The DOI matches its Crossref record; 54 of the 54 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
THEORIZING HYBRIDITY: INSTITUTIONAL LOGICS, COMPLEX ORGANIZATIONS, AND ACTOR IDENTITIES: THE CASE OF NONPROFITS
Open accessAbstract
We propose a novel approach to theorizing hybridity in public and nonprofit organizations. The concept of hybridity is widely used to describe organizational responses to changes in governance, but the literature seldom explains how hybrids arise or what forms they take. Transaction cost and organizational design literatures offer some solutions, but lack a theory of agency. We use the institutional logics approach to theorize hybrids as entities that face a plurality of normative frames. Logics provide symbolic and material elements that structure organizational legitimacy and actor identities. Contradictions between institutional logics offer space for them to be elaborated and creatively reconstructed by situated agents. We propose five types of organizational hybridity – segmented, segregated, assimilated, blended, and blocked. Each type is theoretically derived from empirically observed variations in organizational responses to institutional plurality. We develop propositions to show how our approach to hybridity adds value to academic and policy‐maker audiences.
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
Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services
Lipsky, M. (1981) · Michigan Law Review · doi:10.2307/1288305 · Cited by 8,981
The new institutionalism in organizational analysis
(1992) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.29-5991 · Cited by 5,470
The Institutional Logics Perspective: A New Approach to Culture, Structure and Process
Thornton, P. H., Ocasio, W., & Lounsbury, M. (2012) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199601936.001.0001 · Cited by 3,764
Neither market nor hierarchy: Network Forms of Organization
Milošević, D. (2014) · Cited by 3,446
Williamson, O. E. (1996) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780195078244.001.0001 · Cited by 3,041
Structure in Fives: Designing Effective Organizations.
Berniker, E., & Mintzberg, H. (1984) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393181 · Cited by 2,724
Inside the Hybrid Organization: Selective Coupling as a Response to Competing Institutional Logics
Pache, A.-C., & Santos, F. (2013) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2011.0405 · Cited by 2,409
Thornton, P. H., & Ocasio, W. (2008) · The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism · doi:10.4135/9781849200387.n4 · Cited by 1,978
The institutional logics perspective: a new approach to culture, structure, and process
(2012) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.50-2388 · Cited by 1,936
Managing the Rivalry of Competing Institutional Logics
Reay, T., & Hinings, C. R. (2009) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840609104803 · Cited by 1,821
Cited by
UNDERSTANDING HYBRIDITY IN PUBLIC ORGANIZATIONS
DENIS, J., FERLIE, E., & VAN GESTEL, N. (2015) · Public Administration · doi:10.1111/padm.12175 · Cited by 349
Designing and implementing data collaboratives: A governance perspective
Ruijer, E. (2021) · Government Information Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.giq.2021.101612 · Cited by 76
Competing logics in a hybrid organization: ICT service provision in the Italian health care sector
Maran, L., & Lowe, A. (2022) · Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal · doi:10.1108/aaaj-12-2019-4334 · Cited by 27
Metadata
- Authors
- SKELCHER, C., & SMITH, S. R.
- Venue
- Public Administration
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-07-20
- Volume
- 93
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 433-448
- ISSN
- 0033-3298 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9299
- OpenAlex
- W1613702401
- Cited by
- 649
- References
- 54
- FWCI
- 53.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: THEORIZING HYBRIDITY: INSTITUTIONAL LOGICS, COMPLEX ORGANIZATIONS, AND ACTOR IDENTITIES: THE CASE OF NONPROFITS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/padm.12105
- The paper
- SKELCHER, C., & SMITH, S. R. (2015). THEORIZING HYBRIDITY: INSTITUTIONAL LOGICS, COMPLEX ORGANIZATIONS, AND ACTOR IDENTITIES: THE CASE OF NONPROFITS. Public Administration. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12105
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.