The paper “ Institutional Theories and Their Influence on Human Resource Management in Different Countries” is a potent example of an essay on human resources. The institutional theory considers an organization as an element of society and also seeks to find out the role of the social environment in terms of developmental shaping through the application of pressure for these organizations to conform to the socially acceptable organization practices and values. When struggling to achieve social legitimacy and acceptance, most organizations find themselves very vulnerable to environmental pressures thus leading to isomorphic tendencies (Hitt & Cheng, 2009, Pg 28).
Nonetheless, these organizations may also decide to respond to their environmental pressures by reacting accordingly to combat these forces. The institutional theories have also been known to focus on much deeper and resilient features of the social structures. The major areas of concentration in these theories include the processes through which the structures like rules, norms, schemes, and routines get established as reliable guidelines for social performance. The institutional theory has various components, which are created, adopted, diffused and adapted over time and space; and the manner in which they fall into disuse or decline. Theorists formulating this theory strongly assert that the environment of an institution can greatly determine the level and nature of formal structures developed in an organization.
The innovative structures aimed at improving technical efficiency in the early organizations are often legitimized within the environment. In the long run, the various innovations under this phenomenon often reach a point where failure to adopt them is considered irrational. T this extent, the existing organizations will take up the structures even if the structural form does not improve their efficiency levels. Most philosophers like Rowan and Meyer admits that the institutional myths are simply accepted so that an organization can maintain or gain some legitimacy in the institutional arena.
Most organizations normally adopt these vocabularies of structures that are prevalent in their operational environments like the organizational procedures, job titles and the organizational roles. The adoption of these institutional legitimacy trappings has also worked to preserve the aura of organizational actions that are based on good faith (Cooke, 2008). This legitimacy placed on the institutional environment normally helps the organizations to survive in such environments. These formal structures in an organization, however, can greatly hinder the competitive position of an organization and reduce their efficiency levels in the environments in which they operate.
In efforts to reduce these negative effects, most organizations tend to decouple technical cores from these legitimate structures. A number of organizations will choose to minimize the evaluation and neglect the program implementations in order to maintain internal and external confidence in the formal structures and at the same time reducing the impacts of their efficiency. Most researchers have also concluded that the resulting effects of the institutional pressures aim at increasing the homogeneity of the organizational structures within an institutional environment.
Most firms will try to adopt these structures due to three types of pressures that compel them to do the same. These include the Coercive pressures, mimetic pressures, and normative pressure. The coercive pressure results from the legal mandates that the organizations depend on demands. The mimetic pressure is brought about by trying to copy the successful firms that arise during uncertain times.
Consequently, the normative pressure of homogeneity is brought about by the approaches and attitudes of professional associations and groups that gain entry into the firm through the hiring processes (Brown, 2008, Pg 49).