A critical realist approach to institutional entrepreneurship

TL;DR: In this article, the authors examine the work of actors to create, maintain, and disrupt the practices that are considered legitimate within a field (practice work) and the boundaries between sets of individuals and groups (boundary work), and the interplay of these two forms of institutional work in effecting change.

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors develop a model of practice-driven institutional change, or change that originates in the everyday work of individuals but results in a shift in field-level logic.

TL;DR: In this article, the authors develop answers to these questions drawing on institutional theory and a qualitative investigation of plus-sized consumers who want more options from mainstream fashion marketers, and three triggers for mobilization are posited: development of a collective identity, identification of inspiring institutional entrepreneurs and access to mobilizing institutional logics from adjacent fields.

TL;DR: In this article, the authors studied the development of entrepreneurial competencies to create new ventures within the non-commercial academic environment and identified three competencies of opportunity refinement, leveraging, and championing that appeared crucial for the ventures to gain credibility.

TL;DR: In this article, the authors analyze how measurement tools influence the legitimacy of an industry and the systemic power within it and discuss the implications of their findings for research into measurement tools in the areas of management or business and society.

TL;DR: The authors brings together emerging perspectives from organization theory and management, environmental sociology, international regime studies, and the social studies of science and technology to provide a starting point for discipline-based studies of environmental policy and corporate environmental behavior.

TL;DR: In this article, the authors analyze how measurement tools influence the legitimacy of an industry and the systemic power within it and discuss the implications of their findings for research into measurement tools in the areas of management or business and society.

Abstract: of war art in particular, and almost in contradiction of his thesis, he supports the modern. In so doing, he is reiterating the interpretations put forward by authors such as Modris Eksteins, from whose conclusions he purports to differ, that the war saw the triumph of modernism. In discussing the art of the First World War, for example, Vance consistently asserts that only the modernist painters could capture the horror of modern warfare. The distinguished artist, J. W. Beatty, is dismissed as a landscape artist lacking the appropriate vocabulary for depicting battle. Arthur Lismer's and A. Y. Jackson's criticisms of traditional war art are also quoted to support the value of the modern and to dismiss that of the traditional. Their views, however, are not put in context. As nascent proselytizers of modern art in Canada, how could they have been anything but derogatory of its traditional cousin? The above observations highlight one of the problems facing historians who chart a. course through waters that ebb and flow through many discrete disciplines of research. The enormous expansion in the university world in the past thirty years in Canada has produced a commensurately huge body of research. Combine this with thirty years of generously funded archival practice, the wonders of microfilm, and other technological innovations, and the ability to amass material becomes formidably achievable. It is not always possible, however, to digest this material as thoroughly, and it would seem that his study would have benefited from a more critical analysis of the sources. If these concerns about Vance's use of war art apply to other material, concern naturally arises in regard to other areas. This should not, however, detract from the volume's unquestionable significance in shedding new light on a well-known period of history, and on an evolving topic of historical debate.