Theorizing the institution: foundations,duality, and data

Although a central construct for sociologists, the concept of institution continues to elude clear and full specification. One reason for this lack of clarity is that about 50 years ago empirical researchers in the field of sociology turned their gaze downward, away from macro-sociological constructs in order to focus their attention on middle-range empirical projects. It took almost 20 years for the concept of the institution to work its back onto the empirical research agenda of mainstream sociologists. The new institutional project in organizational sociology led the way. Since then, scholars in this tradition have achieved a great deal but there is still much more to accomplish. Here, future directions for research are considered by reviewing how the concept of the institution has come to be treated by mainstream philosophers, sociologists of science and technology studies, and social network theorists.

---

John W. Mohr (Corresponding author)Email:

Roger Friedland (Corresponding author)Email:

---

John W. Mohr   is Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of California, Santa Barbara. He received his Ph.D. in sociology at Yale University. He has a longstanding interest in using formal network methods to analyze cultural meaning systems. Along with Roger Friedland, he is the organizer of the Cultural Turn Conference series at UCSB and the co-editor of Matters of Culture (Cambridge University Press 2004). He has published a number of articles on the formal analysis of meaning structures. His current research projects include a study of faculty change agents in higher education and the rise of nano-technology as a scientific project. This material is based [in part] upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Cooperative Agreement No. 0531184. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. Roger Friedland   is Professor of Religious Studies and Sociology at the University of California, Santa Barbara. He co-authored with Harold Zelmann The Fellowship: Frank Lloyd Wright and the Taliesin Fellowship (2006), with John Mohr Matters of Culture (2004), and authored “Money, Sex and God: The Erotic Logic of Religious Nationalism” (2002). He is currently working on politicized religion as a case of institutional politics and on the relations among religion, sexuality, and love. His latest essay is “Institution, Practice and Ontology: Towards a Religious Sociology” to appear in Ideology and Organizational Institutionalism, Research in the Sociology of Organizations.