This study challenges two foundational assumptions in institutional theory. First, we demonstrate that environmental jolts do not create opportunities by introducing new possibilities, but instead function as "institutional archaeology"—excavating pre-existing contradictions immobilized by taken-for-granted legitimacy. Second, we reveal that institutional persistence operates through fundamentally different mechanisms in developing versus advanced economies, challenging universalist assumptions of institutional entrepreneurship theory. Drawing on 28 interviews with Malaysian Big 4 auditors (2020-2024), we examine why some pandemic-induced audit adaptations persisted while others reverted after restrictions lifted. Our analysis reveals that all high-persistence innovations addressed problems that were recognized and solvable before the pandemic but were institutionally illegitimate. COVID did not bring new solutions; it stripped away institutional legitimacy that had protected known dysfunctions from remediation. Critically, we reveal geography-contingent institutionalization mechanisms. In our developing economy context, persistence predominantly followed Condition 3-type pathways—resolving global-local asymmetries through institutional void-filling driven by external mandates—contrasting sharply with advanced economy studies emphasizing Condition 1-type pathways of local optimization driven by actor agency. We establish that high resolution of the primary originating tension is necessary but insufficient for institutional lock-in; innovations must also satisfy at least one additional condition at high levels. These findings fundamentally reconceptualize environmental jolts theory and reveal geography-contingent mechanisms of institutional change.