The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Typical Tools for the Job: Research Strategies in Institutional Analysis
Abstract
Institutional theory rests on a rejection of reductionism. Instead of reducing higher-order phenomena to aggregates of behavior, institutional theory reverses this causal imagery. It attributes the behavior of organizations and nation-states to contextual factors, notably organizational fields, national institutional systems, or the emerging global polity, Institutionalists, particularly within sociology, also emphasize specifically cultural mechanisms for these higher-order effects. This article develops the methodological foundations for these claims. It surveys and elaborates research designs for documenting higher-order effects and for differentiating the cultural mechanisms of institutional influence. It also presents new strategies for assessing multiple logics and the coherence of institutional orders, moving beyond adoption and diffusion studies to analyze the dynamic and contested processes of institutionalization and institutional change.
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
Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches
Suchman, M. C. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258788 · Cited by 19,903
Strategic Responses to Institutional Processes
Oliver, C. (1991) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1991.4279002 · Cited by 8,950
Barley, S. R. (1986) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392767 · Cited by 2,315
Institutional conditions for diffusion
Strang, D., & Meyer, J. W. (1993) · Theory and Society · doi:10.1007/bf00993595 · Cited by 2,114
Corporate Elite Networks and Governance Changes in the 1980s
Davis, G. F., & Greve, H. R. (1997) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/231170 · Cited by 1,237
Caveat Emptor: The Construction of Nonprofit Consumer Watchdog Organizations
Rao, H. (1998) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/231293 · Cited by 562
Cited by
Institutional Complexity and Organizational Responses
Greenwood, R., Raynard, M., Kodeih, F., Micelotta, E. R., & Lounsbury, M. (2011) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2011.590299 · Cited by 3,519
Institutions and Institutional Work
Lawrence, T. B., & Suddaby, R. (2006) · The SAGE Handbook of Organization Studies · doi:10.4135/9781848608030.n7 · Cited by 3,338
Entrepreneurship in and around institutional voids: A case study from Bangladesh
Mair, J., & Marti, I. (2009) · Journal of Business Venturing · doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.04.006 · Cited by 1,567
Lounsbury, M. (2007) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2007.24634436 · Cited by 1,352
Suddaby, R., Bitektine, A., & Haack, P. (2017) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/annals.2015.0101 · Cited by 1,082
Metadata
- Authors
- Schneiberg, M., & Clemens, E. S.
- Venue
- Sociological Theory
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2006-09
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 195-227
- ISSN
- 0735-2751 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9558
- OpenAlex
- W2112955837
- Cited by
- 520
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 51.88
- Type
- journal article
- 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: The Typical Tools for the Job: Research Strategies in Institutional Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1467-9558.2006.00288.x
- The paper
- Schneiberg, M., & Clemens, E. S. (2006). The Typical Tools for the Job: Research Strategies in Institutional Analysis. Sociological Theory. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9558.2006.00288.x
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.
