This article introduces and applies a three-stage process to show how advocates of the conflicting institutional logics of budgetary stewardship and performance improvement in English and Welsh local authorities created a hybrid logic. Drawing on interviews with officers in 25 councils, it demonstrates how cooperative working environments meant that hybridization proceeded largely ‘peacefully’, in contrast to previous studies of more competitive contexts that found it occurs on a ‘battlefield’. We argue that the nature of conflict within the hybridization process, along with the power dynamics between representatives of different logics, shapes the nature and sustainability of the resulting hybrid.
AgranoffR (2006) Inside collaborative networks: Ten lessons for public managers. Public Administration Review66(s1): 56–65.
2.
AhrensTFerryL (2016) Institutional entrepreneurship, practice memory, and cultural memory: Choice and creativity in the pursuit of endogenous change of local authority budgeting. Management Accounting Research38: 12–21.
3.
Ahrens T, Ferry L and Khalifa R (2018) The hybridising of financial and service expertise in English local authority budget control: A practice perspective. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management. Epub ahead of print. DOI: 10.1108/QRAM-09-2017-0085.
4.
ArgentoDGrossiGTagessonT, et al. (2010) The externalisation of local public service delivery: Experience in Italy and Sweden. International Journal of Public Policy5(1): 41–56.
5.
BoyneGA (2010) Performance management: Does it work? In: WalkerRMBoyneGABrewerGA (eds) Public Management and Performance: Research Directions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 207–226.
6.
BoyneGAChenAA (2006) Performance targets and public service improvement. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory17(3): 455–477.
7.
CoombsHMEdwardsJR (1995) The financial reporting practices of British municipal corporations 1835–1933: A study in accounting innovation. Accounting and Business Research25(98): 93–105.
8.
DahanA (2015) Professional values and organizational change dynamics: The case of the reform of doctoral training in France. International Review of Administrative Sciences81(2): 245–263.
9.
DiMaggioPJ (1983) State expansion and organizational fields. In: HallTHQuinnRE (eds) Organizational Theory and Public Policy, Beverly Hills: Sage, pp. 147–161.
10.
DiMaggioPJPowellWW (1983) The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review48(2): 147–160.
11.
DoddsA (2011) Logics, thresholds, strategic power, and the promotion of liberalisation by governments: A case study from British higher education. Public Policy and Administration27(4): 303–323.
12.
DunlopCARadaelliCM (2013) Systematising policy learning: From monolith to dimensions. Political Studies61(3): 599–619.
13.
FengerMvan der SteenMvan der TorreL (2014) The responsiveness of social policies. Explaining institutional change in three policy domains. International Review of Administrative Sciences80(3): 659–680.
14.
FerryLCoombsHEckersleyP (2017) Budgetary stewardship, innovation and working culture: Identifying the missing ingredient in English and Welsh local authorities’ recipes for austerity management. Financial Accountability and Management33(2): 220–243.
15.
FerryLEckersleyPZakariaZ (2015) Accountability and transparency in English local government: Moving from ‘matching parts’ to ‘awkward couple’?Financial Accountability and Management31(3): 345–361.
16.
FriedlandRAlfordRA (1991) Bringing society back in: Symbols, practices, and institutional contradictions. In: PowellWWDiMaggioPJ (eds) The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 232–263.
17.
GameC (2006) Comprehensive Performance Assessment in English local government. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management5(6): 466–479.
18.
GilardiF (2016) Four ways we can improve policy diffusion research. State Politics and Policy16(1): 8–21.
19.
GreenwoodRSuddabyR (2006) Institutional entrepreneurship in mature fields: The big five accounting firms. Academy of Management Journal49(1): 27–48.
20.
GrohsS (2014) Hybrid organizations in social service delivery in quasi-markets: The case of Germany. American Behavioural Scientist58(11): 1425–1445.
21.
GrossiGReichardCThomassonA, et al. (2017) Editorial – Performance measurement of hybrid organizations: Emerging issues and future research perspectives. Public Money and Management37(6): 379–386.
22.
HastingsABaileyNGannonM, et al. (2015) Coping with the cuts? The management of the worst financial settlement in living memory. Local Government Studies41(4): 601–621.
23.
HecloHWildavskyA (1974) The Private Government of Public Money, London: Macmillan.
24.
HoffmannAJ (1999) Institutional evolution and change: Environmentalism and the US chemical industry. Academy of Management Journal42(4): 351–371.
25.
Iorweth R (2013) Public services reform: Timeline of local government developments. National Assembly for Wales. Available at: www.assemblywales.org/13-052.pdf (accessed 31 October 2017).
26.
JasPSkelcherC (2014) Different regulatory regimes in different parts of the UK? A comparison of narrative and practice in relation to poor performance in local government. Local Government Studies40(1): 121–140.
LeachSCopusC (2004) Scrutiny and the political party group in UK local government: New models of behaviour. Public Administration82(2): 331–354.
29.
LijphardtA (1971) Comparative politics and the comparative method. American Political Science Review65(3): 682–693.
30.
LockwoodBPorcelliF (2013) Incentive schemes for local government: Theory and evidence from Comprehensive Performance Assessment in England. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy5(3): 254–286.
31.
McAteerMStephensA (2013) New development: The role of benchmarking in supporting improvement in local government – Scottish and Welsh practitioners’ perspectives. Public Money and Management33(4): 281–284.
32.
McEldowneyJ (2003) Public management reform and administrative law in local public service in the UK. International Review of Administrative Sciences69(1): 69–82.
33.
MartinSDowneJGraceC, et al. (2013) New development: All change? Performance assessment regimes in UK local government. Public Money and Management33(4): 277–280.
34.
MeyerRHammerschmidG (2006) Public management reform: An identity project. Public Policy and Administration21(1): 99–115.
35.
MeyerJWRowanB (1977) Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology83(2): 340–363.
MohrZT (2016) Performance measurement and cost accounting: Are they complementary or competing systems of control?Public Administration Review76(4): 616–625.
38.
MullinsD (2006) Competing institutional logics? Local accountability and scale and efficiency in an expanding non-profit housing sector. Public Policy and Administration21(3): 6–24.
39.
Muzio D, Brock DM and Suddaby R (2013) Professions and institutional change: Towards an institutionalist sociology of the professions. Journal of Management Studies 50(5): 699–721.
OsborneSP (2017) Editorial – Public management research over the decades: What are we writing about?Public Management Review19(2): 109–113.
45.
PillaySReddyPSMorganD (2017) Institutional isomorphism and whistle-blowing intentions in public sector institutions. Public Management Review19(4): 423–442.
46.
ReayTHiningsCR (2005) The recomposition of an organizational field: Health care in Alberta. Organization Studies26(3): 351–384.
47.
RogersEM (2003) Diffusion of Innovations, New York: Free Press.
48.
SeoMGCreedWED (2002) Institutional contradictions, praxis, and institutional change: A dialectical perspective. Academy of Management Review27(2): 222–247.
49.
SimmonsBADobbinFGarrettG (2006) Introduction: The international diffusion of liberalism. International Organization60(4): 781–910.
50.
SkelcherCSmithSR (2015) Theorising hybridity: Institutional logics, complex organisations, and actor identities: The case of non-profits. Public Administration93(2): 443–448.
51.
ThorntonPH (2004) Markets from Culture: Institutional Logics and Organisational Decisions in Higher Education Policy, Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.
52.
ThorntonPHJonesCKuryK (2005) Institutional logics and institutional change in organizations: Transformation in accounting, architecture, and publishing. In: LounsburyM (ed.) Transformation in Cultural Industries, Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 125–170.
53.
ThorntonPHOcasioW (1999) Institutional logics and historical contingency of power in organizations: Executive succession in the higher education publishing industry, 1958–1990. American Journal of Sociology105(3): 801–843.
54.
ThurmaierKWoodC (2002) Interlocal agreements as overlapping social networks: Picket-fence regionalism in metropolitan Kansas City. Public Administration Review62(5): 585–598.
55.
van DoorenWBouckaertGHalliganJed2nd (2015) Performance Management in the Public Sector, Abingdon: Routledge.
