Why Do Established Practices Deinstitutionalize? An Actor‐Centred Approach

Abstract

Drawing on 63 in-depth interviews from three American multinationals, we investigate how individual actors negotiate the interplay of insider and outsider pressures on the deinstitutionalization of four employment practices in an institutionally complex setting.Existing institutional theory highlights different degrees of deinstitutionalization, from complete abandonment of practices to partial erosion, with an underlying presumption of organizations and actors striving for stability and stasis. However, the present study finds that actor reconciliation of interacting insider and outsider pressures can result in three distinct phases of deinstitutionalization (complete, partial and negotiated deinstitutionalization), which crucially coexist, suggesting perpetual instability and change. The authors conceptualize the individual-level enabling conditions for each of these different phases of deinstitutionalization, highlighting a range of actor responses as well as differences in how actors exercise agency across each phase. Examining actor negotiation of the interplay of insider and outsider pressures improves our understanding of how individuals engage in differential institutional work when responding to practice deinstitutionalization.

Doing the right thing? An institutional perspective on responsible restructuring in UK local government

“…There are clear policy lessons for national governments, not only in terms of the short‐term underinvestment in public services, but in the risk to long term recruitment and retention of skilled workers arising from deteriorating job quality and the normalisation of fiscal cutbacks (Cunningham et al., 2021). Our findings also complement studies of large private sector organisations that have experienced the contestation of embedded HRM standards (e.g., Chaudhry & Rubery, 2019; McLachlan et al., 2020) Future research might fruitfully explore restructuring processes in matched pairs of public and private sector organisations in different institutional contexts to establish patterns of convergence and divergence in the approach to workforce reform.…”

“…This narrative helps justify the short‐term focus on doing ‘more with less’, but crucially it is vague and open‐ended, and demands ever increasing levels of individual flexibility, resilience and work effort. Indeed, it is the ‘persistent state of instability’ created by internal reorganisation and reform that provides cover for the erosion of HRM standards and practices (Chaudhry & Rubery, 2019, p. 552). Here, we build on earlier institutional analyses of public sector change (Czarniawska‐Joerges, 1989) to show how ongoing reforms confer symbolic legitimacy on managers, whether or not reforms actually achieve any measurable improvements.…”

“…Institutional theory suggests that organisations typically change in incremental path dependent ways as managers are cognisant of embedded norms, rules and cultures (Powell & DiMaggio, 1991). At the same time, adopting an institutional perspective also provides a framework for understanding change where embedded practices lose their legitimacy because of waning organisational consensus and changes in the wider context (e.g., Chaudhry & Rubery, 2019; Czarniawska‐Joerges, 1989; Lewis et al., 2019; Sahdev, 2003).…”

Institutionalism and its effect on HRM in the ASEAN context: Challenges and opportunities for future research

“…This is well aligned with the view that management practices are shaped and executed in accordance with changes in the institutional environment of a particular context (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983;Scott, 2008). In this sense, institutional theory is argued to be necessary to reflect the contextual underpinnings of research in a certain context (Nguyen et al, 2018;Chaudhry & Rubery, 2019). More importantly, institutional theorists highlight that ''the how'' and ''the why'' are not simply a matter of adhering to environmental prescriptions but also a function of the environment shaping the identities, values and schemas of HR professionals (Lewis et al, 2019, p. 316).…”

Temporal Dynamics of Deinstitutionalization – The Case of Asbestos in France

“…D einstitutionalization, the process by which a taken-forgranted practice is eroded until it disappears completely, is a key stage in the life cycle of institutions (Lawrence et al, 2001); however, it is relatively rarely studied in the literature (exceptions include Chaudhry & Rubery, 2017;Clemente & Roulet, 2015;Hiatt et al, 2009;Maguire & Hardy, 2009;Oliver, 1992). When it is studied, the focus is chiefly on its final phase and the exogenous shocks that trigger that phase (e.g., Maguire & Hardy, 2009).…”