EURAM 2017 Flyer-1

ST 01_03 Institutional change, Power, Resistance and Critical Management

As mentioned in the posts below, it follows our standing track for the next EURAM conference. We invite our community to submit papers for EURAM - Glasgow 2017, before than Jenuary 10th, 2017.


The track addresses the paradox of institutional change, the resistance that the change faces and the contradictions that it incites or reveals.

When addressing institutional change, literature emphasizes the role of power. Institutional agency is understood as the power to change institutions countervailing resistance to change.

The track investigates the issues of institutional change, power and resistance. This latter interpreted as both the institutional work of elites to maintain their hegemony and exploitative power, and the one enacted by dominated actors that resist exploitation and hegemony processes.


Paradoxically, institutions defined through their persistence seem increasingly to be dominated by multi factorial causes of change, with the event of the UK EU referendum being just the most evident example today. Connecting networks of knowledge and ways of knowing within institutions and between their social spaces generates the meaning of events, those phenomena that cannot be treated according to a predetermined rule, whose occurrence is a factor in unexpected change.

The track explores why and how what institutions and organizations change, despite routinized tendencies to inertia and the domination over individual members through routines and regularities. Thus, we look for papers that contribute to the advance of institutional theory by coupling persistence and change, order and disorder, authority and resistance.

How do individual actors or coalitions of actors (traders, entrepreneurs, managers, unions, parties, ordinary employees) and actants (such as Eurozone crises) contribute to institutional dynamics? To what extent are managers effectively monitoring institutional change? What is the role of democracy and cooperation and of bureaucracy and authority, and of resistance to each, in initiating and explaining change? How do networks of social knowledge and individual knowing incorporate unexpected events and institutional change?