Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Oct 28:7:983190.
doi: 10.3389/fsoc.2022.983190. eCollection 2022.

MacIntyre, Weber and institutional logic s

Irene Chu  1
Affiliations

MacIntyre, Weber and institutional logic s

Irene Chu. Front Sociol. .

Abstract

This paper explores "what more and what else" MacIntyre's concepts can contribute, specifically as applied to neoinstitutional theory and especially institutional logics. Drawing on the common influence of Max Weber's work as further developed by Friedland, MacIntyre's concept of eudaimonia being furthered by the pursuit of internal goods supported by external goods is used to develop a typology of goods. This typology is then deployed to show how the differing institutional logics of, for example, the market and the family have differing rationalities with differing emphases on internal and external goods, and consequently differing moral content. A simple picture of the market economy is then developed to show how such MacIntyrean concepts can be used to address the critique of a lack of morality in neoinstitutional theory. Conversely, the analytical framework provided by the institutional logics perspective is used to show how MacIntyrean concepts can be applied practically in a way that provides an interesting perspective on the current world.

Keywords: MacIntyre; Max Weber; institutional logics perspectives; morality & values; practice.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
A cross-level model of institutional logics. Source: Reproduced from Thornton et al. (2012).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Albert S., Whetten D. (1985). Organizational identity, in Research in Organizational Behavior Vol. 7, eds Cummings L., Straw B. (Greenwich, CT: JAI Press; ), 263–225.
    1. Alvesson M., Spicer A. (2019). Neo-institutional theory and organization studies: a mid-life crisis? Organiz. Stud. 40, 199–218. 10.1177/0170840618772610 - DOI
    1. Alvesson M., Willmott H. (1992). Critical theory and management studies, in Critical Management Studies, eds Alvesson M., Willmott H. (London: Sage; ), 1–20.
    1. Anthony P. (1986). The Foundation of Management. London: Tavistock.
    1. Beadle R. (2002). The misappropriation of MacIntyre. Reason Pract. 2, 45–54. 10.5840/pom2002226 - DOI

LinkOut - more resources