ABSTRACT The institutional logics and norm circle perspectives have emerged as two approaches to the analysis of institutions in organisations and society. This paper compares the two perspectives and asks whether they should be seen as alternative or complementary approaches. Although the two approaches rest on a shared ontological conception of institutions as objectified, or taken‐for‐granted, phenomena that are imbued with a strong sense of normativity, their diverging epistemological commitments and analytical emphases speak in favour of treating them as relatively distinct alternatives. This is especially the case insofar as the ‘mainstream’ approach, that has dominated research on institutional logics, is concerned. However, I also draw attention to how insights from the institutional logics and norm circle perspectives can be selectively combined and complement each other within a research approach that builds on a shared, critical realist understanding of institutions.
Sven Modell (Thu,) studied this question.