In this paper, I highlight how popular understandings of neoinstitutionalism as a theory of isomorphism need to be revised as institutionalists have shifted attention towards the study of organizational heterogeneity. As part of this shift, old emphases on arational mimicry and stability have been replaced with new emphases on institutional rationality and ongoing struggle and change. I discuss these new directions and the implications for the study of accounting practice. I argue that given recent efforts by institutionalists to account for actors and practice diversity, there is an important opportunity for dialogue with practice theorists, such as those drawing on Actor Network Theory, and the creation of a more comprehensive approach to the study of practice that attends to both institutional and micro-processual dynamics.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Heidi Boesdal).
Related research
Keywords:
Cited by: (explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)