ECO 9004 Contemporary streams of institutional theory in management and accounting

5-9 August 2024 (Bodø, Norway)
Oversiktsbilde over Bodø by med hav og himmel. Foto.
Photo: Kent Even Grundstad / Visit Bodø

Application deadline: 31st of May 2024
Decision for acceptance to the course: 16th of June 2024

ECTS credits: 7,5
Level of course: PhD
Type of course: Elective
Duration: 5 days
Year of study: The course is relevant for PhD students at all stages of their PhD project
Study place: Nord University, Bodø
Faculty responsible: Nord University Business School
Language of instruction: English

Course responsible persons:

Anatoli Bourmistrov, Daniela Argento, Evgenii Aleksandrov (contact person), Giuseppe Grossi

Costs:

The course itself is free of charge, including meals related to course gatherings. The course participants must cover the costs of travel and their accommodation during the period. PhD students from the NFF network will receive travel funding support.

Course evaluation:

Students evaluate the course by final evaluation. These evaluations are included in the university’s quality assurance system.

Course contents:

An increasing number of research communities acknowledge the need for an interdisciplinary approach in management and accounting research. Understanding the contemporary streams of institutional theory and their potential to extend previous knowledge becomes crucial in the quest for contribution to the literature.

The aim of this course is to deepen knowledge and reflect upon the contemporary streams of institutional theory and their application to management and accounting studies. Specifically, the course's ambition is to equip PhD students with a deeper understanding of institutional logics, institutional entrepreneurship and institutional work, and how these streams can be connected to their own research projects. These streams of institutional theory have become increasingly valuable in management and accounting research. At the same time, they are challenging to use under theoretical pluralism agendas. In this regard, the opportunities and challenges of these streams will be examined during the course. In a long-term perspective, the course seeks to contribute to the development of PhD students’ analytical and critical skills, and therefore facilitate the number of individual and joint international publications. During 5-days gathering, the course content will include but not be limited to discussion of:

Day 1. General presentation and discussion of contemporary development of management and accounting research with institutional theory use as theoretical lenses:

  • classical streams (isomorphism and decoupling of institutional theory and Scandinavian institutionalism their application to management and accounting
  • the value of institutional theory for conceptualizing management and accounting research;
  • interactive group session regarding opportunities and challenges of working with classical streams of institutional theory and Scandinavian institutionalism during data collection and analysis;
  • presentation and discussion of student papers;

Day 2. Institutional logics and its application to management and accounting research:

  • presentation of theory and its analytical tools;
  • discussion of examples of theory use in management and accounting literature;
  • interactive group session on opportunities and challenges of working with institutional logics during data collection and analysis;
  • presentation and discussion of student papers;

Day 3. Institutional entrepreneurship and its application to management research:

  • presentation of theory and its analytical tools;
  • discussion of examples of theory use in management and accounting literature;
  • interactive group session on opportunities and challenges of working with institutional entrepreneurship during data collection and analysis;
  • presentation and discussion of student papers;

Day 4. Institutional work and its application to management research:

  • presentation of theory and its analytical tools;
  • discussion of examples of theory use in management and accounting literature;
  • interactive group session on opportunities and challenges of working with institutional work during data collection and analysis;
  • presentation and discussion of student papers;

Day 5. Combining theories and theoretical pluralism:

  • possible paradigmatic issues and justifications for theories’ combinations;
  • discussion of examples from management and accounting studies;
  • interactive group session combining theories and implications for data collection and analysis;
  • presentation and discussion of student papers;
  • wrapping up, further actions and opportunities for publication.

Course faculty:

The course will be arranged through combining the competencies of Nord University Business School and its partners from other Nordic universities, therefore, enhancing the Nordic research cooperation. Faculty will be represented by:

- Anatoli Bourmistrov (Professor, Nord University Business School, Norway)

- Daniela Argento (Associate Professor, Kristianstad University, Sweden)

- Evgenii Aleksandrov (Associate Professor, Nord University Business School, Norway)

- Giuseppe Grossi (Professor, Nord University Business School, Norway; Kristianstad University, Sweden)

- Jan-Erik Johanson (Professor, Tampere University, Finland)

- Jarmo Vakkuri (Professor, Tampere University, Finland)

Learning outcomes:

Knowledge

On completion of the course, the candidate should be able to:

· have advanced knowledge of classical and contemporary streams of institutional theory;

· understand the challenges connected with the applications and combination of the contemporary streams of institutional theory;

· evaluate and analyze the characteristics of different streams of institutional theory;

Skills

On completion of the course, the candidate should be able to:

· assess the analytical value of applying theories to the empirical design of own research projects;

· connect own research projects to the analytical frameworks in both oral and written forms;

· critically examine the research projects of peers in both oral and written forms.

Competence

On completion of the course, the candidate should be able to:

· identify relevant theoretical problem statements and contributions to the literature with the use of contemporary streams of institutional theory;

· critically manage interdisciplinary research papers;

· discuss and give feedback to research projects drawing upon institutional theory.

· identify the development of contemporary institutional theories and respective applications in management and accounting research;

Especially recommended elective courses:

No

Offered as a free-standing course:

Yes

Prerequisites:

To take this course, the student has to be admitted to a Ph.D. program or have the qualifications to be admitted to a Ph.D. program. Must fulfill the English language requirements or must be from approved partner institutions

Recommended previous knowledge:

No

Mode of delivery:

Face-to-face

Learning activities and teaching methods:

Lectures, assignments, individual presentations, research dialogue in class and comments on written written work.

Assessment methods and criteria:

The course consists of one preliminary reflection paper, attendance and active participation in five days of class work and one final reflection paper. The pre-assignment consists of reading of the course literature (see mandatory reading list) and preparing a preliminary reflection paper (approx. 5.000 words) based on mandatory reading. The course foresees obligatory participation and integrates lectures by the course faculty, discussions of the course literature, presentations of own reflection papers, and peer review. The participants will need to submit a final reflection paper (approx. 7.000 words) based on at least one of the contemporary streams of institutional theory within two months after the conclusion of the course. The grades passed/not passed apply. The content from the final reflection paper can be only partially used in the kappa/Ph.D. thesis and will require substantial rewriting.

Mandatory reading:

To be updated with additional reading before the course starts:

Battilana, J. (2006). “Agency and institutions: The 'enabling role of individuals' social position”, Organization, Vol. 13 No. 5, pp. 653-676.

Battilana, J., & D’Aunno, T. (2009). “Institutional work and the paradox of embedded agency”, in Lawrence, T., Suddaby, R., and Leca, B. (Eds.), Institutional Work: Actors and Agency in Institutional Studies of Organizations, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp.31-58.

Battilana, J., Leca, B., & Boxenbaum, E. (2009), “How actors change institutions: towards a theory of institutional entrepreneurship”, The Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 3 No.1, pp. 65-107.

Czarniawska, B. (2009), "Emerging institutions: pyramids or anthills?", Organization Studies, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 423-441.

Friedland, R. and Alford, R. R. (1991). “Bringing Society Back In: Symbols, Practices and Institutional Contradictions," in Walter W. Powell and Paul DiMaggio (Eds.), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 232-263.

Gehman, J. (2021). Searching for values in practice-driven institutionalism: Practice theory, institutional logics, and values work. In T. Schatzki & R. E. Meyer (Eds.), On practice and institution: Theorizing the interface (pp. 139-159). Emerald Publishing Limited.

Greenwood, R., Hinings, C. R., & Whetten, D. (2014). Rethinking institutions and organizations. Journal of management studies, 51(7), 1206-1220.

Greenwood, R., & Suddaby, R. (2006), “Institutional entrepreneurship in mature fields: The big five accounting firms”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 49 No.1, pp. 27-48.

Greenwood, R., Oliver, C., Lawrence, T. B., & Meyer, R. E. (2017). Introduction: Into the fourth decade. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, T. B. Lawrence, & R. E. Meyer (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism (2nd ed., pp. 1–24). Sage.

Johansen, C. B., & Waldorff, S. B. (2017), “What are Institutional Logics - and Where is the Perspective Taking Us?", In Mazza, C., Meyer, R., Krucken, G. & Walgenbach, P. (Eds.), New Themes in Institutional Analysis: Topics and Issues from European Research, Chelterham: Edward Elgar.

Hamadache, K., & Brabet, J. (2014). Rethinking Institutional Entrepreneurship. The case of the construction of the orphan drug field in Europe. Society and Business Review, 9(2), 139-152.

Hampel, Christian, Lawrence, Thomas B. and Tracey, P. (2017), “Institutional work: Taking stock and making it matter”, In: Greenwood, Royston, Oliver, Christine, Lawrence, Thomas B. and Meyer, Renate, (eds.) SAGE Handbook of organizational institutionalism (2nd ed.). UK SAGE, London, pp. 557-590.

Kisfalvi, V., & Maguire, S. (2011). On the nature of institutional entrepreneurs: Insights from the life of Rachel Carson. Journal of Management Inquiry, 20(2), 152-127.

Lawrence, T., & Suddaby, R. (2006). “Institutions and Institutional Work”, in Clegg, S. R., Hardy, C., Lawrence, T., & Nord, W. R.  (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Organization Studies, Sage, London, pp.215-254.

Lawrence, T., Leca, B., & Zilber, T. (2013). “Institutional work: Current research, new directions and overlooked issues”, Organization Studies, Vol.34 No.8, pp.1023-1033.

Lawrence, T., Suddaby, R. and Leca, B. (2009), “Introduction: Theorizing and studying institutional work”,  in Lawrence, T., Suddaby, R., and Leca, B. (Eds.), Institutional Work: Actors and Agency in Institutional Studies of Organizations, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp.1-27

Lawrence, T., Suddaby, R., & Leca, B. (2011). “Institutional work: Refocusing institutional studies of organization”, Journal of Management Inquiry, Vol.20 No.1, pp.52-58.

Levy, D.L., & Scully, M. (2007). The institutional entrepreneur as modern prince: The strategic face of power in contested fields. Organizational Studies, 28(7), 971-991.

Lok, J., Creed, W. D., DeJordy, R., & Voronov, M. (2017). Living institutions: Bringing emotions into organizational institutionalism. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, T. B. Lawrence, & R. E. Meyer (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism (2nd ed., pp. 591–620). Sage.

Lounsbury, M. (2008), “Institutional rationality and practice variation: new directions in the institutional analysis and practice. Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 33, pp. 349-361.

Lounsbury, M., Steele, C. W., Wang, M. S., & Toubiana, M. (2021). New directions in the study of institutional logics: From tools to phenomena. Annual Review of Sociology, 47, 261-280.

Lukka, K. and Vinnari, E. (2014), "Domain theory and method theory in management accounting research", Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 27 No. 8, pp. 1308-1338.

Maguire, S., Hardy, C., & Lawrence, T. (2004). Institutional Entrepreneurship in emerging fields: HIV/AIDS treatment advocacy in Canada. Academy of Management Journal, 47(5),  657-679.

Meyer, R. E., & Höllerer, M. A. (2014). Does institutional theory need redirecting?. Journal of management Studies, 51(7), 1221-1233.

Meyer, J. W., Greenwood, R., & Oliver, C. (2017). Reflections on institutional theories of organizations. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, T. B. Lawrence, & R. E. Meyer (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism (2nd ed., pp. 831–852). Sage.

Modell, S. (2015), "Making institutional accounting research critical: dead end or new beginning?", Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 28 No. 5, pp.773-808.

Modell, S., Vinnari, E. and Lukka, K. (2017), "On the virtues and vices of combining theories: The case of institutional and actor-network theories in accounting research", Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 60, pp. 62-78.

Modell, S. (2022). Is institutional research on management accounting degenerating or progressing? A lakatosian analysis. Contemporary Accounting Research, 39(4), 2560-2595.

Mutch, A. (2007). Reflexivity and the Institutional Entrepreneur: A Historical Exploration. Organization Studies,28(7), 1123-1140.

Ocasio, W., & Gai, S. L. (2020). Institutions: Everywhere but not everything. Journal of Management Inquiry, 29(3), 262-271.

Ocasio, W., Thornton, P. H., & Lounsbury, M. (2017). Advances to the institutional logics perspective. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, T. B. Lawrence, & R. E. Meyer (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism (2nd ed., pp. 509–531). Sage.

Seo, M.-G., & Creed, W. D. (2002), “Institutional contradictions, praxis, and institutional change: A dialectical perspective”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 222-247.

Thornton, P. H., Ocasio, W. and Lounsbury, M. (2012), The Institutional Logics Perspective. A new approach to culture, structure, and process, Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 50-74.

Zilber, T. B. (2013). “Institutional logics and institutional work: Should they be agreed?”, Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Vol.39, pp.77-96.

Institutional logics in management and accounting:

Amans, P., Mazars-Chapelon, A., & Villesèque-Dubus, F. (2015). Budgeting in institutional complexity: The case of performing arts organizations. Management Accounting Research, 27, 47-66.

Argento, D., Culasso, F., & Truant, E. (2016). Competing logics in the expansion of public service corporations. Utilities Policy, 40, 125-133.Bartocci, L., Grossi, G., and Mauro, S. G. (2018), “Toward a Hybrid Logic of Participatory Budgeting”, International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp.65-79

Carlsson-Wall, M., Kraus, K., & Messner, M. (2016). Performance measurement systems and the enactment of different institutional logics: Insights from a football organization. Management Accounting Research, 32, 45-61.

Dai, N. T., Tan, Z. S., Tang, G., & Xiao, J. Z. (2017). IPOs, institutional complexity, and management accounting in hybrid organisations: A field study in a state-owned enterprise in China. Management Accounting Research, 36, 2-23.

Ezzamel, M., Robson, K., & Stapleton, P. (2012). The logics of budgeting: Theorization and practice variation in the educational field. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 37(5), 281-303.

Grossi, G., Dobija, D., & Strzelczyk, W. (2020), “The impact of institutional pressures and logics on the use of performance measurement practices in hybrid universities”, Public Performance Management Review, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 818-844

Kallio, K.M., Kallio T., and Grossi, G., Engblom, J. (2021), “Institutional Logic and Scholars' Reactions to Performance Measurement in Universities”, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 34 (9), pp. 104-130

Le Theule, M.-A., & Lupu, I. (2016). Publishing without editors or authors? Competing logics, circulation, and cultural creation in a publishing firm. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 38, 14-33.

Rautiainen, A., Urquía-Grande, E., & Muñoz-Colomina, C. (2017). Institutional Logics in Police Performance Indicator Development: A Comparative Case Study of Spain and Finland. European Accounting Review, 26(2), 165-191.

Institutional entrepreneurship in management and accounting:

Ahrens, T., & Ferry, L. (2016). Institutional entrepreneurship, practice memory, and cultural memory: Choice and creativity in the pursuit of endogenous change of local authority budgeting. Management Accounting Research, in Press.

Argento, D., Culasso, F. and Truant, E. (2019), “From Sustainability to Integrated Reporting: the legitimizing role of the CSR manager”, Organization & Environment, Vol. 32, N. 4, pp. 484-507.

Argento, D., Peda, P. and Grossi, G. (2018), “The enabling role of institutional entrepreneurs in the adoption of IPSAS within a transitional economy”, Public Administration & Development, Vol. 38, N. 1, pp. 39-49.

Covaleski, M. A., Dirsmith, M. W., & Weiss, J. M. (2013). The social construction, challenge and transformation of a budgetary regime: The endogenization of welfare regulation by institutional entrepreneurs. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 38(5), 333-364.

Elliot, V. H. (2016). Institutional entrepreneurship and change: A contemporary history of the Swedish banking industry and its performance management systems. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, 12(2), 223-251.

Gehman, J. (2021). Searching for values in practice-driven institutionalism: Practice theory, institutional logics, and values work. In T. Schatzki & R. E. Meyer (Eds.), On practice and institution: Theorizing the interface (pp. 139-159). Emerald Publishing Limited.

Gooneratne, T. N., & Hoque, Z. (2016). Institutions, agency and the institutionalization of budgetary control in a hybrid state-owned entity. Critical perspectives on accounting, 36, 58-70.

Guerreiro, M. S., Rodrigues, L. L., & Craig, R. (2015). Institutional change of accounting systems: The adoption of a regime of adapted International Financial Reporting Standards. European Accounting Review, 24(2), 379-409.

Hyvönen, T., Järvinen, J., Oulasvirta, L., & Pellinen, J. (2012). Contracting out municipal accounting: The role of institutional entrepreneurship. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 25(6), 944-963.

Major, M., Conceição, A., & Clegg, S. (2018). When institutional entrepreneurship failed: The case of a responsibility centre in a Portuguese hospital. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 31(4), 1199-1229.

Martin-Sardesai, A. (2016). Institutional Entrepreneurship and management control systems. Pacific Accounting Review, 28(4), 458-470.

Sharma, U., Lawrence, S., & Lowe, A. (2014). Accountants as institutional entrepreneurs: changing routines in a telecommunications company. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 11(3), 190-214.

Institutional work in management and accounting:

Aleksandrov, E., Bourmistrov, A., and Grossi, G. (2018), “Participatory budgeting as a form of dialogic accounting in Russia: actors’ institutional work and reflexivity trap“, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 31(4), pp. 750-781.

Canning, M., & O’Dwyer, B. (2016). Institutional work and regulatory change in the accounting profession. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 54, 1-21.Gibassier, D. (2017). From écobilan to LCA: The elite’s institutional work in the creation of an environmental management accounting tool. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 42, 36-58.

Hayne, C., & Free, C. (2014). Hybridized professional groups and institutional work: COSO and the rise of enterprise risk management. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 39(5), 309-330.

Järvinen, J. T. (2016). Role of management accounting in applying new institutional logics: A comparative case study in the non-profit sector. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 29(5), 861-886.

Kettunen, J. (2017). Interlingual translation of the International Financial Reporting Standards as institutional work. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 56, 38-54.

Modell, S. (2022). Accounting for institutional work: a critical review. European Accounting Review, 31(1), 33-58.

Suddaby, R., Saxton, G. D., & Gunz, S. (2015). Twittering change: The institutional work of domain change in accounting expertise. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 45, 52-68.