Men and Women of the Corporation

What We Know and Don't Know About Corporate Social Responsibility: A Review and Research Agenda

What makes organizations so similar? We contend that the engine of rationalization and bureaucratization has moved from the competitive marketplace to the state and the professions. Once a set of organizations emerges as a field, a paradox arises: rational actors make their organizations increasingly similar as they try to change them. We describe three isomorphic processes-coercive, mimetic, and normative—leading to this outcome. We then specify hypotheses about the impact of resource centralization and dependency, goal ambiguity and technical uncertainty, and professionalization and structuration on isomorphic change. Finally, we suggest implications for theories of organizations and social change.

The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields (Chinese Translation)

Organizations face institutional complexity whenever they confront incompatible prescriptions from multiple institutional logics. Our interest is in how plural institutional logics, refracted through field-level structures and processes, are experienced within organizations and how organizations respond to such complexity. We draw on a variety of cognate literatures to discuss the field-level structural characteristics and organizational attributes that shape institutional complexity. We then explore the repertoire of strategies and structures that organizations deploy to cope with multiple, competing demands. The analytical framework developed herein is presented to guide future scholarship in the systematic analysis of institutional complexity. We conclude by suggesting avenues for future research.

Institutional Complexity and Organizational Responses

1. Introduction to the Institutional Logics Perspective 2. Precursors to the Institutional Logics Perspective 3. Defining the Inter-institutional System 4. The Emergence, Stability and Change of the Inter-institutional System 5. Micro-Foundations of Institutional Logics 6. The Dynamics of Organizational Practices and Identities 7. The Emergence and Evolution of Field-Level Logics 8. Implications for Future Research

The Institutional Logics Perspective: A New Approach to Culture, Structure and Process

Microfoundations of Institutional Theory

Jeannette Colyvas • Michael Crow • Annetine Gelijns • Roberto Mazzoleni Richard R. Nelson • Nathan Rosenberg • Bhaven N. Sampat Institute for International Studies, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305 Office of the Executive Vice Provost, Columbia University, New York, New York 10027 INCHOIR, Columbia University, New York, New York 10027 Department of Economics and Geography, Hofstra University, Hempstead, New York 11594 School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University, New York, New York 10027 Department of Economics, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305 School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30332 colyvas@leland.stanford.edu • mc71@columbia.edu • acp10@columbia.edu • ecorzm@mail1.hofstra.edu rrn2@columbia.edu • nate@leland.stanford.edu • bhaven.sampat@pubpolicy.gatech.edu

How Do University Inventions Get Into Practice

Roads to Institutionalization: The Remaking of Boundaries between Public and Private Science

https://www.sesp.northwestern.edu/docs/publications/18578894984e87b9bf61911.pdf

Breaking the Ivory Tower: Academic Entrepreneurship in the Life Sciences in UK and Germany

Diffusion and institutionalization are of prime sociological importance, as both processes unfold at the intersections of relations and structures, as well as persistence and change. Yet they are often confounded, leading to theoretical and methodological biases that hinder the development of generalizable arguments. We look at diffusion and institutionalization distinctively, each as both a process and an outcome in terms of three dimensions: the objects that flow or stick; the subjects who adopt or influence; and the social settings through which an innovation travels. We offer examples to flesh out these dimensions, and formulate testable propositions from our analytic framework that could lead to further theoretical refinement and progress.

/pdf/ubiquity-and-legitimacy-disentangling-diffusion-and-fphpbjuv56.pdf

Jeannette A. Colyvas

Papers

Microfoundations of Institutional Theory

How Do University Inventions Get Into Practice

Roads to Institutionalization: The Remaking of Boundaries between Public and Private Science

Breaking the Ivory Tower: Academic Entrepreneurship in the Life Sciences in UK and Germany

Ubiquity and Legitimacy: Disentangling Diffusion and Institutionalization*