Institutional Entrepreneurs’ Skills: A Multi-Dimensional Concept

Fohim, Emamdeen

doi:10.1108/s0733-558x2019000065b013

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 81 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This also relates to the under-studied process (and preconditions) of resource conversion, which warrants more theoretical attention than it could receive in this article. In addition, in the context of the mobilization of resources, the role of skills deserves more nuanced attention (see the seven skill dimensions in institutional entrepreneurship identified by Fohim, 2019).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Resources of Institutional Entrepreneurs in Different Structural Settings

Deborah¹,

Köhrsen

Mattes

2023

Organization Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As agents of strategic institutional change, institutional entrepreneurs (IEs) draw resources from their structural environment to alter the structural context in which they are embedded. In this article, we explore which resources IEs mobilize in different structural settings. We distinguish between (positional or free) field resources and personal resources, all of which may be material, cultural, social, symbolic or political in kind. Our review of leading case studies of institutional entrepreneurship shows that centrally positioned IEs draw primarily on organizational positional resources. By contrast, peripherally positioned IEs rely mainly on the skilful mobilization of free resources as well as on the personal resources of individuals. Also the field’s degree of institutionalization has an impact on IEs’ resources: in emerging fields where field positions and field boundaries are not yet defined, resources must be imported from mature fields. Furthermore, although resource-poor peripheral IEs may set off institution-building processes in emerging fields, they are usually superseded by central organizational actors during later stages of institution-building.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Resources of Institutional Entrepreneurs in Different Structural Settings

Deborah¹,

Köhrsen

Mattes

2023

Organization Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They establish a vision and try to assemble allies to support their vision . In order to enhance such transitions, change agents utilize their social skills (Fligstein, 2001;Fohim, 2019). They convey the interests of various actors in order to establish stable coalitions for change (Maguire et al, 2004), convince crucial stakeholders of the need for change by aligning their idea to the dominant field order (McInerney, 2008), or introduce new institutions by embedding them in current discourses so they will be more readily accepted by others (Munir and Phillips, 2005).…”

Section: Institutional Changementioning

confidence: 99%

“…If and how actors take a disruption as a reason for becoming change agents depends on how individuals interpret expressions, which depends on their social position (Battilana, 2006;Cooren et al, 2011). Social position influences how actors perceive their field, their ability to influence the field, and how they act Fohim, 2019). In our example, an aspiring young lawyer who grew up in a family where financial prosperity had a high value might react differently to customer complaints than an established lawyer who grew up in a family where ethical and educational ideals were particularly important.…”

Section: Sedimentationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The communicative constitution of institutional change in expression games

Krautzberger

Fohim

Cooren

et al. 2020

Strategic Organization

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neo-institutional theory has recently advanced our understanding of the early phase of institutional change but presupposes contexts in which verbally and nonverbally expressing the intended institutional change within a group is already possible. We develop a process model that explains how change agents conceal and reveal their intentional work on institutional change over time to avoid painful sanctions and counteractions. The model describes how change agents proceed from the first moment of forming the intention to promote institutional change until change is sedimented through diffused taken-for-granted behavior. It advances the understanding of how individual and collective actors communicatively influence the macro-pathways of institutional change. The model offers new insights into the very first moments of institutional change processes, the ability to change institutions, the role of ambiguity in change processes, and how change agents slowly and fundamentally change institutions.

show abstract

“…Recent scholarship argues that the traditional explanation obscures circumstances under which individuals change institutions (Battilana and D’Aunno 2009; Fligstein and McAdam 2012; Lawrence and Suddaby 2006). In particular, this research explores the contexts that make agency possible (Fligstein 1996, 1997; Fligstein and McAdam 2012; Fohim 2019; Zilber 2013). A prominent explanation has emerged that agency is enabled through localized contexts that are more permeable to individual influence (Fligstein 1997; Fohim 2019; Lawrence et al 2013; Lawrence and Suddaby 2006), or through uniquely destabilizing social events that disrupt standard practice and, in turn, necessitate reflexive action (Fligstein 1996; Fligstein and McAdam 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making the Grade during Pandemic: Early-stage and Late-stage Provisional Institutions

Kinney

Rowland

2021

Sociological Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is an article that draws on the institutional work literature about provisional institutions. To date, nearly every U.S. sector has been impacted by COVID-19. To sustain their core missions, highly institutionalized organizations such as universities have had to rethink foundational structures and policies. Using a historical ethnographic approach to investigate records from faculty senate deliberations at “Rural State University” (RSU), the authors examine the implementation of a temporary grading policy to supplement traditional, qualitative grades spring 2020 during the outbreak. The authors find that RSU implemented a temporary, supplemental grading policy as a provisional institution to momentarily supersede traditional grading as a means to—as soon as possible—return to it. This finding contrasts with the common understanding that provisional institutions operate primarily as a temporary solution to a social problem that leads to more stable and enduring, ostensibly nonprovisional institutions. The temporary grading policy, the authors argue, constitutes a “late-stage” provisional institution and, with this new lens, subsequently characterize the more commonplace understanding of provisional institutions as “early-stage.” This contribution has theoretical implications for studies of institutions and empirical implications for research on shared governance and disruption in higher education.

show abstract

Institutional Entrepreneurs’ Skills: A Multi-Dimensional Concept

Cited by 5 publications

References 81 publications

The Resources of Institutional Entrepreneurs in Different Structural Settings

The Resources of Institutional Entrepreneurs in Different Structural Settings

The communicative constitution of institutional change in expression games

Making the Grade during Pandemic: Early-stage and Late-stage Provisional Institutions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About