Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This paper develops the concept of the subfield as a key feature of field-level change. In particular, it analyses how a subfield emerges, develops and consolidates itself over time. It does this through the concept of field partitioning whereby a formerly established field generates a distinct subfield with its own institutional infrastructure. Three mechanisms are identified (focusing on new opportunities; inter-organization studies and intra-subfield networking; and distinction) through which field partitioning occurs. Each mechanism is shown to contribute to the development of specific aspects of the subfield’s institutional infrastructure, as part of a dynamic process that differentiates the subfield from its parent field.

Keywords

content analysis data analysis institutional theory longitudinal qualitative professions

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abbott

(2004). Methods of discovery: Heuristics for the social sciences. New York: W.W. Norton.

Anand

Watson

M. R.

(2004). Tournament rituals in the evolution of fields: The case of the Grammy Awards. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 59–80.

ASLA (2008). Informazioni Statistiche Aggiornate. www.aslaitalia.it/index.php/documenti/pubblicazioni-e-presentazioni?start=16 (accessed 25 October 2016).

Barley

Kunda

(2004). Gurus, hired guns and warm bodies: Itinerant experts in a knowledge economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Battilana

Dorado

(2010). Building sustainable hybrid organizations: The case of commercial microfinance organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 1419–1440.

Battilana

Leca

Boxenbaum

(2009). How actors change institutions: Towards a theory of institutional entrepreneurship. Academy of Management Annals, 3, 65–107.

Beckert

(2010). How do fields change? The interrelations of institutions, networks, and cognition in the dynamics of markets. Organization Studies, 31, 605–627.

Berg

B. L.

(2004). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Binder

(2007). For love and money: Organizations’ creative responses to multiple environmental logics. Theory and Society, 36, 547–571.

10.

Callister

(1999). Italian firms merge to fight the English. The Lawyer, 4 May.

11.

Campanella

(1994). The Italian legal profession. Journal of the Legal Profession, 19, 59.

12.

Carroll

G. R.

Swaminathan

(2000).) Why the microbrewery movement? Organizational dynamics of resource partitioning in the U.S. brewing industry. American Journal of Sociology, 106, 715–762.

13.

Censis (2016). Rapporto Annuale Sul’Avvocatura Italiana. www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwjsoYCKmPbPAhVsK8AKHWZZBsUQFgglMAA&url= https://%3A%2F%2Fwww.cassaforense.it%2Fmedia%2F4240%2Frapporto_censis_marzo2016.pdf&usg=AFQjCNGFqF3e1-Kxl-EYhHHk4-kodMs8_Q&cad=rja (accessed 25 October 2016).

14.

Collins

(2005). Italian Bar in ethics rule row. Legal Business, 23/5/2005.

15.

Cooper

Hinings

C. R.

Greenwood

Brown

J. L.

(1996). Sedimentation and transformation in organizational change: The case of Canadian law firms. Organization Studies, 17, 623–647.

16.

Cornelissen

J. P.

(2017). Preserving theoretical divergence in management research: Why the explanatory potential of qualitative research should be harnessed rather than suppressed. Journal of Management Studies, 54, 368–383.

17.

Currie

Lockett

Finn

Martin

Waring

(2012). Institutional work to maintain professional power: (Re-)creating medical professionalism. Organization Studies, 33, 937–962.

18.

Danilo

(1998). L’avvocato? Solo se AngloSassone. Il Corriere Della Sera, 11/5/1998, p. 7).

19.

Danovi

(1990). L’indipendenza dell’Avvocato. Milan: Giuffre.

20.

Deephouse

D. L.

Heugens

P. P. M. A. R

. (2009). Linking social issues to organizational impact: The role of infomediaries and the infomediary process. Journal of Business Ethics, 86, 541–553.

21.

Delbridge

Edwards

(2007). Reflections on developments in institutional theory: Toward a relational approach. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 23, 191–205.

22.

DiMaggio

P. J.

Powell

W. W.

(1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160.

23.

Djelic

M. L.

Quack

(2003). Globalization and institutions: Redefining the rules of the economic game. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

24.

Dunn

M. B.

Jones

(2010). Institutional logics and institutional pluralism: The contestation of care and science logics in medical education, 1967–2005. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55, 114–149.

25.

Faulconbridge

Muzio

(2016). Global professional service firms and the challenge of institutional complexity: ‘Field relocation’ as a response strategy. Journal of Management Studies, 53, 89–124.

26.

Fligstein

McAdam

(2011). Toward a general theory of strategic action fields. Sociological Theory, 29, 1–26.

27.

Fligstein

McAdam

(2012). A theory of fields. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

28.

Flood

(1989). Megalaw in the UK: professionalism or corporatism? A preliminary report. Indiana Law Journal, Summer 1989, 569–592.

29.

Furnari

(2014). Interstitial spaces: Microinteraction settings and the genesis of new practices between institutional fields. Academy of Management Review, 39, 439–462.

30.

Furnari

(2018). When does an issue trigger change in a field? A comparative approach to issue frames, field structures and types of field change. Human Relations, 71, 321–348.

31.

Greenwood

Raynard

Kodeih

Micelotta

E. R.

Lounsbury

(2011). Institutional complexity and organizational responses. Academy of Management Annals, 5, 317–371.

32.

Greenwood

Suddaby

(2006). Institutional entrepreneurship in mature fields: The big five accounting firms. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 27–48.

33.

Greenwood

Suddaby

Hinings

C. R.

(2002). Theorizing change: The role of professional associations in the transformation of institutionalized fields. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 58–80.

34.

Hannan

Freeman

(1989). Organizational ecology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

35.

Hardy

Maguire

(2010). Discourse, field-configuring events, and change in organizations and institutional fields: Narratives of DDT and the Stockholm Convention. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 1365–1392.

36.

Heinz

J. P.

Laumann

E. O.

(Eds.) (1982). Chicago lawyers: The social structure of the bar. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

37.

Hinings

C. R.

Logue

D. M.

Zietsma

(2017). Fields, institutional infrastructure and governance. In Greenwood

Meyer

Lawrence

Oliver

(Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism. London: SAGE Publications.

38.

IFLR (1989). Italian lawyers: Learning to live together. International Financial Law Review, 8, ii.

39.

IFLR (1998). Italian firms face foreign invasion. International Financial Law Review, 17, 32.

40.

Lampel

Meyer

A. D.

(2008). Guest Editors’ Introduction. Field-configuring events as structuring mechanisms: How conferences, ceremonies, and trade shows constitute new technologies, industries, and markets. Journal of Management Studies, 45, 1025–1035.

41.

Langley

(1999). Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24, 691–710.

42.

Lee

T. W.

Mitchell

T. R.

Sablynski

C. J.

(1999). Qualitative research in organizational and vocational psychology, 1979–1999. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 55, 161–187.

43.

Lepoutre

J. M. W. N.

Valente

(2012). Fools breaking out: The role of symbolic and material immunity in explaining institutional nonconformity. Academy of Management Journal, 55, 285–313.

44.

Lind (2009). A&O hit by Italy walkout as 17 join Gianni. Legal Week, 14 May.

45.

Locke

(2001). Grounded theory in management research. London: SAGE Publications.

46.

Lounsbury

(2001). Institutional sources of practice variation: Staffing college and university recycling programs. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, 29–56.

47.

Lounsbury

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

48.

Lounsbury

Crumley

E. T.

(2007). New practice creation: An institutional perspective on innovation. Organization Studies, 28, 993–1012.

49.

Marquis

Glynn

M. A.

Davis

G. F.

(2007). Community isomorphism and corporate social action. Academy of Management Review, 32, 925–945.

50.

Meyer

A. D.

(1982). Adapting to environmental jolts. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27, 515–537.

51.

Micelotta

(2010). Professional services firms between resistance and change: Business law firms in Italy. Saarbrücken: Lambert Academic Publishing.

52.

Micelotta

Lounsbury

Greenwood

(2017). Pathways of institutional change: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 43, 1885–1910.

53.

Micelotta

E. R.

Washington

(2013). Institutions and maintenance: The repair work of Italian professions. Organization Studies, 34, 1137–1170.

54.

Mizzi

(1999). Freshfields hits back at Italian price war claim. The Lawyer, 16/6/1999.

55.

Muzio

Faulconbridge

J. R.

(2013). The global professional service firm: ‘One firm’ models versus (Italian) distant institutionalised practices. Organization Studies, 34, 897–925.

56.

Olgiati

Pocar

(1988). The Italian legal profession: An institutional dilemma. In Lawyers in society: The Civil Law World, 2 (pp. 336–368). Berkeley: University of California Press.

57.

Owen-Smith

Powell

W. W.

(2008). Networks and institutions. In Greenwood

Oliver

Sahlin-Andersson

Suddaby

(Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 596–623). London: SAGE Publications.

58.

Petrone

Pessolano-Filos

(1993). L’Avvocato Italiano. Mito, Tradizione e Nuove Realta. Indagine Sociologica. Milan: Franco Angeli.

59.

Porac

J. F.

Thomas

Baden-Fuller

(1989). Competitive groups as cognitive communities: The case of Scottish knitwear manufacturers. Journal of Management Studies, 26, 397–416.

60.

Powell

W. W.

White

D. R.

Koput

K. W.

Owen-Smith

(2005). Network dynamics and field evolution: The growth of interorganizational collaboration in the life sciences. American Journal of Sociology, 110, 1132–1205.

61.

Prandstraller

G. P.

(1981). Gli Avvocati Italiani: Inchiesta sulla Professione di Avvocato nell’Area Lombarda. Milan: Franco Angeli.

62.

Quirke

(2013). Rogue resistance: Sidestepping isomorphic pressures in a patchy institutional field. Organization Studies, 34, 1675–1699.

63.

Raynard

(2016). Deconstructing complexity: Configurations of institutional complexity and structural hybridity. Strategic Organization, 14, 310–335.

64.

Reay

Hinings

C. R.

(2005). The recomposition of an organizational field: Health care in Alberta. Organization Studies, 26, 351–384.

65.

Reay

Hinings

C. R.

(2009). Managing the rivalry of competing institutional logics. Organization Studies, 30, 629–652.

66.

Salento

(2014). The neo-liberal experiment in Italy. False promises and social disappointments, CRESC Working Paper n. 137, University of Manchester. www.cresc.ac.uk/medialibrary/workingpapers/wp137.pdf

67.

Sassen

(2012). Cities in a world economy (4th edition). London: SAGE Publications.

68.

Scott

W. R.

(1994). Conceptualizing organizational fields: Linking organizations and societal systems. In Derlien

Gerhardt

Scharpf

(Eds.), Systems rationality and partial interests (pp. 203–221). Baden: Nomos.

69.

Scott

W. R

(2014). Institutions and organizations: Ideas and interests (4th edition). London: SAGE Publications.

70.

Sine

W. D.

Lee

B. H.

(2009). Tilting at windmills? The environmental movement and the emergence of the US wind energy sector. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54, 123–155.

71.

Smets

Morris

Greenwood

(2012). From practice to field: A multilevel model of practice-driven institutional change. Academy of Management Journal, 55, 877–904.

72.

Spilman

(2012). Solidarity in strategy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

73.

Suddaby

Cooper

D. J.

Greenwood

(2007). Transnational regulation of professional services: Governance dynamics of field level organizational change. Accounting Organizations and Society, 32, 333–362.

74.

Stafanoni

(2009). Il Codice Del Potere. Milan: Malanpo.

75.

Suddaby

Viale

(2011). Professionals and field-level change: Institutional work and the professional project. Current Sociology, 59, 423–441.

76.

Testoni

(2013). La legge degli affair. Milan: Sperling-Kupfer

77.

The Lawyer . (2000). Chiomenti finance head quits. The Lawyer, 13 November.

78.

The Lawyer . (2002). Firms fight it out as Italian securitisation ups the ante. The Lawyer, 28 October.

79.

Thornton

Ocasio

Lounsbury

(2012). The institutional logics perspective: A new approach to culture, structure and process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

80.

van Wijk

Stam

Elfring

Zietsma

den Hond

. (2013). Activists and incumbents structuring change: The interplay of agency, culture, and networks in field evolution. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 358–386.

81.

Weber

Heinze

K. L.

DeSoucey

(2008). Forage for thought: Mobilizing codes in the movement for grass-fed meat and dairy products. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53, 529–567.

82.

Wooten

Hoffman

A. J.

(2017). Organizational fields past, present and future. In Greenwood

Oliver

Sahlin

Suddaby

(Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 130–148). London: SAGE Publications.

83.

Yin

R. K.

(2009). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

84.

Zietsma

Lawrence

T. B.

(2010). Institutional work in the transformation of an organizational field: The interplay of boundary work and practice work. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55, 189–221.

85.

Zietsma

Groenewegen

Logue

Hinings

C. R.

(2017). Field or fields? Building the scaffolding for cumulation of research on institutional fields. Academy of Management Annals, 11, 391–450.

86.

Zilber

T. B.

(2011). Institutional multiplicity in practice: A tale of two high-tech conferences in Israel. Organization Science, 22, 1539–1559.

Field Partitioning: The Emergence,Development and Consolidation of Subfields

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References