The Politics of Progress: A Field-Level Analysis
Abstract
A hallmark of the modern era is the incredible pace at which technical and social progress gets made. Modern societies are organized to facilitate the work of making progress and institutions help ensure the work gets done. Sometimes, however, the progress we seek is destroyed, delayed or diminished. Politics are blamed when this happens. A close reading of the institutional literature betrays that supposition. Scholars have documented many cases and ways in which progress has been impeded by self-interested political action within organizational fields. But, even when the progress we seek is not fully implemented, some progress is usually getting made. This dissertation explores the dynamics of those politics of progress by asking the research question: What role do politics play in the progress that does get made?
To answer that question, I studied a regulatory rulemaking undertaken in the American telecommunications field using archival data and a research design inspired by the methods of theorizing with microhistory. Findings are presented in three chapters. First, a new institutional concept is developed: “Zones of Appropriateness”. I theorize that field actors hold a range of views about what conduct is deemed appropriate in an institutional context. That variance is an essential ingredient in negotiating how progress can get made. Second, I present novel political mechanisms that enable the carving of spaces out of institutional structures in which progress can be imagined and explored. Finally, I theorize mechanisms through which opponents and proponents of progress negotiate the structuring of those carved out spaces.
My dissertation contributes to the institutional power and politics and organizational fields literatures. First, I contribute theorizing about how actors use politics to explore the limitations of existing structure and the potential of progress. A relational view of power is essential to understanding those politics. Second, insights about the value of political resistance to progress are theorized. Finally, to the fields literature I contribute theorizing about how and why organizations take issues to the relational spaces of fields to seek guidance, pursue their interests, and work out the meaning of progress within their institutional contexts.
To answer that question, I studied a regulatory rulemaking undertaken in the American telecommunications field using archival data and a research design inspired by the methods of theorizing with microhistory. Findings are presented in three chapters. First, a new institutional concept is developed: “Zones of Appropriateness”. I theorize that field actors hold a range of views about what conduct is deemed appropriate in an institutional context. That variance is an essential ingredient in negotiating how progress can get made. Second, I present novel political mechanisms that enable the carving of spaces out of institutional structures in which progress can be imagined and explored. Finally, I theorize mechanisms through which opponents and proponents of progress negotiate the structuring of those carved out spaces.
My dissertation contributes to the institutional power and politics and organizational fields literatures. First, I contribute theorizing about how actors use politics to explore the limitations of existing structure and the potential of progress. A relational view of power is essential to understanding those politics. Second, insights about the value of political resistance to progress are theorized. Finally, to the fields literature I contribute theorizing about how and why organizations take issues to the relational spaces of fields to seek guidance, pursue their interests, and work out the meaning of progress within their institutional contexts.