The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Institutional maintenance as narrative acts
Abstract
I n this chapter, I address the forms of institutional work involved in symbolic institutional maintenance. Taking a narrative approach, I define symbolic institutional maintenance as the travel of institutional stories across social levels, and I explore the forms of institutional work used to translate societal meta-narratives into organizations and the lives of individuals. Based on the study of a rape crisis center in Israel, I examine the maintenance of the feminist and therapeutic institutions within which the organization was embedded. I follow the feminist and therapeutic meta-narratives prevalent in Israeli society, as they traveled into, and were modified by, the rape crisis center. Further, I follow the use of these societal-level narratives, and the organizational versions thereof, by organizational members, as they strove to make sense of their own lives and identities. I conceptualize this series of narrative acts as institutional maintenance, worked out in the interfaces of various social levels; embedded in power relations; and involving the delicate balance of duplication and change. At the societal level, institutions are embodied within diverse meta-narratives that encode the “taken-for-granted” in shared poetic tropes, like protagonists and villains, dramatic settings and plots. Organizational members carry these institutional meta-narratives into the organization. Still, societal meta-narratives that are taken up within organizations do not simply duplicate the institutional order. Rather, through reinterpretation organizational elites translate them into local – more specific and selective – versions, which are then used in organizational sense-making processes.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Fee, D., & Fairclough, N. (1993) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2074659 · Cited by 11,611
Emirbayer, M., & Mische, A. (1998) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/231294 · Cited by 6,165
The antecedents of deinstitutionalization
Oliver, C. (1992) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/017084069201300403 · Cited by 1,746
Ricoeur, P., & DePaul University (1991) · Philosophy Today · doi:10.5840/philtoday199135136 · Cited by 591
Cited by
Haack, P., Schoeneborn, D., & Wickert, C. (2012) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840612443630 · Cited by 303
Metadata
- Authors
- Zilber, T. B.
- Venue
- Institutional Work
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 2009-07-16
- Pages
- 205-235
- OpenAlex
- W1890346263
- Cited by
- 174
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 19.68
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Institutional maintenance as narrative acts. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/cbo9780511596605.008
- The paper
- Zilber, T. B. (2009). Institutional maintenance as narrative acts. Institutional Work. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511596605.008
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.