Latin American nations have, in varying degrees, struggled to form a foreign policy which successfully incorporates developmental issues. Through an institutional analysis, this article identifies the institutional frameworks within which a development‐oriented foreign policy (DOFP) is more prone to emerge. It is argued that DOFP has not been able to be consolidated, as foreign policy has primarily remained a tool for regime survival. This is largely because of the institutional exclusiveness and presidentialism embedded in Latin American diplomacy – making foreign policy notoriously vulnerable to regime appropriation. By conducting a comparison between Ecuadorean and Chilean foreign policy, the article sheds light on the institutional components which have allowed the latter to successfully incorporate a development agenda and the former to stumble in its efforts.