Abstract
Over the past 30 years, neo-institutional theory has become a prominent perspective in organization studies. Yet this perspective has received growing criticism for its focus on macro phenomena that fails to account fully for agency. In response, new forms of institutional analysis have emerged including institutional logics, an approach which examines the link between socially constructed rules and individual agency. Patricia Thornton, William Ocasio and Michael Lounsbury’s book convincingly positions institutional logics as a valuable perspective in its own right, distinct and transformed from neo-institutional theory. Across eight chapters, The Institutional Logics Perspective extends the institutional logics project both theoretically and empirically and explicitly addresses many of the shortcomings associated with neo-institutional theory.
In their introductory chapter, the authors strengthen the foundations of the institutional logics perspective by outlining four principles of the approach: the duality of structure and agency; institutions’ possession of material and symbolic elements; the historically contingent nature of institutions; and the operation of institutions at multiple levels of analysis. These principles are particularly useful in delineating the assumptions and utility of institutional logics for researchers. Indeed, in Chapter 2, when the authors trace the evolution of institutional logics, they draw on these four principles to differentiate it from old and neo-institutional perspectives.
The structure of The Institutional Logics Perspective also reflects these core principles by considering the micro, meso and macro levels of logics alongside their respective interactions. This is a particularly strong aspect of the book, as it addresses many of the criticisms levelled against neo-institutional theory as a top-down perspective, while equipping researchers with a comprehensive theoretical framework for future research. For example, in Chapter 3, the authors build on the work of prior researchers to produce a typology of institutions at the societal level (the inter-institutional system). In addition to previously established logics like family and religion, they incorporate the community as a further institutional order or logic. The elaborated typology provides an analytical tool amenable to empirical research, thus supporting further studies. Chapter 4 moves on to consider the individual and organizational levels of analysis by developing a model of the micro-foundations of institutional logics. While readers might have welcomed a deeper consideration of self-identity, the authors do attend to individuals’ social identities, goals and schemas. Indeed, their cross-level effects model is a significant step forward in enabling the institutional logics perspective to account for the role of actors and their ability to transform organizations and institutions through social interaction.
As the text progresses it successfully demonstrates how researchers can apply these typologies and models. Chapter 5 is a particularly interesting example and considers the actions of historical entrepreneurs (e.g. JC Penny), in light of the inter-institutional typology, to show how each entrepreneur blended elements of different institutional logics to innovate. Similarly, Chapter 6 utilizes the micro-foundations model developed earlier to proffer a further, preliminary model that explains the recursive relationship between institutional logics and organizational identities. Chapter 7 considers and develops models for both the emergence and development of field-level logics. While thoughtfully developed, there is sometimes a sense that these models employ several black boxes. Indeed, as the authors acknowledge, elements of the models are categories of mechanisms rather than specific micro-mechanisms themselves. Nonetheless, this should not obscure the value of these latter chapters, which allow ‘the influence of institutions to be theorized and measured’ (p. 126). Developing and applying theoretical models is immensely helpful for researchers as it provides guidance for those wishing to draw on the institutional logics perspective to conduct new studies.
The authors underscore the potential of the institutional logics perspective to evolve further by carefully considering how it could complement other approaches. For example, Chapter 8 calls attention to a popular perspective that also emerged from neo-institutional theory: institutional work. The authors note that some scholars tend to counter-pose the micro focus of the institutional work perspective with the macro focus of the institutional logics perspective. The authors argue this is a false distinction, however, as they encourage further studies of micro processes and ‘embrace institutional work’ (p. 180) as a way to enhance institutional logics research. The book’s emphasis on collaboration, whether with social psychology or institutional work, opens up an array of possibilities for future research to yield new insights.
The Institutional Logics Perspective is a significant contribution to institutional scholarship. The authors have advanced the logics perspective, notably through the elaboration of the inter-institutional systems typology and development of a cross-level effects model. Unencumbered by many of the limitations of neo-institutional theory, institutional logics can now more fully account for institutional change and stability, homogeneity and heterogeneity and macro and micro processes. As such, this text is likely to inform future empirical research, inspire further theoretical developments and become an important resource for researchers.