To extend the understanding of institutional change at the societal level, we explore the way in which multiple types of institutional work are interrelated, and how the interrelations affect both the institutional change and its outcome. Through an in-depth study of the Serbian transition between 2000 and 2008, our findings reveal first that this specific context expands the range of institutional work, for example, the pressure and capitalization work performed by the Mafia, tycoons, and opportunistic politicians in our case. Second, we highlight four complex characteristics of the interrelations between multiple types of institutional work: feedback loops, non-linearity, emergent properties, and discontinuity. We contribute to the neo-institutional literature by showing the importance to attend to the interrelations between multiple types of institutional work performed by different actors, as to understand institutional change, its fluidity, complexity, and its outcome.
AlvessonM.KärremanD. (2007). Constructing mystery: Empirical matters in theory development. Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1265–1281.
2.
AndersonP. (1999). Complexity theory and organization science. Organization Science, 10(3), 216–232.
3.
AntonicS. (2003). Political system and elites in Serbia before and after October 5 th. In VujadinovicD.VeljakL.GoatiV.PavicevicV. (Eds.), Between authoritarianism and democracy, Serbia, Montenegro, Croatia (Vol. I Institutional framework; pp. 125–142). CEDET.
4.
BattilanaJ.LecaB.BoxenbaumE. (2009). How actors change institutions: Towards a theory of institutional entrepreneurship. The Academy of Management Annals, 3(1), 65–107.
5.
BlacklerF.ReganS. (2006). Institutional reform and the reorganization of family support services. Organization Studies, 27(12), 1843–1861.
6.
BochslerD. (2008). Hawk in Dove’s clothing: Political trajectories of political parties in Serbia, 2003–2008. Central European Political Studies Review, 10(4), 292–329.
7.
CappellaroG.CompagniA.VaaraE. (2020). Maintaining strategic ambiguity for protection: Struggles over capacity, equivocality, and absurdity around the Sicilian Mafia. Academy of Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2017.1086
8.
CastroA.AnsariS. (2017). Contextual “readiness” for institutional work. A study of the fight against corruption in Brazil. Journal of Management Inquiry, 26(4), 351–365.
9.
ChallanI.LeclercJ. (2007). Serbia: Model revolution? Episode 4/5 Refractory urns. In Histoire Vivante: RSR, la Première.
10.
ClementeM.RouletT. (2015). Public opinion as a source of deinstitutionalization: A “spiral of silence” approach. Academy of Management Review, 40(1), 96–114.
11.
CorbinJ.StraussA. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3–21.
12.
CrawfordB. (2015). The historical and cultural construction of legitimated interests: The rise of American chambers of commerce. Management & Organizational History, 10(3–4), 230–250.
13.
CreedW. E. D.DeJordyR.LokJ. (2010). Being the change: Resolving institutional contradictions through identity work. Academy of Management Journal, 53(6), 1336–1364.
14.
DacinM. T.GoodsteinJ.ScottW. R. (2002). Institutional theory and institutional change: Introducing to the special research forum. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 43–56.
15.
De ZwartF. (2015). Unintended but not unanticipated consequences. Theory and Society, 44(3), 283–297.
16.
DelbridgeR.EdwardsT. (2008). Challenging conventions: Roles and processes during non-isomorphic institutional change. Human Relations, 61(3), 299–325.
GioiaD.CorleyK. G.HamiltonA. (2013). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15–31.
19.
GranqvistN.GustafssonR. (2016). Temporal institutional work. Academy of Management Journal, 59(3), 1009–1035.
20.
GurievS.RachinskyA. (2005). The role of oligarchs in Russian capitalism. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(1), 131–150.
21.
HampelC. E.LawrenceT. B.TraceyP. (2017). Institutional work: Taking stock and making it matter. In GreenwoodR.OliverC.LawrenceT. B.MeyerR. (Eds.), The sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 558–590). SAGE Publications.
22.
HelfenM.SydowJ. (2013). Negotiating as institutional work: The case of labour standards and international framework agreements. Organization Studies, 34(8), 1073–1098.
23.
HiberD. (2005). The Reform of the judiciary and judicial legislation. In BegovicB.MijatovicB. (Eds.), Four years of transition in Serbia (pp. 263–281). Center for Liberal Democratic Studies.
24.
HillmanA. J.HittM. A. (1999). Corporate political strategy formulation: A model of approach, participation, and strategy decisions. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 825–842.
25.
HirschP.BermissS. Y. (2009). Institutional “dirty” work: Preserving institutions through strategic decoupling. In LawrenceT. B.SuddabyR.LecaB. (Eds.), Institutional work: Actors and agency in institutional studies of organizations (pp. 262–283). Cambridge University Press
26.
KalpokaiteN.RadivojevicI. (2019). Leading a successful transition to democracy: A qualitative analysis of political leadership in Spain and Lithuania. Organization Studies, 41(6), 767–797.
27.
LangleyA. (1999). Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 691–710.
28.
LawrenceT. B.SuddabyR. (2006). Institutions and institutional work. In CleggS.HardyC.LawrenceT. B. (Eds.), The sage handbook of organization studies (pp. 215–254). SAGE Publications.
29.
LawrenceT. (2008). Power, institutions and organizations. In GreenwoodR.OliverC.SahlinK.SuddabyR. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 170–197), SAGE Publications.
30.
LawrenceT. B.SuddabyR.LecaB. (2011). Institutional work: Refocusing institutional studies of organizations. Journal of Management Inquiry, 20(1), 52–58.
31.
LokJ.De RondM. (2013). On the plasticity of institutions: Containing and restoring practice breakdowns at the Cambridge University Boat Club. Academy of Management Journal, 56(1), 185–207.
32.
MacKayR. B.ChiaR. (2013). Choice, chance and unintended consequences in strategic change: A process understanding of the rise and fall of NorthCo automotive. Academy of Management Journal, 56(1), 206–203.
33.
MaguireS.HardyC. (2009). Discourse and deinstitutionalization: The decline of DDT. Academy of Management Journal, 52(1), 148–178.
34.
MahoneyJ.ThelenK. (2010). A theory of gradual institutional change. In MahoneyJ.ThelenK. (Eds.), Explaining institutional change: Ambiguity, agency, and power (pp. 1–36). Cambridge University Press.
35.
MarkovichS. (2008). Nations in transit - Serbia. Freedom House.
36.
MartíI.FernándezP. (2013). The institutional work of oppression and resistance: Learning from the Holocaust. Organization Studies, 34(8), 1195–1223.
37.
MaticV. (2003). Who killed Ante Markovic, great robbery & Serbia married to the Mafia. In MaticV. (Ed.), Independent for the truth. B92.
38.
MijatovicB. (2005). Privatization of the real sector. In BegovicB.MijatovicB. (Eds.), Four years of transition in Serbia (pp. 187–207). Center for Liberal Democratic Studies.
39.
MijatovicB. (2008). Reforms in Serbia: Achievements and challenges. Center for Liberal Democratic Studies.
40.
MisangyiV. F.WeaverG. R.ElmsH. (2008). Ending corruption: The interplay among institutional logics, resources, and institutional entrepreneurs. Academy of Management Review, 33(3), 750–770.
41.
MorçölG. (2001). What is complexity science? Postmodernist or postpositivist?Emergence, 3(1), 104–119.
42.
OliverC. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 145–179.
PavlovicD. (2004). Nations in transit: Serbia and Montenegro 2004. Freedom House.
45.
PowellW. W.ColyvasJ. A. (2008). Microfoundations of institutional theory. In GreenwoodR.OliverC.SahlinK.SuddabyR. (Eds.), The sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 276–298). SAGE Publications.
Rakic-VodinelicV. (2004). An unsuccessful attempt of lustration in Serbia. Yugoslav Law, 31(1–3), 31–40.
48.
RaoH.HirschP. (2003). “Czechmate:” The old banking elite and the construction of investment privatization funds in the Czech Republic. Socio-Economic Review, 1, 247–269.
49.
ReayT.HiningsC. R. (2009). Managing the rivalry of competing institutional logics. Organization Studies, 30(6), 629–652.
50.
SchneibergM.LounsburyM. (2008). Social movements and institutional analysis. In GreenwoodR.OliverC.SahlinK.SuddabyR. (Eds.), The sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 650–672). SAGE Publications.
51.
SeoM. G.CreedW. E. D. (2002). Institutional contradictions, praxis and institutional change: A dialectical perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 27(2), 222–247.
52.
SharafutdinovaG. (2010). Political consequences of crony capitalism inside Russia. University of Notre Dame Press Notre Dame.
53.
SongE. Y. (2019). Protect to damage? Institutional work, unintended consequences and institutional dynamics. Organization Studies. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840618814564
54.
StankovicB. (Ed.). (2005). Reconstruction: How the prime minister was assassinated. In Insajder. B92.
55.
StankovicB. (Ed.). (2007a). Network. In Insajder. B92.
56.
StankovicB. (Ed.). (2007b). State robbery of the state (Episodes 1, 4, 5 & 6). In Insajder. B92.
57.
StankovicB. (Ed.). (2008). Secret services (Episode 2). In Insajder. B92.
58.
StarkD. (1996). Recombinant property in east European capitalism. American Journal of Sociology, 101(4), 993–1027.
59.
StarkD.BrusztL. (1998). Postsocialist pathways, transforming politics and property in east central Europe. Cambridge University Press.
60.
StephensonS. (2015). Gangs of Russia: From the streets to the corridors of power. Cornell University Press.
61.
SuddabyR. (2010). Challenges for institutional theory. Journal of Management Inquiry, 19(1), 14–20.
TilcsikA. (2010). From ritual to reality: Demography, ideology, and decoupling in a post-communist government agency. Academy of Management Journal, 53(6), 1474–1498.
64.
TsoukasH.HatchM. J. (2001). Complex thinking, complex practice: The case for a narrative approach to organizational complexity. Human Relations, 54(8), 979–1013.
65.
UnijatJ. (2006). Organized crime: The case of Serbia. Western Balkans Security Observer-English Edition, (1), 12–15.
66.
VaccaroA.PalazzoG. (2015). Values against violence: Institutional change in societies dominated by organized crime. Academy of Management Journal, 58(4), 1075–1101.
67.
WeikE. (2011). Institutional entrepreneurship and agency. Journal of the Theory of Social Behavior, 41(4), 466–481.
68.
WijenF.AnsariS. (2007). Overcoming inaction through collective institutional entrepreneurship: Insights from Regime Theory. Organization Studies, 28(7), 1079–1100.
69.
YinR. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
70.
ZietsmaC.LawrenceT. B. (2010). Institutional work in the transformation of an organizational field: The interplay of boundary work and practice work. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(2), 189–221.
