Suchergebnisse

The theme of this essay is how to engage with unconscious dynamics in our analysis of institutions. The essay clarifies the ways in which the unconscious influences institutional structures and organizational practices, and this is the main theoretical contribution to organization studies. A conceptual framework is presented that can help scholars of organizations and institutions to deepen analysis and understanding of how people's organizational lives can be shaped by dynamics that are beyond reason, as well as how such dynamics are embedded in social structures. The terms unconscious and institution are aligned to illustrate a new concept, 'institutional illogics'. This refers to the structuring and unsettling effects of unconscious dynamics, particularly social defences and shared fantasies, on organizations and institutions. Examples from published, empirical papers are used to illustrate the value of the framework. The concept of illogics is intended to encourage balance alongside the influence of logics on institutional analysis.

AbstractFrom a modern institutional economics viewpoint, blockchain is an institutional technology that minimizes transaction costs and greatly reduces intermediation. Through an analysis of blockchain, I demonstrate the possibilities of extended institutional approach – a new generation of complexity-focused methodologies and theories of institutional analysis that complement and expand the standard institutional paradigm. By using the theory of transaction value, I argue blockchain technologies not only will lead to a significant reduction in transaction costs but will also reorient intermediaries toward improving the quality of transactions and expanding the offer of additional transaction services. The theory of institutional assemblages indicates it is impossible to form a homogeneous system of blockchain-based institutions associated exclusively with the principles of decentralization, transparency, and openness. Blockchain-based institutions will be of a hybrid and conflicting nature, combining elements of opposing institutional logics – regulatory and algorithmic law, Ricardian and smart contracts, private and public systems, and uncontrollability and arbitration.

Institutions (and institutional distance) are considered a central concept to the field of international business and dealing with a multitude of institutional environments is a front-and-center task for the global manager. However, exactly how institutions matter for foreign firm behavior and performance is a question that still puzzles the academic community. The inherent complexity of institutions is often singled out as one of the reasons for the current difficulty in understanding the role institutions play in international firm activities. This thesis explores the role of institutional complexity in international business research. It takes stock of current literature on cultural and institutional distance, identifies theoretical and methodological challenges associated with the use of different institutional theories, and advances our understanding of institutional research by demonstrating the importance of understanding and accounting for institutional complexity, both theoretically and methodologically. Empirically, this thesis discusses the role of institutions on a variety of phenomena, such as entry mode choice, foreign market selection, foreign subsidiary performance, MNE performance, and the effectiveness of rewarding managers with ownership. The central tenet of this thesis is that institutions and the ways they affect international business activities and outcomes possess multiple facets that each have the potential to influence the phenomenon of interest both simultaneously and divergently.

This paper responds to calls to make more explicit linkages between institutional theory and entrepreneurship research through studies on how entrepreneurs navigate and work with institutions. The research examines the micro-strategies and activities through which small-scale entrepreneurs maneuver between and exploit the multiple, potentially contradictory institutional logics of the different spheres in which they operate. While much research has elucidated how institutional entrepreneurs effect change, this study illustrates how effective entrepreneurs managing and exploiting institutional contradictions engage simultaneously in practices of maintaining and changing institutions to establish a balance between the poles on which their ventures depend. We illustrate this by two cases of small-scale entrepreneurship bridging institutional contradictions from an ethnographic study conducted under the ongoing efforts to implement liberal democracy in Malawi. This transition comprises attempts to build stronger pillars for democratic governance such as the development of a market economy

The concept of "institutional corruption" as developed by Professor Dennis Thompson is a critically important way to understand the failings of a modern democratic state. In this paper, Professor Lessig advances one way to simplify the analysis of "institutional corruption," through the introduction of the idea of improper institutional dependence. That conception of institutional corruption explains the corruption of the United States Congress.

Institutions are strategies, norms, and rules embodied in public policies and/or social conventions. They reflect and establish expectations about who can do what, where, and how, and are often employed for resolving collective action dilemmas and other kinds of governance challenges. Given their salience, social science scholars have dedicated substantial effort to developing analytical approaches for understanding the design, function, and performance of institutions. Particularly valuable are approaches that generalize across institutional types and are versatile enough to be paired with multiple concepts, theories, and methods. This paper focuses on one such approach, called the Institutional Grammar. The Institutional Grammar is an approach for assessing the structure and content of institutions. It received limited attention immediately following its introduction. In recent years, however, numerous journal articles have been published that highlight the promise of the Institutional Grammar for supporting rigorous analyses of institutional design and associated outcomes within the context of various theoretical, conceptual, and methodological approaches. This article (i) reintroduces parts of the Institutional Grammar; (ii) summarizes the theoretical, methodological, and empirical foci of all journal articles published to date that address it; and (iii) presents an agenda for advancing the study of institutions using the Institutional Grammar.

Ein großer Teil der Organisationsforschung ist mit der Frage befasst, wie sich Organisationen verändern. Im vorliegenden Beitrag wird praktisch von der umgekehrten Frage bzw. vom Phänomen der Hysterese ausgegangen. Gemeint ist damit das Beharren auf nicht mehr adäquaten Regeln. Obwohl man allenthalben von Modernisierungsrhetorik umgeben ist, derzufolge alles 'flüssig', disponibel, begründungspflichtig und revidierbar wird, also 'reflexiv' im Sinne der Theorie reflexiver Modernisierung, macht man doch in Organisationen ständig gegenteilige Beobachtungen, auch im eigenen Alltag gegenteilige Erfahrungen. Regeln und Deutungen werden gegen 'falsifizierende' Einflüsse und Erkenntnisse aufrechterhalten, aktiv verteidigt oder geradezu immunisiert. Will man organisationale Modernisierung (Change) angemessen beschreiben und erklären, muss man das für Prozesse des Wandels und der Beharrung gleichermaßen tun. Die Ausführungen gliedern sich in drei Abschnitte: Das erste Kapitel erörtert die These der reflexiven Selbstproduktion, wonach es auch in der Organisationstheorie einen Perspektivwechsel gebe (geben müsse): von der Organisation der Produktion zur Produktion der Organisation. Der zweite Abschnitt befasst sich aus einer analytischen Perspektive mit der Institutionalisierung von Reflexivität und geht dabei der Frage nach, wie sich nun das Ausmaß institutioneller Reflexivität in Organisationen bestimmen lässt. Das dritte Kapitel betrachtet vor dem Hintergrund der Bewertung und Gestaltung von Organisationspraxis abschließend aus einer normativen Perspektive den Aspekt der Organisationsgestaltung. So liefert der Aufsatz Argumente, die begründen, dass und warum Verfahren der systematischen Selbstbeobachtung und Selbstkritik für Unternehmen heute wichtiger werden, in einem Umfeld hochgradiger zwischenbetrieblicher Arbeitsteilung, umweltpolitischer Sensibilität, vermehrten Anforderungen an die Selbstorganisation von Arbeitskräften, und beschleunigter technologischer Entwicklung. Wenn diese Verfahren, hier zusammengefasst unter dem Begriff der Institutionellen Reflexivität, demnach wichtige Beiträge zum Bestand und Erfolg von Unternehmen beitragen können (competitive advantage), so sind sie eben nicht nur relevant für kritische Beobachter einzelwirtschaftlichen Handelns und dessen Folgen, sondern auch für die Unternehmen selbst. Daraus lässt sich ein Interesse ableiten, betriebliche Praktiken auch an Kriterien ihrer Reflexivität zu messen, und nicht einfach zu unterstellen, Rationalisierung und Modernisierung würden heute per se reflexiv erfolgen. (ICG2)

the body of literature on institutional fragmentation and interlinkages has become quite extensive over the last 10-15 years, especially in global environmental governance research. This common ground and the merits of existing scholarly approaches notwithstanding, there are still major new conceptual, theoretical and empirical grounds to be explored. Conceptually, the literature could further go beyond additive accounts that are underspecified with regard to the quality of relations among various components of an institutional complex. Instead, more multi-criteria sets should be developed to assess and compare different degrees of fragmentation across environmental issue areas. Moreover, new methodical ground can be broken following the pioneering examples of different network approaches and mappings (Hollway 2013; Kim and Mackey 2013; Widerberg 2014). Similarly, more can be done to root the study of institutional fragmentation and interlinkages theoretically (Chambers et al. 2008, p. 7; cf. O. Young 2008, p. 134). What Underdal (2006, p. 9) observed nearly ten years ago for research on interlinkages also goes for fragmentation research today: the focus of explanatory approaches has been so far 'primarily on interaction at the level of specific regimes and less on links to the kind of basic ordering principles or norms highlighted in realist and sociological analyses of institutions.' Indeed, some the most influential approaches in the literature on institutional complexity suffice with basic ideas about causal pathways while falling short of more fundamental theoretical approaches that relate to concepts of power, interests, knowledge, norms or other scope conditions (e.g. Keohane and Victor 2011). Moreover, many studies still attend to the normative question whether a centralized or a polycentric global governance architecture is preferable (Biermann et al. 2009a; Ostrom 2010; Rayner 2010; Keohane and Victor 2011). This entangling of analytical and normative claims may have partly stood in the way of the development of more fundamental theoretical frameworks. To be clear: I do not mean to build a strawman argument here. As shown, various authors have begun to address this research gap more systematically, notably Oberthür and Stokke (2011), Gehring and Faude (2013), Zürn and Faude (2013) Orsini et al. (2013) and Van de Graaf (2013) – based inter alia on neoliberal institutionalism, sociological differentiation theory or functionalist approaches. As Zelli and van Asselt (2013) argue in the introductory article to a special issue on the institutional fragmentation of global environmental governance, causal explanations would not need to re-invent the wheel but could in part be derived from different strands of institutionalism and cooperation theory. This 'institutionalism revisited' could develop and examine assumptions that link the degree of fragmentation in a given issue area of environmental governance to, for instance: the constellation of power, drawing on neo-realist perspectives (cf. Benvenisti and Downs 2007); situation structures and constellations of interests, based on NEOLIBERAL INSTITUTIONALISM (cf. Rittberger and Zürn 1990; Van de Graaf 2013); major qualities of the issue area (e.g. the global or local nature of a good; the level of scientific certainty) and the question of institutional fit (O. Young 2002); conflicts among core norms or the contestation of discourses (Zelli et al. 2013; see also LIBERAL ENVIRONMENTALISM).Finally, a whole set of empirical themes merits attention of future single case studies or comparative analyses across environmental domains, for example:- the interactions between TRANSNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS and public institutions (Abbott 2014); - the consequences of fragmentation for different types of non-state actors, including further in-depth studies about the legitimacy, accountability and inclusiveness of complex governance architectures (Karlsson-Vinkhuyzen and McGee 2013; Orsini 2013); - the impact of fragmentation on the overall EFFECTIVENESS of a global governance architecture, by both QUALITATIVE COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS and QUANTITATIVE COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS, e.g. by adopting counter-factual approaches to an entire institutional complex (cf. Hovi et al. 2003; Stokke 2012); - the suitability and effectiveness of specific management attempts like ORCHESTRATION (Abbott and Snidal 2010);- the stability or fragility of institutional complexes, including the question whether they move towards a (new) division of labour (Gehring and Faude 2013) or rather towards new types of positional differences and conflicts (Zelli 2011).