Tendências e oportunidades em lógicas institucionais: um estudo baseado em pareamento bibliográfico

Luis Miguel Zanin; Júlio Araújo Carneiro da Cunha

doi:10.5585/riae.v19i1.13926

Autores

Luis Miguel Zanin Universidade Nove de Julho - Uninove http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7453-3374
Júlio Araújo Carneiro da Cunha Universidade Nove de Julho - Uninove https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1435-055X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5585/riae.v19i1.13926

Palavras-chave:

Teoria institucional, Lógicas institucionais, Pareamento bibliográfico.

Resumo

Objetivo do Estudo: Analisar, por meio do pareamento bibliográfico, as possibilidades e oportunidades de estudos futuros em lógicas institucionais, com destaque às oportunidades para a área de estratégia.

Metodologia/Abordagem: Este é um estudo bibliométrico, no qual analisamos a produção em lógicas institucionais, por meio da técnica de pareamento bibliográfico.

Originalidade/Relevância: Lógicas institucionais são um desdobramento recente do neoinstitucionalismo e oferece uma oportunidade de estudos, indicando as principais possibilidades de contribuição tanto no tema das lógicas institucionais em si, quanto na relação com a estratégia.

Principais Resultados: Devido à maturidade da teoria neoinstitucional, as lógicas institucionais se apresentam, de certo modo, de forma coesa. No entanto, ao contrário do neoinstitucionalismo, apresenta-se como uma opção baseada na teoria institucional para explicar as mudanças e inovações, temas caros à estratégia.

Contribuições Teóricas/Metodológicas: Este trabalho apresenta três contribuições principais: a) indica quais temas dentro do campo estão mais maduros, como complexidade institucional, e quais são emergentes, como a hibridização e categorização como elemento de mudança institucional; b) mostra que os estudos em estratégia estão mais relacionados a lógicas institucionais, como a teoria do alto escalão e a tomada de decisão; e c) entrega acompanhamento objetivo do alinhamento da identidade e seu reflexo no desempenho da organização, a considerar as lógicas institucionais como elementos que direcionarão as tomadas de decisão da organização, inclusive sob o ponto de vista da estratégia como prática. Por último, sob o ponto de vista metodológico, este trabalho contribui por utilizar o pareamento bibliográfico.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Biografia do Autor

Luis Miguel Zanin, Universidade Nove de Julho - Uninove

Doutorando em Administração de Empresas na Universidade Nove de Julho. Mestre em Administração de Empresas pela Universidade Nove de Julho - Uninove. Bacharel em Administração de Empresas pela Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie - Sócio da Conquistar - Jogos e Dinâmicas.

Júlio Araújo Carneiro da Cunha, Universidade Nove de Julho - Uninove

Possui graduação em Administração de Empresas pela Universidade de Ribeirão Preto, mestrado e doutorado em Administração pela Universidade de São Paulo. É professor do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Administração (stricto-sensu) da Universidade Nove de Julho. É editor-chefe da BJMkt (Brazilian Journal of Marketing).

Referências

Almandoz, J. (2014). Founding Teams as Carriers of Competing Logics: When Institutional Forces Predict Banks’ Risk Exposure. Administrative Science Quarterly, 59(3), 442–473. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839214537810

Archambault, É., Campbell, D., Gingras, Y., & Larivière, V. (2009). Comparing bibliometric statistics obtained from the Web of Science and Scopus. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(7), 1320-1326. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21062

Archer, M., Bhaskar, R., Collier, A., Lawson, T., & Norrie, A. (1998). Critical Realism: Essential Readings. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1163/156920601794750701

Ashraf, N., Ahmadsimab, A., & Pinkse, J. (2017). From Animosity to Affinity: The Interplay of Competing Logics and Interdependence in Cross-Sector Partnerships. Journal of Management Studies, 54(6), 793–822. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12273

Bascle, G. (2016). Toward a Dynamic Theory of Intermediate Conformity. Journal of Management Studies, 53(2), 131–160. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12155

Battilana, J., & Casciaro, T. (2012). Change agents, networks, and institutions: A contingency theory of organizational change. Academy of Management Journal, 55(2), 381–398. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.0891

Battilana, J., Leca, B., & Boxenbaum, E. (2009). How actors change institutions: Towards a theory of institutional entrepreneurship. Academy of Management Annals, 3(1), 65–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520903053598

Battilana, J., & Lee, M. (2014). Advancing Research on Hybrid Organizing – Insights from the Study of Social Enterprises. The Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 397–441. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2014.893615

Bednar, M. K. (2012). Watchdog or Lapdog? A Behavioral View of the Media as a Corporate Governance Mechanism. Academy of Management Journal, 55(1), 131–150. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.0862

Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York: Anchor Books.

Bergman, E. M. L. (2012). Finding citations to social work literature: The relative benefits of using Web of Science, Scopus, or Google Scholar. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 38(6), 370-379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2012.08.002

Besharov, M. L., & Smith, W. K. (2014). Multiple institutional logics in organizations: Explaining their varied nature and implications. Academy of Management Review, 39(3), 364–381. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2011.0431

Bitektine, A., & Haack, P. (2015). The “macro” and the “micro” of legitimacy: Toward a multilevel theory of the legitimacy process. Academy of Management Review, 40(1), 49–75. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2013.0318

Boxenbaum, E., & Jonsson, S. (2008). Isomorphism, diffusion and decoupling. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, R. Suddaby, & K. Sahlin (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism (pp. 78–98). London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Bromley, P., & Powell, W. W. (2012). From Smoke and Mirrors to Walking the Talk: Decoupling in the Contemporary World. The Academy of Management Annals, 6(1), 483–530. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2012.684462

Carlsson-Wall, M., Kraus, K., & Messner, M. (2016). Performance measurement systems and the enactment of different institutional logics: Insights from a football organization. Management Accounting Research, 32, 45–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2016.01.006

Christensen, C. M. (1997). Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail. Harvard Business Review Press.

Cloutier, C., & Langley, A. (2013). The Logic of Institutional Logics: Insights From French Pragmatist Sociology. Journal of Management Inquiry, 22(4), 360–380. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492612469057

Currie, G., & Spyridonidis, D. (2016). Interpretation of Multiple Institutional Logics on the Ground: Actors Position, their Agency and Situational Constraints in Professionalized Contexts. Organization Studies, 37(1), 77–97. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840615604503

Dalpiaz, E., Rindova, V., & Ravasi, D. (2016). Combining Logics to Transform Organizational Agency. Administrative Science Quarterly, 61(3), 347–392. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839216636103

Delbridge, R., & Edwards, T. (2013). Inhabiting institutions: Critical realist refinements to understanding institutional complexity and change. Organization Studies, 34(7), 927–947. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840613483805

Dimaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101

Dunn, M. B., & Jones, C. (2010). Institutional Logics and Institutional Pluralism: The Contestation of Care and Science Logics in Medical Education, 1967–2005. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(1), 114–149. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.2010.55.1.114

Durand, R., & Jourdan, J. (2012). Jules or Jim: Alternative conformity to minority logics. Academy of Management Journal, 55(6), 1295–1315. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0345

Edman, J. (2016). Cultivating Foreignness: How Organizations Maintain and Leverage Minority Identities. Journal of Management Studies, 53(1), 55–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12129

Fan, G. H., & Zietsma, C. (2017). Constructing a Shared Governance Logic: The Role of Emotions in Enabling Dually Embedded Agency. Academy of Management Journal, 60(6), 2321–2351. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2015.0402

Fisher, G., Kotha, S., & Lahiri, A. (2016). Changing with the Times: An Integrated View of Legitimacy and New Venture Life Cycles. Academy of Management Review, 41(3), 383–409. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2013.0496

Fleetwood, S. (2014). Bhaskar and critical realism. In P. Adler, P. du Gay, G. Morgan, & M. Reed (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Sociology, Social Theory and Organization Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Friedland, R., & Alford, R. R. (1991). Bringing society back in: Symbols, practices, and institutional contradictions. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The New Institutionalism in Organization Analysis. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structure. Berkeley.

Glanzel, W., & Czerwon, H. J. (1996). A new methodological approach to bibliographic coupling and its application to the national, regional and institutional level. Scientometrics, 37(2), 195–221. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02093621

Greenwood, R., Diaz, A. M., Li, S. X., & Lorente, J. C. (2010). The Multiplicity of Institutional Logics and the Heterogeneity of Organizational Responses. Organization Science, 21(2), 521–539. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0453

Greenwood, R., & Hinings, C. R. (1996). Understanding Radical Organizational Change: Bringing together the Old and the New Institutionalism. The Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1022. https://doi.org/10.2307/259163

Greenwood, R., Raynard, M., Kodeih, F., Micelotta, E. R., & Lounsbury, M. (2011). Institutional Complexity and Organizational Responses. Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 317–371. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2011.590299

Greve, H. R., & Zhang, C. M. (2017). Institutional Logics and Power Sources: Merger and Acquisition Decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 60(2), 671–694. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2015.0698

Haveman, H. a. (1993). Follow the Leader: Mimetic Isomorphism and Entry Into New Markets. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(4), 593. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393338

Jansson, A. (2013). “Real Owners” and “Common Investors”: Institutional Logics and the Media as a Governance Mechanism. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 21(1), 7–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8683.2012.00932.x

Jarneving, B. (2007). Bibliographic coupling and its application to research-front and other core documents. Journal of Informetrics, 1(4), 287–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2007.07.004

Jaskiewicz, P., Heinrichs, K., Rau, S. B., & Reay, T. (2016). To Be or Not to Be: How Family Firms Manage Family and Commercial Logics in Succession. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 40(4), 781–813. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12146

Jay, J. (2013). Navigating Paradox as a Mechanism of Change and Innovation in Hybrid Organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 56(1), 137–159. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0772

Joseph, J., Ocasio, W., & McDonnell, M.-H. (2014). The Structural Elaboration of Board Independence: Executive Power, Institutional Logics, and the Adoption of CEO-only Board Structures in US Corporate Governance. Academy of Management Journal, 57(6), 1834–1858. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2012.0253

Kim, T.-Y., Shin, D., Oh, H., & Jeong, Y.-C. (2007). Inside the Iron Cage: Organizational Political Dynamics and Institutional Changes in Presidential Selection Systems in Korean Universities, 1985–2002. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(2), 286–323. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.52.2.286

Kodeih, F., & Greenwood, R. (2014). Responding to Institutional Complexity: The Role of Identity. Organization Studies, 35(1), 7–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840613495333

Koskela-Huotari, K., Edvardsson, B., Jonas, J. M., Sörhammar, D., & Witell, L. (2016). Innovation in service ecosystems-Breaking, making, and maintaining institutionalized rules of resource integration. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 2964–2971. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.02.029

Lampel, J., Bhalla, A., & Ramachandran, K. (2017). Family values and inter-institutional governance of strategic decision making in Indian family firms. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 34(4), 901–930. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-017-9509-0

Leca, B., & Naccache, P. (2006). A Critical Realist Approach To Institutional Entrepreneurship. Organization, 13(5), 627–651. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508406067007

Lee, M.-D. P., & Lounsbury, M. (2015). Filtering Institutional Logics: Community Logic Variation and Differential Responses to the Institutional Complexity of Toxic Waste. Organization Science, 26(3), 847–866. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2014.0959

Loewenstein, J., Ocasio, W., & Jones, C. (2012). Vocabularies and Vocabulary Structure: A New Approach Linking Categories, Practices, and Institutions. Academy of Management Annals, 6(1), 41–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2012.660763

Lounsbury, M. (2007). A Tale of Two Cities: Competing Logics and Practice Variation in the Professionalizing of Mutual Funds. Academy of Management Journal, 50(2), 289–307. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2007.24634436

Malsch, B., & Gendron, Y. (2013). Re-theorizing change: Institutional experimentation and the struggle for domination in the field of public accounting. Journal of Management Studies, 50(5), 870–899. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12006

Manual, O. (2005). The measurement of scientific and technological activities. Proposed Guidelines for Collecting an Interpreting Technological Innovation Data.

Martí, G. (2017). New Concepts for New Dynamics: Generating Theory for the Study of Religious Innovation and Social Change. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 56(1), 6–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/jssr.12325

Martín-Martín, A., Orduna-Malea, E., & López-Cózar, E. D. (2018). Coverage of highly-cited documents in Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: a multidisciplinary comparison. Scientometrics, 116(3), 2175-2188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2820-9

Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363. https://doi.org/10.2307/2778293

Meyer, R. E., & Höllerer, M. A. (2016). Laying a smoke screen: Ambiguity and neutralization as strategic responses to intra-institutional complexity. Strategic Organization, 14(4), 373–406. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127016633335

Misangyi, V. F. (2016). Institutional complexity and the meaning of loose coupling: Connecting institutional sayings and (not) doings. Strategic Organization, 1476127016635481-. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127016635481

Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106(1), 213-228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5

Nash, A. (1974). Local 1199, Drug and Hospital Union: An Analysis of the Normative and Institutional Orders of a Complex Organization. Human Relations, 27(6), 547–566. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872677402700602

Ocasio, W., & Radoynovska, N. (2016). Strategy and commitments to institutional logics: Organizational heterogeneity in business models and governance. Strategic Organization, 1476127015625040-. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127015625040

Ocasio, William, Loewenstein, J., & Nigam, A. (2015). How Streams of Communication Reproduce and Change Institutional Logics: The Role of Categories. Academy of Management Review, 40(1), 28–48. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2013.0274

OECD and SCImago Research Group (CSIC). (2016). Compendium of Bibliometric Science Indicators. OECD, Paris.

Quevedo-Silva, F., Santos, E. B. A., Brandão, M. M., & Vils, L. (2016). Estudo bibliométrico: orientações sobre sua aplicação. Revista Brasileira de Marketing, 15(2), 246-262. https://doi.org/10.5585/remark.v15i2.3274

Pahnke, E. C., Katila, R., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2015). Who Takes You to the Dance? How Partners’ Institutional Logics Influence Innovation in Young Firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 60(4), 596–633. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839215592913

Patriotta, G., Gond, J.-P., & Schultz, F. (2011). Maintaining Legitimacy: Controversies, Orders of Worth, and Public Justifications. Journal of Management Studies, 48(8), 1804–1836. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00990.x

Person, O., Danell, R., & Schneider, J. W. (2009). How to use Bibexcel for various types of bibliometric analysis. In F. Åström, R. Danell, B. Larsen, & J. W. Schneider (Eds.), Celebrating scholarly communication studies: A Festschrift for Olle Persson at his 60th Birthday (pp. 9–24). Leuven: International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics.

Rao, H., Monin, P., & Durand, R. (2003). Institutional Change in Toque Ville: Nouvelle Cuisine as an Identity Movement in French Gastronomy. American Journal of Sociology, 108(4), 795–843.

Ratinaud, P., & Marchand, P. (2012). No TiApplication de la méthode ALCESTE à de “gros” corpus et stabilité des “mondes lexicaux”: analyse du “CableGate” avec IRaMuTeQtle. Actes Des 11eme Journées Internationales d’Analyse Statistique Des Données Textuelles, 835–844.

Reay, T., Jaskiewicz, P., & Hinings, C. R. (2015). How Family, Business, and Community Logics Shape Family Firm Behavior and “Rules of the Game” in an Organizational Field. Family Business Review, 28(4), 292–311. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894486515577513

Reay, Trish, & Hinings, C. R. R. (2009). Managing the Rivalry of Competing Institutional Logics. Organization Studies, 30(6), 629–652. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840609104803

Reed, M. I. (2009). Critical Realism: Philosophy, Method, or Philosophy in Search of a Method? In D. A. Buchanan & A. Bryman (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Research Methods (pp. 430–448). London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Reinert, M. (1990). Alceste une méthodologie d’analyse des données textuelles et une application: Aurelia De Gerard De Nerval. Bulletin of Sociological Methodology/Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique, 26(1), 24–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/075910639002600103

Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and Organizations: Ideas, Interests, and Identities (4a). London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Selznick, P. (1949). TVA and the Grass Roots - A Study in the Sociology of Formal Organization. University of California Press Berkeley and Los Angeles.

Selznick, P. (1996). Institutionalism “Old” and “New.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(2), 270–277. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393719

Smets, M., Jarzabkowski, P., Burke, G. T., & Spee, P. (2015). Reinsurance Trading in Lloyd’s of London: Balancing Conflicting-yet-Complementary Logics in Practice. Academy of Management Journal, 58(3), 932–970. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2012.0638

Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches. The Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571. https://doi.org/10.2307/258788

Thijs, B., Zhang, L., & Glänzel, W. (2015). Bibliographic coupling and hierarchical clustering for the validation and improvement of subject-classification schemes. Scientometrics, 105(3), 1453–1467. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1641-3

Thornton, P. H., & Ocasio, W. (1999). Institutional Logics and the Historical Contingency of Power in Organizations: Executive Succession in the Higher Education Publishing Industry, 1958– 1990 1. American Journal of Sociology, 105(3), 801–843. https://doi.org/10.1086/210361

Thornton, P. H., & Ocasio, W. (2008). Institutional Logics. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, K. Sahlin, & R. Suddaby (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism (pp. 99–129). London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Thornton, P. H., Ocasio, W., & Lounsbury, M. (2012). The institutional logics perspective: A new approach to culture, structure and process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for Developing Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review. British Journal of Management, 14, 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00375

van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3

Vickers, I., Lyon, F., Sepulveda, L., & McMullin, C. (2017). Public service innovation and multiple institutional logics: The case of hybrid social enterprise providers of health and wellbeing. Research Policy, 46(10), 1755–1768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.08.003

Vogel, R., & Güttel, W. H. (2013). The dynamic capability view in strategic management: A bibliometric review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15(4), 426–446. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12000

Westphal, J. D., & Park, S. H. (2012). Unintended agency: Impression management support as a trigger of institutional change in corporate governance. Research in Organizational Behavior, 32, 23–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2012.10.002

Wry, T., & York, J. G. (2017). An Identity-Based Approach to Social Enterprise. Academy of Management Review, 42(3), 437–460. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2013.0506

York, J. G., Hargrave, T. J., & Pacheco, D. F. (2016). Converging winds: Logic hybridization in the Colorado wind energy field. Academy of Management Journal, 59(2), 579–610. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2013.0657

York, J. G., O’Neil, I., & Sarasvathy, S. D. (2016). Exploring Environmental Entrepreneurship: Identity Coupling, Venture Goals, and Stakeholder Incentives. Journal of Management Studies, 53(5), 695–737. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12198

Zanin, L. M., Nassif, V. M. J., Cunha, J. A. C. da, & Pedron, C. D. (2015). Aqueles Que Mudam as Regras do Jogo: uma Revisão Sistemática sobre o Empreendedorismo Institucional. In VII Encontro de Estudos em Estratégia 3Es. Brasilia.

Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric Methods in Management and Organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429–472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629