Human service nonprofits (HSNPs) are primarily responsible for addressing prominent social problems such as poverty, homelessness, addiction, and mental health. As such, they vary considerably in their service provision to their marginalized clients. In this paper, I use the theories of institutional logics and inhabited institutions to highlight how individual actors within HSNPs translate different institutional logics in service provision. Using qualitative interviews from 38 HSNP managers working with sex workers, I focus on competing logics and gender ideologies that influence HSNPs. Findings show that despite conflict between different gender ideologies, HSNP employees discover merits in combining logics and ideologies, discovering ways to reinterpret these at the ground level in conjunction with social relationships and interactions in the field. The implications around the role of individual agency and meaning-making in nonprofit dynamics, as well as a reflection upon what this means for HSNPs and their work, is discussed.
AdamsT. L. (2020). Professional employees and professional managers: Conflicting logics, hybridity and stratification. Journal of Professions and Organization, 7(1), 101–115.
2.
AnastiT. (2017). Radical professionals? Sex worker rights activists and collaboration with human service nonprofits. Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance, 41(4), 416–437.
3.
AuerbachC.SilversteinL. (2003). Qualitative data: An introduction to coding and analysis. New York University Press.
4.
BarleyS. R. (2019). Working institutions. In ReayT.ZilberT. B.LangleyA.TsoukasH. (Eds.), Institutions and organizations: A process view (pp. 12–32). Oxford University Press.
5.
BeatonE.DeJordyR.FosterP. (2020). The lived experience of managerialization: Understanding values conflict in nonprofits through a pragmatic institutionalism. Journal of Management Studies, 58(1), 1471–1506.
6.
BeatonE.MacIndoeH.WangT. (2020). Combining nonprofit service and advocacy: Organizational structures and hybridity. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 50, 372–396.
7.
BinderA. (2007). For love and money: Organizations creative responses to multiple environmental logics. Theory & Society, 36(6), 547–571.
8.
CaiY.MountfordN. (2021). Institutional logics analysis in higher education research. Studies in Higher Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2021.1946032
D’AunnoT.SuttonR.PriceR. (1991). Isomorphism and external support in conflicting institutional environments: A study of drug abuse treatment units. Academy of Management Journal, 34(3), 636–661.
DempseyM. (2010). Sex trafficking and criminalization: In defense of feminist abolitionism. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 158(6), 1729–1778.
13.
DeWaltK.DeWaltB. (2011). Participant observation: A guide for fieldworkers. AltaMira Press.
14.
DiMaggioP.PowellW. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.
15.
DouglasM,. (1986). How institutions think. Syracuse University Press.
16.
Duerst-LahtiG. (2008). Gender ideology: Masculinism and feminalism. In GoertzG.MazurA. (Eds.), Politics, gender, and concepts: Theory and methodology (pp. 159–192). Cambridge University Press.
17.
EverittJ. (2012). Teacher careers and inhabited institutions: Sense-making and arsenals of teaching practice in educational institutions. Symbolic Interaction, 35(2), 203–220.
18.
EverittJ.LevinsonB. (2016). Inhabited institutions in new destinations: Local sense-making and institutional work in community response to new immigration. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 45(2), 115–142.
19.
FitzgeraldT.ShepherdD. (2018). Emerging structures for social enterprises within nonprofits: An institutional logics perspective. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 47(3), 474–492.
20.
FriedlandR.AlfordR. (1991). Bringing society back in: Symbols, practices, and institutional contradictions. In PowellW. W.DiMaggioP. J. (Eds.), The New institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 232–267). The University of Chicago Press.
21.
GarrowE.HasenfeldY. (2014). Institutional logics, moral frames, and advocacy: Explaining the purpose of advocacy among nonprofit human-service organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 43(1), 80–98.
22.
GoffmanE. (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays in face-to-face behavior. Aldine.
23.
GrantM. G. (2014). Playing the whore: The work of sex work. Verso Books.
24.
HallettT. (2010). The myth incarnate: Recoupling processes, turmoil, and inhabited institutions in an urban elementary school. American Sociological Review, 75, 52–74.
25.
HallettT.HawbakerA. (2019). Bringing society back in again: The importance of social interaction in an inhabited institutionalism. In HaackP.SiewekeJ.WesselL. (Eds.), Microfoundations in institutions (pp. 317–336). Emerald Publishing.
26.
HallettT.VentrescaM. (2006). Inhabited institutions: Social interactions and organizational forms in Gouldner’s patterns of industrial bureaucracy. Theory & Society, 35(2), 213–236.
27.
HirschP. (1997). Sociology without social structure: Neoinstitutional theory meets brave new world. American Journal of Sociology, 102, 1702–1723.
28.
LipskyM. (1980). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services. Russell Sage Foundation.
29.
LofaroR.MillerH. (2021). Narrative politics in policy discourse: The debate over safe injection sites in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Contemporary Drug Problems, 48(1), 75–95.
30.
LuneH. (2002). Weathering the storm: Nonprofit organization survival strategies in a hostile climate. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 31(4), 463–483.
31.
LutnickA. (2016). Domestic minor sex trafficking. Columbia University Press.
32.
MajicS. (2014). Beyond “victim-criminals”: Sex workers, nonprofit organizations, and gender ideologies. Gender & Society, 28(3), 463–485.
33.
MarshJ.AllbrightT.BulkleyK.KennedyK.ThaliwalkT. (2020). Institutional logics in Los Angeles Schools. American Journal of Education, 126, 603–651.
34.
McMasterS. (2004). Harm reduction: A new perspective on substance abuse services. Social Work, 49(3), 356–363.
35.
MeyerJ.RowanB. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.
36.
MikolajczakP. (2020). Social enterprises’ hybridity in the concept of institutional logics: Evidence from Polish NGOs. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 31(3), 472–483.
37.
MooreC. (2012). History and context of harm reduction in the U.S. In PatesR. (Ed.), Harm reduction in substance use and high-risk behavior (pp. 382–394). John Wiley.
NadelmannE.LaSalleL. (2017). Two steps forward, one step back: Current harm reduction policy and politics in the U.S. Harm Reduction Journal, 14(1), 37–43.
OnishiT. (2019). Venture philanthropy and practice variations: The interplay of institutional logics and organizational identities. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 48(2), 241–265.
42.
OselinS.WeitzerR. (2013). Organizations working on behalf of prostitutes: An analysis of goals, practices and strategies. Sexualities, 16(3–4), 445–466.
43.
PowellW. W.ColyvasJ. (2008). Microfoundations of institutional theory. In GreenwoodR.OliverC.SahlinK.SuddabyR. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 276–298). SAGE.
44.
RekartM. (2005). Sex work harm reduction. The Lancet, 366(9503), 2123–2134.
45.
SkelcherC.SmithS. (2015). Theorizing hybridity: Institutional logics, complex organizations, and actor identities. Public Administration, 93(2), 433–448.
46.
SmithM.MacJ. (2018). Revolting prostitutes: The fight for sex workers’ rights. Verso Books.
47.
SpitzmuellerM. (2016). Negotiating competing institutional logics at the street level: An ethnography of a community mental health organization. Social Service Review, 90(1), 35–82.
48.
ThorntonP.OcasioW.LounsburyM. (2012). The institutional logics perspective: A new approach to culture, structure and process. Oxford University Press.
49.
WahabS.PanichelliM. (2013). Ethical and human rights issues in coercive interventions with sex workers. Affilia, 28(4), 344–349.
50.
WeissR. S. (1994). Learning from strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview studies. Free Press.
51.
WeitzerR. (2007). The social construction of sex trafficking: Ideology and institutionalization of a moral crusade. Politics & Society, 35(3), 447–475.
