Behind Smoke and Mirrors: A Political Approach to Decoupling

In this paper, we examine neglected dimensions of decoupling - i.e., its power and political aspects. We draw on an empirical study of the reaction of two hospital subunits and an external agency (the Regional Health Agency) to a policy implementation, to contribute to the recent renewed interest in decoupling. We first reconsider the distinction between internal and external actors by investigating how they interact in their responses to the new policy implementation. While observing different forms of decoupling, we show how power and politics allow us to understand how these forms are articulated and related. Furthermore, we highlight that contexts characterized by institutional complexity are particularly propitious for decoupling. Finally, we outline that how actors use logics to justify their claims might differ significantly from how they enact those logics. More broadly, this paper contributes by bringing back power and politics into the analysis of institutional processes.

[1]  András Tilcsik,et al.  From Ritual to Reality: Demography, Ideology, and Decoupling in a Post-Communist Government Agency , 2010 .

[2]  Thomas B. Lawrence,et al.  Power, Institutions and Organizations , 2008 .

[3]  Kurt Sandholtz,et al.  Making Standards Stick: A Theory of Coupled vs. Decoupled Compliance , 2012 .

[4]  Thomas B. Lawrence,et al.  Institutional Work: Actors and Agency in Institutional Studies of Organizations , 2009 .

[5]  Satinder P. Singh,et al.  Introduction , 2002, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[6]  Thomas Ahrens,et al.  Accounting for Flexibility and Efficiency: A Field Study of Management Control Systems in a Restaurant Chain , 2004 .

[7]  Robert N. Stern,et al.  The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. , 1979 .

[8]  K. Munir.  A Loss of Power in Institutional Theory , 2015 .

[9]  J. Rodrigues,et al.  The Globalization of Managerial Innovation in Health Care: DRGs in France , 2008 .

[10]  Peter Miller,et al.  Mediating instruments and making markets: Capital budgeting, science and the economy , 2007 .

[11]  C. Hood.  The “new public management” in the 1980s: Variations on a theme , 1995 .

[12]  Hayagreeva Rao,et al.  Institutional Sources of Boundary-Spanning Structures: the Establishment of Investor Relations Departments in the Fortune 500 Industrials , 1999 .

[13]  M. Lounsbury,et al.  Institutional Complexity and Organizational Responses , 2010 .

[14]  R. Emerson.  Power-Dependence Relations , 1962, Power in Modern Societies.

[15]  Kathleen M. Eisenhardt,et al.  Theory Building From Cases: Opportunities And Challenges , 2007 .

[16]  L. L. Cummings,et al.  Strategic Response to Institutional Influences on Information Systems Outsourcing , 1997 .

[17]  A. Binder.  For love and money: Organizations’ creative responses to multiple environmental logics , 2007 .

[18]  F. Wijen.  Means Versus Ends in Opaque Institutional Fields: Trading Off Compliance and Achievement in Sustainability Standard Adoption , 2013 .

[19]  Tim Hallett.  The Myth Incarnate: Recoupling Processes, Turmoil, and Inhabited Institutions in an Urban Elementary School , 2010 .

[20]  Christine Oliver.  The New Institutionalism in Organization Analysis , 1993 .

[21]  R. Suddaby.  Challenges for Institutional Theory , 2010 .

[22]  W. Powell,et al.  Decoupling revisited: Common pressures, divergent strategies in the U. S. nonprofit sector , 2012 .

[23]  Stephen Vaisey.  Motivation and Justification: A Dual‐Process Model of Culture in Action1 , 2009, American Journal of Sociology.

[24]  Walter W. Powell,et al.  From Smoke and Mirrors to Walking the Talk: Decoupling in the Contemporary World , 2012 .

[25]  Edward J. Zajac,et al.  Defections from the Inner Circle: Social Exchange, Reciprocity, and the Diffusion of Board Independence in U.S. Corporations , 1995 .

[26]  Tiziana Casciaro,et al.  Power Imbalance, Mutual Dependence, and Constraint Absorption: A Closer Look at Resource Dependence Theory , 2005 .

[27]  T. Fogarty.  The imagery and reality of peer review in the U.S.: Insights from institutional theory , 1996 .

[28]  S. Clegg.  The State, Power, and Agency: Missing in Action in Institutional Theory? , 2010 .

[29]  A. Gouldner.  Patterns Of Industrial Bureaucracy , 1954 .

[30]  W. Scott.  'Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony', American Journal of Sociology, 83, pp. 340-63. , 2016 .

[31]  H. Willmott.  Why Institutional Theory Cannot Be Critical , 2015 .

[32]  Wendy Nelson Espeland,et al.  The Discipline of Rankings: Tight Coupling and Organizational Change , 2009 .

[33]  S. Fagerhaugh,et al.  Participant Observation , 1979 .

[34]  C. Oliver.  STRATEGIC RESPONSES TO INSTITUTIONAL PROCESSES , 1991 .

[35]  Olivier Boiral,et al.  Corporate Greening Through ISO 14001: A Rational Myth? , 2007, Organ. Sci..

[36]  Juhani Vaivio,et al.  Examining ''The Quantified Customer'' , 1999 .

[37]  Filip Roodhooft,et al.  Drivers of cost system development in hospitals: results of a survey. , 2004, Health policy.

[38]  T. Reay,et al.  Managing the Rivalry of Competing Institutional Logics , 2009 .

[39]  R. Fetter,et al.  Diagnosis related groups: product line management within hospitals. , 1986, Academy of management review. Academy of Management.

[40]  T. Reay,et al.  The Recomposition of an Organizational Field: Health Care in Alberta , 2005 .

[41]  John R. Kimberly,et al.  The globalization of managerial innovation in health care , 2008 .

[42]  Edward J. Zajac,et al.  Decoupling Policy from Practice: The Case of Stock Repurchase Programs , 2001 .

[43]  Bruce G. Carruthers,et al.  Accounting, ambiguity, and the new institutionalism , 1995 .

[44]  Philip Selznick.  TVA and the grass roots , 1949 .

[45]  Zahirul Hoque,et al.  Budgeting for legitimacy: The case of an Australian university , 2011 .

[46]  M. Covaleski,et al.  An Institutional Theory Perspective on the DRG Framework, Case-Mix Accounting Systems and Health-Care Organizations , 1993 .

[47]  M. Covaleski,et al.  An Institutional Perspective on the Rise, Social Transformation, and Fall of a University Budget Category. , 1988 .

[48]  K. J. Euske,et al.  RATIONAL, RATIONALIZING, AND REIFYING USES OF ACCOUNTING DATA IN ORGANIZATIONS. , 1987 .

[49]  Anne-Claire Pache,et al.  When Worlds Collide: The Internal Dynamics of Organizational Responses to Conflicting Institutional Demands , 2010 .

[50]  S. Timmermans,et al.  Theory Construction in Qualitative Research , 2012 .

[51]  K. Lukka,et al.  Validation in interpretive management accounting research , 2010 .

[52]  Anne-Claire Pache,et al.  Inside the Hybrid Organization: Selective Coupling as a Response to Competing Institutional Logics , 2013 .

[53]  Mark W. Dirsmith,et al.  The use of budgetary symbols in the political arena: An historically informed field study , 1988 .

[54]  K. Eisenhardt.  Building theories from case study research , 1989, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.