Beyond Competition: Institutional Isomorphism in U.S. Accounting Research

Abstract

We propose remedies to the dramatic reduction in the diversity of research topics within the academic accounting literature. As a basis for our recommendations, we apply institutional theory in the field of academic accounting research and propose that responses to identifiable institutional influences rather than competitive forces account for the current exclusion of nonfinancial accounting topics. All three processes of institutional isomorphism (mimetic, coercive, and normative) appear to shape the organizational field of accounting research. However, the field has reached a stage where it is primarily, but not exclusively, motivated by the normative isomorphism. As such, institutional pressures often eclipse theoretical relevance, individual research preferences, and practical applicability. These effects pervade aspects of the accounting academy beyond publishing. We outline programs and propose actions for enhancing diversity as prescriptions for countering the institutional forces acting within the field of academic accounting research.

The institutionalisation of mining company sustainability disclosures

“…A natural progression is often evident in the development of a new field (Tuttle and Dillard, 2007). A new field often creates much innovation and uncertainty (Delmas, 2002).…”

“…Developed by building on DiMaggio and Powell (1983), and Tuttle and Dillard (2007) Both mimetic and coercive influences can lead to normative isomorphism. For example, other South African mining companies start to copy BHP Billiton's adherence to the GRI disclosure framework, the GRI disclosure framework becomes the norm all mining companies view as the new accepted professional standard.…”

“…Managers are typically uncertain how to deal with new pressures and do not know which rules and structures to respond with in order to maintain the appearance of legitimacy. One of the strategies managers adopt is to mimic successful competitors, which over time results in rules and structures converging (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983;Tuttle and Dillard, 2007). As a field, for example sustainability disclosures, develops, matures and becomes widely accepted, it increasingly becomes the subject of regulation and/or increased stakeholder pressure.…”

“…At this stage in the development of a field, a consensus develops among professionals about the normatively appropriate forms of practice (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983). At this mature stage in the development of a field, the rules and structures adopted by organizations occupying the same position in the field have converged even further (Tuttle and Dillard, 2007). These generalised notions around the development of a new field apply to sustainability disclosure.…”

Teorie opisujące działanie rady nadzorczej

“…Nacisk mimetyczny obejmuje benchmarking i identyfikowanie najlepszych praktyk i wiodących graczy w danym obszarze. Izomorfizm mimetyczny pojawia się, gdy procesy wywołane przez te naciski stają się zinstytucjonalizowane do tego stopnia, że kopiowanie jest kontynuowane raczej z powodu jego instytucjonalnej akceptacji niż konkurencyjnej konieczności (Tuttle Dillard, 2007). Izomorfizm mimetyczny szczególnie rzuca się w oczy w odniesieniu do decyzji zatrudniania, zwalniania i awansowania na określone stanowiska.…”