Requisitos para créditos hipotecarios

systems and cognitive understanding that give meaning to social exchange and thus enable self-reproducing social order’ (Greenwood et al., 2008:4). The institutional perspective, therefore, frames the studying of organizations within the, … ‘idea that there are enduring elements of social life – institutions – that have a profound effect on the thoughts feelings and behaviour of individual and collective actors’

(Lawrence and Suddaby, 2006:216). Institutions are commonly studied at

organizational or field level. Institutions also lead to a reduction in uncertainties in the environment through enacting behaviours that mark the standards expected for a legitimate environment (Zietsma and McKnight).

Institutions comprise rules and laws and practices that are commonly accepted (Zietsma and McKnight, 2009). Examples of institutions within an organization are, ... ‘the use of informal accounting controls, particular structures and impersonal personnel practices’ (Greenwood et al., 2008: 5). Examples of field-level institutions embrace a wider examination of, … ‘hierarchies of status between categories of occupations or between organizations that affect hiring patterns and alliances’ (Greenwood et al., 2008: 5).

3.2 Institutional Theory

Early institutional theorists framed the concept of institutionalisation as the point where social activities became rules (Meyer and Rowan, 1977). This concept was then extended to consider the concepts of isomorphism where:

‘Coercive isomorphism occurs because organizations are motivated to avoid sanctions available to organizations on which they are dependent. Normative isomorphism occurs because organizations are motivated to respect social obligations. And mimetic

isomorphism occurs because organizations are motivated by their interpretation of others successful behaviours.’ (Greenwood et al., 2008:7).

DiMaggio and Powell’s seminal study (1983) outlines a ‘highly structured

organizational field provides a context in which individual efforts to deal rationally with uncertainty and constraint often lead in the aggregate to homogeneity in structure, culture and output’ (ibid 1983:147) defining ‘coercive’, ‘mimetic’ and ‘normative’ processes that cause organizations operating in a given field to be similar (ibid).

Ashworth, Boyne and Delbridge (2009) have subsequently applied this concept of isomorphism to the contemporary public-sector in the UK in identifying attributes of organizations that might be subject to these pressures. This study establishes

detailed appraisal of change in terms of the characteristics of an organization and their likelihood of conforming to institutional pressures (Ashworth et al., 2009). This study identifies coercive pressures with the Local Government Act, 1999 in the

form of a mandatory requirement for local authorities to review their functions and monitor their performance through the setting of targets. Mimetic pressures are associated with councils being encouraged to form benchmarking clubs in support of the performance agenda introduced by central government. The creation of a

“Beacon Council” scheme to acknowledge the councils who were demonstrating the highest performance also endorses the practical application of this process (ibid). Normative processes associated with local authority performance are highlighted by the finding that, … ‘the impact of management on performance may be mediated by the weight of institutional norms’ (Ashworth et al., 2009: 184). Lawrence et al., (2011) suggest that an institutional approach provides an excellent insight into the way organizations operate in practice and relate to other organizations.

3.2.2 Institutional pillars

Institutional pillars (Scott, 1995) are identified as being very important to

institutional theory because they bring together the disparate aspects of its various concepts by making a distinction on the characteristics underpinning institutions defining these as ‘regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive ‘pillars’ (Greenwood et al., 2008:15). In practice emphasis on institutional pillars has been selective although the original intended application was for researchers to be specific on which pillar was in operation and to define the specific context (ibid).

Institutional pillars define, … ‘cognitive, normative and regulative structures and activities that provide stability and meaning to social behaviour’ (Scott, 1995:33). Operating at many layers of authority institutions has been observed to permeate culture, routines and structure (ibid).

The regulatory pillar is characterised by, … ‘explicit regulative processes – rule setting, monitoring and sanctioning activities’ (Scott 1995: 35). An example of the application of this is provided in Zietsma and McKnight’s (2009) longitudinal study of the British Columbian (BC) coastal forest industry between 1992 and 2006. This research highlights how sponsors were able to gain support to their activities by using coercive mechanisms including exerting monitoring pressures and applying sanctions.

The cultural-cognitive pillar, … ‘stresses the central role played by the socially mediated construction of a common framework of meaning’ (Scott, 1995: 45). This also has associations with activities that are taken for granted within organizations because they are easily understood routines and procedures (Zietsma and McKnight, 2009). A practical application of the is identified in this study through the depiction of the British Columbian (BC) coastal forest industry as an illustration of how the involvement of multiple stakeholders is justified on the basis that the public should participate in decision-making processes on public owned land (ibid).

The normative pillar represents, … ‘normative rules that introduce a prescriptive, evaluative and obligatory dimension into social life’ (Scott, 1995: 37). These are representative of obligation and standards that are accepted as moral obligations (ibid). An example of the application of normative activities is a campaign that deliberately demonizes destroying BC forests through skilful advertising (Zietsma and McKnight, 2009). In this example the activity was able to achieve the support from the public and a number of organizations to use sustainably harvested wood (ibid).

Processes causing institutions to emerge and then subsequently be maintained emphasises the importance of the concept of institutional pillars as ‘regulative, normative or cognitive systems’ (Scott: 1995: 89). This provides a good illustration on how institutions work and persist through the continual effort of actors in being purposeful in engaging in activities that will ensure that structures are maintained and do not disappear (Scott 1995: 90).

The next section considers how Lawrence and Suddaby’s (2006) concept of institutional work has provided the basis for considering the institutional pillars within a recognised theoretical framework. In particular, these studies emphasise important to emphasise the benefits of drawing on, … ‘Scott’s three pillars of

institutionalization to point to a variety of kinds of effort associated with institutional work’ (Lawrence, et al., 2009:15).