An institutional understanding of triple bottom line evaluations and the use of social and environmental metrics

Measuring social and environmental metrics of property is necessary for meaningful triple bottom line (TBL) assessments. This paper demonstrates how relevant indicators derived from environmental rating systems provide for reasonably straightforward collations of performance scores that support adjustments based on a sliding scale. It also highlights the absence of a corresponding consensus of important social metrics representing the third leg of the TBL tripod. Assessing TBL may be unavoidably imprecise, but if valuers and managers continue to ignore TBL concerns, their assessments may soon be less relevant given the emerging institutional milieu informing and reflecting business practices and society expectations.

Varieties of Asian capitalism : toward an institutional theory of Asian enterprise

In this paper we respond to calls for an institution-based perspective on strategy. With its emphasis upon mimetic, coercive, and normative isomorphism, institutional theory has earned a deterministic reputation and seems an unlikely foundation on which to construct a theory of strategy. However, a second movement in institutional theory is emerging that gives greater emphasis to creativity and agency. We develop this approach by highlighting co-evolutionary processes that are shaping the varieties of capitalism (VoC) in Asia. To do so, we examine the extent to which the VoC model can be fruitfully applied in the Asian context. In the spirit of the second movement of institutional theory, we describe three processes in which firm strategy collectively and intentionally feeds back to shape institutions: (1) filling institutional voids, (2) retarding institutional innovation, and (3) deploying institutional escape. We outline the key contributions contained in the articles of this Special Issue and discuss a research agenda generated by the VoC perspective.

Institutional problems of the emerging scientific community in Iran

This article attempts to explore the concept of scientific community at the macro-national level in the context of Iran. Institutionalisation of science and its professional growth has been constrained by several factors. The article first conceptualises the notion of science community as found in the literature in the context of Iran, and attempts to map through some indicators. The main focus, however, lies in mapping some institutional problems through empirical research. This was undertaken in 2002–04 in order to analyse the structure of the scientific community in Iran in the ‘exact sciences’ (mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology and earth sciences). The empirical work was done in two complementary perspectives: through a questionnaire and statistical analysis of it, and through semistructured interviews with the researchers. There are number of problems confronting scientists in Iran. Facilities provided by institutions is one of the major problems of research. Another is the tenuous cooperation among scientists. This is reported by most of the researchers, who deplore the lack of cooperation among their group. Relationships are mostly with the Ph.D. students and only marginally with colleagues. Our research shows that the more brilliant the scientists, the more frustrated they are from scientific institutions in Iran. Medium-range researchers seem to be much happier about the scientific institution to which they belong than the brighter scholars. The scientific institutions in Iran seem to be built for the needs of the former rather than the latter. These institutions seem not to play a positive role in the case of the best scientists. On the whole, many ingredients of the scientific community, at least at its inception, are present among Iranian scientists: the strong desire for scientific achievement in spite of personal, institutional and economic problems.

Towards a model of the institutional logics of climate change

The proliferation of innovative schemes to address climate change at international, national and local levels signals a fundamental shift in the priority and role of the natural environment to society, organizations and individuals. This shift in shared priorities invites academics and practitioners to consider the role of institutions in shaping and constraining responses to climate change at multiple levels of organisations and society. Institutional theory provides an approach to conceptualising and addressing climate change challenges by focusing on the central logics that guide society, organizations and individuals and their material and symbolic relationship to the environment. For example, framing a response to climate change in the form of an emission trading scheme evidences a practice informed by a capitalist market logic (Friedland and Alford 1991). However, not all responses need necessarily align with a market logic. Indeed, Thornton (2004) identifies six broad societal sectors each with its own logic (markets, corporations, professions, states, families, religions). Hence, understanding the logics that underpin successful –and unsuccessful– climate change initiatives contributes to revealing how institutions shape and constrain practices, and provides valuable insights for policy makers and organizations. This paper develops models and propositions to consider the construction of, and challenges to, climate change initiatives based on institutional logics (Thornton and Ocasio 2008). We propose that the challenge of understanding and explaining how climate change initiatives are successfully adopted be examined in terms of their institutional logics, and how these logics evolve over time. To achieve this, a multi-level framework of analysis that encompasses society, organizations and individuals is necessary (Friedland and Alford 1991). However, to date most extant studies of institutional logics have tended to emphasize one level over the others (Thornton and Ocasio 2008: 104). In addition, existing studies related to climate change initiatives have largely been descriptive (e.g. Braun 2008) or prescriptive (e.g. Boiral 2006) in terms of the suitability of particular practices. This paper contributes to the literature on logics by examining multiple levels: the proliferation of the climate change agenda provides a site in which to study how institutional logics are played out across multiple, yet embedded levels within society through institutional forums in which change takes place. Secondly, the paper specifically examines how institutional logics provide society with organising principles –material practices and symbolic constructions– which enable and constrain their actions and help define their motives and identity. Based on this model, we develop a series of propositions of the conditions required for the successful introduction of climate change initiatives. The paper proceeds as follows. We present a review of literature related to institutional logics and develop a generic model of the process of the operation of institutional logics. We then consider how this is applied to key initiatives related to climate change. Finally, we develop a series of propositions which might guide insights into the successful implementation of climate change practices.

neXus2. An investigation into the library and information services workforce in Australia: The institutional perspective. Final report prepared for the Australian Library and Information Association and National and State Libraries Australia

The neXus2 research project has sought to investigate the library and information services (LIS) workforce in Australia, from the institutional or employer perspective. The study builds on the neXus1 study, which collected data from individuals in the LIS workforce in order to present a snapshot of the profession in 2006, highlighting the demographics, educational background and career details of library and information professionals in Australia. To counterbalance this individual perspective, library institutions were invited to participate in a survey to contribute further data as employers. This final report on the neXus2 project compares the findings from the different library sectors, ie academic libraries, TAFE libraries, the National and State libraries, public libraries, special libraries and school libraries.

Contradictions : Genre, causal layered analysis and analysis of institutional change

In what follows, I put forward an argument for an analytical method for social science that operates at the level of genre. I argue that generic convergence, generic hybridity, and generic instability provide us with a powerful perspectives on changes in political, cultural, and economic relationships, most specifically at the level of institutions. Such a perspective can help us identify the transitional elements, relationships, and trajectories that define the place of our current system in history, thereby grounding our understanding of possible futures.1 In historically contextualising our present with this method, my concern is to indicate possibilities for the future. Systemic contradictions indicate possibility spaces within which systemic change must and will emerge. We live in a system currently dominated by many fully-expressed contradictions, and so in the presence of many possible futures. The contradictions of the current age are expressed most overtly in the public genres of power politics. Contemporary public policy—indeed politics in general-is an excellent focus for any investigation of possible futures, precisely because of its future-oriented function. It is overtly hortatory; it is designed ‘to get people to do things’ (Muntigl in press: 147). There is no point in trying to get people to do things in the past. Consequently, policy discourse is inherently oriented towards creating some future state of affairs (Graham in press), along with concomitant ways of being, knowing, representing, and acting (Fairclough 2000).

The impact of institutional, instrumental and interpersonal underpinnings on network dynamics and outcomes

Networks form a key part of the infrastructure of contemporary governance arrangements and, as such, are likely to continue for some time. Networks can take many forms and be formed for many reasons. Some networks have been explicitly designed to generate a collective response to an issue; some arise from a top down perspective through mandate or coercion; while others rely more heavily on interpersonal relations and doing the right thing. In this paper, these three different perspectives are referred to as the “3I”s: Instrumental, Institutional or Interpersonal. It is proposed that these underlying motivations will affect the process dynamics within the different types of networks in different ways and therefore influence the type of outcomes achieved. This proposition is tested through a number of case studies. An understanding of these differences will lead to more effective design, management and clearer expectations of what can be achieved through networks.