IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/amsrev/v11y2021i3d10.1007_s13162-021-00199-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Markets and institutional fields: foundational concepts and a research agenda

Author

Listed:
  • Nicola Mountford

    (Maynooth University School of Business)

  • Susi Geiger

    (University College Dublin)

Abstract

We borrow the notion of field from institutional theory to think through how markets and their ‘outsides’–or at least one particular manifestation of an ‘outside’–stand in a dynamic and interactive relationship. We distinguish the field and the market in terms of issues versus exchange and identity versus position. We argue that the lack of clarity as to how fields and markets differ, relate, overlap, and are bounded, jeopardizes our ability to address important societal debates concerning the roles of markets within and across other areas of social life. It also hinders a consolidation of insights across different approaches to studying markets, even though researchers from different disciplines often address similar concerns. Key questions for which both conceptual and analytical clarity are essential include how markets and their ‘outsides’ (here: fields) intersect; whether and how diverse sets of actors interact, work, and migrate between fields and markets; and what dynamics may be observable between field and market. We provide four illustrative examples of field/market relationships and a theoretical, methodological, and empirical research agenda for future research into markets and their ‘outsides’.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicola Mountford & Susi Geiger, 2021. "Markets and institutional fields: foundational concepts and a research agenda," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 11(3), pages 290-303, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:amsrev:v:11:y:2021:i:3:d:10.1007_s13162-021-00199-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s13162-021-00199-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13162-021-00199-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13162-021-00199-8?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gerardo Patriotta, 2020. "Actors and Actorhood in Institutional Theory," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(4), pages 867-872, June.
    2. Geiger, Susi & Kjellberg, Hans, 2021. "Market mash ups: The process of combinatorial market innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 445-457.
    3. Suvi Nenonen & Kaj Storbacka & Charlotta Windahl, 2019. "Capabilities for market-shaping: triggering and facilitating increased value creation," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 617-639, July.
    4. Nina Granqvist & Stine Grodal & Jennifer L. Woolley, 2013. "Hedging Your Bets: Explaining Executives' Market Labeling Strategies in Nanotechnology," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(2), pages 395-413, April.
    5. Vargo, Stephen L. & Koskela-Huotari, Kaisa & Baron, Steve & Edvardsson, Bo & Reynoso, Javier & Colurcio, Maria, 2017. "A systems perspective on markets – Toward a research agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 260-268.
    6. Maxim Voronov & Klaus Weber, 2020. "People, Actors, and the Humanizing of Institutional Theory," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(4), pages 873-884, June.
    7. 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.
    8. Mountford, Nicola, 2019. "Managing by proxy: Organizational networks as institutional levers in evolving public good markets," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 92-104.
    9. Daiane Scaraboto & Eileen Fischer, 2013. "Frustrated Fatshionistas: An Institutional Theory Perspective on Consumer Quests for Greater Choice in Mainstream Markets," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 39(6), pages 1234-1257.
    10. Nina Granqvist & Tiina Ritvala, 2016. "Beyond Prototypes: Drivers of Market Categorization in Functional Foods and Nanotechnology," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(2), pages 210-237, March.
    11. Dong-Jae Kim & Bruce Kogut, 1996. "Technological Platforms and Diversification," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(3), pages 283-301, June.
    12. N. Anand & Richard A. Peterson, 2000. "When Market Information Constitutes Fields: Sensemaking of Markets in the Commercial Music Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(3), pages 270-284, June.
    13. Finch, John & Geiger, Susi & Reid, Emma, 2017. "Captured by technology? How material agency sustains interaction between regulators and industry actors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 160-170.
    14. Cova, Bernard & Ivens, Björn Sven & Spencer, Robert, 2021. "The ins and outs of market shaping: Exclusion as a darkside?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 483-493.
    15. Tammar B. Zilber, 2011. "Institutional Multiplicity in Practice: A Tale of Two High-Tech Conferences in Israel," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(6), pages 1539-1559, December.
    16. Diane M. Martin & John W. Schouten, 2014. "Consumption-Driven Market Emergence," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 40(5), pages 855-870.
    17. Hélène Rainelli Weiss & Isabelle Huault, 2016. "Business as usual in Financial Markets? The creation of incommensurables as institutional maintenance work," Post-Print hal-01275254, HAL.
    18. Stoyan V. Sgourev, 2013. "How Paris Gave Rise to Cubism (and Picasso): Ambiguity and Fragmentation in Radical Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(6), pages 1601-1617, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Geiger, Susi & Kjellberg, Hans, 2021. "Market mash ups: The process of combinatorial market innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 445-457.
    2. Lee, Chu-Heng & Hsieh, Ming-Huei, 2023. "Market innovation as an institutional reconciliation process: Two individual-level case studies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    3. Suvi Nenonen & Kaj Storbacka, 2021. "Market-shaping: navigating multiple theoretical perspectives," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 11(3), pages 336-353, December.
    4. Suvi Nenonen & Kaj Storbacka & Charlotta Windahl, 2019. "Capabilities for market-shaping: triggering and facilitating increased value creation," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 617-639, July.
    5. Hans Kjellberg & Riikka Murto, 2021. "Theorizing markets," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 11(3), pages 207-215, December.
    6. Heiko Wieland & Angeline Nariswari & Melissa Archpru Akaka, 2021. "On managerial relevance: reconciling the academic-practitioner divide through market theorizing," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 11(3), pages 252-271, December.
    7. Melissa Archpru Akaka & Kaisa Koskela-Huotari & Stephen L. Vargo, 2021. "Formalizing service-dominant logic as a general theory of markets: taking stock and moving forward," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 11(3), pages 375-389, December.
    8. Thompson-Whiteside, Helen & Fletcher-Brown, Judith & Middleton, Karen & Turnbull, Sarah, 2023. "Emergence in emergency: How actors adapt to service ecosystem disruption," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    9. Julia A. Fehrer, 2020. "Rethinking marketing: back to purpose," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 10(3), pages 179-184, December.
    10. Stathakopoulos, Vlasis & Kottikas, Konstantinos G. & Painesis, Grigorios & Theodorakis, Ioannis G. & Kottika, Efthymia, 2022. "Why shape a market? Empirical evidence on the prominent firm-level and market-level outcomes of market-driving strategy," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 1240-1254.
    11. Diaz Ruiz, Carlos & Makkar, Marian, 2021. "Market bifurcations in board sports: How consumers shape markets through boundary work," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 38-50.
    12. Stephen L. Vargo & Linda Peters & Hans Kjellberg & Kaisa Koskela-Huotari & Suvi Nenonen & Francesco Polese & Debora Sarno & Claudia Vaughan, 2023. "Emergence in marketing: an institutional and ecosystem framework," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 51(1), pages 2-22, January.
    13. Nguyen, Arthur & Özçaglar-Toulouse, Nil, 2021. "Nation branding as a market-shaping strategy: A study on South Korean products in Vietnam," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 131-144.
    14. Swapan Deep Arora, 2024. "Consumer proactive empowerment: A systematic review and taxonomy development," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 14(1), pages 104-121, June.
    15. Alaa Chaabo, 2022. "Semantic Multiplicity : How Lexical Ambiguity Elicit Imperfect Organizational Discourse Sustaining Category Ambiguity In Case of NPD," Post-Print hal-04090505, HAL.
    16. Tierney, Kieran D. & Oswald Karpen, Ingo & Westberg, Kate, 2022. "Brand meaning and institutional work: The light and dark sides of service employee practices," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 244-256.
    17. Nicolas Battard & Paul Donnelly & Vincent Mangematin, 2017. "Organizational Responses to Institutional Pressures: Reconfiguration of Spaces in Nanosciences and Nanotechnologies," Post-Print hal-01745508, HAL.
    18. Cozzolino, Alessio & Geiger, Susi, 2024. "Ecosystem disruption and regulatory positioning: Entry strategies of digital health startup orchestrators and complementors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(2).
    19. Nathaniel D. Line & Rodney C. Runyan & Tracy Gonzalez-Padron, 2019. "Multiple stakeholder market orientation: a service-dominant logic perspective of the market orientation paradigm," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 9(1), pages 42-60, June.
    20. Hope Jensen Schau & Melissa Archpru Akaka, 2021. "From customer journeys to consumption journeys: a consumer culture approach to investigating value creation in practice-embedded consumption," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 11(1), pages 9-22, June.

    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:spr:amsrev:v:11:y:2021:i:3:d:10.1007_s13162-021-00199-8. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.