Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
-
Upload
andrei6200 -
Category
Documents
-
view
220 -
download
0
Transcript of Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
1/24
Dimaggio, Hall and North on
INSTITUTIONS
A Critique to the Concept of
UNCERTAINTY
Course: Contemporary Social and Political Theory;
Instructor: Prof. C. Edling
Presenter: Andreea Aiordachioaie
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
2/24
Overview
Introduction The Concept of Uncertainty
Occurrences of the Concept in Dimaggio & Powell (1983)
Comments 1
Occurrences of the Concept in Hall & Taylor (1996)
Comments 2
Occurrences of the Concept in North (1991)
Comments 3
Final (Personal) Comments
Discussion
References
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
3/24
Introduction The Concept of
Uncertainty
It appears several times in the three texts, withdifferent functions
Why is it inseparable from the discussions oninstitutions? Because it is tightly related with the idea of strategy
Because authors link it to the relationship betweeninstitutions and individual behavior
Because uncertainty is also considered to be a feature
of politics and economics Because it is also mentioned as the root of risk (in
economics, one of the purposes of institutions is therisk administration)
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
4/24
Occurrences of the Concept in
Dimaggio & Powell (1983)
1. The three mechanisms of institutionalisomorphic change:
a. Coercive
b. Mimetic (resulting to standard responses touncertainty Dimaggio & Powell [1983], p. 150)
c. Normative
Here, the term is related to the concept ofstrategy(from an entrepreneurialperspective)
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
5/24
2. The term is repeated when the authorsformulate hypotheses based on the predictors
for isomorphic change (organizational- and
field-level predictors):
Occurrences of the Concept in
Dimaggio & Powell (1983)
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
6/24
Hypothesis A-3: the mimetic tendencies of an
organization increase with the level ofuncertainty of the relationships between
means and ends.
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
7/24
Hypothesis A-4: the mimetic tendencies of an
organization increase with the level ofuncertainty and ambiguity of its goals.
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
8/24
Hypothesis B-4: The greater the extent to
which technologies are uncertain or goals areambiguous within a field, the greater the rate
of isomorphic change (Dimaggio & Powell
[1983],p. 156).
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
9/24
Preliminary Comments 1
Dimaggio and Powell employ the concept of
uncertainty mainly as one of the causes of
institutional isomorphism.
Uncertainty, here, is seen as a factor inhibiting
the development of a strategy.
Mostly refers to very modern institutional
environments.
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
10/24
Occurrences of the Concept in Hall &
Taylor (1996)
1. The first of the four features of historical
institutionalism: the tendency to
conceptualize the relationship between
institutions and individual behavior in
relatively broad terms(Hall & Taylor [1996],
p. 938)
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
11/24
The major way in which institutions
affect behavior is by giving actorsgreater or lesser degrees of certainty
about the present and future behavior
of other actors (idem, p. 939)
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
12/24
Occurrences of the Concept in Hall &
Taylor (1996)
2. The third feature of the rational choice
institutionalism: emphasizing the role ofstrategic interactions in the
determination of political outcomes:
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
13/24
Institutions structure such interactions by
affecting the range and sequence of
alternatives on the choice-agenda or by
providing information and enforcement
mechanisms that reduce uncertainty about
the corresponding behavior of others (idem,
p. 945)
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
14/24
3. Members of this school [rational choice
institutionalism] emphasize that political
action involves the management of
uncertainty, long one of the most central and
neglected features of politics (idem, p. 951)
Occurrences of the Concept in Hall &
Taylor (1996)
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
15/24
Preliminary Comments 2
Hall and Taylor -> micro-level approach to
institutionalism: the relationship of
institutions with individuals or evenrelationships between individuals that are
mediated by institutions.
Perspective: strategy, again.
Politics comes into discussion for the first time
and uncertainty appears as its main feature.
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
16/24
Occurrences of the Concept in North
(1991)
1. First paragraph of the text, right after the
definition of institutions: Throughout
history, institutions have been devised by
human beings to create order and reduce
uncertainty in exchange (North [1991], p.
97)
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
17/24
2. The sub-chapter dedicated to the innovations
brought to institutions in early modern
Europe:
The transformation of uncertainty into risk.
Occurrences of the Concept in North
(1991)
By uncertainty, I mean here a condition wherein
one cannot ascertain the probability of an event
and therefore cannot arrive at a way of insuringagainst such an occurrence. Risk, on the other
hand, implies the ability to make an actuarial
determination of the likelihood of an event and
hence insure such an outcome (idem, p. 106)
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
18/24
Preliminary Comments 3
Modernization of institutions =>
transformation of uncertainty into risk
(minimizing unpredictability; increasing levelof anticipation gained from experience)
Reduction of uncertainty + creation of order =
the only causes of the creation of institutions
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
19/24
Conclusion
Reviewed literature:
Uncertainty = one of the bases and main causes of
the emergence of institutions
It is emphasized as part of personal, political,
economic relations
Institutions are supposed to diminish the level of
uncertainty in those relations
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
20/24
Final Comments
Other possible causes that led to the
emergence and development of institutions:
Need for efficient communication (via
intermediates)
Need for recognition of group-affiliation
Geographical boundaries and large distances
Need for security (not certainty)
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
21/24
Final Comments
With the emergence of institutional
isomorphism, institutions might not be as
successful in diminishing uncertainty (they
employ pattern-behaviors, standard solutions,
classical strategies)
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
22/24
Discussion
In your opinion, how well are institutions
doing in diminishing the level of uncertainty
in:
Individual relations?
Institutional-individual relations?
Inter-institutional relations?
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
23/24
Discussion:
Ruling
(Government)Marriage Banks
Child
Adoption
Social
AssistanceElderly care
CorporationsPostal
ServicesHealth care
Consider the following institutions or institutionalized activities:
Choose one and discuss to what extent some form of uncertainty caused the
apparition of that particular institution in the first place.
-
8/9/2019 Presentation 2- InSTITUTIONS Final
24/24
References
Dimaggio, P. J. & Powell, W. W. (1983). The Iron Cage
Revisited Institutional Isomorphism and Collective
Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological
Review 48(2): 147-160
Hall, P. A. and Taylor, R. C. R. (1996). Political Science and
the Three New Institutionalisms. Political Studies 44(5):
936-957
North, D. C. (1991). Institutions. Journal of Economic
Perspectives 5(1): 97-112