Toward a Dynamic Theory of Intermediate Conformity

• Date: 01 March 2016
• Published date: 01 March 2016
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12155
• Author: Guilhem Bascle

Toward a Dynamic Theory of Intermediate

Conformity

Guilhem Bascle

Catholic University of Louvain

ABSTRACT The issue of conformity to social norms has been a major focus of research. Yet,

intermediate conformity, which refers to actors who are neither total conformers nor non-

conformers, has received scant attention even though the behaviour is likely widespread. This

paper aims to extend the literature on conformity to social norms by laying the foundations

for a tractable theory of intermediate conformity. Here, a set of key factors hypothesized to

lead actors into intermediate conformity is identified and formal arguments about the

dynamic-legitimacy and reputational effects of their intermediate conformity moves are

formulated. Important building blocks include a taxonomy of norms that allows for norm

heterogeneity and a recognition that conformity may change over time. The developed

framework provides a new conceptual lever for better understanding how intermediate

conformers cope over time with social norms of different types and importance.

Keywords: institutional logics, intermediate conformity, legitimacy, organization theory,

reputation, social norms

INTRODUCTION

The study of conformity to external expectations is a cornerstone of organizational

theory research (e.g., DiMaggio and Powell, 1983; Mitchell et al., 1997; Pfeffer and Sal-

ancik, 1978). This interest is longstanding and can be traced to works by Durkheim

(1895) and Weber (1922), for instance. This interest is also not surprising, because exter-

nal expectations exist in almost every dimension of social life, although sometimes they

go unnoticed (Dinitz et al., 1975). To illustrate, in many societies individuals may be

expected to greet colleagues when entering a meeting, to come prepared if given a task,

or to avoid using offending language. Likewise, organizations are expected to respond

Address for reprints: Guilhem Bascle, Department of Strategy and Organization, Louvain School of

Management, Catholic University of Louvain, Place des Doyens 1, 1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium

(guilhem.bascle@uclouvain.be).

V

C2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd and Society for the Advancement of Management Studies

Journal of Management Studies 53:2 March 2016

doi: 10.1111/joms.12155

to external expectations, such as reducing their environmental footprint, promoting

diversity, or improving work conditions of sweatshop workers.

Researchers have sought to identify the drivers and consequences of conformity to

social norms, i.e., external expectations. However, our understanding of determinants of

individual or organizational conformity and assessments of conformity or defiance may

be limited. In particular, whereas past research has shown that individuals and organiza-

tions are targeted by a range of social norms (e.g., O’Reilly and Chatman, 1996), the

key implications of this observation are underexplored. To begin, if individuals and

organizations must respond to diverse social norms, complete defiance is likely rare,

since uniform defiance to all norms is both challenging for individuals and organiza-

tions, and uncommon in fields with at least one proscriptive norm. Furthermore, com-

plete conformity may be rarely observed, because, for instance, actors may find it

challenging to completely conform, especially when norms conflict with resource com-

mitments or when norms from different institutional logics conflict. While past research

has often assumed overall conformity to social norms (see Oliver, 1991), recent research

on institutional logics, and in particular on institutional complexity, has been developing

models that consider how actors cope with conflicting norms and institutional logics (for

a review, see for instance Greenwood et al., 2011). Despite its impressive contributions,

research on institutional logics has typically focused on (or assumed) binary conformity

models; that is, it has generally focused on how (or assumed that) actors, in a field,

replace one logic and its set of norms with a conflicting set, or embrace altogether con-

flicting logics and their associated norms. Taken together, our understanding of how

actors deal with norms may be sketchy if we accept that actors likely neither fully follow

nor reject all social norms. We thus lack detailed accounts that focus systematically on

what is likely widespread behaviour, namely, intermediate conformity whereby actors,

in a field, are neither solely full conformers nor non-conformers.

This paper seeks to address this gap by developing a framework for the foundation

of a theory of intermediate conformity. Here, we examine its drivers and dynamic-

legitimacy as well as reputational effects, under conditions of potential changes in con-

formity over time. Developing such a framework can shape our understanding of how

individuals and organizations deal with multiple norms, the repercussions of changes in

individual and organizational conformity patterns, and how everyday behaviours of

intermediate conformity may produce long-term field-level effects.

PRELIMINARY DEFINITION OF KEY TERMS

In every society, social norms – defined from Scott (2001) as shared expectations prescrib-

ing and/or proscribing behaviour, and defining legitimate means to pursue valued ends

– generally cluster around major and/or recurrent activities. This clustering may reflect

an institutional logic and its associated social norms (referred to hereafter as norms), sug-

gesting that norms constitute ‘a critical dimension’ of institutional logics (Thornton and

Ocasio, 2008, p. 106). Institutional logics, or the ‘broad cultural beliefs and [norms] that

structure cognition and fundamentally shape decision making and action in a field’

(Marquis and Lounsbury, 2007, p. 799), define institutions’ content and meaning

(Thornton and Ocasio, 2008).

132 G. Bascle

V

C2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd and Society for the Advancement of Management Studies