The Legalization of the Workplace

Sutton, John R.; Dobbin, Frank; Meyer, John W.; Scott, W. Richard

doi:10.1086/230368

Cited by 330 publications

(221 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

211

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These middle-manager reformers assist in the elaboration and enforcement of employee rights both because they are committed to these ideals and because they seek to increase their power within their organizations (Edelman 1990;Dobbin et al 1993;Heimer and Stevens 1997). They may use new models proffered in their professional journals, conferences, and networks to persuade top managers to adopt particular programs (Edelman 1990(Edelman , 1992Sutton et al 1994). Over time, they may even come to disassociate these new programs from regulation and justify them in economic terms (Dobbin and Sutton 1998;Kelly and Dobbin 1998;Edelman, Uggen, and Erlanger 1999;Edelman et al 2001).…”

Section: Institutional Change In Response To Regulation In the Literamentioning

confidence: 99%

Operating Room: Relational Spaces and Microinstitutional Change in Surgery

Kellogg

2009

American Journal of Sociology

452

469

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Institutional Change In Response To Regulation In the Literamentioning

confidence: 99%

Operating Room: Relational Spaces and Microinstitutional Change in Surgery

Kellogg

2009

American Journal of Sociology

452

469

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…American employers responded to the 1964 Civil Rights Act with a host of structural and practical actions. They instituted formal grievance procedures (Edelman 1990, Sutton et al 1994) and established equal employment opportunity and affirmative action departments (Edelman 1992). They also developed policies that supported internal labor markets (Dobbin et al 1993) and created specialized units to manage human resources issues, including antidiscrimination, safety, and benefits departments (Dobbin and Sutton 1998).…”

Section: Punctuational Regulatory Changementioning

confidence: 99%

Organizational Environments in Flux: The Impact of Regulatory Punctuations on Organizational Domains, CEO Succession, and Performance

Haveman

Russo

Meyer

2001

Organization Science

188

126

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A central debate in organizational theory concerns how organizations evolve. There are two diametrically opposing viewpoints. Adaptation theories predict that change occurs as fluid organizations adjust to meet shifting environmental demands, while selection theories predict that change occurs through the differential selection and replacement of inert organizations as environmental demands vary over time. Our paper bridges these polar opposites by using a punctuated equilibrium framework to examine organizations' responses to discontinuous industrylevel change. This framework recognizes that the histories of many industries are occasionally punctuated by dramatic exogenous shocks, such as radical technological innovation, social and political turmoil, major changes in government regulation, and economic crashes. Our central thesis is that such environmental punctuations dramatically reduce pressures and rewards for organizational inertia and thereby alter both organizations' propensities for change and their survival chances following change.We focus on one form of punctuation, major regulatory change, and study firms in two industries: general hospitals and savings and loan associations. For organizations in both industries, we examine three important outcomes: shifts in organizational domain, CEO succession, and changes in financial performance. Our analyses show that punctuational regulatory change prompts shifts in organizational domains and executive leadership. Additionally, post-punctuation domain change and post-punctuation CEO succession both affect subsequent performance. We discuss our results in light of current thinking about the content and process effects of core organizational change, which has been developed in the context of stable environments. Finally, we argue for the development of more temporally sensitive theories of organizational action. (Organizational Evolution; Punctuated Equilibrium; Deregulation; Organizational Change; Organizational Inertia; Organizational Performance; CEO Succession) Change in the core attributes of organizations is difficult and fraught with peril. Organizational ecologists have proposed that when organizations change, resources are diverted from operating to reorganizing, which reduces efficiency and survival chances (Hannan andFreeman 1984, 1989;Amburgey et al. 1993; Barnett and Carroll 1995). These process effects of core change-the costs associated with redirecting resources from operations to reorganization, learning new routines, and building new relations with exchange partners-are expected to be negative. In contrast, the content effects of core change-the impact of adjusting to fit environmental demands-may be positive or negative, depending on the luck and skill of organizational decision makers and implementers. Considering process and content effects together, core organizational change is likely to impair performance and may even lead to failure.Despite the inherent riskiness of core organizational change, it is sometimes necessary and...

show abstract

“…For example, Fligstein (1990) showed how the Celler-Kefauver Act of 1950, which prohibited vertical mergers, limited the options available to corporations and how one result was increased cross-industry acquisition activity and the rise of conglomerates. On the normative side, a number of studies have shown how changes in the legal environment in the wake of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 disposed organizations in the 1960s and early 1970s to adopt different organizational structures that signaled normative compliance with the emerging regulatory regime (Dobbin et al, 1993;Edelman, 1990Edelman, , 1992Sutton et al, 1994).…”

Section: Theory and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This body of work suggests that there are important state-level effects. For example, in their study of firm responses to federal legislation, the Dobbin and Sutton team (Dobbin et al, 1993;Dobbin and Sutton, 1998;Sutton et al, 1994;Sutton and Dobbin, 1996) draw their sample of firms from three different states to test the hypothesis that state-level legislative environments will cause firms to behave differently above and beyond the impact of federal legislative change. They consistently find that location in the State of California-with its comparatively liberal laws in support of workers' rights (compared to Virginia and New Jersey)-has a significant positive impact on the firm-level adoption of a variety of labor-oriented practices.…”

Section: Theory and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Shifts in federal laws have been shown to cause corporations to interpret their environments differently and to influence the economic decisions of organizations. Research has shown that firm structure (Fligstein, 1990;Roy, 1997;Zorn, 2004), strategy (Davis et al, 1994), and even internal policy (Dobbin et al, 1993;Edelman, 1990Edelman, , 1992Sutton et al, 1994) are shaped by legal changes at the federal level. For example, Fligstein (1990) showed how a number of federal regulatory changes in the twentieth century drove the evolution of the corporate form.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

State activism and the hidden incentives behind bank acquisitions

Marquis

Guthrie

Almandoz

2012

Social Science Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tA number of studies have shown that, as a result of the ambiguity of US legal mandates, organizations have considerable latitude in how they comply with regulations. In this paper, we address how the different agendas of the federal and state governments increase ambiguities in state-firm relations and how states are interested actors in creating opportunities for firms to navigate the federal legislation. We analyze the institutional forces behind bank acquisitions within and across state lines in order to illuminate the ways that US states take advantage of federal ambiguity and are able to shape corporate practices to their benefit. We specifically examine how patterns of bank acquisitions are shaped by the crucial relationship between the federal Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) and a littleunderstood provision in the federal tax code that is implemented at the state level, the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC). The relationship is complex because, while the federal government uses the CRA to control bank acquisition activity, states promote use of the LIHTC, through which banks can address federal CRA concerns, and thereby promote bank acquisitions in their jurisdictions. Thus, our findings suggest that the implementation of social legislation at one level in a federal regulatory system undermines the mechanisms of social legislation at another level. We use archival research and in-depth interviews to examine the interaction between these institutional processes and formulate hypotheses that predict the ways in which bank acquisitions are constrained by banks' CRA ratings and the way states in turn help banks overcome their CRA constraints. Quantitative analyses of all bank acquisitions in the United States from 1990-2000 largely support these hypotheses.

show abstract

The Legalization of the Workplace

Cited by 330 publications

References 17 publications

Operating Room: Relational Spaces and Microinstitutional Change in Surgery

Operating Room: Relational Spaces and Microinstitutional Change in Surgery

Organizational Environments in Flux: The Impact of Regulatory Punctuations on Organizational Domains, CEO Succession, and Performance

State activism and the hidden incentives behind bank acquisitions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About