A criticism of the use of ideal types in studies on institutional logics

Guillermo Cruz

doi:10.1590/1984-9230711

Abstract

Abstract A line of research directed towards studying how the preferences, identities, values, and assumptions of individuals and organizations are embedded in institutional logics has been established within the institutional area in recent years. One of the alternatives proposed to study the logic of organizational fields comprises using “ideal types”. In this article, I seek to reflect on the use of ideal types by some authors on institutionalism in studies on the logics present in the contexts studied. I argue that there is a misreading of what is advocated by Weber with respect to ideal-type construction, ignoring the issue of axiological neutrality and the impossibility of ideal types being found empirically. In this respect, I argue that the way in which ideal types are used in studies on institutional logics needs to be reconsidered, taking these issues into consideration.

Highlights

Aline of research directed towards studying how the preferences, identities, values, and assumptions of individuals and organizations are embedded in institutional logics has been established within the institutional area in recent years
Organizations altered their formal structures in order to gain legitimacy in their context, adapting their formal structure according to myths institutionalised in the environment, thereby avoiding the risk of being labelled negligent, irrational or even obsolete (MEYER; ROWAN, 1977)
Different efforts have been made in the institutional area in order to introduce dynamics to institutional studies in recent years

Summary

Introduction

Aline of research directed towards studying how the preferences, identities, values, and assumptions of individuals and organizations are embedded in institutional logics has been established within the institutional area in recent years. A criticism of the use of ideal types in studies on institutional logics laws would not constitute the end to social sciences studies, but rather a means in the effort used in investigation to understand the empirical social reality (WEBER, 1949).

Results

Conclusion