TY - JOUR
T1 - Ontology, levels of society, and degrees of generality
T2 - Theorizing actors as abstractions in institutional theory
AU - HWANG, HOKYU
AU - COLYVAS, JEANNETTE A.
N1 - Funding Information:
We would like to thank Tricia Bromley, Gili Drori, Joe Fowler, Mark Granovetter, Steve Hoffman, Yong Suk Jang, Stella Jun, Georg Krücken, Michael Lounsbury, John Meyer, Woody Powell, David Suarez, Roy Suddaby, and the members of the OT group in the School of Management at the UNSW Business School for their comments and encouragement. We are also grateful to Peer Fiss for his patience and generosity throughout the review process and to the three anonymous reviewers for their probing questions and insightful comments. Hokyu Hwang would like to acknowledge that research for this paper was partially supported by funds from the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2018S1A5A2A03030694). Jeannette Colyvas would like to acknowledge the School of Education and Social Policy, the Institute for Policy Research, and the Northwestern Institute for Complex Systems for resources that supported this project, as well as the American Bar Foundation for the residency year, which provided time, space, and an invaluable community of scholars to work on this project.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Academy of Management. All rights reserved.
PY - 2020/7
Y1 - 2020/7
N2 - The term "actor" is a central yet contested construct in institutional theory. Regardless of one's position, institutional theory requires a scaffolding that acknowledges the novelty and diversity of actor analyses and facilitates the commensurability, application, and reach in scholarly uses of the term. We put forth a view of actor as an abstraction that consists of three core elements: (1) the level(s) of society that claims about actors occupy (e.g., from individual to organizational to societal), (2) the degree of generality that claims about actors reach (i.e., from concrete to abstract), and (3) the essential features that constitute actors (i.e., ontology). Our lens pushes beyond the prolific use of the term by providing a foundation for identifying and positioning actorbased studies. It also delineates reference sets of actor-based scholarship, even absent of the term altogether, so as to identify where conceptual specifications converge, expand, complement, or compete. Our lens also provides a means of relating actor-based analyses to one another in ways that distinguish the quality of the actor specification from its novelty or empirical validity. In so doing, we move the agenda forward on the analyses of actor as both explanandum and explanans.
AB - The term "actor" is a central yet contested construct in institutional theory. Regardless of one's position, institutional theory requires a scaffolding that acknowledges the novelty and diversity of actor analyses and facilitates the commensurability, application, and reach in scholarly uses of the term. We put forth a view of actor as an abstraction that consists of three core elements: (1) the level(s) of society that claims about actors occupy (e.g., from individual to organizational to societal), (2) the degree of generality that claims about actors reach (i.e., from concrete to abstract), and (3) the essential features that constitute actors (i.e., ontology). Our lens pushes beyond the prolific use of the term by providing a foundation for identifying and positioning actorbased studies. It also delineates reference sets of actor-based scholarship, even absent of the term altogether, so as to identify where conceptual specifications converge, expand, complement, or compete. Our lens also provides a means of relating actor-based analyses to one another in ways that distinguish the quality of the actor specification from its novelty or empirical validity. In so doing, we move the agenda forward on the analyses of actor as both explanandum and explanans.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85090161259&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85090161259&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.5465/AMR.2014.0266
DO - 10.5465/AMR.2014.0266
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85090161259
SN - 0363-7425
VL - 45
SP - 570
EP - 595
JO - Academy of Management Review
JF - Academy of Management Review
IS - 3
ER -