ABSTRACT
Theviewthatorgan1zat10nsareembeddedinnetworksof soc1alrelat1onsh1psISw1delyadvertisedasanalternativeto theeconomiCaccountoforganizationalbehav1or1ngeneral (Granovetter.1985)andstructuralchange1nparticular (Palmeretal.,1987).Tos1mplify,econom1ctheonesassume thatorgan1zat1onsareSituated1natom1zedmarketsand adoptstructuresthatmax1m1zefirmeffic1ency(Williamson. 1975;NelsonandWinter,1982).Theembeddedness perspect1veassumesthatorgan1zat1onsareSituatedin networksofsoc1alrelat1onsh1psandadoptstructures 1rrespect1veofeff1c1encycons1derat1ons.Withinthe embeddednessperspective,politicalandinstitutional approachesareoftencounterposedtooneanother.Political theoryassumesthatorgan1zat1onsarecomposedof compet1ngcoalitionsw1thdifferentInterestsandcapacities forinfluenceandadoptstructuresthatbolsterthe1rdominant coalition'spower(PfefferandSalancik,1978;Pfeffer,1981). PoliticalcompetitiOnhasboth1nter-andintraorgan1zational dimens1ons.Coalitionscompetingforpoweronthe 1nterorgan1zationallevelmcludevanousownershipgroups (e.g.,cap1talistfam11iesandfinanc1alinstitutions)andonthe intraorganizatiOnallevel.avanetyofmanagerialcliques(e.g., sales,finance,production,etc).Institutionaltheoryassumes thatorganizationsadoptstructuresthatarecons1dered leg1t1matebyotherorgamzat1onsintheirfields.regardlessof politicalconsiderations.Legitimatedstructurescanbe transmittedtoorgan~zat1ons1nafieldthroughtradition. representedbythefield'sfoundingorganizations;through imitation,basedonthefield'scurrentlymostprevalent forms;throughcoerc1on,exercisedbythefield'sdominant organizations;andthroughnormativepressures,diffused througheducationalorganizationsandsocialnetworks (MeyerandRowan,1977;Scott,1988).
