2018
DOI: 10.1093/jpo/joy001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Co-optation as a response to competing institutional logics: Professionals and managers in healthcare

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
105
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 81 publications
(109 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
4
105
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, we also found evidence of some consultants expressing co-optation as a more defensive strategy (Andersson & Liff, 2018), as a way of heading off an increasing number of complaints:…”
Section: One Of the Things That I Value In My Job Is The Ability To Ementioning
confidence: 65%
“…However, we also found evidence of some consultants expressing co-optation as a more defensive strategy (Andersson & Liff, 2018), as a way of heading off an increasing number of complaints:…”
Section: One Of the Things That I Value In My Job Is The Ability To Ementioning
confidence: 65%
“…The traditional conflict model of institutional logics has been challenged, and there are calls for more nuanced approaches (Andersson & Liff, 2018). Many of these studies are case studies that provide little insight into the influence of institutional context on organizational fields.…”
Section: Conflicting Institutional Logics?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It was possible to place arguments within either a business‐like logic, or a professional logic. In studies of institutional logics in healthcare a division is sometimes drawn between physicians who base their actions on a logic of cure and nurses who base theirs on a logic of care (Andersson & Liff, ). In this study, however, we found that managers and directors argued on the basis of a business‐like logic whereas physicians and nurses both argued similarly on the basis of a professional logic which foregrounded the organisational and competence needs of their professional group.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%