American Journal of Sociology · 2014 · 173 citations · 111 references
ManagementOrganization StudiesOrganizational BehaviorInstitutional TheoryRegulatory ComplianceRegulatory GovernanceAuthorityCompliance GovernanceCompliance ManagementCompliance TheoryRegulationSafety ComplianceComplianceCompliance Governance StructuresEthnographic Data AnalysisHierarchyOrganizational GovernanceRegulatory Compliance In ProcessesSafety Compliance BehaviorVariable Compliance Control
The study examines how organizational actors interpret the regulator by developing a typology based on multisite ethnographic data, aiming to extend institutional and ecological accounts of governance and compliance. The authors employed multisite ethnographic data on safety practices to construct a typology of regulator interpretations across organizational positions, expertise, and autonomy. The study finds that actors view the regulator as ally, threat, or obstacle depending on expertise, authority, and relationship continuity; compliance varies within and across organizations, driven by internal positions rather than institutional logics, and the typology links micro‑level action to organizational performance.
Looking inside organizations at the different positions, expertise, and autonomy of the actors, the authors use multisite ethnographic data on safety practices to develop a typology of how the regulator, as the focal actor in the regulatory process, is interpreted within organizations. The findings show that organizational actors express constructions of the regulator as an ally, threat, and obstacle that vary with organizational expertise, authority, and continuity of relationship between the organizational member and the regulator. The article makes three contributions to the current understandings of organizational governance and regulatory compliance, thereby extending both institutional and ecological accounts of organizations’ behavior with respect to their environments. First, the authors document not only variation across organizations but variable compliance within an organization. Second, the variations described do not derive from alternative institutional logics, but from variations in positions, autonomy, and expertise within each organization. From their grounded theory, the authors hypothesize that these constructions carry differential normative interpretations of regulation and probabilities for compliance, and thus the third contribution, the typology, when correlated with organizational hierarchy provides the link between microlevel action and discourse and organizational performance.
111