Critical analysis examines marketization effects in public organizations, showing implications for accountability and decision-making.
How are public organizations subjected to institutional work that reduces barriers to marketization within public decision-making while undermining procedural safeguards and democratic accountability? Drawing on a critical hermeneutic analysis, we examine the procurement of a multibillion hospital project in Sweden, where a public–private partnership gained legitimacy despite established safeguards for procedural fairness and public accountability that weighed against it. We show how liminality, as a state of being neither fully inside nor outside organizations, enables interventions in bureaucratic procedures without equivalent formal accountability. We conceptualize this as liminal market-shaping, expressed through management consultants’ efforts to destabilize decision paths, moral foundations, and sanctioning mechanisms in public procurement. The study contributes to marketing theory by extending market-shaping research to public organizations, introducing liminal market-shaping as a form of disruptive institutional work, and conceptualizing public de-responsibilization to explain how marketization erodes rather than activates agency in markets and beyond, within democratic governance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yngfalk et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: