How organizational research can avoid the pitfalls of a co-optation perspective: analyzing gender equality work in Austrian universities with organizational institutionalism

References

• Acker, J. 1992. “Gendered Institutions. From Sex Roles to Gendered Institutions.” Contemporary Sociology 21 (5): 565–569. doi: 10.2307/2075528
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahmed, S. 2007. “The Language of Diversity.” Ethnic and Racial Studies 30 (2): 235–256. doi: 10.1080/01419870601143927
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahmed, S. 2012. On Being Included: Racism and Diversity in Institutional Life. London: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Alvesson, M., and Y. D. Billing. 2002. “Beyond Body-Counting: A Discussion of the Social Construction of Gender at Work.” In Gender, Identity and the Culture of Organizations, edited by I. Aaltio and A. J. Mills, 72–91. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Auer, M., and H. Welte. 2007. “Social Positioning of Equal Opportunity Actors in Austria.” Equal Opportunities International 26 (8): 778–801. doi: 10.1108/02610150710836136
   Google Scholar
• Barry, J., J. Chandler, and E. Berg. 2007. “Women’s Movements and New Public Management: Higher Education in Sweden and England.” Public Administration 85 (1): 103–122. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2007.00636.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bendl, R., and A. Schmidt. 2012. “Revisiting Feminist Activism at Managerial Universities.” Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal 31 (5–6): 484–505.
   Google Scholar
• Berger, P., and T. Luckmann. 1967. The Social Construction of Reality. A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. London: Penguin Books.
   Google Scholar
• Boxenbaum, E., and J. Strandgaard Pedersen. 2009. “Scandinavian Institutionalism – A Case of Institutional Work.” In Institutional Work: Actors and Agency in Institutional Studies of Organizations, edited by T. B. Lawrence, R. Suddaby, and B. Leca, 178–204. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Burke, M. C., and M. Bernstein. 2014. “How the Right Usurped the Queer Agenda: Frame Co-optation in Political Discourse.” Sociological Forum 29 (4): 830–850. doi: 10.1111/socf.12122
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, B. R. 1998. Creating Entrepreneurial Universities: Organizational Pathways of Transformation. New York: Pergamon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Coy, P. G. 2013. “Co-Optation.” In The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social and Political Movements, edited by D. A. Snow, D. Della Porta, B. Klandermans, and D. McAdam, 280–281. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Deem, R., and K. J. Brehony. 2005. “Management as Ideology: The Case of ‘New Managerialism’ in Higher Education.” Oxford Review of Education 31 (2): 217–235. doi: 10.1080/03054980500117827
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. “Building Theories from Case Study Research.” The Academy of Management Review 14 (4): 532–550.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eschle, C., and B. Maiguashca. 2014. “Reclaiming Feminist Futures: Co-Opted and Progressive Politics in a Neo-Liberal Age.” Political Studies 62: 634–651. doi: 10.1111/1467-9248.12046
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferguson, M. L. 2005. “‘W’ Stands for Women: Feminism and Security Rhetoric in the Post-9/11 Bush Administration.” Politics & Gender 1 (1): 9–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flick, U. 2009. An Introduction to Qualitative Research. 4th ed. Los Angeles: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Fraser, N. 2009. “Feminism, Capitalism and the Cunning of History.” New Left Review 56: 97–117.
   Google Scholar
• Fraser, N. 2013. “How Feminism Became Capitalism's Handmaiden – And How to Reclaim It.” The Guardian, October 14. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/14/feminism-capitalist-handmaiden-neoliberal.
   Google Scholar
• Friedland, R., and R. R. Alford. 1991. “Bringing Society Back In: Symbols, Practices, and Institutional Contradictions.” In The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, edited by W. W. Powell, and P. J. DiMaggio, 232–263. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Giddens, A. 1984. The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Greenwood, R., C. Oliver, R. Suddaby, and K. Sahlin. 2008. The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism. Los Angeles: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Greenwood, R., M. Raynard, F. Kodeih, E. R. Micelotta, and M. Lounsbury. 2011. “Institutional Complexity and Organizational Responses.” The Academy of Management Annals 5 (1): 317–371. doi: 10.1080/19416520.2011.590299
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hofbauer, J., A. Striedinger, K. Kreissl, and B. Sauer. 2015. “Of Trump Cards and Game Moves: Positioning Gender Equality as an Element of Power Struggles in Universities.” In Pierre Bourdieu, Organization, and Management, edited by A. Tatli, M. Özbilgin, and M. Karatas-Ozkan, 139–161. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kreissl, K., A. Striedinger, B. Sauer, and J. Hofbauer. 2015. “Will Gender Equality Ever Fit In? Contested Discursive Spaces of University Reform.” Gender and Education 27 (3): 221–238. doi: 10.1080/09540253.2015.1028903
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawrence, T. B., and R. Suddaby. 2006. “Institutions and Institutional Work.” In Sage Handbook of Organization Studies, 2nd ed., edited by S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, T. B. Lawrence, and W. R. Nord, 215–254. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Lawrence, T., R. Suddaby, and B. Leca. 2009. Institutional Work: Actors and Agency in Institutional Studies of Organization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lawrence, T., R. Suddaby, and B. Leca. 2011. “Institutional Work: Refocusing Institutional Studies of Organization.” Journal of Management Inquiry 20 (1): 52–58. doi: 10.1177/1056492610387222
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lind, I. 2003. “Gender Mainstreaming – neue Optionen für Wissenschaftlerinnen?” In Gleichstellung in der Forschung. Organisationspraktiken und politische Strategien, edited by H. Matthies, E. Kuhlmann, M. Oppen, and D. Simon, 173–187. Berlin: edition sigma.
   Google Scholar
• Lounsbury, M. 2001. “Institutional Sources of Practice Variation: Staffing College and University Recycling Programs.” Administrative Science Quarterly 46 (1): 29–56. doi: 10.2307/2667124
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meier, P., and K. Celis. 2011. “Sowing the Seeds of Its Own Failure: Implementing the Concept of Gender Mainstreaming.” Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society 18 (4): 469–489. doi: 10.1093/sp/jxr020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer, J. W., and B. Rowan. 1977. “Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony.” American Journal of Sociology 83 (2): 340–363. doi: 10.1086/226550
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyerson, D. E., and M. A. Scully. 1995. “Crossroads Tempered Radicalism and the Politics of Ambivalence and Change.” Organization Science 6 (5): 585–600. doi: 10.1287/orsc.6.5.585
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyerson, D. E., and M. Tompkins. 2007. “Tempered Radicals as Institutional Change Agents: The Case of Advancing Gender Equity at the University of Michigan.” Harvard Journal of Law and Gender 30: 303–322.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, C., and S. Razavi. 1998. Missionaries and Mandarins: Feminist Engagement with Development Institutions. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Morimoto, S. A., and A. Zajicek. 2014. “Dismantling the ‘Master’s House’: Feminist Reflections on Institutional Transformation.” Critical Sociology 40 (1): 135–150. doi: 10.1177/0896920512460063
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naples, N. A. 2013. “"It's Not Fair!": Discursive Politics, Social Justice and Feminist Praxis SWS Feminist Lecture” Gender & Society 27 (2): 133–157. doi: 10.1177/0891243212472390
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Power, M. 1997. The Audit Society: Rituals of Verification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Prügl, E. 2011. “Diversity Management and Gender Mainstreaming as Technologies of Government.” Politics & Gender 7 (1): 71–89. doi: 10.1017/S1743923X10000565
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reay, T., K. Golden-Biddle, and K. Germann. 2006. “Legitimizing a New Role: Small Wins and Microprocesses of Change.” Academy of Management Journal 49 (5): 977–998. doi: 10.5465/AMJ.2006.22798178
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reeves, A. 2012. “Feminist Knowledge and Emerging Governmentality in UN Peacekeeping.” International Feminist Journal of Politics 14 (3): 348–369. doi: 10.1080/14616742.2012.659853
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saravanamuthu, K., and S. Filling. 2004. “A Critical Response to Managerialism in the Academy.” Critical Perspectives on Accounting 15 (4–5): 437–452. doi: 10.1016/S1045-2354(03)00037-6
   Google Scholar
• Schimank, U. 2000. “Welche Chancen und Risiken können unterschiedliche Modelle erweiterter Universitätsautonomie für die Forschung und Lehre der Universität bringen?.” In Universitäten im Wettbewerb. Zur Neustrukturierung österreichischer Universitäten, edited by S. Titscher, G. Winckler, H. Biedermann, H. Gatterbauer, S. Laske, R. Moser, F. Strehl, F. Wojda, and H. Wulz, 94–147. München: Rainer Hampp Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Schneiberg, M., and M. Lounsbury. 2008. “Social Movements and Institutional Analysis.” In The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism, edited by R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, R. Suddaby, and K. Sahlin, 648–670. Los Angeles: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, W. R. 1995. Institutions and Organizations. Newbury Park: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, W. R., and G. F. Davis. 2007. Organizations and Organizing: Rational, Natural and Open Systems Perspectives. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Stratigaki, M. 2004. “The Cooptation of Gender Concepts in EU Policies: The Case of ‘Reconciliation of Work and Family’.” Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society 11 (1): 30–56. doi: 10.1093/sp/jxh025
   Google Scholar
• Striedinger, A., K. Kreissl, J. Hofbauer, and B. Sauer. 2014. “Assimilation, Contradiction, Opposition: Gender Equality Logics and Institutional Complexity in Higher Education Reform.” Paper presented at the 30th EGOS Colloquium, Rotterdam, July 3–5.
   Google Scholar
• Swan, E., and S. Fox. 2010. “Playing the Game: Strategies of Resistance and Co-Optation in Diversity Work.” Gender, Work and Organization 17 (5): 567–589. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0432.2010.00524.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thornton, P. H., W. Ocasio, and M. Lounsbury. 2012. The Institutional Logics Perspective: A New Approach to Culture, Structure, and Process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wetterer, A. 2009. “Gleichstellungspolitik im Spannungsfeld unterschiedlicher Spielarten von Geschlechterwissen. Eine wissenssoziologische Rekonstruktion.” GENDER Zeitschrift für Geschlecht, Kultur und Gesellschaft 1 (2): 45–60.
   Google Scholar
• Yin, R. K. 1994. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
   Google Scholar