Dimaggio, Hall and North on

INSTITUTIONS
A Critique to the Concept of
UNCERTAINTY
Course: Contemporary Social and Political Theory;
Instructor: Prof. C. Edling
Presenter: Andreea Aiordachioaie

Overview
Introduction The Concept of Uncertainty
Occurrences of the Concept in Dimaggio & Powell (1983)
Comments 1
Occurrences of the Concept in Hall & Taylor (1996)
Comments 2
Occurrences of the Concept in North (1991)
Comments 3
Final (Personal) Comments
Discussion

References

Introduction The Concept of

Uncertainty
It appears several times in the three texts, with
different functions
Why is it inseparable from the discussions on
institutions?
Because it is tightly related with the idea of strategy
Because authors link it to the relationship between
institutions and individual behavior
Because uncertainty is also considered to be a feature
of politics and economics
Because it is also mentioned as the root of risk (in
economics, one of the purposes of institutions is the
risk administration)

Occurrences of the Concept in

Dimaggio & Powell (1983)
1. The three mechanisms of institutional
isomorphic change:
a. Coercive
b. Mimetic (resulting to standard responses to
uncertainty Dimaggio & Powell [1983], p. 150)
c. Normative

Here, the term is related to the concept of

strategy (from an entrepreneurial
perspective)

Occurrences of the Concept in

Dimaggio & Powell (1983)

2. The term is repeated when the authors

formulate hypotheses based on the predictors
for isomorphic change (organizational- and
field-level predictors):

 Hypothesis A-3: the mimetic tendencies of an

organization increase with the level of
uncertainty of the relationships between
means and ends.

 Hypothesis A-4: the mimetic tendencies of an

organization increase with the level of
uncertainty and ambiguity of its goals.

 Hypothesis B-4: The greater the extent to

which technologies are uncertain or goals are
ambiguous within a field, the greater the rate
of isomorphic change (Dimaggio & Powell
[1983],p. 156).

Preliminary Comments 1
Dimaggio and Powell employ the concept of
uncertainty mainly as one of the causes of
institutional isomorphism.
Uncertainty, here, is seen as a factor inhibiting
the development of a strategy.
Mostly refers to very modern institutional
environments.

Occurrences of the Concept in Hall &

Taylor (1996)
1. The first of the four features of historical
institutionalism: the tendency to
conceptualize the relationship between
institutions and individual behavior in
relatively broad terms (Hall & Taylor [1996],
p. 938)


The major way in which institutions
affect behavior is by giving actors
greater or lesser degrees of certainty
about the present and future behavior
of other actors (idem, p. 939)

Occurrences of the Concept in Hall &

Taylor (1996)
2. The third feature of the rational choice
institutionalism: emphasizing the role of
strategic interactions in the
determination of political outcomes:

 Institutions structure such interactions by

affecting the range and sequence of
alternatives on the choice-agenda or by
providing information and enforcement
mechanisms that reduce uncertainty about
the corresponding behavior of others (idem,
p. 945)

Occurrences of the Concept in Hall &

Taylor (1996)
3. Members of this school [rational choice
institutionalism] emphasize that political
action involves the management of
uncertainty, long one of the most central and
neglected features of politics (idem, p. 951)

Preliminary Comments 2
Hall and Taylor -> micro-level approach to
institutionalism: the relationship of
institutions with individuals or even
relationships between individuals that are
mediated by institutions.
Perspective: strategy, again.
Politics comes into discussion for the first time
and uncertainty appears as its main feature.

Occurrences of the Concept in North

(1991)
1. First paragraph of the text, right after the
definition of institutions: Throughout
history, institutions have been devised by
human beings to create order and reduce
uncertainty in exchange (North [1991], p.
97)

Occurrences of the Concept in North

(1991)
2. The sub-chapter dedicated to the innovations
brought to institutions in early modern
Europe:
The transformation of uncertainty into risk.
By uncertainty, I mean here a condition wherein
one cannot ascertain the probability of an event
and therefore cannot arrive at a way of insuring
against such an occurrence. Risk, on the other
hand, implies the ability to make an actuarial
determination of the likelihood of an event and
hence insure such an outcome (idem, p. 106)

Preliminary Comments 3
Modernization of institutions =>
transformation of uncertainty into risk
(minimizing unpredictability; increasing level
of anticipation gained from experience)
Reduction of uncertainty + creation of order =
the only causes of the creation of institutions

Conclusion
Reviewed literature:
Uncertainty = one of the bases and main causes of
the emergence of institutions
It is emphasized as part of personal, political,
economic relations
Institutions are supposed to diminish the level of
uncertainty in those relations

Final Comments
Other possible causes that led to the
emergence and development of institutions:
Need for efficient communication (via
intermediates)
Need for recognition of group-affiliation
Geographical boundaries and large distances
Need for security (not certainty)

Final Comments
With the emergence of institutional
isomorphism, institutions might not be as
successful in diminishing uncertainty (they
employ pattern-behaviors, standard solutions,
classical strategies)

Discussion
In your opinion, how well are institutions
doing in diminishing the level of uncertainty
in:
Individual relations?
Institutional-individual relations?
Inter-institutional relations?

Discussion:
Consider the following institutions or institutionalized activities:

Ruling
(Government)

Marriage

Banks

Child
Adoption

Social
Assistance

Elderly care

Corporations

Postal
Services

Health care

Choose one and discuss to what extent some form of uncertainty caused the
apparition of that particular institution in the first place.

References
Dimaggio, P. J. & Powell, W. W. (1983). The Iron Cage
Revisited Institutional Isomorphism and Collective
Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological
Review 48(2): 147-160
Hall, P. A. and Taylor, R. C. R. (1996). Political Science and
the Three New Institutionalisms. Political Studies 44(5):
936-957
North, D. C. (1991). Institutions. Journal of Economic
Perspectives 5(1): 97-112