• Antônio Carlos Franco Federal University of Technology – Paraná image/svg+xml
  • Luciane Silva Franco Federal University of Technology – Paraná image/svg+xml



Organization, Legitimacy, Theory of Innovation


The present study aims to conduct a systematic review of the literature on Institutional Theory and innovation with a focus on investigating the respective trends and influences between the theories. Innovation is the use of new knowledge for the design of new products, services or processes, especially with an unprecedented character, in order to meet the current and future demands of industries, organizations and individuals. Globalization encouraged by innovations through development and diffusion, has increased mainly in the last two decades. The methodology used was a systematic literature review, the main articles were identified without a delimited time frame. The databases adopted were: Scopus, Web of Science and ScienceDirect. For that, filters were applied to the total portfolio of articles among the selected databases. Initially 106 articles were identified and 22 articles were selected to identify the trends and relationships between Institutional Theory and innovation. The results show the main trends in the literature between 2010 and 2020, the possible links between institutional theory and innovation, as well as the continents that carried out studies. Yet, it can be seen the main countries housing publications with impact factor on the approached themes and their locations. In addition, this study shows the most cited journals and presents an overview of Institutional Theory and Innovation. As future research, the authors suggest theoretical contributions on distinctions between formal and informal institutions, regulatory, normative and cultural-cognitive types of institutions.


Metrics Loading ...

Author Biographies

Antônio Carlos Franco, Federal University of Technology – Paraná


Luciane Silva Franco, Federal University of Technology – Paraná



Bergsgard, N. A., Nødland, S. I. (2020). Open Tenders in Public Procurement of Welfare Services: Professionalization, Standardization, and Innovation among Civil Sector Providers. Journal of Civil Society, 56(1), p.1-14.

Berger, P; Luckmann, T. (1985). A construção social da realidade. 19º Edição, Editora Vozes. Petrópolis.

Berrone, P. (2013). Necessity as the mother of ‘green’ inventions: institutional pressures and environmental innovations. Strategic Management Journal, New Jersey, 34(8), p.891-909.

Branstad, A., Solem, B. A. (2020). Emerging theories of consumer-driven market innovation, adoption, and diffusion: A selective review of consumer-oriented studies. Journal of Business Research, 116(1), p.561-571.

Carvalho, A. D .P., DA Cunha, S. K., Lima, L. F., Carstens, D. D. (2016). The role and contributions of institutional theory for the theory of innovation. Espacios, 37(30),p.17-29.

Chandler, D.; Hwang, H. (2015). Learning From Learning Theory: A Model of Organizational Adoption Strategies at the Microfoundations of Institutional Theory. Journal of Management, 41(5). p.1446-1476.

Dimaggio, P. J.; Powell, W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(1), p. 147-160.

Dutra, F. G.; Almeida, F. G. (2018). Elementos para estímulo da cultura de inovação: Mapeamento das diterizes adotadas por empresas de destaque brasileiras. Revista Brasileira de Gestão e Inovação. 5(3), p. 96-120.

Estol, J., Camilleri, M. A., Font, X. (2018). European Union tourism policy: an institutional theory critical discourse analysis. Tourism Review. 73(3), p. 421-431.

Hatch, M. J.; Cunliffe, A. L. (2006). Organization theory: Modern, symbolic, and postmodern perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hazarika, N.; Zhang, X. (2019). Evolving theories of eco-innovation: A systematic review. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 18(1). p.64-74.

Hojnik, J., Ruzzier, M. (2019). What drives eco-innovation? A review of an emerging literature. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions. 19(1), p. 31-41.

Jenssen, J. I., Nybakk, E. (2013). Inter-organization networks and innovation in small, knowledge-intensive firms: A literature review. International Journal of Innovation, 17(2), p.1-15.

Karkinbayeva, S. I., Kirdasinova, K. A., Adiyetova, E. M., Kanatova, A. Z., Korgan, B. B. (2019). Topical issues surrounding supply chain management in developing food industry: Kazakhstan case study. International Journal of Supply Chain Management. 8(4), p. 743-750.

Khurshid, M. M.; Zakaria, N. Hidayati; R. A. (2020). Modeling of Open Government Data for Public Sector Organizations Using the Potential Theories and Determinants: A Systematic Review. Informatics Basel, 7(3), p. 24-32.

Koskela-Huotari, K.; Vink, J.; Edvardsson, B. (2020). The institutional turn in service research: taking stock and moving ahead. Journal of Services Marketing, 34 (3) p.373-387.

Liao, Z. J., Huang, C. (2017). Review on enterprises' eco-innovation. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 28 (12), p. 4150-4156.

Meyer, J. W.; Rowan, B. (1991). Institutionalized organizations: formal structure as myth and ceremony. In: Powell, W. W.; Dimaggio, P. J. (Eds.). The new institutionalism in organization analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Mignerat, M.; Rivard, S. (2010). Positioning the institutional perspective in information systems research. Journal of information technology, 24(4). p.‏ 339-369.

Mizruchi, M.; Fein, L. C. (1999). The social construction of organizational knowledge: a study of uses of coercive, mimetic, and normative isomorphism. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(4), p. 653-683.

Niesten, E., Jolink, A. (2020). Motivations for Environmental Alliances: Generating and Internalizing Environmental and Knowledge Value. International Journal of Management Reviews. 22(4), p. 356-377.

Pishdad, A.; Haider, A.; Koronios, A. (2012). An Institutionalisation Perspective on Technology Lifecycle-A Literature Review. International Business Information Management, 18(2), p. 78-91.

Rosevear, E., Trebilcock, M., Mota Prado, M. (2020). The New Progressivism and its implications for institutional theories of development. Development Policy Review. 10(3), p. 33-47.

Scott, W. R. (1995). Introduction: institutional theory and organizations. In W. R. Scott & S. Christensen (Eds.). The institutional construction of organizations (pp. xi-xxiii). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

Smith, A.; C. J.; Tuck, J.; Mceachern, S. (2012). Building the capacity to innovate: the role of human capital. NCVER, Austrália.

Szyliowicz, D.; Galvin, T. (2010). Applying broader strokes: Extending institutional perspectives and agendas for international entrepreneurship research. International Business Review, 19(4), p.317-332.

Tidd, J.; Bessant, J. (2018). Innovation Management Challenges: From fads to fundamentals. University of Sussex. International Journal of Innovation Management, 1(2), p.1-13.

Van Oorschot, J. A. W. H.; Hofman, E.; Halman, J. I. M. (2018). A bibliometric review of the innovation adoption. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 134(1), p.1-21.

Verhoeven, J. C. (2020). De Wit, K. How did Australian scholars perceive the Bologna Process? Higher Education Research and Development, 4(2), p. 27-41.

Watson, R., Wilson, H. N., Smart, P., Macdonald, E. K. (2018). Harnessing Difference: A Capability-Based Framework for Stakeholder Engagement in Environmental Innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 35(2), p. 254-279.

Wolsink, M. (2020). Distributed energy systems as common goods: Socio-political acceptance of renewables in intelligent microgrids. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 127(1), p. 1-22.

Zollet, R. (2014). Interactivity of Corporate Websites: An Integrative Review of the Literature. Transactions on Professional Communication, 57(1), p.2-16.




How to Cite

Franco, A. C., & Franco, L. S. (2022). AN INSTITUTIONAL THEORY INVESTIGATION: ANALYSIS OF THE MAIN TRENDS IN INNOVATION. Brazilian Journal of Management and Innovation (Revista Brasileira De Gestão E Inovação), 9(2), 126–144.