Abstract

Courts are multirational organizations in that they are characterized by the coexistence of various rationalities, pursuing divergent goals and following different logical patterns, thus posing additional challenges on management. Rationalities define the distinct way actor groups think, speak and act. Multiple rationalities challenge decision makers in courts as they need to respond by developing practices to deal with the complexity they generate. The objectives of this paper are twofold. First, we intent to critically review and discuss the literature on court management which somehow addresses the phenomenon of multirationality within courts. Second, we draw a nexus between the research fields of court management and New Institutionalism, since the latter is supposed to provide important insights for the former. It is concluded that, although the concept of multirational court management has implicitly already been indicated by some scholars from the field of court management, it has not yet been explicitly mentioned and discussed in sufficient detail. Two research streams are identified. The first stream of research implicitly focuses on multirationality by analyzing the perceptions, attitudes, and relationships of different court actors. Local legal culture is the second stream, which refers to the presence of competing values within courts. For further research, we suggest four types of practices to structure possible managerial responses in courts.

Highlights

  • Today, courts find themselves more than ever in the midst of an area of tension

  • DiMaggio and Powell identify three different types of isomorphism: coercive isomorphism, which is caused through political influence and legitimacy problems; mimetic isomorphism stemming from uncertainty, and normative isomorphism relating to professionalization (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983, p. 150)

  • In their study Heydebrand and Seron observed a certain degree of isomorphism, mainly resulting from political pressure

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Courts find themselves more than ever in the midst of an area of tension. On the one hand they are confronted with increasing workloads, increased case complexity and a relative decline in resources. In this respect Saari very aptly noted: „It may be no accident that courts are one of the last major powerful institutions to allow management to enter into their midst, perhaps because of the extraordinary complexity of the institution” It has to be asked: What renders court management that difficult?

Objectives
Results
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.