Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Theoretical framework investigates how everyday interactions lead to non-intentional changes in institutions, suggesting a new perspective on change processes.
Although researchers have acknowledged that not all institutional change results from the intentional efforts of relatively reflexive actors, we lack an explanation of how mundane interactions between actors can result in non‐strategic institutional change. To address this, we advance the theory of institutional drift that reveals how the practice deviation(s) that occur between interaction partners in an institutional order, transformed into tolerable deviations by the self and others, can lead to the non‐strategic transformation of that institutional order. Our framework extends the interactionist perspective in organizational institutionalism by showing how interpersonal interactions are animated and constrained by people’s passionate attachment to the fundamental sacred ideals, or ethos, underlying institutional orders. It is this connection with ethos that animates the interactional processes tied to both maintaining and disrupting institutions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Voronov et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: