IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/buetqu/v23y2013i01p1-30_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Institutional Work and Complicit Decoupling across the U.S. Capital Markets: The Work of Rating Agencies

Author

Listed:
  • Clark, Cynthia E.
  • Newell, Sue

Abstract

We focus on the core institution of the capital market and the institutional work of professional service firms that provide ratings on corporate issuers, initially in a bid to maintain this institution, which suffered when those involved relied solely on information from the issuers themselves. Through our analysis we identify a new type of decoupling—complicit decoupling. Complicit decoupling evolves over time, beginning with the creation of a new practice, here corporate ratings as a form of policing work, which emerges to help to maintain a core institution. This practice is then adopted, implemented and later becomes decoupled. Exposure does not undermine the legitimacy of the practice because external actors collude in the ‘window dressing’ and, because it has become normalized, only partial repairs are enacted. It is by nature field-level institutional work, benefiting the majority of the field and inherently involves a violation of promise keeping. We conclude with implications for managers and behavioral ethics researchers.

Suggested Citation

  • Clark, Cynthia E. & Newell, Sue, 2013. "Institutional Work and Complicit Decoupling across the U.S. Capital Markets: The Work of Rating Agencies," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(1), pages 1-30, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:23:y:2013:i:01:p:1-30_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1052150X00005352/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Styhre Alexander, 2018. "The Making of the Shareholder Primacy Governance Model: Price Theory, the Law and Economics School, and Corporate Law Retrenchment Advocacy," Accounting, Economics, and Law: A Convivium, De Gruyter, vol. 8(3), pages 1-31, December.
    2. Muel Kaptein, 2023. "A Paradox of Ethics: Why People in Good Organizations do Bad Things," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 184(1), pages 297-316, April.
    3. Viviana Gutiérrez-Rincón, 2014. "Beyond the internal dynamics of organizational responses to conflicting institutional demands," Estudios Gerenciales, Universidad Icesi, November.
    4. Daniela Giménez & Andrea Calabrò, 2018. "The salient role of institutions in Women’s entrepreneurship: a critical review and agenda for future research," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 857-882, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:23:y:2013:i:01:p:1-30_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/beq .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.