The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Standardization as Institutional Work: The Regulatory Power of a Responsible Investment Standard
Open accessAbstract
This paper conceptualizes standardization as institutional work to study the emergence of a standard and the deployment of its regulatory power. We rely on unique access to longitudinal archival data for exploring how the FTSE4Good index, a responsible investment index, emerged as a standard for socially responsible corporate behavior. Our results show how three types of standardization work – calculative framing, engaging and valorizing – support the design, legitimation and monitoring processes whereby a standard acquires its regulatory power. Our findings reveal new facets in the dynamics of standardization by approaching standardization as a product of institutional work and in showing how unintended consequences of that work can be recaptured to strengthen the regulatory power of the standard.
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
Strategies for Theorizing from Process Data
Langley, A. (1999) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1999.2553248 · Cited by 7,008
Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences
Bowker, G. C., & Star, S. L. (1999) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/6352.001.0001 · Cited by 6,188
A world of standards but not a standard world: Toward a sociology of standards and standardization
Timmermans, S., & Epstein, S. (2010) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.012809.102629 · Cited by 1,226
Cited by
How Do Companies Respond to Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) ratings? Evidence from Italy
Clementino, E., & Perkins, R. (2021) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-020-04441-4 · Cited by 486
The quality of sustainability reports and impression management: A stakeholder perspective
Diouf, D., & Boiral, O. (2017) · Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal · doi:10.1108/aaaj-04-2015-2044 · Cited by 429
Researching corporate social responsibility communication: Themes, opportunities and challenges
Crane, A., & Glozer, S. (2016) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/joms.12196 · Cited by 418
The dynamics of standardization: Three perspectives on standards in organization studies
Brunsson, N., Rasche, A., & Seidl, D. (2012) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840612450120 · Cited by 392
Doing well by doing good: a systematic review and research agenda for sustainable investment
Talan, G., & Sharma, G. D. (2019) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su11020353 · Cited by 192
Metadata
- Authors
- Slager, R., Gond, J.-P., & Moon, J.
- Venue
- Organization Studies
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2012-05
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 5-6
- Pages
- 763-790
- ISSN
- 0170-8406 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-3044
- OpenAlex
- W2144279059
- Cited by
- 271
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 28.25
- 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: Standardization as Institutional Work: The Regulatory Power of a Responsible Investment Standard. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0170840612443628
- The paper
- Slager, R., Gond, J.-P., & Moon, J. (2012). Standardization as Institutional Work: The Regulatory Power of a Responsible Investment Standard. Organization Studies. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840612443628
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.
