Sociology of Institutions – key concepts
Week 1:
Key assumptions on why humans have developed institutions and
organisations:
o To make behaviour predictable.
o To regulate interaction.
o To provide a safety net.
o To organise distribution of scarcer resources.
o To shape societies and create some form of stability.
Institution:
o The formal and informal rules which regulate our behaviour to a lesser
or greater extent, or in other words, “society’s rules of the game.”
o Examples: customs, laws, guidelines, codes of conduct, exam
regulations, the constitution, conventions (the Geneva Convention for
example), protocols, LBBTQ+ rights, and heteronormativity.
Formal institution:
o A formal institution is codified, usually has official sanctions in case of
violation (organisations are dedicated to maintaining the institution).
Informal institution:
o An informal institution is non-codified and is maintained through
informal social control.
Organisation:
o Associations between people who are pursuing common goals, or in
other words, “the teams of the game.”
o Examples: schools, hospitals, the government, International Crime
Court, the Exam Committee, multinationals, sport clubs, the army,
universities, the court, the United Nations.
Formal organisation:
o A formal organisation is a legal entity.
o Examples: government organisations, market organisations, and civil
society organisations.
Informal organisation:
o An informal organisation has no legal status.
o Examples: networks, informal clubs, and social movements.
o Family is an informal organisation. However, it can be argued as a
formal organisation.
Scott’s assumptions about institutional theory:
o Institutions are relatively resistant to change, they provide ‘solidity’
across time and space. Institutions also impose restrictions by defining
legal, moral, and cultural boundaries (distinguishing between
acceptable and unacceptable behaviour).
o Institutions restrain but also have an enabling function.
Marx’s alternative explanation of stability:
, o Ownership of means of production and material interests creates
stability. Stability is dominated by the elites as long as the working-class
does not revolt. Stability should be seen in the light of class struggle.
Durkheim’s alternative explanation of stability:
o Collective sentiments, symbols, and rituals create collective
effervescence, which than turns into organic solidarity.
Critical theory explanation of stability:
o Due to the culture industry, people are so used to living in a consumer
society, that they forget to protest.
Scott’s definition of institutions:
o “Institutions comprise regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive
elements that together with associated activities and resources, provide
stability and meaning to social life.”
o Institutions are multifaced, durable social structures, made up of
symbolic elements, social activities, and material resources.
o Institutions are resistant to change, and are an enduring feature of
social life, they give ‘solidarity’ to social systems.
o In stable social situations, all three pillars are aligned. But often one
pillar assumes primacy/operates on its own. If pillars are not aligned
this may create confusion, conflict, and may give rise to institutional
change.
o Legitimacy is a condition which is needed for agreements with all three
pillars: a generalised perception or assumption that the actions of an
entity are desirable, proper, or appropriate within some socially
constructed system of norms, values, beliefs, and definitions.
o The initial reaction (cultural-cognitive) is what the individual wants, but
this might be stopped due to social obligation/binding expectations
(normative).
Scott’s regulative pillar of institutions:
o Institutions with (codified) laws, rules, and regulations, that are
complied with due to self-interest, and cost-benefit deliberations. The
regulative pillar is enforced through formal sanctions and surveillance, it
is weakly internalised. The regulative pillar affects fear, and guilt or
innocence.
o Examples of organisations that are involved with the regulative pillar
are: politics, judiciary, police, regulatory bodies, inspectorate,
examination, or disciplinary boards.
o Lawyers and economists mostly focus on the regulative pillar.
o The state has an important role as rule-maker, referee, and enforcer.
o Explanation of neoliberalism through the regulative pillar .
Scott’s normative pillar of institutions:
o Institutions with (non-codified) norms and values, that are complied with
due to social obligation, binding expectations, and a sense of
appropriateness. The normative pillar is enforced through social
, sanctions and is moderately internalised. The normative pillar affects
shame or honour, and remorse and self-respect.
o Examples of organisations that are involved with the normative pillar
are: family, church, education, sport, and civil society.
o Sociologists mostly focus on this pillar, and the normative pillars usually
involve roles which are defined by a set of norms for individuals
occupying those roles.
Scott’s cultural-cognitive pillar of institutions:
o Institutions with conventions, routines, categorisations, scripts, and
formats, which are complied with due to the taken-for-granted, shared
understanding. The cultural-cognitive pillar does not need enforcement
and is strongly internalised. The cultural-cognitive pillar affects certainty
or confusion.
o There is no particular organisation as example.
o Shared conceptions that constitute the nature of social reality and
create the frames through which meaning is made.
o Neo-institutionalist sociologists mostly focus on the cultural-cognitive
pillar because it stresses the cognitive dimensions of human existence
and the importance of symbols in mediation between the external world
and the response of individuals (symbolic processes construct social
reality!).
Week 2
Mahoney’s path dependence in historical sociology:
o Organisations and institutions are difficult to change because
(coincidental) paths selected before, are hard to divert from in the
present. Institutions are seen by Mahoney as mechanisms of social
order.
o Path dependence is about tracing a given outcome back to a particular
set of historical events, and showing how these events are themselves
contingent occurrences that cannot be explained on the basis of prior
historical conditions.
o A more or less contingent event in the past sets in motion a chain of
events, which are causally linked since each co-determined the next
one, making it costly to divert from this track. As a result, the institution
is constantly being reproduced.
Time 1) initial conditions.
Time 2) critical juncture.
Time 3) self-reinforcement.
o Diverging from history is costly (“locked-in”), and so we stick with
suboptimal institutions. However, this costly means more than
inefficiency.
Self-reinforcing sequences – Mahoney:
o Formation and long-term reproduction of a given institutional pattern,
which delivers increasing benefits with its continued adoption, and thus
over time it becomes more and more difficult to transform the pattern or
Week 1:
Key assumptions on why humans have developed institutions and
organisations:
o To make behaviour predictable.
o To regulate interaction.
o To provide a safety net.
o To organise distribution of scarcer resources.
o To shape societies and create some form of stability.
Institution:
o The formal and informal rules which regulate our behaviour to a lesser
or greater extent, or in other words, “society’s rules of the game.”
o Examples: customs, laws, guidelines, codes of conduct, exam
regulations, the constitution, conventions (the Geneva Convention for
example), protocols, LBBTQ+ rights, and heteronormativity.
Formal institution:
o A formal institution is codified, usually has official sanctions in case of
violation (organisations are dedicated to maintaining the institution).
Informal institution:
o An informal institution is non-codified and is maintained through
informal social control.
Organisation:
o Associations between people who are pursuing common goals, or in
other words, “the teams of the game.”
o Examples: schools, hospitals, the government, International Crime
Court, the Exam Committee, multinationals, sport clubs, the army,
universities, the court, the United Nations.
Formal organisation:
o A formal organisation is a legal entity.
o Examples: government organisations, market organisations, and civil
society organisations.
Informal organisation:
o An informal organisation has no legal status.
o Examples: networks, informal clubs, and social movements.
o Family is an informal organisation. However, it can be argued as a
formal organisation.
Scott’s assumptions about institutional theory:
o Institutions are relatively resistant to change, they provide ‘solidity’
across time and space. Institutions also impose restrictions by defining
legal, moral, and cultural boundaries (distinguishing between
acceptable and unacceptable behaviour).
o Institutions restrain but also have an enabling function.
Marx’s alternative explanation of stability:
, o Ownership of means of production and material interests creates
stability. Stability is dominated by the elites as long as the working-class
does not revolt. Stability should be seen in the light of class struggle.
Durkheim’s alternative explanation of stability:
o Collective sentiments, symbols, and rituals create collective
effervescence, which than turns into organic solidarity.
Critical theory explanation of stability:
o Due to the culture industry, people are so used to living in a consumer
society, that they forget to protest.
Scott’s definition of institutions:
o “Institutions comprise regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive
elements that together with associated activities and resources, provide
stability and meaning to social life.”
o Institutions are multifaced, durable social structures, made up of
symbolic elements, social activities, and material resources.
o Institutions are resistant to change, and are an enduring feature of
social life, they give ‘solidarity’ to social systems.
o In stable social situations, all three pillars are aligned. But often one
pillar assumes primacy/operates on its own. If pillars are not aligned
this may create confusion, conflict, and may give rise to institutional
change.
o Legitimacy is a condition which is needed for agreements with all three
pillars: a generalised perception or assumption that the actions of an
entity are desirable, proper, or appropriate within some socially
constructed system of norms, values, beliefs, and definitions.
o The initial reaction (cultural-cognitive) is what the individual wants, but
this might be stopped due to social obligation/binding expectations
(normative).
Scott’s regulative pillar of institutions:
o Institutions with (codified) laws, rules, and regulations, that are
complied with due to self-interest, and cost-benefit deliberations. The
regulative pillar is enforced through formal sanctions and surveillance, it
is weakly internalised. The regulative pillar affects fear, and guilt or
innocence.
o Examples of organisations that are involved with the regulative pillar
are: politics, judiciary, police, regulatory bodies, inspectorate,
examination, or disciplinary boards.
o Lawyers and economists mostly focus on the regulative pillar.
o The state has an important role as rule-maker, referee, and enforcer.
o Explanation of neoliberalism through the regulative pillar .
Scott’s normative pillar of institutions:
o Institutions with (non-codified) norms and values, that are complied with
due to social obligation, binding expectations, and a sense of
appropriateness. The normative pillar is enforced through social
, sanctions and is moderately internalised. The normative pillar affects
shame or honour, and remorse and self-respect.
o Examples of organisations that are involved with the normative pillar
are: family, church, education, sport, and civil society.
o Sociologists mostly focus on this pillar, and the normative pillars usually
involve roles which are defined by a set of norms for individuals
occupying those roles.
Scott’s cultural-cognitive pillar of institutions:
o Institutions with conventions, routines, categorisations, scripts, and
formats, which are complied with due to the taken-for-granted, shared
understanding. The cultural-cognitive pillar does not need enforcement
and is strongly internalised. The cultural-cognitive pillar affects certainty
or confusion.
o There is no particular organisation as example.
o Shared conceptions that constitute the nature of social reality and
create the frames through which meaning is made.
o Neo-institutionalist sociologists mostly focus on the cultural-cognitive
pillar because it stresses the cognitive dimensions of human existence
and the importance of symbols in mediation between the external world
and the response of individuals (symbolic processes construct social
reality!).
Week 2
Mahoney’s path dependence in historical sociology:
o Organisations and institutions are difficult to change because
(coincidental) paths selected before, are hard to divert from in the
present. Institutions are seen by Mahoney as mechanisms of social
order.
o Path dependence is about tracing a given outcome back to a particular
set of historical events, and showing how these events are themselves
contingent occurrences that cannot be explained on the basis of prior
historical conditions.
o A more or less contingent event in the past sets in motion a chain of
events, which are causally linked since each co-determined the next
one, making it costly to divert from this track. As a result, the institution
is constantly being reproduced.
Time 1) initial conditions.
Time 2) critical juncture.
Time 3) self-reinforcement.
o Diverging from history is costly (“locked-in”), and so we stick with
suboptimal institutions. However, this costly means more than
inefficiency.
Self-reinforcing sequences – Mahoney:
o Formation and long-term reproduction of a given institutional pattern,
which delivers increasing benefits with its continued adoption, and thus
over time it becomes more and more difficult to transform the pattern or
