2018
DOI: 10.1093/jpo/joy016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

New governance regulation and lawyers: When substantive compliance erodes legal professionalism

Abstract: A dominant theme within institutional theory is that organizational responses to regulatory demands will be characterised by decoupling. However, this assumption rests on regulation as a coercive force. The emergence of 'new governance regulation' and the freedom afforded to firms to tailor regulatory demands to local circumstances should, theoretically, foster greater commitment to, achievement of, regulatory goals. Focusing on the responses of solicitor practices in England and Wales to outcome-focused regul… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Historically, PAs have been 'paired organisations' (Lester, 2009), representing their members and serving as de facto regulators. In some areas, such as legal services in the UK, state-enforced separation of membership and regulatory functions has eroded the dual role (Aulakh and Kirkpatrick, 2018). By contrast, formal de-coupling of regulatory functions in the US is far less advanced (Levin et al, 2018).…”
Section: Sources Of Changementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Historically, PAs have been 'paired organisations' (Lester, 2009), representing their members and serving as de facto regulators. In some areas, such as legal services in the UK, state-enforced separation of membership and regulatory functions has eroded the dual role (Aulakh and Kirkpatrick, 2018). By contrast, formal de-coupling of regulatory functions in the US is far less advanced (Levin et al, 2018).…”
Section: Sources Of Changementioning
confidence: 99%
“…A related stream of work on institutional logics, either concerning their intractability (Raelin, 1991; Reay & Hinings, 2009) or the possibility of hybridity (Adams, 2020; van Schothorst, et al., 2020), or even “fluidity” (ten Dam & Waardenburg, 2020). Another body of work deals with professional regulation (Adams, 2017; Aulakh & Kirkpatrick, 2018; Currie et al., 2009). Also at the institutional level, we see work on inter‐professional demarcation and jurisdictional issues—such as boundary work (Bos‐de Vos et al., 2019; Langley, et al., 2019) and Siebert (2020) on status symbols in preserving inter‐professional boundaries.…”
Section: Research On Professional Organizationsmentioning
confidence: 99%