Institutional Logics and Conventions in Organizational Analysis (20 - 22 May 2015)


 
Faculty 

Prof. Laurent Thévenot, EHESS, Paris
Prof. Roger Friedland, Sociology, University of California
Prof. Stefano Ponte, Department of Business and Politics, CBS
Assoc. Prof. Susanne Boch Waldorff, Department of Organization, CBS
Assist. Prof. Christina Berg Johansen, Department of Organization, CBS
Prof. Ann Westenholz, Department of Organization, CBS
 

Course coordinator 
Prof. Ann Westenholz
Prerequisites 

The PhD student is expected to be working on a research project involving Institutional Logics and/or Convention theory, or at least to be considering the possibility of applying such approaches to his/her project. The PhD student is required to present a five-page paper in which the curriculum literature in the course links to his/her project.

Deadline for submission of presentations is Monday 20 April 2015. The student papers will provide material for group discussion during the course, and all students are expected to have read all papers and to actively participate in the discussion of other papers.

It is a precondition for receiving the course diploma that the student attends the whole course.
 

Aim 

People and organizations increasingly navigate situations where there is no common sense of reality, value, moral or feelings. And they often have to coordinate their activities in indeterminate and ambiguous situations. In the course we bring two theoretical approaches together which have received considerable attention in the last twenty years dealing with this issue: Conventions developed by Boltanski and Thévenot, and Institutional Logics developed by Friedland and Alford. The two approaches not only have a similar purpose in helping us to understand indeterminacy and ambiguity, but they also both identify different widespread social orders that may change over time; they both recognize that actorhood is important for the transformation of social orders; and they have both developed an understanding of how social orders and actorhood are interrelated.  
Although they have these commonalties, the two approaches have developed in different ways in France and in the USA and not much dialogue has taken place between. This is the reason why we are interested in comparing them – as well as exploring how they might learn from each other – and discussing if they can be combined in organizational analysis. The course will cover applications of these theories in organizational analysis, and help participants to develop their capacity to use these approaches in their own work.


 

Learning objectives 

Participants will build in-depth knowledge of the Institutional Logics and Conventions approaches and their contemporary application in a variety of disciplines and empirical fields. The participants will also test the use of these approaches in their own projects.

Lecture plan 

Preliminary lecture plan

Wednesday 20 May
9:00 – 9:45       Presentation of the course program
                       Presentation of participants
                        Expectations

9:45 – 12:00    The two theoretical figures and the genealogy of ‘fundamental’ ideas:
                    
Conventions: Thévenot (45 min.)
Readings:
Thévenot, L. (1984) “Rules and implements: investment in forms”, Social Science Information, vol.23, n°1, pp.1-45.

Thévenot, L. (2002) “Which road to follow ? The moral complexity of an 'equipped' humanity” in Law John, Mol Annemarie (eds), Complexities: Social Studies of Knowledge Practices, Durham and London, Duke University Press, pp.53-87.

Thévenot,L. (2014)"Voicing concern and difference. From public spaces to common-places", European Journal of Cultural and Political Sociology, 1(1) pp. 7-34.

                        Coffee break (15 min.)

Institutional Logics: Friedland (45 min.)
Readings:
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.

Friedland, R. (2009) “Institution, Practice and Ontology: Towards A Religious Sociology”, Ideology and Organizational Institutionalism, Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Vol. 27, eds. Renate Meyer, Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson, Marc Ventresca, Peter Walgenbach, pp. 45-83.

Friedland R, J Mohr, H Roose and P Gardinali, (2014) “The Institutional Logics of Love,”  Theory and Society, Vol. 43:3-4, pp. 333-370.
      
Discussion: Chair: Westenholz (30 min.)

12.00 – 13:30    Lunch

13.30 – 16:30    Presentation and discussion of PhD papers

16:30 – 17:00    Plenary discussion: Chair: Johansen

Thursday 21 May
9:00 – 10:30     Putting the two theoretical figures to the test of fieldwork:
                         
Conventions in practice: Ponte (30min.)
Readings:
Ponte, S. (2009) Governing through Quality: Conventions and supply relations in the value chain for South Africa. European Society for Rural Sociology. Sociologia Rualis, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 236-257.

Ponte, Stefano and Cheyns, Emmanuelle, 2013, “Voluntary standards, expert knowledge and the governance of sustainability networks”, Global Networks, 13(4), 459–477.

Westenholz, A. (2012) Institutional Non-Work in the Development of the TYPO3 Community. In: Westenholz, a. (ed.) The Janus face of Commercial Open Source Software Communities. Copenhagen Business School Press, chap. 3.5, pp. 99-121.

Discussion: Chair Westenholz (15 min.)
                      
Institutional logics in practice: Waldorff and Johansen (30 min)
Readings:
Waldorff S B and Johansen C B (2014) What are logics? An investigation of the methodologies in the Institutional Logics perspective. Paper presented at the Neo-Institutional Workshop, Rome, Italy, March. Forthcoming as a book chapter.

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. Page: 50-74.

Waldorff, S. B., Reay, T., & Goodrick, E. (2013). A tale of two countries: How different constellations of logics impact action. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 39, 99-129.
Discussion: Chair Westenholz (15 min.)

10.30-10.45     Coffee break

10.45-12.15     Power, values and objects and contributions from arts: Friedland and Thévenot     cross-reading each other

Conventions: Friedland (30 min.)
Readings:
Thévenot, L. (2012) “At Home and in a Common World, in a Literary and a Scientific Prose: Ginzburg’s Notes of a Blockade Person” in Van Buskirk, Emily and Zorin, Andrei (eds.), Lydia Ginzburg’s Alternative Literary Identity, Bern, Peter Lang (trans. by Joe Bourghol), pp. 283-304.

Thévenot, L. (2013) “The latest emperor's new clothes. Metamorphoses of powers vested in individuals and things”, lecture at the invitation of the Danish Sociological Association, Copenhagen, May 22 forthcoming in Hansen Magnus (ed.)
(You can listen directly to the lecture given in English at the invitation of the Danish Sociological Association:  http://sociologi.dk/soc/index.php?id=29&L=1  and for the mp3 directly  http://sociologi.dk/soc/fileadmin/Lydfiler/Thévenot_THE_EMPEROR%27S_NEW_CLOTHES_final_edited_version.mp3)

Thévenot, L. (2014) “Enlarging Conceptions of Testing Moments and Critical Theory. Economies of Worth, On Critique and Sociology of Engagements”, in Susen Simon and Brian S. Turner (eds.), The Spirit of Luc Boltanski. Essays on the ‘Pragmatic Sociology of Critique’, London: Anthem Press, pp. 245-261.

Institutional Logics: Thévenot (30 min)
Readings:
Friedland, R. (2013) “Divine Institution: Max Weber’s Value Spheres and Institutional Theory,” Paul Tracey, Nelson Phillips, Michael Lounsbury (ed.) Religion and Organization Theory (Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Volume 41), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 217-258.

Friedland, R. (2012) Book review: Patricia H. Thornton, William Ocasio & Michael Lounsbury The Institutional Logics Perspective: A new approach to Culture, Structure, and Process. M@n@gement, 15(5), 582-595.  http://www.management-aims.com/PapersMgmt/155Friedland.pdf      

Friedland R. (2014)  Amore: An American Father's Roman Holiday, New York, Harper, 2014. In particular, chap.9, "Reading Holden Caufield in Rome", pp. 135-149.

Discussion: Chair Johansen and Waldorff (30 min)

12:15-13:30     Lunch

13.30-16.30     Presentation and discussion of PhD papers

16.30-17:00     Plenary discussion: Chair: Westenholz

Friday 22 May
09:00-10:45    Presentation and discussion of PhD papers

10.45-11.00    Coffee break

11.00-11.45     Conventions and Institutional Logics: Westenholz (30 min)
Readings:
Westenholz A (2014) Conventions and Institutional Logics. Invitation to a dialogue between two theoretical approaches. Paper presented at Neo-Institutional Workshop, Rome, Italy, March. Forthcoming as book chapter.

Clotier C and Langley A (2013) The Logic of Institutional Logics: Insights from French Pragmatist Sociology. Journal of Management Inquiry 22(4):360-80.

Dansou K and Langley A (2012) Institutional Work and the Notion of Test. M@n@gement 15(5):502-527.

Discussion: Chair Waldorff (15 min.)

11.45-12.45    Lunch

12.45-14.45    Analyzing and writing at the intersection of Conventions and Institutional Logics?
Discussion in smaller groups
Plenary: presentations from the group discussions.
Chair: Johansen
 
14.45-15.30     What have we learned: Thevenot and Friedland
                       Plenary discussion and final remarks
                       Chair: Johansen, Waldorff and Westenholz

15.30-16.00 Course Evaluation

 

Course literature 

Obligatory readings:
Obligatory readings will be uploaded in a shared Dropbox folder accessible only by participants

1.    Thévenot, L. (1984). Rules and implements: investment in forms”, Social Science Information, vol.23, n°1, pp.1-45.

2.    Thévenot, L. (2002). Which road to follow ? The moral complexity of an 'equipped' humanity” in Law John, Mol Annemarie (eds), Complexities: Social Studies of Knowledge Practices, Durham and London, Duke University Press, 2002, pp.53-87.

3.    Thévenot, L. (2014) "Voicing concern and difference. From public spaces to common-places", European Journal of Cultural and Political Sociology, 1(1) pp. 7-34.

4.    Friedland R and Alford R R (1991). Bringing society back in: Symbols, practices, and institutional contradictions. In Powel W W and DiMaggio P J (Eds.) The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Pp. 232-263.

5.    Friedland R (2009) Institution, Practice and Ontology: Towards A Religious Sociology”, Ideology and Organizational Institutionalism, Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Vol. 27, eds. Renate Meyer, Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson, Marc Ventresca, Peter Walgenbach, pp. 45-83.

6.    Friedland R, J Mohr, H Roose and P Gardinali, (2014) The Institutional Logics of Love.  Theory and Society, Vol. 43:3-4, pp. 333-370.

7.    Ponte, S. (2009) Governing through Quality: Conventions and supply relations in the value chain for South Africa. European Society for Rural Sociology. Sociologia Rualis, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 236-257.

8.    Ponte, Stefano and Cheyns, Emmanuelle, 2013, “Voluntary standards, expert knowledge and the governance of sustainability networks”, Global Networks, 13(4), 459–477.

9.    Westenholz, A. (2012) Institutional Non-Work in the Development of the TYPO3 Community. In: Westenholz, a. (ed.) The Janus face of Commercial Open Source Software Communities. Copenhagen Business School Press, chap. 3.5, pp. 99-121.

10.    Waldorff S B and Johansen C B (2014) What are logics? An investigation of the methodologies in the Institutional Logics perspective. Paper presented at the Neo-Institutional Workshop, Rome, Italy, March. Forthcoming as a book chapter.

11.    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. Page: 50-74.

12.    Waldorff, S. B., Reay, T., & Goodrick, E. (2013). A tale of two countries: How different constellations of logics impact action. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 39, 99-129.

13.    Thévenot, L. (2012)“At Home and in a Common World, in a Literary and a Scientific Prose: Ginzburg’s Notes of a Blockade Person” in Van Buskirk, Emily and Zorin, Andrei (eds.), Lydia Ginzburg’s Alternative Literary Identity, Bern, Peter Lang (trans. by Joe Bourghol), pp. 283-304.

14.    Thevenot, L. (2013) “The latest emperor's new clothes. Metamorphoses of powers vested in individuals and things”, lecture at the invitation of the Danish Sociological Association, Copenhagen, May 22  forthcoming in Hansen Magnus (ed.)
         (You can listen directly to the lecture given in English at the invitation of the Danish Sociological Association:  http://sociologi.dk/soc/index.php?id=29&L=1  and for the mp3 directly  http://sociologi.dk/soc/fileadmin/Lydfiler/Thévenot_THE_EMPEROR%27S_NEW_CLOTHES_final_edited_version.mp3)

15.    Thévenot, L. (2014) “Enlarging Conceptions of Testing Moments and Critical Theory. Economies of Worth, On Critique and Sociology of Engagements”, in Susen Simon and Brian S. Turner (eds.), The Spirit of Luc Boltanski. Essays on the ‘Pragmatic Sociology of Critique’, London: Anthem Press, pp. 245-261.

16.    Friedland, R. (2013) “Divine Institution: Max Weber’s Value Spheres and Institutional Theory,” Paul Tracey, Nelson Phillips, Michael Lounsbury (ed.) Religion and Organization Theory (Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Volume 41), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 217-258.

17.    Friedland, R. (2012) Book review: Patricia H. Thornton, William Ocasio & Michael Lounsbury The Institutional Logics Perspective: A new approach to Culture, Structure, and Process. M@n@gement, 15(5), 582-595.  http://www.management-aims.com/PapersMgmt/155Friedland.pdf      

18.    Friedland R. (2014)  Amore: An American Father's Roman Holiday, New York, Harper, 2014. In particular, chap.9, "Reading Holden Caufield in Rome", pp. 135-149.

19.     Westenholz A (2014) Conventions and Institutional Logics. Invitation to a dialogue between two theoretical approaches. Paper presented at Neo-Institutional Workshop, Rome, Italy, March. Forthcoming as book chapter.

20.    Clotier C and Langley A (2013) The Logic of Institutional Logics: Insights from French Pragmatist Sociology. Journal of Management Inquiry 22(4):360-80.

21.    Dansou K and Langley A (2012) Institutional Work and the Notion of Test. M@n@gement 15(5):502-527.

Supplementary readings:
Battilana, J., & Dorado, S. (2010). Building sustainable hybrid organizations: The case of commercial microfinance organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 1419-1440.

Battilana, J., Leca, B., & Boxenbaum, E. (2009). How actors change institutions: Towards a theory of institutional entrepreneurship. Academy of Management Annals, 3(1), 65(43)-65(43).

Boltanski L and Thévenot L (1999) The Sociology of Critical Capacity. European Journal of Social Theory 2(3):359-77.

Boltanski L and Thévenot L (2006) On Justification – Economies of Worth. Princeton: Princeton University Press. (Published in French in 1991 as De la Justification: Les Économies de la Grandeur.).

Centemeri, Laura, 2014, "Reframing problems of incommensurability in environmental conflicts through pragmatic sociology. From value pluralism to the plurality of modes of engagement with the environment", Environmental values (forthcoming).

Cheyns, Emmanuelle, 2014, "Making ‘minority voices’ heard in transnational roundtables: The role of local NGOs in reintroducing justice and attachments", Agriculture and Human Values,  vol 31 n°3, pp. 439-453.

Diaz-Bone R (2012) Elaborating the Conceptual Difference between Conventions and Institutions. Historical Social Research 37(4):64-75.

Diaz-Bone R (2014) Methodological Positionings and Perspectives: Comparing Economics of Convention With the Institutional Logics Approach. Journal of Management Inquiry, online January:4 pages.

Friedland, R. (2002). Money, sex, and god: The erotic logic of religious nationalism. Sociological Theory, 20(3), 381-425.

Greenwood, R., Raynard, M., Kodeih, F., Micelotta, E. R., & Lounsbury, M. (2011). Institutional complexity and organizational responses. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 317-371.

Lok, J. (2010). Institutional logics as identity projects. Academy of Management Journal, 53(6), 1305-1335.

Lounsbury, M. (2007). A tale of two cities: Competing logics and practice variation in the professionalizing of mutual funds. Academy of Management Journal, 50(2), 289-307.

Lounsbury M and Boxenbaum E (2013) Introduction. In Boxenbaum E. and M Lounsbury: Institutional logics in action. ABC Network conference. United Kingdom: Emerald.

McPherson, C. M., & Sauder, M. (2013). Logics in action managing institutional complexity in a drug court. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58(2), 165-196.

Pache, A., & Santos, F. (2013). Inside the hybrid organization: Selective coupling as a response to conflicting institutional logics. Academy of Management Journal, , amj. 2011.0405.

Patriotta G, Gond J-P and Schultz F (2011). Maintaining Legitimacy: Controversies, Orders of Worth, and Public Justifications. Journal of Management Studies 48(8):1804-36.

Pattaroni L., 2014, "Difference and the Common of the City :The Metamorphosis of the 'Political' from the Urban Struggles of the 1970's to the Contemporary Urban Order" in Alexandre Martin and José Resende (ed.),The making of the common in social relations, Cambridge Scholars Publishing (forthcoming)

Reay, T., & Hinings, C. R. (2009). Managing the rivalry of competing institutional logics. Organization Studies, 30(6), 629-652.

Thévenot L (2001) Pragmatic Regimes Governing the Engagement with the world. In Knorr-Cetina K, Schatzki T and Savigny E (Eds.) The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory. London: Routledge.

Thévenot L (2007) The Plurality of Cognitive Formats and Engagements: moving between the familiar and the public. European Journal of Social Theory 10(3):413-27.

Thévenot L (2014) Making commonality in the plural on the basis of binding engagements. In Dumouchel P and Gotoh R (eds.) Social Bonds as Freedom: Revising the Dichotomy of the Universal and the Particular. Oxford: Berghahn (forthcoming)

Thévenot L, Moody M and Lafaye C (2000) Forms of Valuing Nature: Arguments and Modes of Justification in French and American Environmental Disputes. In Lamont M and Thévenot L (eds.) Rethinking Comparative Cultural Sociology: Repertoires of Evaluation in France and the United States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
 

PhD School 
PhD School in Organisation and Management Studies
Enroll no later than 
Mandag, 2 marts, 2015 - 23:45