indicates a generally positive association between corporate environmental performance and corporate financial performance but emphasizes that the effect is contingent on factors such as the type of environ- mental performance, firm characteristics, and measurement approach (Dixon-Fowler et al., 2013). Complementing this, firm-level analyses of leading global sustainability perform- ers show higher sales growth, return-on-assets, profit before tax, and operating cash flows than matched peers over time, R. B. Bağcı et al. suggesting that, when appropriately designed and imple- mented, sustainability practices can complement financial performance (Ameer & Othman, 2012). For PSS specifi- cally, these findings imply that profitability gains are most likely where PSS initiatives are proactive and aligned with organizational capabilities and market context. For manufacturers, PSS frequently entails redesigned value propositions (efficiency and low emissions), service- based value delivery (maintenance, diagnostics), and value capture grounded in reliability and performance (Bocken et al., 2014; Evans et al., 2017), representing a paradigm shift that combines economic efficiency with sustainability commitments (Hahn & Pinkse, 2022; Kühl et al., 2023). However, PSS enactment is shaped by both institutional context and ethical stance. Business case research on sus- tainability differentiates between symbolic and substantive sustainability; internal, proximate stakeholders tend to pro- pel substantive decarbonization, whereas external audience pressures can induce more reputational or certification- driven responses (Block et al., 2024; Schaltegger & Burritt, 2018). Ethically, this maps onto “reactionary” and “reputational” versus “responsible” and “collaborative” business cases, where the latter embed environmental and social responsibil- ities into core operations even at near-term cost (Schaltegger & Burritt, 2018). Cross-national PSS rollouts may traverse phases of decoupling, translation, or even dehybridization as the salience of competing logics shifts, raising risks of mission drift if governance is weak (Yang et al., 2023). Finally, the assumption that PSS invariably yield sub- stantial sustainability benefits is contested (Hahn & Pinkse, 2022; Hahn et al., 2015). The heterogeneity of institutional logics, encompassing divergent standards, regulations, and practices, may not always be congruent with sustainability objectives, posing integration and implementation chal- lenges that slow or constrain broader adoption (Milosevic et al., 2023; Yin & Jamali, 2021). This positions PSS not merely as a site where competing logics must be actively bridged, requiring strategies to integrate environmental, eco- nomic, and societal goals and seize the potential of sustain- able innovations within their operations. Institutional Logics Institutional theory is among the conjectures that shed light on the dynamic interplay of logics within the context of sustainability (Chen et al., 2024; Yin & Jamali, 2021). Accordingly, North (1990) posits that institutions func- tion as societal ‘rules of the game,’ shaping interactions through humanly devised constraints. These institutions are tangible through their structures and practices (Kok et al., 2019) and are given life through institutional log- ics, which Thornton and Ocasio (1999, p. 804) describe as “the socially constructed patterns of symbols and material practices, assumptions, values, beliefs, and rules by which individuals and organizations produce and reproduce their material subsistence, organize time and space, and provide meaning to their social reality.” Importantly, institutional logics are distinct from institutional forces: whereas insti- tutional forces, such as coercive, normative, and mimetic forces, highlight how conformity and legitimacy are exter- nally imposed (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983), institutional logics illuminate the internal meaning systems that actors draw upon to make sense of and justify action (Thornton & Ocasio, 1999). Studying logics rather than forces allows us to attend to the plural, and often conflicting, value sys- tems within organizations, thereby capturing the nuanced, agentic responses to sustainability demands that a focus on isomorphic pressure alone would obscure. Friedland and Alford (1991) view institutional logics as a combina- tion of material practices and symbolic constructions that serve as organizing principles. The diversity of logics cor- responds with varied organizational principles, necessitat- ing distinct, considered behaviors from individuals (Reay & Hinings, 2009; Thornton et al., 2012). Institutional logics underpin the shared assumptions within an institution, pro- viding frameworks for organizing activities and interpreting cues for appropriate behavior (Lounsbury et al., 2021; Reay & Hinings, 2009). These logics are essential and guide the adaptation of organizational practices to enhance social and environmental impacts (Milosevic et al., 2023). The institutional logics perspective has been applied to a wide range of empirical studies, focusing on the conse- quences of these logics and the management of competing logics within organizations (e.g., Chen et al., 2024; Kok et al., 2019; Smets et al., 2015).1 Among the different log- ics, commercial logic, state logic, and sustainability logic are central in shaping organizational decision-making and the design and delivery of PSS (Grinevich et al., 2019). Below, we conceptualize these logics to set the stage for understanding the interplay and tensions between them, bridging multiple institutional logics, and achieving sustain- ability objectives in PSS. In this paper, with bridging insti- tutional logics, we essentially refer to the dynamic process 1  Although the coexistence of institutional logics is often framed as competing, it can also serve as a foundation for mutual reinforce- ment (Milosevic et al., 2023). Real-world examples show how envi- ronmental logics can, in some instances, support commercial success by turning ecological challenges into viable business opportunities. For instance, the platform-based organization Too Good To Go has aligned its revenue model with food waste reduction, earning income through commissions and partnerships while creating a significant environmental impact (Ho & Nguyen, 2024). Another example is Patagonia’s commitment to sustainable practices, which has allowed it to maintain premium prices and strong brand loyalty in a competi- tive market (Allal-Chérif et al., 2023). Bridging Different Institutional Logics: The Role of Institutional Work in Translating… of juggling between, synthesizing, and strategically steering diverse and often competing logics toward the advancement of PSS. As explained below, this is accomplished through institutional work, which enables actors to manage tensions and translate PSS across varied contextual settings. The discourse on institutional logics in business literature frequently centers on commercial logic, which is primarily concerned with decisions that maximize economic returns (Pesterfield & Rogerson, 2023; Thornton et al., 2012). Com- mercial logic—characterized by a profit imperative, market efficiency, and competitive advantage as guiding principles for organizational practices and decision-making—is inte- gral to organizational strategies aimed at enhancing effi- ciency and reducing costs (Dahlmann & Grosvold, 2017). Studies have examined the influence of commercial logic on other logics, notably professional and community logics, observing its tendency to overshadow them (Diebel et al., 2024; Smets et al., 2015). The pursuit of competitive advan- tage, efficiency, and profit underpins commercial logic, sug- gesting economically driven behavior (Kok et al., 2019). Mimetic isomorphism, as proposed by institutional theorists, describes organizations imitating successful practices from others to mitigate uncertainty, thereby legitimizing certain behaviors (Zampone et al., 2023). Commercial logic’s per- vasiveness in global commerce underscores a commitment to profitability and efficiency, often prioritizing shareholder interests over other stakeholders, including environmental considerations (Diebel et al., 2024; Thornton et al., 2012). This logic has been noted to significantly influence business strategies and practices globally (Greenwood et al., 2011; Kok et al., 2019; York et al., 2018), emphasizing shareholder value and profit maximization. However, this focus can con- flict with sustainability logics, as profitability-driven actions may not align with sustainability investments (Glavas & Mish, 2015). Consequently, commercial logic can impact decisions regarding PSS. Sustainability logic—emphasizing achieving environ- mental and social objectives, such as reducing ecological impact, promoting resource efficiency, and fostering long- term societal well-being—seeks to steer behaviors toward social equity and environmental stewardship (Arenas et al., 2020). This logic, which advocates for reducing emissions and fostering clean energy (de Clercq & Voronov, 2011), is part of a broader institutional logic supporting environmen- tal protection and pollution mitigation (Sine & Lee, 2009). Although not yet established as a societal-level institutional order, the presence and variability of sustainability logic in different contexts have been subjects of study (Vedula et al., 2022). These practices provide frameworks for stake- holders to align their actions with evolving definitions of sustainability (Silva & Figueiredo, 2020). From a business ethics perspective, this alignment is critical to ensuring that sustainability is not treated as an afterthought or mere com- pliance measure but is integrated into core business strate- gies and operations (Dahlmann & Grosvold, 2017; Yin & Jamali, 2021). The pervasiveness of sustainability logic is increasingly recognized, especially as corporate sustainabil- ity concerns like climate change become central to business strategy (Hahn & Pinkse, 2022; Thornton et al., 2012). This contrasts with commercial logic, where the economic inter- ests of customers and clients influence decisions. The concept of state logic, which prioritizes public wel- fare and compliance with regulations, policies, and govern- ance frameworks imposed by governmental or state institu- tions, centers on the societal expectation for organizations to adhere to legal and regulatory frameworks (Pesterfield & Rogerson, 2023; Yin & Jamali, 2021). These frameworks typically establish baseline standards for organizational conduct (Pesterfield & Rogerson, 2023). State logic encom- passes efforts to preserve political and social stability by controlling business and societal entities (Liu et al., 2016). Greenwood et al. (2011) argue that while laws and regula- tions set definitive standards, they also allow businesses to interpret and extend their roles and responsibilities, suggest- ing a balance between compliance and discretionary prac- tices. Table 1 compares the three logics. Institutional logics are rarely singular or stable; instead, they can conflict or align in unpredictable ways (Durand & Thornton, 2018; Reay & Hinings, 2009). Individuals within organizations respond by selectively engaging with these Table 1   Comparing different logics Commercial logic Sustainability logic State logic Specific domain Market (Thornton et al., 2012) Environmental agenda (Kok et al., 2019) Regulations (Yin & Jamali, 2021) Goals Creating profit from activities (Dahlmann & Grosvold, 2017; Kok et al., 2019) Maintaining the environment (de Clercq & Voronov, 2011; Sine & Lee, 2009) Ensuring order and processes (Greenwood et al., 2011) Management principle Profit maximization, legitimacy (Zampone et al., 2023) Environmental impact (Diebel et al., 2024; Vedula et al., 2022) Legal compliance (Luo et al., 2017; Pesterfield & Rogerson, 2023) Source of specificity Market demands (York et al., 2018) Ethical principles (Silva & Figueiredo, 2020) R. B. Bağcı et al. logics through practices such as hybridizing, segmenting, or resisting (Jay, 2013; Smets et al., 2015). Pache and Santos (2013) show how selective coupling enables organizations to manage competing logics while preserving legitimacy across cultural contexts. Academic inquiry into institutional logics has evolved from recognizing a singular dominant logic to acknowledging the dynamism of multiple coexisting log- ics (Dahlmann & Grosvold, 2017; Greenwood et al., 2011; Lounsbury et al., 2021). While some logics may become predominant, the interplay among them can lead to the cre- ation of new institutions or the amalgamation of existing logics (Jarzabkowski et al., 2013; Reay & Hinings, 2009). Accordingly, a dominant institutional logic can coexist with others (Thornton & Ocasio, 1999), and understanding this coexistence is key to managing the interplay (Besharov & Smith, 2014; Reay & Hinings, 2009). The juxtaposition of commercial, state, and sustainability logics illustrates the varying priorities of profitability, organizational growth, and environmental stability (Diebel et al., 2024). Neo-institutional theory has long drawn attention to how institutional environments shape the adoption, meaning, and trajectory of sustainability practices across national contexts (Aragón-Correa et al., 2020; Milosevic et al., 2023), which offers a relevant lens to our study that examines institutional logics and institutional work vis-à-vis sustainable PSS across Japan and Türkiye. Comparative studies reveal that national institutions influence the adoption and interpretation of dif- ferent practices, with significant contrasts observed across contexts such as Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom (Benassi, 2024). Moreover, Uzunca et al. (2018) show that institutional strategies yield different outcomes depending on the degree of institutionalization and the dominant logic at play, with more relational approaches fostering sustain- able legitimacy in highly institutionalized settings. Tashman et al. (2019) further demonstrate that stronger sustainability pressures exist in more developed host countries. Rovanto and Virtanen (2025) similarly show how institutional logics shape capabilities for slowing resource loops in small circular economy businesses in China, Japan, and Finland, with pro- fessional logics converging but market logics diverging across contexts. Building on this body of work, our study draws on a comparative institutional logics perspective to examine how companies bridge competing logics and create a balance between them across national boundaries, which we seek to do by incorporating the discussion of institutional work. Institutional Work Institutional work entails carefully balancing resources, stakeholder interests, and strategic responses to ensure organizational survival and performance. This involves tradeoffs, negotiations, and distinctive capabilities (Jarzab- kowski et al., 2013). Recent studies have been particularly concerned with the challenge of gaining acceptance from field-level actors of various logics. Besharov and Smith (2014) categorize organizations based on logic compat- ibility and centrality to explain the varied implications of multiple institutional logics. However, logic may be more or less valued, leading to different levels of commitment. This introduces another dimension to the centrality and compat- ibility of a set of institutional logics: the degree of commit- ment to one logic over another (Lawrence & Suddaby, 2006). Thus, understanding how institutional logics influence busi- nesses’ commitments and actions necessitates exploring the mechanisms by which institutions are created, maintained, and disrupted. This is where the framework of institutional work offers valuable insights. Creation, as the first category of institutional work, refers to the active processes through which new institutions are established to address emerging needs or shifts in organi- zational priorities. It often arises in response to significant environmental or societal changes, prompting organizations to innovate or adapt to new contexts (Lawrence & Sud- daby, 2006). It is characterized by the articulation of new rules, practices, and belief systems that align with emerging institutional logics or stakeholder demands. It involves the continuous development and transformation of institutions over time, influenced by both exogenous and endogenous dynamics. For example, businesses developing circular economy business models engage in institutional creation by integrating sustainability principles into their operations. These efforts often require actively mobilizing resources, coalitions, and legitimacy to establish these new norms and practices (Lawrence & Suddaby, 2006). However, the crea- tion process is rarely straightforward. It involves bridging competing logics and managing tensions between traditional practices and transformative objectives. Understanding its mechanisms provides a foundation for examining how busi- nesses innovate to address complex environmental and social challenges. Thus, creation embodies how new institutions emerge and become established (Jarzabkowski et al., 2009). Maintenance, the second category of institutional work identified by Lawrence and Suddaby (2006), examines how institutions are actively produced and reproduced through everyday practice. When multiple, potentially contradictory logics coexist (Seo & Creed, 2002), any particular institu- tion must continuously be maintained to avoid being domi- nated by other competing logics. This involves adhering to rule systems and reproducing norms and belief systems (Jarzabkowski et al., 2013). The concept of loose coupling provides a “working space” for individuals bridging mul- tiple conflicting institutional logics (Seo & Creed, 2002). For instance, businesses striving to balance profitability with sustainability must constantly negotiate to align operational priorities with long-term environmental goals. Maintenance work ensures that institutional logics remain relevant and Bridging Different Institutional Logics: The Role of Institutional Work in Translating… actionable in the face of external pressures and evolving stakeholder expectations. Disruption, a precursor to broader change within the firm, occurs when the existing institutions and practices no longer meet the stakeholders’ interests (Jarzabkowski et al., 2009). This is often the case in situations of ethical ten- sions. While sustainability initiatives may initially impact profitability due to investments in eco-friendly practices, the long-term benefits can be substantial. However, some companies, driven by short-term financial goals, may com- promise environmental and social responsibility, leading to a clash between profitability and sustainability. Hence, actors mobilize sufficient support to challenge or undermine exist- ing institutional structures and practices through disruption (Jarzabkowski et al., 2009). For example, quickly heightened regulatory scrutiny or substantial and accelerated shifts in public expectations can catalyze organizational transforma- tions, compelling firms to adopt new practices that better align with emerging logics. In sum, institutional work is critical in handling the ten- sions inherent in complexity stemming from different insti- tutional logics. These processes reflect businesses’ efforts to bridge competing logics while addressing stakeholder expectations and environmental pressures (Milosevic et al., 2023). Institutional work provides a dynamic lens for understanding how businesses adapt to, resist, or reshape institutional structures to remain relevant in changing con- texts. However, despite its criticality, the interplay between institutional work and the competing logics of sustain- ability, commercial imperatives, and state policies remains underexplored. Building on comparative work on PSS and institutional logics across countries (e.g., Doni et al., 2019; Kohtamäki et al., 2023; Kok et al., 2019; Paiola et al., 2021), we carry this comparative lens into our empirical analysis, focusing on how sustainability, state, and commercial logics are translated in PSS practices as they move between insti- tutional environments. As such, we examine how businesses balance these logics to drive meaningful transformations and adoption of PSS. Methods Research Approach and Case Selection This study adopts an exploratory case-based research approach to investigate the complex dynamics surround- ing the adoption and implementation of PSS. Our research approach is best described as being abductive, whereby we integrate theoretical constructs with emerging empiri- cal insights in an iterative manner throughout the data col- lection and analysis (Dubois & Gadde, 2002; Kistruck & Slade Shantz, 2022). Rather than treating the data as a “clean state,” we followed a tabula geminus (“twin slate”) stance (Kreiner, 2016), moving repeatedly between empirical mate- rial and evolving theoretical ideas. We selected HeatingCo (pseudonym), a prominent Japa- nese firm specializing in industrial steam and hot water boiler systems for manufacturing plants, operating exclusively in the B2B sector, as our empirical setting. HeatingCo’s product port- folio focuses on modular boiler systems designed for energy- intensive industries such as textiles, food processing, and chemicals, supported by complementary maintenance services, water treatment solutions, and certified boiler chemicals. Heat- ingCo began producing industrial steam boilers in the 1950s, capturing over 60% of the domestic market shortly thereafter. Since entering the Turkish market in 2015, the firm has sought to expand further into Europe and the Commonwealth of Inde- pendent States (CIS) by leveraging its combined expertise in high-efficiency equipment and service-based energy solutions. HeatingCo has a turnover exceeding ¥150 billion and employs approximately 6,000 people worldwide (HeatingCo Annual Report, 2024), providing substantial empirical depth for ana- lyzing sustainability-oriented PSS in a multinational setting. Central to HeatingCo’s business model is a strong after- market service orientation, operationalized through long- term maintenance contracts and preventative monitoring programs for industrial clients. Company documents report that around 1,200 technical experts are deployed across Japan and overseas subsidiaries to ensure rapid response times and continuous operational support. These service arrangements illustrate a shift from transactional equip- ment sales toward integrated solutions that deliver reli- able thermal energy outcomes for clients, a core feature of PSS business models. HeatingCo also invests heavily in technological innovation and environmental performance improvements. Its high-pressure steam boilers are fitted with energy recovery systems that reclaim thermal energy from condensate and residual flue gases, improving fuel effi- ciency while reducing CO2 and NOx emissions; reported efficiencies reach 98–99%, offering measurable reductions in energy use relative to conventional systems. Alongside equipment provision, HeatingCo delivers energy diagnostics and water analysis services, drawing on thousands of annual site assessments in Japan to help factories identify inefficien- cies and design process optimizations. This dual emphasis on advanced technology and long-term service relationships provides a theoretically relevant setting for studying how sustainability-oriented logics are transferred from headquar- ters to subsidiaries and translated into locally enacted PSS practices across different institutional contexts. To enable in-depth theorization, we deliberately focused on a single network, defined as the constellation of relation- ships linking HeatingCo’s Japanese HQ, its Turkish subsidi- ary, and focal customer plants in Türkiye that purchase boil- ers and associated service contracts. In this network, nodes R. B. Bağcı et al. comprise relevant organizational units and roles at HQ, the subsidiary, and customer plants, while ties consist of long- term sales and service contracts, routine maintenance and diagnostic visits, and project-based collaborations around energy efficiency and sustainability. We bounded the net- work by concentrating on customer relationships in Türkiye where HeatingCo provided both equipment and ongoing service contracts, thereby excluding upstream suppliers and other foreign subsidiaries not directly involved in these transactions. Figure 1 depicts how these actors and ties are connected in the empirical case. We employed a purposive sampling approach (Patton, 2015) to select participants who were directly involved in PSS-related decisions or activities at HeatingCo HQ, Türkiye subsidiary, and focal customer plants. More specifically, we sought variation across organizational levels (senior man- agement, middle management, and operational specialists) and across core functions (e.g., sales, service, engineering), excluding employees whose roles had no substantive con- nection to PSS or sustainability initiatives. These categories were recorded as case attributes and later used to compare emerging themes across organizational levels, functions, and organizational affiliations (see Online Appendix 1 for an overview of the sample). Participants were chosen for their relevance to our theoretical focus on institutional logics and institutional work in shaping PSS adoption. Institutional log- ics and institutional work thus served as sensitizing concepts that oriented us toward how actors justified and contested practices, rather than as fixed coding categories. Taken together, the combination of a technologically advanced, service-intensive PSS business model, a head- quarters embedded in Japan’s regulatory and societal con- text, and a subsidiary operating in Türkiye’s and supplying energy-intensive manufacturers renders this HQ-subsidiary- customer constellation a particularly informative setting for examining how sustainability, state, and commercial logics are transferred, contested, and translated in practice. Data Collection Over two years, from 2022 to 2024, the research team engaged in over 100 interactions with HeatingCo’s HQ, Fig. 1   Illustration of case overview Bridging Different Institutional Logics: The Role of Institutional Work in Translating… Turkish subsidiary, and customers. While the first author led the fieldwork and was physically present during all site visits and the majority of meetings, the three authors jointly designed the interview guides and observation protocols and held regular debriefings to refine sampling and questioning in light of emerging insights. These interactions included a diverse array of data collection methods, such as inter- views, company meetings, conferences, executive presenta- tions, and site observations. The length of these interactions ranged from extensive one-day visits to HeatingCo’s Türkiye branch to email exchanges with company personnel. Infor- mal email exchanges and corridor conversations were pri- marily used to arrange access and clarify factual details; only when such interactions were written up as fieldnotes and imported into NVivo were they treated as data for systematic analysis. Table 2 summarizes the different data sources and their use. The primary data were obtained through 43 interviews conducted with the representatives of HeatingCo’s Japanese HQ (10), Turkish subsidiary (15), and customers in Türkiye (18), each selected for their in-depth knowledge of the busi- ness operations (see Online Appendix 1 and Fig. 2 for time- line). Ten interviews were face-to-face, and 33 interviews were conducted online via Microsoft Teams to bridge geo- graphical distances (Davies et al., 2020). Through a semi- structured interview approach, we navigated key inquiries while allowing interviewees to raise other relevant issues linked to the research. The interview questions focused on participants’ approaches to PSS and sustainability (see Online Appendix 2). Within HeatingCo, the sampling frame consisted of employees who were responsible for selling, designing, servicing, or managing industrial boiler systems and sustainability-related initiatives at the Japanese HQ and the Turkish subsidiary. On the customer side, we focused on factory and unit managers responsible for production, main- tenance, or energy management in plants that had adopted HeatingCo’s boilers and associated service contracts. The initial set of informants was selected using purposeful sam- pling (Patton, 2015) in collaboration with a senior contact at HQ and the country manager in Türkiye, who acted as internal gatekeepers. We explicitly asked these gatekeep- ers to include individuals with differing views on PSS and sustainability and then used snowball sampling to reach additional informants, including some who voiced skepti- cal or critical perspectives. Although we did not systemati- cally record refusals, our impression is that non-participation largely reflected scheduling constraints rather than active opposition. Data collection and analysis proceeded iteratively. As interviews accumulated across HQ, the Turkish subsidi- ary, and customer plants, we monitored whether additional interviews introduced substantively new themes or pri- marily elaborated existing ones. As the study progressed, later interviews tended to confirm and nuance the codes and themes already identified rather than generating new categories. On this basis, we judged that, for our focused research aim and specific single-network case, the 43 inter- views provided adequate theoretical and meaning saturation, while recognizing that different research questions or set- tings might warrant additional sampling. The interviews were conducted by the first author, whose proficiency in English, Japanese, and Turkish ensured accu- rate communication across all focal languages (cf. Ciulli et al., 2020; Rovanto & Finne, 2023).2 All the interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and translated into English, with interviewees allowed to review transcript accuracy. To guarantee precision in translations, native Japanese and Turkish speakers were enlisted to scrutinize English translations, ensuring fidelity to the original intent (Munday, 2013)3 (see Online Appendix 3 for additional detail). Throughout this study, the first author conducted in- person observations at various company meetings and site operations. For example, observing sales meetings at the Turkish subsidiary provided insights into the power dynam- ics between Japanese managers stationed in Türkiye, the vis- iting manager from headquarters, and Turkish middle man- agers and frontline employees. These meetings revealed how authority was negotiated in practice, with Japanese managers often asserting hierarchical control while Turkish middle managers acted as intermediaries, translating and softening top-down directives. Frontline sales staff navigated these ten- sions by subtly resisting or reframing instructions to better fit local customer expectations. This immersion facilitated an acute awareness of the firm’s operational framework, allowing direct examination of decision-making processes and the interplay of organizational dynamics. In addition to formal meetings, the first author took contemporaneous fieldnotes on contextual observations and informal conver- sations (for example, exchanges before and after meetings), 2  As a notary-authorized translator and interpreter holding the JLPT N1 certification, the author possessed the formal credentials required for high-quality translation. Extensive experience living in both Tür- kiye and Japan provided deep cultural insight, while previous busi- ness and diplomatic interpreting roles demonstrated competence in conveying nuanced meanings in professional settings. Familiarity with secondary materials in all three languages further strengthened the author’s ability to contextualize interview data within relevant lit- erature. 3  For example, one Japanese interview phrase was initially translated as “The best way is to buy a machine after that if you have trust in it.” Following review by the native Japanese speaker, this was revised to “it’s best for customers to buy after having them trust what you do,” which more accurately captured the emphasis on earning customer trust through prior actions. This illustrates the attention paid to pre- serving meaning rather than literal wordings in cross-lingual interpre- tation. R. B. Bağcı et al. which informed subsequent interviews and analytic memos. As a result of these observations, we were able to explore emerging issues and seek clarification from some of those interviewed. Observations were treated as a distinct data source, coded and analyzed alongside interviews and docu- ments in NVivo, enabling triangulation and thematic con- vergence across sources. Concurrently, the research team’s follow-up at the side-event sessions of the United Nations Climate Change Conferences (COP) provided insights into the firm’s public portrayal of its environmental commitments and helped contextualize its strategic positioning within broader environmental discourses, thereby augmenting our understanding of its operational ethos and commitment to sustainability. It is also important to note that data collection across Japan and Türkiye required sensitivity to cultural norms, organizational hierarchies, and patterns of deference. Power distance and indirect communication styles, especially in Japan, influenced what was said and how it was commu- nicated in interviews and meetings. The first author, fluent in Turkish, Japanese, and English, served as a cultural and linguistic intermediary, facilitating rapport and contextual understanding (see e.g., Brannen, 1996). Although the first author conducted the interviews and on-site observations, the second and third authors—native speakers of Eng- lish and Turkish, respectively—were actively involved in designing the protocols, in regular debriefings during field- work, and in the subsequent coding and interpretation of all English-language transcripts and translated excerpts. These complementary linguistic and cultural skills, together with independent checks by a native Japanese speaker, helped ensure that meanings were preserved and not lost in transla- tion or filtered through a single cultural lens. Data Analysis We followed an abductive approach, moving iteratively between data and theory throughout the research process (Dubois & Gadde, 2002; Timmermans & Tavory, 2012). In line with a tabula geminus (“twin slate”) stance (Kreiner, 2016), we combined inductive, line-by-line coding of inter- views and fieldnotes with the gradual use of institutional logics and institutional work as sensitizing concepts, paying particular attention to how sustainability, state, and com- mercial logics were articulated across Japan and Türkiye and how HQ-originating PSS practices were translated, adapted, or resisted in the Turkish subsidiary and customer plants (see Online Appendix 3 for full details of the analytical steps) (Fig. 3). Our abductive analysis unfolded in the three interlinked cycles (summarized in Fig. 4 and detailed in Online Appen- dix 3). In an initial cycle, we conducted largely inductive, line-by-line coding to surface recurring practices, rationales, and tensions without imposing institutional logics terminol- ogy. A second cycle drew more explicitly on institutional logics and institutional work as sensitizing concepts, guid- ing us to re-read the material for how actors invoked envi- ronmental goals, state regulations and incentives, and com- mercial pressures in justifying their decisions (Besharov & Smith, 2014; Dahlmann & Grosvold, 2017). In a third cycle, comparative coding across HQ, subsidiary, and customer accounts highlighted differences in the pace (accelerated vs. gradual) and coupling (tight vs. loose) of sustainability practices and in explicit trade-off talk, which informed the themes and aggregate dimensions reported in Fig. 3a, b. In alignment with Corbin and Strauss (2008), our initial analysis involved thoroughly examining the transcripts to capture the evolving dynamics within the data. Initial coding focused on actors’ own language and on recurring practices and value conflicts. As categories stabilized, we engaged in theoretical matching with institutional logics research (see Besharov & Smith, 2014; Dahlmann & Grosvold, 2017; Olesson et al., 2023; see also Table 1) to refine—rather than overwrite—emergent themes (Klag & Langley, 2013). In this abductive, tabula geminus process (Kreiner, 2016), the aggregate labels “sustainability logic,” “state logic,” and “commercial logic” emerged as analytic framings informed by, but not dictated by, prior theory. We also constructed case descriptions for HeatingCo HQ and HeatingCo Tür- kiye to facilitate comparison of emerging themes related to institutional logics and institutional work; these descriptions were refined and discussed in regular meetings among the authors. The first and second authors independently coded an initial subset of interviews and fieldnotes, then met to dis- cuss interpretations, merge overlapping codes, and clarify code definitions; these discussions were documented in memos and used to iteratively refine the codebook (Cor- bin & Strauss, 2008; Lincoln & Guba, 1986). The third author reviewed coded segments and memos, challenging ambiguous or overly theory-driven readings, and disa- greements were resolved by returning to the raw material together. Observational and documentary data, including write-ups of contextual observations and relevant informal conversations, were coded in later stages and fed into the same abductive cycles as the interview data, occasionally prompting code refinements (e.g., tightening the bounda- ries of “state logic” after contrasting COP presentations with internal meetings). For each interviewee, we coded, occasionally prompting code refinements. Case attributes for organizational level, function, and organizational affilia- tion (HQ, subsidiary, customer) as case attributes in NVivo, allowing for systematic comparison of patterns across these groups. Analytically, we used this within-case heterogeneity to examine how sustainability, commercial, and state log- ics were articulated and enacted across HQ and subsidiary, Bridging Different Institutional Logics: The Role of Institutional Work in Translating… across senior, middle-management, and frontline roles, and across different customer plants, thereby surfacing patterns of convergence and divergence in institutional work within the same network. More specifically, the iterative approach began with the first and second authors coding the raw interview data line by line, moving between existing literature and codes derived from emergent data patterns. The subsequent coding of supplementary data sources deepened our comprehen- sion of the underlying processes (Corbin & Strauss, 2008; Lincoln & Guba, 1986). The third author read the inter- view transcripts and secondary sources, engaging in ongo- ing discussions with the first and second authors regarding emerging codes, themes, and theoretical matching. In early iterations, we used provisional labels such as “environmen- tal stewardship,” “regulatory governance,” and “market Table 2   Overview of data sources Interviews Affiliation Data collected Informant info., format, duration details Details Japan headquarters ▪ 10 interviews Overseas executives (3), technical managers (2), branch managers (5) ▪ 10 online ▪ Duration: 30–60 min ▪ November 2023 – April 2024 ▪ 200 pages of text (transcribed verbatim) ▪ Insights into how institutional logics are interpreted and enacted within the headquarters ▪ Providing a baseline for comparison with subsidiary operations and customer interactions Turkish subsidiary ▪ 15 interviews General manager (2), maintenance managers (5), business development manager (1), sales managers (2), staff (5) ▪ 5 face-to-face, 10 online ▪ Duration: 30–90 min ▪ March 2022 – April 2024 ▪ 350 pages of text (transcribed verbatim) ▪ Understanding the adaptation and negotiation of institutional logics in a subsidiary context ▪ Providing a focus on the interplay between sustainability and digitalization in PSS Customers ▪ 18 interviews Factory managers (3), maintenance managers (7), chiefs (8) ▪ 5 face-to-face, 13 online ▪ Duration: 30–90 min ▪ March 2022 – April 2024 ▪ 200 pages of text (transcribed verbatim) ▪ Examining how customers perceive and influence the implementation of PSS ▪ Providing insights into how institutional logics and institutional work interplay in customers Total = 43 Interviews Observations Events Duration Number of meetings/sessions Details Internal meetings 25 h ▪ 10 meetings ▪ Understanding how the interrelated events unfolded in the timeline ▪ In-person observations of sales and monthly meetings ▪ Site visits and customer visits ▪ Online participation in COP events COP 26–28 events 10 h ▪ 4 sessions of COP 26—28 ▪ 200 pages of text (transcribed verba- tim) Secondary data Type Period Number of reports Details Annual reports 2016–2024 ▪ 9 annual reports ▪ 540 pages ▪ Product catalog and information ▪ Service catalog and information ▪ Product and service manuals ▪ Sustainability reports ▪ Insights into sustainability strategies of the firm ▪ Email to organize interviews, follow- ups, clarifications, etc ▪ Triangulation of insights Integrated reports (CSR reports) 2020–2023 ▪ 4 integrated reports ▪ 160 pages IMF Reports on regulations 2023 ▪ 2 reports ▪ 118 pages E-mail exchanges with companies 2022–2024 200 + emails approx Brochures and technical reports 2022–2024 500 + pages R. B. Bağcı et al. competitiveness” for clusters of practices and justificatory narratives. Through repeated comparison of these clusters with both the data and the institutional logics literature, we refined these into more precise aggregate dimensions of “sustainability logic,” “state logic,” and “commercial logic” (see Besharov & Smith, 2014; Dahlmann & Grosvold, 2017; Olesson et al., 2023; see also Table 1). Empirically, we coded a segment as expressing sustain- ability logic when actors foregrounded environmental out- comes (e.g., CO2 reductions, resource conservation, long- term ecological impact), as state logic when regulations, standards, or state incentives were invoked as primary rea- sons for action or inaction, and as commercial logic when margins, price competition, sales quotas, or market share were emphasized. We also actively searched for disconfirm- ing cases—instances where, for example, cost considera- tions were framed primarily as technical feasibility rather than profit-seeking—and used them to refine the boundaries of each logic (Corbin & Strauss, 2008; Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Coding examples and additional details are provided in Online Appendix 3. As we grouped and synthesized codes into higher-level themes, comparative analysis between HQ and Türkiye revealed two distinct trajectories in how HeatingCo pursued sustainability within its PSS. We labeled as an “accelerated approach to sustainability” those instances where managers described moving ahead of regulatory timelines, rapidly add- ing smart service products, or reallocating resources toward sustainability projects despite short-term cost implications. A “gradual approach to sustainability” captured accounts emphasizing pilots, feasibility studies, infrastructural and investment constraints, and sequencing changes over longer time horizons. We also identified decision episodes in which actors explicitly weighed profitability against environmental outcomes. For example, accepting longer payback periods to install more efficient equipment, or postponing sustainability investments to protect short-term margins. We grouped these under the aggregate dimension of “disruption trade-off” to capture how actors prioritized either sustainability or profit- ability when the two came into tension. The resulting data structure is presented in Fig. 3b, with further illustration in Online Appendix 3. Finally, based on the final coding structure, we organ- ized the themes and aggregate dimensions into a model that captured how the institutional logics influence the adoption of PSS in an organization across two country contexts and how the institutional work undertaken shapes the translation across differing contexts. Figure 4 provides an overview of the research process (Table 2). Trustworthiness Following Lincoln and Guba’s (1986) criteria for qualita- tive research quality, we implemented measures to ensure the trustworthiness of our study. Accordingly, we sought to enhance credibility, dependability, confirmability, and trans- ferability. These measures included detailed documentation of procedures, triangulation of interviews, observations, and documents, iterative team-based coding, and insider–out- sider dialogs within the author team to reduce bias. Addi- tionally, the steps taken to uphold these standards are out- lined comprehensively in Table 3, providing transparency and enabling other researchers to assess the relevance across organizational national contexts. While a single-network design inevitably limits statistical generalizability, our aim is analytical generalization (Yin, 2014), that is, to use this analytically rich constellation to refine mid-range explanations of how competing logics shape PSS adoption in multinational settings (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007). As such, we do not claim direct transfer- ability; the provision of a ‘thick description’ (Geertz, 1973) allows for informed comparison, facilitating analytical Fig. 2   Data collection timeline Bridging Different Institutional Logics: The Role of Institutional Work in Translating… generalization by highlighting the extent to which similar dynamics may be observed elsewhere. Findings Our analysis identifies three distinct but interrelated insti- tutional logics influencing HeatingCo’s approach to PSS adoption across Japan and Türkiye: sustainability, state, and commercial logics. While these logics occasionally overlap, they are anchored in each country’s specific cultural norms, regulatory frameworks, and market conditions. We first examine how each logic manifests within the two contexts, highlighting its significance for advancing PSS and the tensions that emerge when these logics interact. We then trace how these logics are transferred from HeatingCo’s home market in Japan to its subsidiary in Türkiye, where they are translated, adapted, and sometimes contested. This analysis foregrounds the institutional work undertaken by organizational actors to navigate, negotiate, and bridge dif- ferences between contexts, offering insight into how sustain- ability-oriented PSS practices are enacted in practice rather than simply adopted. The Logics Across the Two Contexts Sustainability Logic Sustainability emerged as a dominant organizing principle in HeatingCo’s strategy and operations in both Japan and Türkiye, cutting across internal agendas and external stake- holder expectations. The sustainability logic manifested in two main ways: (1) the imperative for sustainability and (2) taking steps to support the sustainability agenda. Our analy- sis suggests that these themes are closely interlinked, high- lighting how ecological pressures and societal expectations influence HeatingCo’s approach to sustainability beyond mere compliance or opportunistic green initiatives. The imperative for sustainability: HeatingCo’s communi- cations and informants’ accounts reflect a heightened aware- ness of environmental degradation and resource constraints, indicating a shared belief that sustainability is a fundamental necessity for long-term viability. This emphasis was often framed in terms of water scarcity in most industrial regions and temperature increase due to industrial activities. Corporate reports explicitly acknowledged growing envi- ronmental pressures: One of the profound changes in external environments that has been affecting [HeatingCo’s] business over the past few years is the growing environmental concerns (HeatingCo, Integrated Report, 2022) This demonstrates an organizational framing of sustain- ability as a structural shift in market and regulatory require- ments, rather than a transient issue. For Japan, informants connected climate change to tangible challenges, notably the rise in summer temperatures: Japan is growing from north to south, and temperatures approach 40 degrees in summer... much of the energy consumed by homes comes from the use of air condi- tioners. (COP28-P2). Here, high energy consumption is directly tied to climate- induced heatwaves, reinforcing how industrial activities and domestic energy use create feedback loops that exacerbate global warming. The industrial sector’s contribution to this dilemma, through substantial emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) like carbon dioxide and methane, further aggravates and accelerates the planet’s warming. The implication is that HeatingCo faces not only reputational but also operational pressures to adapt its products and services to mitigate these effects. In Türkiye, the critical issue of water scarcity was repeat- edly mentioned, with one informant articulating its escala- tion vividly: They say water used to come out at 5 meters... But over time, this has decreased to 50 meters, 100 meters, 200 meters, and so on. (CST13) This observation highlights a structural decline in groundwater availability, signaling that unsustainable water use patterns threaten basic societal and industrial needs. Another informant linked water-intensive industries, nota- bly textiles, to environmental harm: “Besides, for example, textile is one of the sectors that cause[s] the most damage to nature. Because there is a lot of water consumption” (CST11). Such comments suggest that HeatingCo operates within an ecosystem of interdependent industries, where shared resource constraints amplify calls for systemic sus- tainability measures. Taking steps to support sustainability agenda: In response to these pressures, corporate strategies reveal a significant shift toward sustainability, a movement driven not merely by profit considerations but by the essential need to protect the environment and adapt to the planet’s limited resources. Corporate leaders framed these actions as integral to safe- guarding natural resources: Forests not only absorb and fix carbon dioxide, but also protect biodiversity, soil, and water resources, promote human health, provide healing … (COP 27-P1, Presi- dent and CEO) This articulation situates sustainability not as an optional add-on but as foundational to organizational purpose and R. B. Bağcı et al. Fig. 3   Data structures Note: The data structures in Figs. 3a and b result from an abductive analysis in which emerging codes and themes were iteratively compared with existing theory on institutional logics and institutional work (Dubois & Gadde, 2002; Timmermans & Tavory, 2012). The aggregate dimensions (e.g., sustainability, state, and commercial logics; strategically creating sustainability; maintaining coupling practices; disruption trade-off) represent the outcome of this iterative engagement with data and theory, rather than a purely inductive or post hoc relabeling exercise Bridging Different Institutional Logics: The Role of Institutional Work in Translating… legitimacy. Our findings suggest that HeatingCo HQ and Turkish subsidiary are progressively instituting sustainabil- ity initiatives with a long-term perspective. This evolution in corporate consciousness acknowledges that sustainability transcends altruistic ‘doing good’; it is an imperative that underpins their desire to reduce environmental harm: So, well, there are many things like digitalization, but first of all, we must develop products that have less environmental impact … which I think is the minimum requirement. (JP5) This demonstrates a shift from a compliance-driven view of sustainability to a proactive stance that embeds ecological considerations into PSS development. In Türkiye, a participant described direct investments aimed at conserving water: “Water is very important and will be very important in the future … we planned to make such an investment [to save water].” (CST11). Customers also engaged in systemic actions aligned with HeatingCo’s sustainability goals, including reducing carbon footprints, using water resources prudently, and enhancing waste recy- cling efforts. These measures signify a shift toward sustain- able operations that are conscientious of environmental impacts and resource conservation: … [W]e are doing our best to save electricity. We have changed all the lamps. … So, if something needs to be done, we really do it. For example, we have reduced the use of air conditioning a lot in winter. (CST3-R2) By setting incremental targets, HeatingCo and its custom- ers create measurable pathways to environmental steward- ship. This suggests an emerging governance structure for sustainability, where internal initiatives align with broader stakeholder expectations and collective action is mobilized across organizational boundaries. State Logic Our analysis indicates that state logic operates through two primary means: (1) regulatory oversight and (2) government incentivization for sustainability. Both direct HeatingCo’s actions toward compliance with policy mandates and align- ment with broader societal expectations. Regulatory oversight: Across Japan and Türkiye, regula- tory pressures have intensified in recent years, reinforcing the expectation that firms must adopt sustainability-oriented technologies and practices. This trend mirrors global com- mitments made at COP28, which set ambitious targets for emission reductions and environmental protection. One informant noted: “The state has gradually increased meas- ures in this regard … now you can’t just throw away the waste” (CST10). This statement illustrates how regula- tory escalation reshapes organizational routines, making Fig. 4   Research process R. B. Bağcı et al. previously tolerated practices no longer viable. It also signals that compliance now demands substantive invest- ments in sustainable infrastructure rather than procedural adjustments. While both countries exhibit a commitment to sustaina- bility, their legislative frameworks differ in focus and scope. Japan has enacted laws regulating smoke, soot, and hazard- ous emissions from industrial sources, including targeted measures on nitrogen oxides and particulate matter from vehicles (Ian, et al., 2023). Türkiye’s framework, by contrast, has broader coverage of greenhouse gas emissions across multiple sectors but lacks similarly specialized regional emission controls (Ian, et al., 2023). Informants emphasized that regulatory mechanisms for monitoring and reporting form a critical component of over- sight: “[E]nvironmental issues … are seriously monitored by the state” (CST7). These mechanisms include routine audits, inspections, and mandatory disclosures of sustain- ability metrics, enhancing transparency, and enabling public and investor scrutiny. However, differences in monitoring standards remain notable. Türkiye has updated its rules for GHG monitoring and reporting between 2014 and 2021, whereas Japan’s JBIC (Japan Bank for International Coop- eration) GREEN Operation Guidelines provide sector- specific methodologies and integrate Energy Management Systems (EMS), indicating a more differentiated approach to industrial emissions governance. This variation suggests that multinational firms like HeatingCo must navigate hetero- geneous regulatory demands while maintaining consistent sustainability strategies across jurisdictions. Government incentivization for sustainability: The sec- ond mechanism, government incentives for sustainability projects, encourages firms to invest in sustainable tech- nologies by reducing their financial burden. One informant described how HeatingCo benefited from state-supported efficiency projects: … we have also invested within the scope of efficiency improvement projects—VAP (Verimlilik Artırıcı Proje). Our [parent firm] also had such an investment, and it shows this investment. There is an investment approved by the Ministry of Energy. As a result, it also shows these. In other words, incentives with govern- ment approval. Yes, yes, there are systems that have received incentives (TR8). These incentives—tax credits, grants, or subsidies— improve project viability and accelerate the adoption of sustainable technologies across the sector. Regulatory instruments differ between the two countries. Türkiye relies on implicit carbon pricing via fuel taxes, covering an estimated 29.9% of emissions as of 2021, with limited trading mechanisms for nitrogen oxides. Japan, by contrast, operates a national Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) and a NOx cap-and-trade program targeting multi- ple sources, including factories and power plants. These schemes create a market for emission permits, embedding sustainability objectives into corporate cost structures and strategic planning. We also observed government remuneration for eco- friendly products in both countries, designed to stimu- late green innovation and consumption. One informant in Table 3   Research quality criteria implemented Criterion Strategies adopted Measures implemented Credibility “Inside” researcher, insider–outsider author dialog, member check ▪ Conducted iterative discussions between researchers with varying degrees of familiarity with the context; conducted member checks with key informants to validate findings Prolonged engagement ▪ Studied firms for over 2 years Triangulation ▪ Collected data from interviews, internal documents, external reports, and field observations to cross-verify and strengthen the analysis Independent check ▪ Utilized an independent, native Japanese speaker to scrutinize and check transcriptions Dependability and confirmability Purposive sampling ▪ Selected informants with deep knowledge of institutional processes and those positioned to offer diverse perspectives on the servitization practices Insider–outsider dialogs and data interrogation ▪ Conducted regular dialogs to challenge assumptions and refine interpretations Records ▪ Maintained comprehensive audit trails, including detailed notes on data collection, analysis decisions, and researcher reflections Transferability Thick description ▪ Provided detailed contextual descriptions of the organizational settings and processes to enable the applicability of findings to other organizational contexts Bridging Different Institutional Logics: The Role of Institutional Work in Translating… Türkiye highlighted state support for specific technologies: “the state incentivizes flue filters,4 almost making it a neces- sity” (CST8). In Japan, climate transition bonds will raise substantial funds for decarbonization initiatives: So, this policy certainly stimulates the industries and market change from the[ir] current status to decar- bonization, and to stimulate Japan, the government … will provide ¥20 trillion. And to raise this ¥20 trillion, Japan’s climate transition bond, which is a government bond, will be issued from the beginning of next year. (COP28-P2) These policies create direct and indirect financial advan- tages for sustainable products, reshaping competition, and demand patterns. HeatingCo responds to such incentives by setting long-term environmental goals: “to achieve by FY2051, including reducing Scope 1, 2, and 3 GHG emis- sions, increasing the recycling rate of waste, and reducing water waste” (HeatingCo, Integrated Report, 2023), aligning its commercial strategy with evolving regulatory landscapes and public expectations. This alignment illustrates how state logic not only constrains but also enables firms to integrate sustainability objectives into their core value propositions. Commercial Logic Our findings suggest two interrelated dynamics dominate commercial logic: (1) market development opportunities and (2) legitimacy requirements. These dynamics highlight that sustainability has shifted from being a reputational add- on to a strategic necessity embedded in competitive market positioning. Market development opportunities: HeatingCo increas- ingly frames sustainability initiatives as a means of creat- ing value for industrial customers by offering solutions that reduce environmental impacts. These opportunities encom- pass energy efficiency, waste minimization, and the explora- tion of renewable energy sources and eco-friendly materials: Industrial customers are increasingly interested in reducing the environmental impact of their operations to help mitigate global warming. In particular, they have the challenge of reducing heat-energy usage and carbon emissions in their plants. As a leader in sup- plying industrial heat energy, [HeatingCo] sees a busi- ness opportunity in providing advanced heat-energy- management solutions. (HeatingCo, Integrated Report, 2023) This illustrates how sustainability is strategically posi- tioned as both a moral imperative and a commercial lever, opening pathways for market differentiation. We observed that saturated sales in the home market drive HeatingCo’s push into international markets. As one head- quarters participant noted: We mainly manufacture steam boilers, but Japan is already saturated with the amount of steam used to do things. Therefore, the current amount of evaporation is not going to increase that rapidly because the various facilities are already saturated. (JP1) This saturation compels HeatingCo to leverage its sus- tainability-oriented offerings as a basis for growth abroad, particularly in emerging markets like Türkiye, where indus- trial customers face strong cost and efficiency pressures. One customer highlighted these imperatives: In terms of water, electricity, natural gas, we need to be constantly efficient. We need to do projects constantly; we need to reduce their consumption. (CST6) HeatingCo Türkiye’s sales meeting revealed how these customer concerns are actively translated into PSS solutions that promise measurable reductions in resource consump- tion. This suggests that sustainability not only aligns with environmental goals but also becomes a core value propo- sition for expanding market share in resource-constrained regions. Legitimacy requirements: Our research findings highlight the demand for green and environmentally friendly solu- tions within industrial markets in Japan and Türkiye. This demand is largely attributable to heightened environmen- tal consciousness and regulatory imperatives by the state and society, compelling HeatingCo to integrate sustainabil- ity into its operations as an integral part of its operations. Concomitantly, HeatingCo progressively acknowledged the espoused advantages associated with sustainability integra- tion by adopting practices aimed at reducing waste, mitigat- ing carbon emissions, and enhancing resource efficiency. This trend toward environmentally conscious practices transcended diverse sectors, encompassing manufacturing, construction, and energy, in which HeatingCo supplies its products. In Japan, one participant captured the growing inevitability of sustainability standards as follows: Sustainability is the first thing that we need to focus on in today’s world. And, of course, the environment. There is no escape from this. Everyone is taking vari- ous measures and doing various things to become car- bon neutral, but if you don’t make products that are geared toward that goal, you probably won’t be able to participate in the competition. (JP5) 4  A flue filter in machinery removes particulate matter and pollutants from exhaust gases before they are released into the atmosphere. R. B. Bağcı et al. Here, sustainability functions as a threshold condition for market entry, linking product design directly to perceived legitimacy among customers and peers. Similarly, within the manufacturing sector in Türkiye, we found that there were pressures to innovate around sus- tainability so that companies could emulate the successful green strategies of market leaders to bolster their competi- tive standing. One informant captures this dynamic, noting: … most of them [industrial customers] are searching [for] ways to save energy, save chemicals, save peo- ple... to increase their competitiveness by following innovations and buying new machines. (CST8) This suggests that customers were influenced by mimetic pressures in their investment decisions regarding green innovation, providing a basis for upholding legitimacy and sustaining their competitive edge within the industry. Cou- pled with this, pressures from end customers for sustainable offerings are increasingly influencing business decisions. Our analysis indicates that, in both HeatingCo HQ and its Turkish operations, a substantial segment of business cus- tomers incorporates sustainability as a key criterion in pro- curement decisions. Observations from sales meetings reveal that some customers explicitly seek to install HeatingCo’s boilers to enhance their own credibility on sustainability in the eyes of customers. Moreover, collaborations along the supply chain are facilitating the adoption of sustainable prac- tices as firms seek to meet the sustainability requirements of their partners: Especially global companies … [where] environmental carbon emission is important. Companies working for Inditex, which pays a lot of attention to this... It is very important for them. As we are the boiler [firm] with the highest flue gas efficiency when carbon emission is possible, this is a great advantage for them. This is also a very big factor for them to choose HeatingCo. (TR10) The quote suggests that, for most firms operating in today’s markets, fulfilling sustainability objectives is a non- negotiable condition for being perceived as legitimate. Our findings suggest that sustainability has become embedded within prevailing commercial logics as an essen- tial standard by which corporate legitimacy is assessed in the market context. Accordingly, sustainability initiatives are influenced not only by formal regulatory requirements but also by informal stakeholder expectations and competitive dynamics. This dual influence creates a form of normative pressure that encourages firms to adopt sustainability prac- tices irrespective of legal mandates. Evidence from Türkiye and Japan reveals that firms in both settings engage in such practices, though the intensity and scope vary. Notably, multinational and local firms often translate and respond to the sustainability imperative in distinct ways: multination- als tend to align with global standards, whereas local firms adapt to context-specific norms and constraints, a dynamic we explore further in the next section. Overall, our findings suggest that HeatingCo’s com- mercial logic is shifting toward a more integrative business model that reflects the tensions and trade-offs inherent in balancing economic, environmental, and social objectives, in line with Hahn et al.'s (2015) framework on corporate sustainability. In Japan, the firm has institutionalized a more coherent approach, embedding sustainability as part of long- term competitiveness and legitimacy. In Türkiye, by con- trast, responses remain more fragmented, with sustainability primarily leveraged as a cost-saving and reputational tool in response to customer pressures. This difference underscores how commercial logic interacts dynamically with state and sustainability logics, producing varying patterns of integra- tion and tension across organizational contexts. Online Appendix 4 provides an overview comparison of the different logics between HeatingCo in Japan and Türkiye presented above. Further illustrative excerpts for the three logics are also available in Online Appendix 5. Translating Competing Logics Through Institutional Work In the preceding section, we identified three distinct but interacting logics shaping HeatingCo’s sustainability jour- ney. Here, we focus on how organizational actors translate and reconfigure these logics through institutional work in two different contexts. Our findings indicate that HeatingCo HQ demonstrates greater capacity to combine sustainabil- ity, state, and commercial logics into a coherent strategy. In contrast, within the Turkish subsidiary, these logics are enacted more unevenly, reflecting localized interpretations and context-specific constraints. This analysis highlights that institutional logics are not static impositions but subject to active negotiation and selective enactment by organizational members, leading to divergent pathways for sustainability integration. Strategically Creating Sustainability Practices Although institutional logics are shaped at a macro level, their realization depends on deliberate action by organiza- tional actors. HeatingCo’s experience shows that sustainabil- ity practices are strategically created, not merely adopted, as actors interpret and reconfigure external expectations within firm-specific and market-specific realities. We observe two distinct approaches: an accelerated approach to sustainabil- ity at headquarters, where sustainability is actively lever- aged to reshape PSS offerings, and a gradual approach to Bridging Different Institutional Logics: The Role of Institutional Work in Translating… sustainability in Türkiye, where translation of sustainabil- ity logic is slower and more fragmented due to contextual frictions. Accelerated approach to sustainability: At HeatingCo HQ, sustainability has been elevated from a compliance obli- gation to a strategic driver of innovation and market posi- tioning with targeted initiatives for its PSS offerings. These initiatives aimed to strategically enhance energy efficiency, reduce carbon emissions, and promote environmentally con- scious practices across the firm’s operations. A informant highlighted the tangible environmental gains from replacing existing boilers: If we change the boiler to a once-through boiler that uses natural gas or LNG at 95% efficiency, the CO2 emission reduction rate will be 64%, less than half of the current level. So, we have been making a strong effort to promote the conversion to gas. (JP3) This indicates a deliberate reframing of sustainability logic into a calculable and commercially viable benefit, where environmental impact reduction is positioned as a clear value proposition for customers. HeatingCo reinforced this commitment institutionally through the creation of a dedicated Sustainability Promo- tion Office: For [HeatingCo], corporate sustainability is to remain focused on using our competitive advantages to sup- port the social infrastructure and promote environmen- tal stewardship. To put this high-level concept into practice, we established the Sustainability Promotion Office in April 2022. This unit is tasked with visual- izing and keeping track of the group-wide implementa- tion of corporate sustainability initiatives against a set of KPIs, and keeping external stakeholders informed of the progress and outcome. (HeatingCo, Integrated Report, 2022) By creating formal structures, HQ embeds sustainabil- ity goals into decision-making routines, enabling consist- ent monitoring and signaling accountability to stakehold- ers. These endeavors aimed to harmonize sustainability and state logics as part of the commercial logic, reflecting Heat- ingCo’s alignment with evolving regulatory landscapes and market dynamics. Furthermore, HeatingCo HQ developed smart, car- bon–neutral equipment to support decarbonization initiatives among customers in Japan (COP26-P2). The strategy was twofold: broadening the scope of solutions offered while ensuring profitability, balancing customer value creation with the firm’s bottom line. A significant stride in this direc- tion involved integrating diverse equipment types into the service portfolio, enhancing the versatility of PSS offerings, and meeting a wider range of operational needs. HeatingCo explicitly positioned this integrated approach as a key step toward redefining itself as a “super maintenance” firm. To illustrate this ambition, corporate reports and informants framed future services as upgraded, comprehensive, and customer-oriented: [T]he Group will continue to offer upgraded total solu- tions and one-stop maintenance services and make the foundation of its legacy business more robust. (Heat- ingCo, Integrated Report, 2022) We are aiming for a company called ‘Super Mainte- nance’… a one-stop shop. (JP1) In the medium term, the Company aspires to evolve from a leading manufacturer of industrial and com- mercial boilers into a preeminent provider of total solutions and one-stop maintenance services in Japan, assisting industrial customers in operating their entire utility and manufacturing infrastructures, including boilers, more efficiently in their plants. We intend to achieve this challenging objective by training our field service engineers to become trusted heat-energy con- sultants for customers. (HeatingCo, Integrated Report, 2023) Together, these excerpts build a consistent narrative: HQ seeks to transcend product-based manufacturing toward a service-driven, consultative model that couples sustain- ability and commercial logics. This institutional work actively recombines environmental, regulatory, and market imperatives into a coherent strategy that strengthens com- petitive advantage while addressing pressing sustainability challenges. Gradual approach to sustainability: Despite HeatingCo’s efforts to transfer sustainability-focused PSS offerings to its Turkish subsidiary, adoption proved challenging. Resistance to novel technologies and services revealed tensions between competing logics, with commercial priorities frequently out- weighing sustainability and state considerations due to cost sensitivity and risk aversion. As one participant explained: … it is a new technology. It is a technology out of the ordinary. Therefore, sometimes managers are against it. (TR2) This highlights how decision-making in Türkiye often privileges cost control and operational certainty over envi- ronmental benefits, delaying transitions toward cleaner technologies. Observations from sales meetings showed that unfamili- arity with advanced equipment created a trust deficit among prospective customers. Many questioned whether the sys- tems could reliably meet production load demands, slowing purchase decisions and forcing sales teams to focus on reas- surance rather than closing deals. This incrementalism was openly acknowledged: R. B. Bağcı et al. But while we are still using coal boilers, it is not really right to switch to hydrogen all of a sudden in most regions. So … slowly, gradually, step by step, first you will digest it, you will learn to use it, you will reach the awareness of this. After that, I think it is definitely healthier to do this gradually to a higher technology. (TR13) The Turkish subsidiary, therefore, adopted a phased strat- egy, delaying the introduction of carbon–neutral equipment until existing solutions were fully embedded and accepted. This incremental progression ensured that innovation does not outpace the organization’s capacity for change, thereby maintaining a balance between novel advancements and operational stability. Nevertheless, HeatingCo’s potential introduction of advanced low NOx equipment, an enhance- ment over existing low CO2 technologies, was met with apathy in the Turkish market. This indifference is captured succinctly in the following: But unfortunately, not much attention is paid to nitro- gen emissions and carbon emissions in Türkiye (TR2). This response suggested that the Turkish market is still at a nascent stage in adopting advanced technology or that other underlying factors, such as economic considerations, a deficit in awareness, or regulatory constraints, played a role. Moreover, some HeatingCo customers expressed a willing- ness to adopt carbon–neutral technologies but highlighted significant infrastructural limitations that constrained feasi- bility. One customer illustrated how technical and environ- mental conditions made transitioning to renewable energy sources problematic: We had a lot of meetings online [with solar panel sup- pliers], but the systems at the location of our factory, that is, the amount of sun we receive annually, the amount of sun we receive daily, [the amount required to] meet the steam we consume, which is already sliced away at night. Therefore, it seems a little difficult to be honest. (CST6) This quote highlights two key challenges: insufficient solar energy availability to meet high steam demands and technical mismatches between renewable installations and operational requirements. Such constraints underscore that the adoption of sustainable PSS in Türkiye is not solely a matter of willingness or awareness but depends heavily on complementary infrastructure and reliable energy inputs. Without these foundational conditions, firms are unable to progress toward carbon–neutral technologies despite expressed interest, leading to a slower and more incremental sustainability transition. Moreover, observations from internal meetings revealed that maintenance teams regularly encountered technical challenges related to both the installation process and cus- tomers’ effective use of the equipment. These difficulties often stemmed from mismatches between product specifi- cations and on-site conditions, requiring additional post- installation adjustments. In certain regions, frictions also arose due to delays or constraints in extending gas pipeline infrastructure, which often impeded operational readiness. While the aspiration for sustainability undoubtedly existed, practical impediments need to be surmounted to actualize PSS adoption. HeatingCo HQs accelerated its sustainability efforts, aligning with the growing adoption of such practices among customers in Japan. However, these efforts faced challenges when translated into Türkiye, where a more gradual approach to sustainability prevailed. Our findings suggest that customers in Türkiye require a set of preparatory steps before full sustainability integra- tion becomes viable for their operations. These steps involve upgrading plant infrastructure with digital remote monitor- ing and PLC systems,5 retrofitting existing facilities for energy efficiency, and training personnel in PSS-based deliv- ery models. Financial readiness also emerged as a constraint, with some customers requiring access to blended financing mechanisms, such as green bonds, development finance, and private equity, to absorb the initial costs of smart tech- nologies. Organizational alignment was equally important. Companies needed to synchronize strategic objectives with sustainability goals, establish cross-functional teams for service co-creation, and restructure internal processes to support outcome-based contracts and long-term service relationships. Taken together, the distinction between accelerated and gradual approaches was not confined to the examples we highlight. Similar accounts of bringing forward decarboni- zation targets and rapidly adding smart-service features appeared in several HQ interviews and internal meetings, whereas managers at the Turkish subsidiary and customer maintenance chiefs repeatedly described sequencing sustain- ability-related changes through pilots, feasibility studies, and alignment with investment cycles. One obvious alternative explanation is that HQ simply faced fewer technical or infra- structural constraints than customers, but even in situations where similar technical solutions were technically available in Türkiye, actors framed their hesitation primarily in terms of commercial risk and alignment with local regulatory incentives. This suggests that differences in how sustain- ability, state, and commercial logics were combined, rather than technical feasibility alone, underpinned the divergent trajectories. In sum, strategic creation of sustainability practices is contingent on local agency and context. While HQ actively 5  Programmable Logic Controller systems. Bridging Different Institutional Logics: The Role of Institutional Work in Translating… reshapes offerings to integrate sustainability into com- mercial advantage, Türkiye is found to follow an adaptive, incremental path shaped by infrastructural constraints, risk perceptions, and market readiness. These variations high- light how institutional logics are enacted through situated practices rather than uniformly imposed, creating divergent trajectories for sustainability transitions within the same multinational firm. Maintaining Coupling Practices Having created sustainability practices to support PSS, Heat- ingCo HQ sought to bridge the competing logics at play by tightly coupling them in Japan. However, when transferred to Türkiye, these same practices were translated into a looser form, producing weaker connections between sustainability, state, and commercial logics. Our findings suggest that the degree of coupling reflects how local actors perceive risks, incentives, and legitimacy requirements, shaping the depth of sustainability integration in practice. Tightly coupled sustainability practices: At HQ, institu- tional work focused on embedding sustainability more firmly within commercial operations and customer relations. One central strategy involved delegating operational responsibili- ties to suppliers via service contracts, thus reducing buyer hesitancy over new technologies: So, we would like to make good use of our mainte- nance organization to provide maintenance services for other products as well, and to increase the use of heat in an effective way. (JP2) By taking ownership of maintenance obligations, HQ lowered perceived risks for customers, making adoption of sustainable technologies more attractive. This reflects a deliberate attempt to bridge commercial and sustainability logics through relational contracting, redistributing responsi- bility for performance and reliability across the supply chain. HeatingCo also embedded cost-saving features into sus- tainable offerings, particularly targeting reductions i