Institutional entrepreneurship: a literature review and analysis of the maturing consulting field

Smets, Michael; Reihlen, Markus

doi:10.4337/9781781009109.00028

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 102 publications

(158 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Third, the literature indicates that peripheral, but resource-poor, individuals and organizations disadvantaged by the existing institutional arrangements are motivated to undertake institutional change (Smets and Reihlen, 2012;Micelotta et al, 2017). This study lends credence to the idea that individuals at the top of the organizational hierarchy and seemingly advantaged by the existing institutional arrangements could also be involved in attempts to change the status quo to meet their needs (Greenwood et al, 2002;Greenwood and Suddaby, 2006).…”

Section: Aaaj 349supporting

confidence: 57%

Institutional entrepreneurship: collaborative change in a complex Canadian organization

Opara

Okafor

Ufodike

et al. 2021

AAAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis study adopts an institutional entrepreneurship perspective in the context of public–private partnerships (P3s) to highlight the role of social actors in enacting institutional change in a complex organizational setting. By studying the actions of two prominent social actors, the authors argue that successful institutional change is the result of dynamic managerial activity supported by political clout, organizational authority and the social positioning of actors.Design/methodology/approachThe authors conducted a field-based case study in a complex institutional and organizational setting in Alberta, Canada. The authors employed an institutional entrepreneurship perspective to identify and analyze the activities of two allied actors motivated to transform the institutional environment for public infrastructure delivery.FindingsThe empirical study suggests that the implementation of institutional change is both individualistic and collaborative. Moreover, it is grounded in everyday organizational practices and activities and involves a coalition of allies invested in enacting lasting change in organizational practice(s), even when maintaining the status quo seems advantageous.Originality/valueThe authors critique the structural explanations that dominate the literature on public–private partnership implementation, which downplays the role of agency and minimizes its interplay with institutional logics in effecting institutional change. Rather, the authors demonstrate that, given the observed impact of social actors, public–private partnership adoption and implementation can be theorized as a social phenomenon.

show abstract

Section: Aaaj 349supporting

confidence: 57%

Institutional entrepreneurship: collaborative change in a complex Canadian organization

Opara

Okafor

Ufodike

et al. 2021

AAAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…ABTA, for example, faces reputational risks from the bulk of its members not engaging with its own guidelines (A7, A10). On the one hand, it is expected that those that promote a standard most likely already comply with it and, as a result of this, automatically gain legitimacy advantages and enhancement of their institutions (Smets & Reihlen, 2012). On the other hand, public acknowledgement of norms may be seen as posturing, or it may be argued that making such public statements is part of a developmental process of change towards internalising new values (Gunningham & Rees, 1997;Scharmer & Kaufer, 2013;van Wijk et al, 2013).…”

Section: Industry Self-regulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trade associations as corporate social responsibility actors: an institutional theory analysis of animal welfare in tourism

Font

Bonilla-Priego

Kantenbacher

2019

Journal of Sustainable Tourism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most travel trade associations ignore their responsibility towards sustainable development broadly and animal welfare in particular. We analyse the development and implementation of animal welfare standards across 62 national and international associations using interviews, surveys, content analysis of published materials and websites. Only 21 associations mention sustainability in their websites, and only six refer to animal welfare. Of these, three associations have well-developed animal welfare activities (ABTA, ANVR and GSTC) [AQ1] and only one (lightly) monitors its members' sustainability and animal welfare standards (ANVR). ABTA's Animal Welfare Guidelines are the de facto industry standard, despite being designed for information (not auditing) purposes and lacking enforcement mechanisms. We examine jolts that prompt some associations to respond to external pressures and the institutional entrepreneurship process that triggers a process of reflexivity, theorisation and diffusion of a broader sense of responsibility. We examine the field-level conditions that lead to mostly mimetic pressures on large European tour operators (that compel them to act due to reputational risk management), with minimal normative pressures that would diffuse animal welfare practices across other association members. Change is not divergent, and the resources allocated to animal welfare protect trade associations' members from criticism without binding them to implementation.

show abstract

“…Once recruited, the consultants receive high levels of pay, training, mentoring by partners and continual feedback (Lemann, 1999: 215). They are also subject to an ‘up-or-out policy’, with up to 80 percent of consultants leaving in the first 5 years (O’Shea and Madigan, 1997: 261), which not only ensures a steady stream of new recruits, but also a strong alumni network (Smets and Reihlen, 2012). Strong normative controls aim to ensure that the ‘McKinsey mind’ is maintained even after consultants have left (Raisel, 2003), an argument partially supported by the management styles and techniques of ex-McKinsey CEOs who use their methods (Haigh, 2003).…”

Section: Vignettesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Power and the diffusion of management ideas: The case of McKinsey & Co

O’Mahoney

Sturdy

2015

Management Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In studies of the diffusion or translation of management ideas, power is frequently implied but is rarely theorised explicitly. Moreover, when it is recognised, the focus is often on only one form of power. This can obscure how different forms of power relate to each other, shape idea diffusion and connect to different forms of resistance. Using Lukes’ classic framing of power, we explore the activities of a key agent in the diffusion of ideas – management consultancy – and one of the leading players in that field – McKinsey & Co. We draw on diverse, publicly available forms of data on three different management ideas to identify how different forms of power and resistance enable and constrain the diffusion of management ideas. Our study emphasises both the dynamic relations between different forms of power over time and the importance of acknowledging the unintended consequences of power. At the same time, by focusing on power dynamics mostly operating outside of consulting projects, we add to our understanding of the role of consultancy in the diffusion of management ideas more generally.

show abstract

Institutional entrepreneurship: a literature review and analysis of the maturing consulting field

Cited by 5 publications

References 102 publications

Institutional entrepreneurship: collaborative change in a complex Canadian organization

Institutional entrepreneurship: collaborative change in a complex Canadian organization

Trade associations as corporate social responsibility actors: an institutional theory analysis of animal welfare in tourism

Power and the diffusion of management ideas: The case of McKinsey & Co

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About