SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Organizasyon ve Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi / 2022 / Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 2

ACTOR AGENCY, INSTITUTIONAL LOGICS CHANGE AND LEADERSHIP STYLES: A PROPOSED MODEL

AKTÖR EYLEMLİLİĞİ, KURUMSAL MANTIK DEĞİŞİMİ VE LİDERLİK TARZLARI: BİR MODEL ÖNERİSİ

Meral KIZRAK
Pages
99–134
Publication Date
2022-12-31
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Based on the discussions, a theoretical model and propositions have been developed.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Drawing on the the basic assumptions of the institutional logics approach and symbolic interactionist theory, the present study theoretically discusses that the leader can take actions to change the institutional order and create a new system of sense making within the structural limitations.
📊
Key Findings & Data:It has been claimed that the leader can activate symbolic and cognitive dynamics and reconstruct meaning and action in this actor agency process, using the strategies of framing, role definition, context control and designing new behavior patterns, which leads to a change in institutional logics at the organizational level.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Based on the discussions, a theoretical model and propositions have been developed.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Kurumsal mantıklar · Simgesel etkileşimcilik · Aktör eylemliliği

Abstract

Drawing on the the basic assumptions of the institutional logics approach and symbolic interactionist theory, the present study theoretically discusses that the leader can take actions to change the institutional order and create a new system of sense making within the structural limitations. It has been claimed that the leader can activate symbolic and cognitive dynamics and reconstruct meaning and action in this actor agency process, using the strategies of framing, role definition, context control and designing new behavior patterns, which leads to a change in institutional logics at the organizational level. In addition, it has been discussed that leadership styles may have an interactive role in the effect of actor agency on the change in institutional logics. Based on the discussions, a theoretical model and propositions have been developed.

Özet

Bu kuramsal çalışmada, kurumsal mantıklar yaklaşımı ve simgesel etkileşimcilik kuramının temel varsayımlarından yararlanılarak, liderin yapısal sınırlılıklar içinde, kurumsal düzeni değiştirme eylemlerinde bulunabileceği ve yeni bir anlamlar sistemi meydana getirebileceği tartışılmıştır. Liderin bu aktör eylemliliği sürecinde, sembolik ve bilişsel dinamikleri harekete geçirip anlam ve eylemi tekrar yapılandırabileceği; çerçevelendirme, rol tanımı, bağlam denetimi ve yeni davranış örüntüleri tasarlama stratejileriyle örgütsel düzeyde kurumsal mantık değişimine yol açabileceği iddia edilmiştir. Ayrıca, aktör eylemliliğinin kurumsal mantık değişimi üzerindeki etkisinde liderlik tarzlarının etkileşimsel bir rolü olabileceği tartışılmış ve bu kapsamda bir model önerisi ve önermeler geliştirilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

KIZRAK, M. (2022). ACTOR AGENCY, INSTITUTIONAL LOGICS CHANGE AND LEADERSHIP STYLES: A PROPOSED MODEL. Organizasyon ve Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 2, 99–134. https://ajindex.com/articles/888163

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Andreoni, J. Harbaugh, W. & Vesterlund, L. (2003). The carrot or the stick: Rewards, punishment, and cooperation. American Economic Review, 93(3), 893-902.
  2. Antonakis, J., Avolio, B. J. & Sivasubramaniam, N. (2003). Context and leadership: An examination of the ninefactor full-range leadership theory using the multifactor leadership questionnaire. The Leadership Quarterly, 14(3), 261-295.
  3. Avolio, B. J. & Bass, B. M. (2004). Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire: Third Edition Manual And Sample Set. Redwood City, CA: Mind Garden. Bartlett, J., Tywoniak, S. & Newton, Cameron J. (2009). Towords a model of the institutional logics of climate change. Proceedings of EGOS 2009: 25th European Group for Organizational Studies Conference, 2-4 July, (2009).
  4. Barcelona, Spain. Bass, B. M. & Avolio, B. J. (1992). Multifactor leadership questionnaire. Redwood City, CA: Mind Garden, Inc. Battilana, J. (2006). Agency and institutions: The enabling role of individuals' social position. Organization, 13(5): 653-676.
  5. Battilana, J., Leca, B. & Boxenbaum, E. (2009). How actors change institutions: Towards a theory of institutional entrepreneurship. The Academy of Management Annals, 3(1): 65-107.
  6. Benford, R. D. & Snow, D. A. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26: 611-639.
  7. Besharov, M. L. & Smith, W. K. (2014). Multiple institutional logics in organizations: Explaing their varied nature and emplications. Academy of Management Review, 39(3): 364-381.
  8. Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Brown, M. E., Trevino, L. K. & Harrison, D. A. (2005). Ethical leadership: A social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 97: 117-134.
  9. Bryant, M. & Stensaker, I. (2011). The competing roles of middle management: Negotiated order in the context of change. Journal of Change Management, 11(3): 353-373.
  10. Burke, P. J. (1980). The self: Measurement implications from a symbolic interactionist perspective. Social Psychology Quarterly, 43: 18-29.
  11. Burke, P. J. (1991). An identity theory approach to commitment. Social Psychology Quarterly, 54: 239-251.
  12. Cast, A. D. (2003). Power and the ability to define the situation. Social Psychology Quarterly, 66: 185-201.
  13. Castel, P. & Friedber, E. (2010). Institutional change as an interactive process: The case of the modernization of the French cancer centers. Orga