The Institutional Work of Third-Sector Social Service Providers: Mechanisms that Contribute to Institutional Change in Logics of Public Safety

• In Event: Accountability and Contestation in Social Work

Abstract

Recent institutional change efforts in public safety involve shifting the relationship between policing and social services, and their respective institutional logics of punishment and care. Third-sector social service providers are in a key position to advance and negotiate their roles, practices, and relationships as policy implementers in this shifting institutional landscape. Indeed, organizational research has shown that service providers shape policy on-the-ground in the face of complex organizational, institutional, and resource environments (Brodkin & Marston, 2013; Lipsky, 2010; Maynard‐Moody & Musheno, 2012). Yet, scholars have paid little attention to how the actions of individuals within organizations may contribute to change in field-level institutional logics (Gawer & Phillips, 2013). In this paper, I ask: How does the institutional work of social service providers contribute to change in the institutional logics of public safety?

Institutional work research explores how individuals within organizations make institutional change happen from the bottom-up, focusing on individuals’ motivations, experiences, and actions in pursuing a broad array of institutional goals (Hampel et al., 2017; Lawrence et al., 2011). This research is often siloed from research on institutional logics (Gawer & Phillips, 2013). Through institutional work, service providers may contribute to institutional change that advances a care-based version of public safety, an urgent issue for third-sector organizations (Das et al., 2022; Jacobs et al., 2021).

A comparative case study was conducted of two cities that have taken substantial steps to transform local public safety services, including through defunding the police. Primary methods included a 21-month virtual ethnography of each city’s transformation process and fifty qualitative interviews of relevant organizational actors, including third-sector social service administrators and frontline providers, police, public administrators, activists, and funders. Using pattern coding and thematic analysis (Saldaña, 2016), ethnographic observation and interviews were used to identify and contextually understand the institutional work mechanisms of service providers that contributed to institutional change in public safety logics.

Qualitative analysis uncovered five specific institutional work mechanisms that contributed to institutional change in logics. The first three mechanisms—segmenting, bridging, and demarcating—are about managing boundaries between institutional logics and their associated actors in the organizational field. The other two mechanisms—spreading and shaping—concern the expansion of logics in the organizational field. Across all mechanisms, I found that institutional and organizational contexts—including relevant policies and programs—facilitated service providers’ institutional work. I argue that service providers conduct institutional work by managing their relationships to those associated with a conflicting logic, primarily police, thereby contributing to bottom-up institutional change.

This paper adds to our understanding of how institutional work supports change in institutional logics. Marrying these perspectives underscores how the institutional work of service providers is based in distinct approaches regarding how and by whom public safety should be achieved (i.e., logics and their professional representatives). Through uncovering these mechanisms, this paper contributes to discussions taking place among service providers regarding their appropriate relationship to police and carceral systems. Findings underscore how restricting inter-professional collaboration can be important to institutional work with anti-oppressive aims.

References

Abbasi, G. (2020). Discipline and commoditize: How U-visas exploit the pain of gender-based violence. Feminist Criminology, 15(4), 464-491.
Abrams, L., & Dettlaff, A. (2020, June 23). An open letter to NASW and allied organizations on social work’s relationship with law enforcement. Medium. https://medium.com/@alandet tlaff/an-open-letter-to-nasw-and-allied-organizations-on-social-works-relationship-withlaw-enforcement-1a1926c71b28
Battilana, J., Besharov, M., & Mitzinneck, B. (2017). On hybrids and hybrid organizing: A review and roadmap for future research. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, T. Lawrence, & R. Meyer, The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism (pp. 133-169). SAGE Publications Ltd.
Bertels, S., & Lawrence, T. B. (2016). Organizational responses to institutional complexity stemming from emerging logics: The role of individuals. Strategic Organization, 14(4), 336-372.
Beunen, R., & Patterson, J. J. (2019). Analysing institutional change in environmental governance: Exploring the concept of ‘institutional work’. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 62(1), 12-29.
Binder, A. (2007). For love and money: Organizations’ creative responses to multiple environmental logics. Theory and society, 36(6), 547-571.
Breit, E., Andreassen, T. A., & Salomon, R. H. (2016). Modification of public policies by street-level organisations: an institutional work perspective. Journal of Social Policy, 45(4), 709-728.
Brodkin, E. Z., & Marston, G. (Eds.). (2013). Work and the welfare state: Street-level organizations and workfare politics. Georgetown University Press.
Cloutier, C., Denis, J. L., Langley, A., & Lamothe, L. (2016). Agency at the managerial interface: Public sector reform as institutional work. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 26(2), 259-276.
Das, A., Anasti, T., & Wells, R. (2022). Role of community-based organizations in countering carceral logics: Comparing two caring profession organizations in Chicago. Journal of Urban Affairs, 1-16.
Dunn, M. B., & Jones, C. (2010). Institutional logics and institutional pluralism: The contestation of care and science logics in medical education, 1967–2005. Administrative science quarterly, 55(1), 114-149.
Fixler, A. L., Jacobs, L. A., & Davis, C. D. (2023). Police-Social Work Collaboration and the Ethical Practice Paradox: Perspectives from Social Work’s Next Generation. Journal of Progressive Human Services, 35(1).
Gawer, A., & Phillips, N. (2013). Institutional work as logics shift: The case of Intel’s transformation to platform leader. Organization studies, 34(8), 1035-1071.
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Univ of California Press.
Gieryn, T. F. (1983). Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. American sociological review, 781-795.
Goodrick, E., & Reay, T. (2011). Constellations of institutional logics: Changes in the professional work of pharmacists. Work and Occupations, 38(3), 372-416.
Greenwood, R., Raynard, M., Kodeih, F., Micelotta, E. R., & Lounsbury, M. (2011). Institutional complexity and organizational responses. Academy of Management annals, 5(1), 317-371.
Gümüsay, A. A., Claus, L., & Amis, J. (2020). Engaging with grand challenges: An institutional logics perspective. Organization Theory, 1(3), 2631787720960487.
Hallett, T., & Ventresca, M. J. (2006). Inhabited institutions: Social interactions and organizational forms in Gouldner’s Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy. Theory and society, 35(2), 213-236.
Hampel, C. E., Lawrence, T. B., & Tracy, P. (2017). Institutional work: Taking stock and making it matter. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, T. Lawrence, & R. Meyer, The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism (pp. 558-590). SAGE Publications Ltd.
Hasenfeld, Y. (2010). Organizational Responses to Social Policy: The Case of Welfare Reform. Administration in Social Work, 34(2), 148–167. https://doi.org/10.1080/03643101003608976
Jacobs, L. A., Kim, M. E., Whitfield, D. L., Gartner, R. E., Panichelli, M., Kattari, S. K., ... & Mountz, S. E. (2021). Defund the police: Moving towards an anti-carceral social work. Journal of Progressive Human Services, 32(1), 37-62.
Kaba, M., & Ritchie, A. J. (2022). No More Police: A Case for Abolition. The New Press.
Kim, M. E., Chung, M., Hassan, S., & Ritchie, A. J. (2021). Defund the police – invest in community care: A guide to alternative mental health responses. https://www.interruptingcriminalization.com/non-police-crisis-response-guide
Lawrence, T., Suddaby, R., & Leca, B. (2011). Institutional work: Refocusing institutional studies of organization. Journal of management inquiry, 20(1), 52-58.
Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service. Russell Sage Foundation.
Lounsbury, M. (2007). A tale of two cities: Competing logics and practice variation in the professionalizing of mutual funds. Academy of management journal, 50(2), 289-307.
Maynard‐Moody, S., & Musheno, M. (2012). Social equities and inequities in practice: Street‐Level workers as agents and pragmatists. Public Administration Review, 72(s1), S16-S23.
Mosley, J. E. (2020). Social Service Nonprofits: Navigating Conflicting Demands. In The nonprofit sector (pp. 251-270). Stanford University Press.
Murray, B. J., Copeland, V., & Dettlaff, A. J. (2023). Reflections on the Ethical Possibilities and Limitations of Abolitionist Praxis in Social Work. Affilia, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/08861099221146151
Nanasi, N. (2017). The U Visa's Failed Promise for Survivors of Domestic Violence. Yale JL & Feminism, 29, 273-320.
Ocasio, W. (2023). Institutions and Their Social Construction: A Cross-Level Perspective. Organization Theory, 4(3), 26317877231194368.
Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of management review, 16(1), 145-179.
Pache, A. C., & Santos, F. (2013). Inside the hybrid organization: Selective coupling as a response to competing institutional logics. Academy of management journal, 56(4), 972-1001.
Powell, W. W., & Rerup, C. (2017). Opening the Black Box: The Microfoundations of Institutions. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, T. Lawrence, & R. Meyer, The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism (pp. 311–335). SAGE Publications Ltd.
Purdy, J. M., & Gray, B. (2009). Conflicting logics, mechanisms of diffusion, and multilevel dynamics in emerging institutional fields. Academy of Management Journal, 52(2), 355-380.
Rahman, S., Teicher, J., Cox, J. W., & Alam, Q. (2023). Slipstreaming for public sector reform: How enterprising public sector leaders navigate institutional inertia. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 33(1), 4-18.
Raynard, M. (2016). Deconstructing complexity: Configurations of institutional complexity and structural hybridity. Strategic Organization, 14(4), 310-335.
Reay, T., Goodrick, E., & Lu, C. (2021). Institutional Settlements and Organizational Hybridity: The Rise and Fall of Supervised Consumption Sites. In Organizational Hybridity: Perspectives, Processes, Promises. Emerald Publishing Limited.
Reay, T., & Hinings, C. R. (2009). Managing the rivalry of competing institutional logics. Organization studies, 30(6), 629-652.
Rogers, M. S., McNiel, D. E., & Binder, R. L. (2019). Effectiveness of Police Crisis Intervention Training Programs. The journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 47(4), 414-421.
Saldaña, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.
Schenwar, M., & Law, V. (2020). Prison by any other name: The harmful consequences of popular reforms. The New Press.
Schneiberg, M., & Lounsbury, M. (2017). Social movements and the dynamics of institutions and organizations. The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism, 281-310.
Seo, D. , Bryson, J. M. , Crosby, B. C. (2023). How can collaboration deliver? A structurational approach to understanding collaboration process and effectiveness. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 1– 26. https://doi-org.proxy.lib.umich.edu/10.1002/nml.21571
Sherraden, M. (2020, June). Social work and the future of policing: Key points for changes in policy and practice (CSD Policy Brief No. 20-14). St. Louis, MO: Washington University, Center for Social Development. https://doi.org/10.7936/885h-rh13
Skelcher, C., & Smith, S. R. (2015). Theorizing hybridity: Institutional logics, complex organizations, and actor identities: The case of nonprofits. Public administration, 93(2), 433-448.
Smets, M., Jarzabkowski, P., Burke, G. T., & Spee, P. (2015). Reinsurance trading in Lloyd’s of London: Balancing conflicting-yet-complementary logics in practice. Academy of management journal, 58(3), 932-970.
Spitzmueller, M. C. (2018). Remaking “community” mental health: Contested institutional logics and organizational change. Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance, 42(2), 123-145.
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of management review, 20(3), 571-610.
Topal, C. (2015). A relational perspective of institutional work. Journal of Management & Organization, 21(4), 495-514.
Tyllström, A. (2021). More than a revolving door: Corporate lobbying and the socialization of institutional carriers. Organization Studies, 42(4), 595-614.
Ulmer, J. T. (2019). Criminal courts as inhabited institutions: Making sense of difference and similarity in sentencing. Crime and Justice, 48(1), 483-522.
Wooten, M., & Hoffman, A. J. (2017). Organizational fields: Past, present and future. In The Sage Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism (pp. 55-72). SAGE Publications Ltd.
Wright II, J. E., Gaozhao, D., Dukes, K., & Templeton, D. (2022). The power of protest on policing: Black Lives Matter protest and civilians evaluation of the police. Public Administration Review.
Zilber, T. B. (2002). Institutionalization as an interplay between actions, meanings, and actors: The case of a rape crisis center in Israel. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 234-254.
Zilber, T. B. (2013). Institutional logics and institutional work: should they be agreed?. In Institutional logics in action, Part A (Vol. 39, pp. 77-96). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Author

• Matthew Bakko