The institutional field of creative entrepreneurship: a first glance in México and Colombia

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 (47) ◽  
pp. 66-88
Author(s):  
Daniel Cortázar Triana ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Institutional Field

EARTH, ENVIRONMENT AND HUMAN INTERACTIONS IN TENNESSEE: INSIGHTS FROM A MULTI-INSTITUTIONAL FIELD COURSE EXPERIENCE

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neil P. Kelley ◽  
◽  
Rodney Blackwell ◽  
Aniya Bryant ◽  
Amaris Daniels ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Human Interactions ◽  
Earth Environment ◽  
Course Experience ◽  
Institutional Field

Business planning as pedagogy: language and control in a changing institutional field

2010 ◽  
pp. 152-164
Author(s):  
Leslie S. Oakes ◽  
Barbara Townley ◽  
David J. Cooper ◽  
Gerry Johnson ◽  
Ann Langley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Business Planning ◽  
Institutional Field ◽  
And Control

The regulation of statutory auditing: an institutional theory approach

2014 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 371-394 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Richard Baker ◽  
Jean Bédard ◽  
Christian Prat dit Hauret
Keyword(s):  
Institutional Theory ◽  
Capital Markets ◽  
Theory Approach ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Sarbanes Oxley ◽  
External Pressures ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Institutional Field ◽  
Apparent Similarity ◽  
External Forces

Purpose – This paper aims to examine the recent evolution of the regulation of statutory auditing since the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 in the USA by comparing the regulatory structures for auditing in the USA, France and Canada. Design/methodology/approach – Using publicly available documents, the paper seeks to understand how the regulatory structures for statutory auditing have changed in the period since the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The USA, France and Canada were chosen for analysis because prior to Sarbanes-Oxley the regulatory structures of these three countries were relatively distinct, whereas subsequent to the Act they appear to be becoming similar. Findings – The authors interpret the increasing apparent similarity in the regulatory structures for statutory auditing in these three countries to be the result of external pressures from global capital markets for standardized regulatory practices. However, this apparent similarity may also be a form of “decoupling”, whereby actors in the institutional field of professional regulation, under pressures from powerful external forces, seek to enhance their legitimacy while maintaining internal flexibility and a certain capacity for resistance against external pressures in the institutional field. Research limitations/implications – The paper relies on a qualitative analysis of regulatory structures based on a review and analysis of publicly available documents and legislation. As such, it has limitations similar to other qualitative studies. Practical implications – The regulation of statutory auditing is important to society both to assure the proper functioning of capital markets and to provide reliable information to the general public. Gaining a better understanding of the regulatory structures for statutory auditing advances the public interest. Originality/value – There have been few prior research efforts that have examined the regulation of statutory auditing through the lens of new institutional theory.

scholarly journals Championing Physical Cultural Sciences

2019 ◽  
Vol 82 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-93
Author(s):  
Jerzy Kosiewicz
Keyword(s):  
Biological Sciences ◽  
Cultural Practices ◽  
Social Values ◽  
Physical Phenomenon ◽  
Physical Culture ◽  
Cultural Character ◽  
Theoretical Assumptions ◽  
Institutional Field ◽  
Political Character ◽  
Supportive Function

AbstractThe term “physical culture” is, first of all, associated (referring to the etymology of the word “culture” from the Latin “colo,-ere”, meaning “to cultivate”, “to inhabit” or “to honor”) with cultivation and taking care of the human “physis” – obviously in the context of social and natural environment. What matters in physical cultural reflection is not movement as such – as a purely physical phenomenon – but only such a form of movement which has been cultivated and attributed with conventionalized social values of symbolic and autotelic character. Biological sciences connected with the human being are traditionally – after MacFadden, among others – counted among physical cultural sciences. Because of the bodily foundations of human physical activity, they perform a significant cognitive function: they describe natural foundations of special forms of movement, but they are not offering knowledge of cultural character. As there are no values in the human being’s nature, the biological sciences within the institutional field of physical culture can with their separate methodological and theoretical assumptions only offer an auxiliary, supportive function. Physical cultural sciences are primarily dealing with the significant relations between humans in physical cultural practices, with knowledge of an axiological (ethical and aesthetical) and social (philosophical, sociological, pedagogical, historical or political) character. The alleged superiority of biological sciences within physical cultural sciences and the connected marginalization of the humanities – which constitute, after all, a necessary and hence an unquestionable foundation for cultural studies – is, therefore, a clear challenge in the institutional field of physical culture.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document