Field or fields? Building the scaffolding for cumulation of research on institutional fields

C. Zietsma, P. Groenewegen, D. Logue, C.R. Hinings

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

The concept of an institutional field is one of the cornerstones of institutional theory, and yet the concept has been stretched both theoretically and empirically, making consolidation of findings across multiple studies more difficult. In this article, we review the literature and analyze empirical studies of institutional fields to build scaffolding for the cumulation of research on institutional fields. Our review revealed two types of fields: exchange and issue fields, with three subtypes of each. We describe their characteristics, and subsequently, review field conditions in the extant literature and develop a typology based on two dimensions: the extent of elaboration of institutional infrastructure and the extent to which there is an agreed-upon prioritization of logics. We discuss the implications of field types and conditions for isomorphism, agency, and field change, based on a review of the literature that revealed six pathways of field change and the factors affecting them. We outline a research agenda based on our review highlighting the need for consolidation of field studies and identify several outstanding issues that are in need of further research.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)391-450
JournalAcademy of Management Annals
Volume11
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017

Fingerprint

Consolidation
Institutional infrastructure
Isomorphism
Prioritization
Logic
Field study
Pathway
Elaboration
Research agenda
Empirical study
Factors
Institutional theory

Cite this

@article{4bfb14bad7654515bc3d3e0cde0eb8af,
title = "Field or fields? Building the scaffolding for cumulation of research on institutional fields",
abstract = "The concept of an institutional field is one of the cornerstones of institutional theory, and yet the concept has been stretched both theoretically and empirically, making consolidation of findings across multiple studies more difficult. In this article, we review the literature and analyze empirical studies of institutional fields to build scaffolding for the cumulation of research on institutional fields. Our review revealed two types of fields: exchange and issue fields, with three subtypes of each. We describe their characteristics, and subsequently, review field conditions in the extant literature and develop a typology based on two dimensions: the extent of elaboration of institutional infrastructure and the extent to which there is an agreed-upon prioritization of logics. We discuss the implications of field types and conditions for isomorphism, agency, and field change, based on a review of the literature that revealed six pathways of field change and the factors affecting them. We outline a research agenda based on our review highlighting the need for consolidation of field studies and identify several outstanding issues that are in need of further research.",
author = "C. Zietsma and P. Groenewegen and D. Logue and C.R. Hinings",
year = "2017",
doi = "10.5465/annals.2014.0052",
language = "English",
volume = "11",
pages = "391--450",
journal = "Academy of Management Annals",
issn = "1941-6520",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "1",

}

Field or fields? Building the scaffolding for cumulation of research on institutional fields. / Zietsma, C.; Groenewegen, P.; Logue, D.; Hinings, C.R.

In: Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 11, No. 1, 2017, p. 391-450.

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Field or fields? Building the scaffolding for cumulation of research on institutional fields

AU - Zietsma, C.

AU - Groenewegen, P.

AU - Logue, D.

AU - Hinings, C.R.

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - The concept of an institutional field is one of the cornerstones of institutional theory, and yet the concept has been stretched both theoretically and empirically, making consolidation of findings across multiple studies more difficult. In this article, we review the literature and analyze empirical studies of institutional fields to build scaffolding for the cumulation of research on institutional fields. Our review revealed two types of fields: exchange and issue fields, with three subtypes of each. We describe their characteristics, and subsequently, review field conditions in the extant literature and develop a typology based on two dimensions: the extent of elaboration of institutional infrastructure and the extent to which there is an agreed-upon prioritization of logics. We discuss the implications of field types and conditions for isomorphism, agency, and field change, based on a review of the literature that revealed six pathways of field change and the factors affecting them. We outline a research agenda based on our review highlighting the need for consolidation of field studies and identify several outstanding issues that are in need of further research.

AB - The concept of an institutional field is one of the cornerstones of institutional theory, and yet the concept has been stretched both theoretically and empirically, making consolidation of findings across multiple studies more difficult. In this article, we review the literature and analyze empirical studies of institutional fields to build scaffolding for the cumulation of research on institutional fields. Our review revealed two types of fields: exchange and issue fields, with three subtypes of each. We describe their characteristics, and subsequently, review field conditions in the extant literature and develop a typology based on two dimensions: the extent of elaboration of institutional infrastructure and the extent to which there is an agreed-upon prioritization of logics. We discuss the implications of field types and conditions for isomorphism, agency, and field change, based on a review of the literature that revealed six pathways of field change and the factors affecting them. We outline a research agenda based on our review highlighting the need for consolidation of field studies and identify several outstanding issues that are in need of further research.

U2 - 10.5465/annals.2014.0052

DO - 10.5465/annals.2014.0052

M3 - Article

VL - 11

SP - 391

EP - 450

JO - Academy of Management Annals

JF - Academy of Management Annals

SN - 1941-6520

IS - 1

ER -