The rise in globalisation studies in comparative education places neoinstitutional theory at the centre of many debates among comparative education researchers. However, uncertainty about how to interpret neoinstitutional theory still persists among educational comparativists. With this uncertainty comes misinterpretation of its principles, variations and explanatory power. Two problematic misconceptions prevail: (1) the belief that the 'world culture' strand is the only version of neo-institutional theory applicable to comparative education research; and (2) the assumption that the global homogenisation of society, culture and schooling is a goal of researchers applying neo-institutional theory to comparative education phenomena. This article addresses these misconceptions, elucidating neo-institutional theory and its applicability to comparative education research. Our findings suggest that neo-institutional frameworks for comparative education research are useful, but that complementary approaches and methods are also necessary.