Budget formality and informality as a tool for organizing and governance amidst divergent institutional logics

The influence of institutional pressures on the implementation of a performance measurement system in an Egyptian social enterprise

“…The complex mission of SEs reflects two different institutional logics, namely, the commercial logic and the social logic (Nielsen et al, 2019). Institutional logics are a set of socially constructed assumptions, beliefs, values and practices that shape the cognition and actions of people and organisations (Carlsson-Wall et al, 2016), considering adaptive governance to be determined by the interaction between social systems and human psychology (Kaufman and Covaleski, 2019). While the commercial logic focusses on operational financial performance, the social logic emphasises the societal acceptance and legitimacy of the organisation (Busco et al, 2017).…”

“…Although financial operational indicators can be designed using wellestablished metrics from management accounting/PMS literature (Carlsson-Wall et al, 2016;Chenhall and Moers, 2015;Chenhall et al, 2013), accounting-based PMS metrics may conflict with the key assumptions underlying institutional social logics that shape the design and operation process of societal health improvement assessment indicators in SEs (Nielsen et al, 2019;Busco et al, 2017;Jenner, 2016). Furthermore, although by combining elements from different logics, management accounting/PMS can be used to reconcile conflict (Ferry and Eckersley, 2020), it is argued that little is known in the literature on the influence of the institutional field on the interplay of commercial and social institutional logics and the choice of key performance indicators (KPIs) during PMS implementation of SEs, which combines operational financial performance with social impact indicators (Nielsen et al, 2019;Kaufman and Covaleski, 2019;Busco et al, 2017;Carlsson-Wall et al, 2016).…”

“…This lack of previous management accounting literature to explore the influence of institutional pressures at the field level on SEs' internal PMS and institutional logic was the motivation for this study. Most previous studies, reinforced by different theoretical explanations and empirical methodologies, explore SEs' internal PMS and institutional logics at both the organisational and individual levels, both in developed and developing contexts (Rozenfeld and Scapens, 2020;Knardal, 2020;Ferry and Eckersley, 2020;Manville and Greatbanks, 2020;Kaufman and Covaleski, 2019;Diab and Metwally, 2019;Busco et al, 2017;Contrafatto and Burns, 2013). However, there is still a lack of existing literature and hitherto unexplored linkages on the influence of institutional forces, at a macro-level, on the creation and use of a PMS, at a micro-level.…”

Preparers’ Construction of Users’ Information Needs in Corporate Reporting: A Case Study

“…Such considerations can be conceptualized as institutional logics, i.e., 'the socially constructed, historical practices, assumptions, values, beliefs, and rules by which individuals produce and reproduce their material subsistence, organize time and space, and provide meaning to their social reality' (Thornton & Ocasio, 1999, p. 804). Institutional logics are not only cognitive frames of reference but are templates for individuals' actions and constitutive of their identities (Kaufman & Covaleski, 2019;Thornton & Ocasio, 2008). While institutional logics can constrain actions, they can also provide sources of agency and change (Thornton & Ocasio, 2008).…”

“…The institutional logics perspective was originally introduced to study institutional change (Friedland & Alford, 1991). While such change can occur at different levels, recent literature has highlighted the potential of this perspective to study micro-processes of organizational change, and how they are linked to broader institutional logics (e.g., Currie & Spyridonidis, 2016;Ezzamel et al, 2012;Kaufman & Covaleski, 2019). In this vein, it can be analyzed how institutional logics are 'actualized on the ground' (McPherson & Sauder, 2013, p. 167) with a focus on the practices of individual actors within organizations in light of existing institutional logics.…”