Skip to main content
Log in

Implementing New Institutional Logics in Pioneering Organizations: The Burden of Justifying Ethical Appropriateness and rustworthiness

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This mixed-methods case study describes the experiences of a rural health organization in Canada that was a pioneer in undergoing institutionally driven radical change. This change was advocated by senior managers and physicians with the strong backing of the government. The senior managers and physicians made a strong case for the radical change and argued that a focus on efficiency and wellness would lead to improved service and quality of patient-care. However, this radical change initiative was resisted by nurses and support staff who perceived that these changes were being driven by market-based institutional logics and questioned their ethical appropriateness in a public system. They also expressed a lack of trust given the large-scale layoffs in a prior restructuring. These findings run counter to extant theory by highlighting the role of agency despite institutional pressures. Specifically, change implementers not only face the burden of justifying ethical appropriateness of institutional logics, but also are required to engage in persuasive discourse that these institutional logics protect the interests of the members.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Arndt, M., and Bigelow, B. (2000). Presenting structural innovation in an institutional environment: Hospitals’ use of impression management. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(3), 494–522. doi:10.2307/2667107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barley, S. J. and Tolbert, P. S. (1997). Institutionalization and structuration: Studying the links between action and institution. Organization Studies, 18, 93–117. doi:10.1177/017084069701800106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartunek, J. (1984). Changing interpretive schemes and organizational restructuring: The example of a religious order. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 355–372. doi:10.2307/2393029.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dacin, M. T., Goodstein, J. and Scott, W. R. (2002). Institutional theory and institutional change: Introduction to the special research forum. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 45–57. doi:10.2307/3069284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denis, J., Lamothe, L., Langley, A., and Valette, A. (1999). The struggle to redefine boundaries in health care systems. In D. Brock, M. Yowell and C.R. Hinings (Eds) Restructuring the Professional Organization: Accounting, Health care and law. London: Rutledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P., and Powell, W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160. doi:10.2307/2095101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P., and Powell, W. (1991). Introduction. In Powell, W.W. and DiMaggio, P.J. (Eds), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis: 1–40. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobbin, F., and Dowd, T. J. (1997). How policy shapes competition: Early railroad foundings in Massachusetts. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 501–529. doi:10.2307/2393736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobbin, F. and R. Sutton: 1998, ‹The Strength of a Weak State: The Rights Revolution and the Rise of Human Resources Management Divisions’, American Journal of Sociology 104, 441-476. Doi:10.1086/210044.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edelman, L.: 1992, ‹Legal Ambiguity and Symbolic Structures: Organizational Mediation of Civil Rights Law’, American Journal of Sociology 97(6), 1531-1576. Doi:10.1086/229939.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edelman, L. B., S. R. Fuller and I. Mara-Drita: 2001, ‹Diversity Rhetoric and the Managerialization of Law’, American Journal of Sociology 106(6), 1589-1641. Doi: 10.1086/321303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Floyd, S. W., and Wooldridge, B. (1992). Middle management involvement in strategy and its association with strategic type: A research note. Strategic Management Journal, 13(Special Issue), 153–167. doi:10.1002/smj.4250131012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedland, R., and Alford, R. R. (1991). Bringing society back in: symbols practices and institutional contradictions. In W. W. Powell and P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.). The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis: 232–263. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. and Strauss, A. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory. New York: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, R., and Hinings, C. R. (1996). Understanding radical organizational change: Bringing together the old and the new institutionalism. Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1022–1054. doi:10.2307/259163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hendry, J. (2002). The Principal’s Other Problems: Honest Incompetence and the Specification of Objectives. Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 98–113. doi:10.2307/4134371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jick, T. D. (1979). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 602–611. doi:10.2307/2392366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, G., Smith, S., and Codling, B. (2000). Microprocesses of Institutional Change in the Context of Privatization. Academy of Management Review, 25(3), 572–580. doi:10.2307/259310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, G., and George, J. (1998). The Experience and Evolution of Trust: Implications for Cooperation and Teamwork. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 531–546. doi:10.2307/259293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, R. M.: 1996, ‹Divergent Realities and Convergent Disappointments in the Hierarchical Relation, Trust and the Intuitive Auditor at Work’, in R. M. Kramer and T. R. Tyler (eds.) Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research (Sage, London), pp. 216-246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, R. M. (1999). Trust and distrust in organizations: Emerging perspectives, enduring questions. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 569–598. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewicki, R., and Bunker, B. (1996). Developing and Maintaining Trust in Work Relationships. In R. M. Kramer and T. R. Tyler (Eds.) Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research: 114–139. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. C., and Davis, J. H. (1999). The Effect of Performance Appraisal System on Trust for Management: A Field Quasi-Experiment. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 123–136. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.84.1.123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., and Schoorman, D. (1995). An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709–734. doi:10.2307/258792.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McAllister, D. J. (1995). Affect- and Cognition-Based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 24–58. doi:10.2307/256727.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McEvily, B., Perone, V., and Zaheer, A. (2003). Trust as an Organizing Principle. Organization Science, 14(1), 91–103. doi:10.1287/orsc.14.1.91.12814.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J., and Rowan, B. (1977). Institutional organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340–363. doi:10.1086/226550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. and A. Huberman: 1994, Qualitative Data Analysis (Sage Publications, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, A. K. (1996). Organizational responses to crisis: The centrality of trust. In R. M. Kramer and T. R. Tyler (Eds.). Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research: 261–287. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neundorf, K. A.: 2002, The Content Analysis Guidebook (Sage Publications, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, C. (1997). Sustainable competitive advantage: Combining institutional and resource-based views. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 697–713. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199710)18:9<697::AID-SMJ909>3.0.CO;2-C.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ranson, S., Hinings, C. R., and Greenwood, R. (1980). The Structuring Of Organizational Structures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(1), 1–17. doi:10.2307/2392223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao, H., Monin, P., and Durand, R. (2003). Institutional change in Toque Ville: Nouvelle cuisine as an identity movement in French gastronomy. American Journal of Sociology, 108(4), 795–843. doi:10.1086/367917.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reay, T. and C. R. Hinings: 2005, The Recomposition of an Organizational Field: Healthcare in Alberta. Organization Studies (Forthcoming).

  • Rust, R. T., and Cooil, B. (1994). Reliability Measures of Qualitative Data: Theory and Implications. JMR, Journal of Marketing Research, 31, 1–14. doi:10.2307/3151942.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and Organizations. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R., Reuf, M., Mendel, P., Caronna, C. (2000). Institutional Change and Healthcare Organizations. Chicago: University of Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selznick, P. (1949). TVA and the Grassroots. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selznick, P. (1957). Leadership and Administration. Evanston, Illinois: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Straus, A., and Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Straus, A., and Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thornton, P. (2002). The rise of the corporation in a craft industry: Conflict and conformity in institutional logics. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 81–101. doi:10.2307/3069286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornton, P. and W. Ocasio: 1999, `Institutional Logics and the Historical Contingency of Power in Organizations', American Journal of Sociology 105(3), 801–843.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T., and Degoey, P. (1996). Trust in organizational authorities: The influence of motive attributes on willingness to accept decisions. In R. M. Kramer and T. R. Tyler (Eds.). Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research: 331–356. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. and R. M. Kramer: 1996, ‹Whither Trust?’, in R. M. Kramer and T. R. Tyler (eds.) Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research (Sage, London), pp. 331-357.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, E. J. (1996). Trust and crisis. In R. M. Kramer and T. R. Tyler (Eds.). Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research: 288–301. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, R. P.: 1990, Basic Content Analysis (Sage Publications, London).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by a grant from Canadian Foundation for Health Research Service. We also acknowledge the support received from several members of the Faculty of Management at the University of Lethbridge in Canada.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karan Sonpar.

Additional information

Karan Sonpar is Assistant Professor of Strategy at Instituto de Empresa Business School. He earned his PhD in strategic management from University of Alberta in Canada in 2008. His current research interests include institutional theory, stakeholder theory, top managerial attention, and use of qualitative methods for theory-elaboration. His work has appeared or is appearing in publications such as Journal of Management, Human Relations, and Organizational Research Methods.

Jay M. Handelman is Associate Professor of Marketing at Queen’s School of Business. Jay’s research focuses on the cultural, institutional, and ethical aspects of branding and consumer behavior. His publications have appeared in the Journal of Marketing, Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Retailing as well as other journals and international conferences.

Ali Dastmalchian is Professor of Organizational Analysis and Dean of the Faculty of Business, University of Victoria, Canada. His current research interests are on cross-national leadership and organizational practices, organizational change, teamworking, and organizational and HR climates. His most recent book is entitled Work Life Integration: International Perspectives on Managing Multiple Roles, Palgrave Macmillan, 2006 (co-authored with Paul Blyton, Betsy Blunsdon and Ken Reed). His publications have appeared in journals including Academy of Management Executive, British Journal of Industrial Relations, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Journal of Management Studies, Human Relations, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, and Organizational Studies.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sonpar, K., Handelman, J.M. & Dastmalchian, A. Implementing New Institutional Logics in Pioneering Organizations: The Burden of Justifying Ethical Appropriateness and rustworthiness. J Bus Ethics 90, 345–359 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0045-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0045-9

Keywords

Navigation