Search results

This essay raises a concern about the trajectory that new institutionalism has been following during the last decades, namely an emphasis on heterogeneity, change and agentic behavior instead of isomorphism and conformist behavior. This is a crucial issue from the perspective of the philosophy and methodology of science since a theory that admits both change and stability as a norm has less scientific weight then a theory that predicts a prevalence of passivity and isomorphism over change and strategic behavior. The former provides explanations and predictions while the latter does not.

The paper offers an analysis of the nature, characteristics, functions and boundaries of institutional theories in the spirit of philosophy and methodology of science literature.

The power of the former institutional theory developed by Meyer, Rowan, DiMaggio and Powell lies in its generalization, explanation and prediction of observable and unobservable phenomena: as a typical organizational theory that puts forward directional predictions, it explains and predicts the tendency for organizations to become more similar to each other over time and express less strategic and interest-driven behavior, conforming to ever-increasing institutional pressures. A theory of isomorphism makes scientific predictions while its modern advancements do not. Drawing on Popper's idea of the limit of domains of explanation and limited domains of theories we present two propositions that may direct our attention towards the strength or weakness of institutional theories with regard to their explanations of organizational processes and behavior.

The paper draws implications for further theory building in institutional analysis by suggesting the nature of institutional explanations and the place of institutional change in the theoretical apparatus. Once institutional theory explains the tendency of the system towards equilibrium, there is no need to explain the origins and causes of radical change per se. Institutional isomorphism theory explains and predicts how even after radical changes organizational fields will move towards isomorphism, that is, institutional equilibrium. The task is, therefore, not to explain agency and change but to show that it is natural and inevitable processes that organizational field will return to isomorphic dynamics and move towards homogenization no matter how much radical change occurred in this field.

The paper discusses the practical problems with instrumental utility of institutional theories. In order to be useful any theory must clearly delineate its boundaries and offer explanations and predictions and it is only the former 1977/1983 institutional theory that satisfies these requirements while modern advancements merely offer ambiguous theoretical umbrellas that escape empirical tests. For researchers therefore it is important to recognize which theory can be applied in a given limited domain of research and which one has little or no value.

This paper aims to introduce and discuss a new contextual framework to explain the processes of management accounting change in various organizations.

Having an institutional perspective, the paper develops a “conceptual contextual framework” of management accounting change. The methodology to accomplish this theory building consists of an integration of a number of different works summarizing the common elements, contrasting the differences and extending the work in some fashion. Particularly, it draws on theoretical triangulation by adopting three approaches: old institutional economics for internal processes and factors (Burns and Scapens, 2000); new institutional sociology for external processes and pressures (Dillard et al., 2004); and power and politics mobilization (Hardy, 1996).

The proposed framework provides an understanding of the complex “mixture” of interrelated factors that may influence management accounting change at multi-institutional levels: political and economic level, organizational field level and organizational level.

The framework extends institutional theory-based management accounting research as well as provides a comprehensive basis for examining dynamics of accounting in the institutionalization process. Through further research, the framework will be extended and refined.

The paper has practical implications for practitioners and officers as well as for the accounting profession and academics alike.

The proposed contextual framework provides insights into the processes of change by focusing attention on the underlying institutions that encode accounting systems or practices in three institutional levels: political and economic level, the organizational field level and organization level. Examining the tension between institutionalized beliefs and values that may occur between these three levels of institutions will enhance our understanding of management accounting change in organizations.

Institutional theory is becoming one of the dominant theoretical perspectives in organization theory and is increasingly being applied in accounting research to study the practice of accounting in organizations. However, most institutional theory research has adequately theorized neither the institutionalization process through which change takes place nor the socio‐political context of the institutional formations. We propose a social theory based framework for grounding and expanding institutional theory to more fully articulate institutionalization processes. Specifically, we incorporate institutional theory and structuration theory and draw on the work of Max Weber in developing a framework of the context and the processes associated with creating, adopting and discarding institutional practices. We propose that the expanded framework depicts the socio‐economic and political context better and more directly addresses the dynamics of enacting, embedding and changing organizational features and processes. Expanding the focus of the institutional theory based accounting research can facilitate a more comprehensive representation of accounting as the object of institutional practices as well as provide a better articulation of the role of accounting in the institutionalization process.

The purpose of this paper is to examine an entrepreneur’s attempt to gain legitimacy and change institutions in a multiple institutions setting.

The authors conducted a qualitative case study to track an entrepreneur’s efforts to create a new financial instrument and get it accepted and traded on the New York Stock Exchange.

The authors introduce the concept of institutional judo, analogous to the martial art where a fighter uses his opponent’s forces against him. While institutional theory has focussed on how institutional pressures force actors to conform, the term judo refers to an actor using institutional pressures to their advantage in changing those very institutions.

This qualitative research involves a single case study, but is most suited to revealing extensions of theory and subtle processes.

The approach allowed the authors to provide a nuanced look at the actual change efforts by an entrepreneur to gain legitimacy.

This study provides a nuanced look at actual attempts to change institutions.

Institutional judo offers a new change mechanism within institutional theory.

This study aims to analyze the dynamics of the institutional change and institutional stability undergone by strategic networks (SNs) in the pharmaceutical industry.

The authors performed a case study with four Brazilian SNs which followed different patterns of institutional change and institutional stability. Twenty network managers and network members from the pharmaceutical industry were interviewed, and documents were analyzed.

The results show how and why institutions changed or remained the same. More specifically, exogenous shocks can negatively impact the competitive environment influencing institutional change in SNs. Moreover, endogenous shocks may prevent institutional change and stimulate institutional stability. Continuous interaction between institutions and SNs is the key to institutional change, especially if public and private policies are considered a source of political institutions.

Research has highlighted the endogenous influence of SNs on firms in selecting their partners and arranging their positions in the SNs, but little attention has been paid to how SNs themselves respond to institutions or promote institutional change. This study explains how and why change fails at the network level, additionally pinpointing the main sources of the institutional change and inertia in SNs. As such, network members may use different strategies to stimulate institutional change or stability according to their interests.

Institutional theory had been developed for the purpose of explaining widespread diffusion, mimetic adoption and institutionalization of organizational practices. However, further extensions of institutional theory are needed to explain a range of different institutional trajectories and organizational responses since institutionalized standards constitute a minority of all diffusing practices. The study presents a theoretical framework which offers guidelines for explaining and predicting various adoption, variation and post-adoption scenarios.

The paper is primarily conceptual in nature, and the arguments are developed based on previous institutional theory and organizational change literature.

The notion of institutional inertia is proposed in order to provide a more detailed explanation of when and why organizations ignore, adopt, modify, maintain and abandon practices and the way intra-organizational institutional pressures shape, direct and constrain these processes. It is specified whether institutional inertia will be temporarily eclipsed or whether it will actively manifest itself during adoption, adaptation and maintaining attempts. The study distinguishes between four institutional profiles of organizational practices – institutionalized, institutionally friendly, neutral and contested practices – which can vary along three dimensions: accuracy, extensiveness and meaning. The variation and post-adoption outcomes for each of them can be completely characterized and predicted by only three parameters: the rate of institutional inertia, institutional profile of these practices and whether they are interpretatively flexible. In turn, an extent of intraorganizational institutional resistance to new practices is determined by their institutional profile and flexibility.

It is expected that proposed theoretical explanations in this paper can offer insights into these empirical puzzles and supply a broader view of organizational and management changes. The study’s theoretical propositions help to understand what happens to organizational practices after they are handled by organizations, thus moving beyond the adoption/rejection dichotomy.

The paper explores and clarifies the nature of institutional inertia and offers an explanation of its manifestation in organizations over time and how it shapes organizational practices in the short and long run. It challenges a popular assumption in organizational literature that fast and revolutionary transition is a prerequisite for successful change. More broadly, the typology offered in this paper helps to explain whether and how organizations can successfully handle and complete their change and how far they can depart from institutional norms.

Given managerial choices and the sociocultural context in which they are made are at the heart of management history, then an understanding of both is critical. This paper argues that the “late” North (2005) provides such an understanding.

This study is a research review synthesizing much disparate but cognate literature across the new institutionalism in organizational sociology/studies and in economics.

“Late” North (2005) provides an important ontological frame for dealing with the so-called “paradox of embedded agency”, an approach that may afford management historians a more thorough account of how institutions are formed and change over time. North has always maintained that institutional change is the outcome of deliberate or intentional choices made by actors. However, and unlike his earlier work which ignores how humans come to make the said choices, North (2005) explicates the sociocognitive process by which intentionality emerges with expanded consciousness, as humans construct ideas and beliefs about reality, beliefs that shape decisions to alter the said reality via the process of institutional change.

It is rather curious that despite North’s status as a “historian”, management historians – or at least those publishing in this journal from its founding in 1995 – do not seem to be terribly interested in North’s work. Although North rates a mention in rival journals, other than Dagnino and Quattrone’s (2006) study, papers in this journal invoking institutional theory align with the new institutionalism in organizational sociology/studies (NIOS) rather than North’s new institutional economics (NIE). Even in the related sub-discipline of business history, those professing an interest in institutions are more interested in the NIE of non-historians Coase and Oliver Williamson than they are in North’s NIE. And, in recent work analysing the place and significance of institutional theory in historical research, the foundations are unmistakeably NIOS rather than North’s NIE.

The aim of this article is to test the hypothesis that peer-to-peer technology platforms (Uber) are associated with disruption in the institutional environment, affecting beliefs, norms and users' ways of thinking and acting.

Probability sample comprising 843 users (446 passengers; 397 drivers) in the city of Belo Horizonte, Brazil, using a set of indicators was specifically designed for this study.

Uber triggers significant changes in the systems of rewards and sanctions, in social preferences, and in entrepreneurial structure and governance, and promotes the coexistence of an institutional logic, hitherto dominant, with new believes, rules, norms and regulatory systems.

This is a pioneer study that associates institutional approach's elements with technology platforms; the authors also elaborated and utilized an analysis model consisting of a set of completely original indicators capable of mapping and measuring different dimensions of the phenomenon under analysis.

The aim of this paper is to illustrate and discuss how healthcare organisations can act as institutional entrepreneurs in a context of change.

The authors conducted an in-depth longitudinal case study (2005-2008) of a healthcare organisation in the province of Quebec, Canada. Data collection consisted of real-time observations of senior managers (n=87), interviews (n=24) with decision-makers and secondary data analysis of documents.

The paper reports on the extent to which entrepreneurial healthcare organisations can be a driving force in the creation of a new practice. The authors analyse the development of a diabetes reference centre by a healthcare organisation acting as an institutional entrepreneur that illustrates the conceptualisation of an innovation and the mobilisation of resources to implement it and to influence other actors in the field. The authors discuss the case in reference to three stages of change: emergence, implementation and diffusion. The results illustrate the different strategies used by managers to advance their proposed projects.

This study helps to better understand the dynamics of mandated change in a mature field such as healthcare and the roles played by organisations in this process. By adopting a proactive strategy, a healthcare organisation can play an active role and strongly influence the evolution of its field.

This paper is one of only a few to analyse strategies used by healthcare organisations in the context of mandated change.

Government initiatives to improve construction have increasingly become more focused on introducing a repertoire of technologies to transform the sector. In the literature on construction industry transformation through policy-backed initiatives, how firms will respond to the demands to adopt and use innovative technologies and approaches is taken for granted, and there is scarcely any attention given to the institutional implications of transformation agenda. The purpose of this paper is to discuss these gaps and offer directions for future research.

Following a synthesis of literature on the UK’s industry transformation agenda, the authors use the concepts of institutional logics, arrangements, complexity and strategic responses to suggest seven research questions that are at the nexus of policy-backed transformation and institutional theory.

In this paper, the authors argue that increasing demands for the adoption and use of digital technologies, platforms, manufacturing approaches and other “industry-4.0”-related technologies will reconfigure existing logics and arrangements in the construction industry, creating a problem of institutional complexity for general contracting firms in particular.

The questions are relevant for our understanding of the nature of institutional complexities, change, strategic firm responses, field-level dynamics and implications for the construction industry in relation to the transformation agenda. This paper is positioned to spur future research towards exploring the consequences of industry transformation through the lens of institutional theory.