The European Union’s multi-level impact on member state projectification in light of neoinstitutional theory

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to understand how has the European Union (EU) funding influenced projectification of the Polish public sector. The projectification of the public sector is analysed in relation to three levels: mega (state level), macro (sector level) and mezo (organisation level). Hence, it is understood as a multidimensional phenomenon that permeates different social structures. The study also applies elements of neoinstitutional theory and Europeanisation concept to the research on projectification. Design/methodology/approach The research is based on the mixed methods approach. The adopted methods (document analysis, quantitative analysis and in-depth interviews) are both qualitative and quantitative in nature and were used sequentially to address the research question, while securing the triangulation of the data. Findings The Polish public sector was projectified as a result of the implementation of hundreds of thousands of projects co-financed by the EU, which among other things, effected in legal regulations that support the project implementation of public tasks and changes in organisational structures towards a project-oriented direction. At public organisation level, it causes changes in the scope of organisational structures, strategic management processes and methods of work. On the basis of the assumptions that explain the mechanism of organisational isomorphism and Europeanisation, the paper may conclude that the public sector projectification process was triggered by a misfit between the projectified EU structures and the low degree of projectification in the Polish public sector. Originality/value The study is the first step to try to understand how the massification of project activities can affect the activities of the public sector of the particular country and the shaping of public policies at home. Because Poland has been the largest beneficiary of EU funds in Europe for over ten years, it can be assumed that these processes in this country are particularly intense. An attempt was also made to identify the scale of the public sector projectification process in Poland by not only describing, but also quantifying the phenomenon.

State regulation of the economy using neoinstitutional approach

The relevance of the study stipulated by the need to clarify the basic l mainstream theories of economic regulation, which do not take into account the limited rationality and opportunistic behavior of economic agents. Statement of the problem: in order to improve state regulation of the economy a theoretical foundation based on neoinstitutional methodology, taking into account the diversity of interests of economic agents that go beyond classical theories has to be elaborated. The literature review has shown that neoinstitutional theory has been developing constantly, but it does not pay enough attention to the issues of harmonization of economic interests within the framework of state regulation of the economy. The purpose of the study: the development of the theoretical foundations of state regulation based on the harmonization of the interests of economic agents within the framework of neoinstitutional paradigm. Research methods: neoinstitutional theory and methodology. The results of the work: the expediency of improving of state regulation of the national economy based on the coordination of economic interests, taking into account limited rationality and the possible opportunistic behavior of economic agents, is substantiated. The author's aggregated classification of interests based on the goal of ensuring their harmonization is given. The necessity of priority orientation of state regulation within the Eastern institutional matrix on coordination and balancing of the economic interests of social macrogroups is substantiated. Application area: government bodies in the coordination of economic interests. Conclusions: mainstream approaches to the regulation of economic processes should be supplemented by a modern theory of neoinstitutional regulation, which allows to coordinate interests of economic agents as a whole taking into account the specifics of the institutional matrix.

Political Management, Research and Development, and Advertising Capital in the Pharmaceutical Industry: A Good Prognosis?

Regulatory oversight that affects the firm's product-market environment continues to increase. Political management capital (PMC) describes firm expenditure committed to address the political and regulatory context. Neoinstitutional theory casts PMC as an institutionally expected normative response investors use when evaluating firm performance. Although limited evidence has suggested that firms benefit from PMC, the authors demonstrate its effects across financial outcomes including firm value, systematic risk, and idiosyncratic risk. Likewise, they examine how PMC interacts with a firm's product market through research-and-development (R&D) capital and advertising capital. Regression analysis of an unbalanced data set of 212 firms in the pharmaceutical and medical device industry, tracked from 2003 to 2014, reveals that while PMC improves investor expectations through firm value and systematic risk, it increases idiosyncratic risk. The authors find that PMC plays both substitutive and complementary roles with R&D such that increasing levels of both PMC and R&D weakens main effects. Political management capital has limited, but substitutive, effects with advertising likely because there is less regulatory oversight on advertising versus R&D in this industry. The authors explore these asymmetric effects, provide implications for neoinstitutional theory, and offer managerial insights.

Social enterprise and neoinstitutional theory

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to argue that neoinstitutional theory can provide insights into the conflicts between social ends and economic means within social enterprises (SEs). Tensions between these differing institutional logics may be seen as a manifestation of ambiguity and incoherence in an organizational field that is, despite many recent regulative and normative changes, still weakly institutionalized in the UK. Design/methodology/approach – The research design adopts a qualitative approach and is based on semi-structured, in-depth interviews with 40 SE managers in four major UK cities. Findings – Findings suggest that SE managers deal with the competing institutional logics of “the market” and “social care” in differing ways. Research limitations/implications – The case studies are derived from major UK cities where SEs are more likely to be dependent on state and quasi-public sector forms of support. Practical implications – Policies attempting to imbue a more commercial and business-like approach with the institutional field of SE should recognize the tensions imposed by such a shift. These tensions are especially pronounced in SEs affected by changes to state funding regimes and publicly sponsored markets. In some situations, such market logic may be largely inappropriate. Social implications – Changing institutional logics within an organizational field such as SE requires a recognition of the complex interrelationships between that factors that create and sustain such a field, most notably legal (regulative), educational (normative) and attitudinal (cognitive) factors. Originality/value – This is one of the few papers to explore the value of neoinstitutional theory in the context of SE.