IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eurman/v31y2013i6p626-641.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Surfing on institutions: When temporary actors in organizational fields respond to institutional pressures

Author

Listed:
  • Boutinot, Amélie
  • Mangematin, Vincent

Abstract

Institutional scholars have emphasized the isomorphism of actors in organizational fields – but what about organizations that interact only temporarily in such fields – how do they react to their institutional constraints? Based on an in-depth analysis of an architectural contest, this paper focuses on actors who interact with a field only once or occasionally. Such actors do not conform completely to the field’s existing institutions, but rather ‘surf’ on them: adopting their general frameworks to benefit from their dynamics and the predictability of action they guarantee, but adapting institutional rules and conventions to their own benefit. Introducing the notion of ‘surfing on institution’ allows us to complement the literature on organizations’ responses to institutional pressures and norms.

Suggested Citation

  • Boutinot, Amélie & Mangematin, Vincent, 2013. "Surfing on institutions: When temporary actors in organizational fields respond to institutional pressures," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 626-641.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:eurman:v:31:y:2013:i:6:p:626-641
    DOI: 10.1016/j.emj.2013.03.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0263237313000297
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.emj.2013.03.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. T. Lawrence & R. Suddaby & B. Leca, 2009. "Introduction : Theorizing and studying institutional work," Post-Print hal-00808954, HAL.
    2. Olivier Boiral, 2003. "ISO 9000: Outside the Iron Cage," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(6), pages 720-737, December.
    3. Garud, Raghu & Karnoe, Peter, 2003. "Bricolage versus breakthrough: distributed and embedded agency in technology entrepreneurship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 277-300, February.
    4. Thomas Lawrence & Roy Suddaby & Bernard Leca, 2009. "Introduction: theorizing and studying institutional work," Post-Print hal-00576557, HAL.
    5. Eva Boxenbaum & Linda Rouleau, 2011. "New knowledge products as bricolage: Metaphors and scripts in organizational theory," Post-Print hal-00719599, HAL.
    6. Pinkse, Jonatan & Kolk, Ans, 2007. "Multinational Corporations and Emissions Trading:: Strategic Responses to New Institutional Constraints," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 441-452, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Elbasha, Tamim & Avetisyan, Emma, 2018. "A framework to study strategizing activities at the field level: The example of CSR rating agencies," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 38-46.
    2. Pichault, Francois & Fatien Diochon, Pauline & Nizet, Jean, 2020. "Autonomy of independent professionals: A political process perspective," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 623-633.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Binz, Christian & Harris-Lovett, Sasha & Kiparsky, Michael & Sedlak, David L. & Truffer, Bernhard, 2016. "The thorny road to technology legitimation — Institutional work for potable water reuse in California," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 249-263.
    2. Maximilian Benner, 2021. "System-level agency and its many shades: How to shape the system for path development?," PEGIS geo-disc-2021_10, Institute for Economic Geography and GIScience, Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    3. Martínez-Ferrero, Jennifer & García-Sánchez, Isabel-María, 2017. "Coercive, normative and mimetic isomorphism as determinants of the voluntary assurance of sustainability reports," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 102-118.
    4. Victoria Johnson & Walter W. Powell, 2015. "Poisedness and Propagation: Organizational Emergence and the Transformation of Civic Order in 19th-Century New York City," NBER Working Papers 21011, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Syed Imran Saqib & Matthew MC Allen & Geoffrey Wood, 2022. "Lordly Management and its Discontents: ‘Human Resource Management’ in Pakistan," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 36(3), pages 465-484, June.
    6. Stephen L. Vargo & Robert F. Lusch, 2016. "Institutions and axioms: an extension and update of service-dominant logic," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 5-23, January.
    7. Richard Nielsen & Felipe Massa, 2013. "Reintegrating Ethics and Institutional Theories," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 115(1), pages 135-147, June.
    8. Beninger, Stefanie & Francis, June N.P., 2021. "Collective market shaping by competitors and its contribution to market resilience," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 293-303.
    9. Carney, Michael & Dieleman, Marleen & Taussig, Markus, 2016. "How are institutional capabilities transferred across borders?," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 51(6), pages 882-894.
    10. Canning, Mary & O'Dwyer, Brendan, 2016. "Institutional work and regulatory change in the accounting profession," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 1-21.
    11. Surachman, Eko Nur & Perwitasari, Sevi Wening & Suhendra, Maman, 2022. "Stakeholder management mapping to improve public-private partnership success in emerging country water projects: Indonesia’s experience," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    12. Bettini, Yvette & Brown, Rebekah R. & de Haan, Fjalar J. & Farrelly, Megan, 2015. "Understanding institutional capacity for urban water transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 65-79.
    13. Mélodie Cartel & Eva Boxenbaum & Franck Aggeri, 2014. "Policy making as bricolage: the role of platforms in institutional innovation," Post-Print hal-01089462, HAL.
    14. Julia Mergner & Liudvika Leišytė & Elke Bosse, 2019. "The Widening Participation Agenda in German Higher Education: Discourses and Legitimizing Strategies," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(1), pages 61-70.
    15. Aburous, Dina, 2019. "IFRS and institutional work in the accounting domain," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1-15.
    16. Sietze Vellema & Greetje Schouten & Rob Van Tulder, 2020. "Partnering capacities for inclusive development in food provisioning," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 38(6), pages 710-727, November.
    17. Ripoll Servent, Ariadna and Amy Busby, 2013. "Introduction: Agency and influence inside the EU institutions," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 17, July.
    18. Oliver Henk, 2020. "Internal control through the lens of institutional work: a systematic literature review," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 239-273, September.
    19. Clerkin, Brendan & Quinn, Martin & Connolly, Ciaran, 2024. "Decoupled accounting in a non-profit context: An explanation for stable management accounting?," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    20. Kathrin, Böhling, 2019. "Collaborative governance in the making: Implementation of a new forest management regime in an old-growth conflict region of British Columbia, Canada," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 43-53.

    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:eee:eurman:v:31:y:2013:i:6:p:626-641. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/115/description#description .

    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.