THEORIZING HYBRIDITY: INSTITUTIONAL LOGICS, COMPLEX ORGANIZATIONS, AND ACTOR IDENTITIES: THE CASE OF NONPROFITS.
THEORIZING HYBRIDITY: INSTITUTIONAL LOGICS, COMPLEX ORGANIZATIONS, AND ACTOR IDENTITIES: THE CASE OF NONPROFITS.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/padm.12105
复制
发表时间：
2015-06
影响因子：
3.5
通讯作者：
Smith SR
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Skelcher C;Smith SR
我们提出了一种新的方法来理论化公共和非营利组织的混合。混合的概念被广泛用于描述组织对治理变化的反应，但文献很少解释混合是如何产生的，或者它们采取什么形式。交易成本和组织设计的文献提供了一些解决方案，但缺乏一个代理理论。我们使用制度逻辑的方法来理论化的实体，面对多元的规范框架的混合体。逻辑为组织合法性和行动者身份的构建提供了象征性和物质性的元素。制度逻辑之间的矛盾，为情境主体对制度逻辑的阐述和创造性重构提供了空间。我们提出了五种类型的组织杂交-分割，隔离，同化，混合，和封锁。每一种类型理论上都是从经验上观察到的组织对制度多元化的反应变化中得出的。我们开发的命题，以显示我们的方法来混合如何增加价值的学术和政策制定者的观众。
We propose a novel approach to theorizing hybridity in public and nonprofit organizations. The concept of hybridity is widely used to describe organizational responses to changes in governance, but the literature seldom explains how hybrids arise or what forms they take. Transaction cost and organizational design literatures offer some solutions, but lack a theory of agency. We use the institutional logics approach to theorize hybrids as entities that face a plurality of normative frames. Logics provide symbolic and material elements that structure organizational legitimacy and actor identities. Contradictions between institutional logics offer space for them to be elaborated and creatively reconstructed by situated agents. We propose five types of organizational hybridity – segmented, segregated, assimilated, blended, and blocked. Each type is theoretically derived from empirically observed variations in organizational responses to institutional plurality. We develop propositions to show how our approach to hybridity adds value to academic and policy-maker audiences.