Institutional entrepreneurship: collaborative change in a complex Canadian organization

Abstract

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.

Public-private partnership in Alberta, Canada: a path dependence perspective

“…One of the limitations of the Alberta P3 program as implemented was that it was not anchored on established institutional structures, rather was it anchored around the trusted duo of Stelmach and Ramotar (Opara et al. , 2021, 2022; Opara, 2020).…”

“…Second, for some researchers, P3 implementation is considered a transplanted policy devoid of social actors (Lewis, 2021; Andon, 2012). This study demonstrates that human agents are intricately involved in policy initiation, enactment, and successful field-level implementation (Opara et al. , 2021, 2022; Biygautane et al.…”

“…On revisiting the emergence and implementation of P3s in Alberta over the last 20 years, we mobilized our professional training to review the role of accounting in the enactment of P3s as a socially constructed phenomenon (Opara et al, 2021(Opara et al, , 2022Biygautane et al, 2019). Using the lens of constructivist/interpretivist research we were especially concerned that the various accounting calculative technologies (including NPV, VfM, Cashflow discounting, etc.)…”

“…We observe Alberta's P3 policies while modified to draw on and fit the institutional context was rather modest and incremental in approach. This incrementalist approach was a reflection of the still conservative bent of the existing institutions while making assumptions about the changes occurring within this overall framework (Chan, 2020; Opara et al. , 2021, 2022).…”

“…Furthermore, while aspects of P3s were modified to suit the P3 policy arrangements, certain institutional environment factors were modified to make P3s work in Alberta. To many observers, Alberta remains a deeply conservative society; however, institutional entrepreneurs Ed Stelmach and Jay Ramotar were convinced Alberta society can be remade to accept P3s as a made-in-Alberta policy for Alberta citizens (Opara et al, 2021(Opara et al, , 2022.…”