FRAME APPROPRIATION AFTER INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE: THE NEW ROLE OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT

MASTER THESIS:

FRAME APPROPRIATION AFTER INSTITUTIONAL

CHANGE: THE NEW ROLE OF THE LOCAL

GOVERNMENT

Business Administration: Change Management

University of Groningen – Faculty of Economics and Business Supervisor: J.C.L. Paul

Co-supervisor: M.A.G. Offenbeek Date of submission: 23 – 01 – 2017

Jasper Zaar S2126761

Abstract – This research relates the concepts of institutional change, sensemaking, and frame

appropriation within local governments. As this research expands on existing literature about institutional theory, institutional works, sensemaking, and frame appropriation it tries to elaborate how local governments deal with institutional change. Furthermore, this research was conducted within five local governments by means of an in-depth case study where results were compared in a cross-case analyses. These local governments had to make sense of the shifting institutional context and created consensus about new roles and responsibilities. In general, this research found that local governments notice changes within the institutional context, enact on the noticed changes, and retain the advantages, which influences the frame appropriation. More specific, four paths were found in this research about how local governments deal with institutional change, where two contribute to frame appropriation and two to partial frame appropriation. Therefore, the findings of this research show how local governments appropriate new frames after institutional change by means of sensemaking.

Table of Contents

Introduction & Research Question ... 3

Literature Review ... 6

Theoretical Framework... 6

Institutional Theory ... 7

Institutional Works ... 9

Sensemaking ... 10

Frames and Frame Appropriation ... 12

Methodology ... 15 Research design ... 15 Case selection ... 16 Data collection ... 17 Data analyses ... 19 Findings ... 21 Institutional context ... 21 Veiligheidshuis ... 23 Case 1 ... 24 Case 2 ... 26 Case 3 ... 28 Case 4 ... 30 Case 5 ... 32 Cross-case analyses ... 34 Discussion ... 40 Research question ... 40 Managerial implications ... 43

Limitations and further research ... 43

Conclusion ... 44

I

&

R

Q

Within the current literature, a lot of research has been done towards the subject of sensemaking within the institutional field (Jennings and Greenwood, 2003; Weick 1995; Scott, 2001; Pope et al., 2006, Weber and Glynn, 2006). Due to institutionalization, which creates order and stability within an organizational field, development of common understanding of rules and norms is created that shapes social reality (Hardy and Phillips, 1999). On the other hand, the sensemaking process of individuals influences the institutional context (Weber and Glynn, 2006). According to those authors, combining the aspects of institutions and sensemaking processes creates a dynamic perspective for the process of organizational change.

One of those authors are Weber and Glynn (2006) who argue that the institutional context influences the sensemaking processes of individuals and in turn influences the transformation of the institutional context. That is, the contextual factors where institutions prime, edit and trigger the action formatting of individuals leads to a feedstock within the institutional context. According to Weber and Glynn, this means that institutions shape the identity and trigger actions due to predefined frames and scripts within the organizational field. Thus, institutions and the organizational field are connected through the link between meaning and action.

More in depth, Pope et al. (2006) argue that the link between meaning and actions is typified by the complex multi-level phenomena comprising of layers of interlacing networks. This typification of actions and meaning is due to the framing of institutions, influencing the upward and downward social enactment and interpretation of individuals. Pope et al. reason that the enactment and interpretations creates interconnections and interdependencies on different levels. In turn, the sensemaking processes of individuals on different levels creates space for interpretation within the institutional field (Weick, Scutliffe and Obstfeld, 2005). This typification of meaning and action shows the dynamic perspective of organizational change when institutions and sensemaking processes are combined.

reframing and frame appropriation. In turn, frame appropriation is a consequence of aligning employee frames, management frames and themes of institutional discourse. Thus, institutional change can create discursive practises that influences the reframing of meaning about situations and contribute to change.

Moreover, these three authors showed the first step in elaborating how institutions and sensemaking processes are connected within the field of organizational change. Even though many authors already have done research towards the subject of institutions and sensemaking (Jennings and Greenwood, 2003; Weick 1995; Scott, 2001; Pope et al., 2006, Weber and Glynn, 2006), many questions remain within this literature field. According to Weber and Glynn (2006) a deeper understanding is required about the process where institutions prime, edit, and trigger the sensemaking processes of individuals in the form of frame analysis where identity and action expectations are altered. Secondly, Pope et al. (2006) call for a deeper understanding of the dynamic process in which meaning is framed, reframed and appropriated after organizational change. Lastly, Chreim (2006) encourage further research on the dynamics surrounding frames interacting with the institutional field.

Because these three authors propose avenues for further research in sensemaking and institutions, the research question of this research will be:

How are institutional change and sensemaking influencing the frame appropriation of local governments?

The focus on local governments is due to recent institutional changes where sensemaking processes were applied that contributed to frame appropriation. Furthermore, sub questions of this research will be: (1) how institutions influence sensemaking processes? (2) How sensemaking processes influence the organizational field (3) How frames are appropriated in the organizational field?

the right direction on the understanding of sensemaking processes and frame appropriation after institutional change.

Additionally, answering these questions can help local governments in dealing with institutional changes. Especially, when different parties need to align their mind-sets about new roles and responsibilities. As this research focuses on how frame appropriation is established in local governments. Understanding the concept of frame appropriation in combination with sensemaking can help local governments guide implementing new methods after institutional change.

L

R

In this section, an overview of the relevant literature will be given. Within this research, the model developed by Weber and Glynn (2006) was used as a theoretical framework, that served as a guidance to answer the main research question. Furthermore, by using the relevant aspects of the framework an elaboration can be given about how institutions (1) shape actions, (2) are influenced by actors, strategies, and systems, (3) influence the individual sensemaking processes, and (4) frames and frame appropriation are connected within the institutional context.

Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework used in this research can be seen in figure 1. Weber and Glynn (2006) elaborate two different views on how the institutional context influences the sensemaking processes of individuals and groups, the traditional and the extended view. The traditional view, according to Weber and Glynn, influences sensemaking by cognitive constraints which is mainly internalized by a socialization processes (Zucker, 1991). Whereas, Weber and Glynn (2006) propose the extended view where institutions can prime, edit, and trigger sensemaking processes. The key difference is that the cognitive constraints perspective excludes agencies (Weber and Glynn, 2006). Whereas, institutions priming, editing, and triggering sensemaking creates institutionalized expectations of accepted behaviour through the policing of social actions (Weber and Glynn, 2006). Moreover, by enacting with the contextual structure, created by the macro level, individuals make sense by creating a perception of the context, interpret the context, and act upon the perception and interpretation within the context (Weber and Glynn, 2006). Therefore, the macro context is able to influence the micro-context.

role structure and understanding of procedures which resulted in chaos. However, some of the firefighters were able to create a new meaning and structure due to individual sensemaking. Afterwards, the firefighters who survived were evaluated and created standard procedures to prevent such a crisis in the future. In other words, the incident showed that the firefighters were able to influence the institutional context, due to changing their framework and meaning in a crisis (Jennings and Greenwood, 2003). Thus, institutions prime, edit, and trigger sensemaking processes. But, individuals can also create a feedstock for institutionalization.

Institutional Theory

The focus of the article of Weber and Glynn (2006) is on how institutions prime, edit and trigger individual sensemaking processes. However, how the institutional context is formed is neglected. The formation of the institutional context shapes institutions, and therefore indirectly primes, edits, and triggers individual sensemaking processes. Therefore, this section will elaborate how the institutional context is formed with institutional theory.

Institutional theory is a multi-level analysis of individuals, organizations and the organizational field (Jensen, Kjaergaard and Svejvig, 2009). Organizational scholars have

tried to find sociological explanations for understanding the interaction between organizational structures and behaviours within a context (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983). This interaction can be expressed in the following quote that describes organizational structures as: “an adaptive vehicle shaped in reaction to the characteristics and commitments of participants as well as to influences and constraints from the external environment” (Scott, 1987, p. 494). In other words, the institutional context influences the structures and behaviour.

There are three aspects of importance that defines the institutional context. First, the organizational field which is defined as “all organizations that constitute a recognized area of institutional life” (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983, p. 148). Secondly, institutional logics, which are “the practices and symbolic constructions which constitute organizing principles” (Friedland and Alford, 1991, p. 248) within a field. For example, Reay and Hinnings (2005) described the organizational field and institutional logics of the health care industry before 1994 in Alberta. This organizational field was composed of key suppliers, consumers, regulatory agencies and other service providing organizations which interacted both formally and informally which each other to provide health services. Furthermore, the main institutional logic within this organizational field was that all health services were built around physicians. Therefore, the organizational field includes all the actors, while the institutional logic defines the practices within an organizational field. The third aspect that defines the institutional context is isomorphism. According to Zucker, isomorphism is the “process of institutions creating a common understanding about what is appropriated and, fundamentally, meaningful behaviour” (1983, p. 5). For example, Radaelli (2000) found that within the European Union there was an isomorphic effect of tax reductions. When one country would lower its taxes, another country would lower its taxes as well. Therefore, there was a continues shift in the common understanding, where countries lowered their taxes because other countries did it as well. In other words, the organizational field is governed by institutions which define the elaboration of rules and requirements for individual organization to receive support and legitimacy (Scott, 1987).

(Hoffman, 1999; Scott and Davis, 2007). Combining these three pillars within the institutional context, defines the appropriate behaviour within the organizational field (Scott and Davis, 2007).

Thus, institutional theory describes the deterministic approach of institutions creating appropriate actions and behaviour within the organizational field, due to the underlying institutional logics and the creation of a common understanding. Furthermore, the regulative, normative and cultural-cognitive aspects guide the appropriate behaviour in the form of sanctions, beliefs and values, and cultural rules. Additionally, the formation of the institutional context indirectly influences the sensemaking processes, as institutions primes, edits, and triggers sensemaking (Weber and Glynn, 2006).

Institutional Works

In this section, an opposite view will be given where the institutional context can be transformed. Whereas, the previous section elaborated the formation of the institutional context which was rather deterministic where institutions create the social reality which cannot be altered. In comparison, with the theoretical framework, Weber and Glynn (2006) propose that sensemaking processes are the feedstock for institutionalization. However, this section will show that actors, strategies, and systems create new institutionalized logics.

information sharing and connectedness, physicians adapted these new themes which reconstructed the roles of other entities within the organizational field as well. In the end, the Canadian physicians all focused on the integration and wellness themes. Therefore, professionals are able to create, maintain, and disrupt institutions with their actions (Lawrence and Suddaby, 2006).

Secondly, strategies of organizations can alter the institutional context. According to Davis and Scott (2007) organizations respond strategically to institutional changes rather than confirm to institutional logics. Oliver (1991) argued that organizations respond to institutional change by changing the combinations of resources and strategies to stay in line with institutional logics. As a result, the alteration of strategies can influence the institutional field. For example, D’Aunno, Sutton, and Prince (1991) found that mental health agencies adopted a new business model and template in response to institutional changes, resulting in changing the business model within the industry. Therefore, strategies of organizations can influence the institutional context.

Furthermore, organizational systems can influence the institutional context as well. Organizations grow and invent new systems and structures to stay efficient and legitimate, however, this can create misalignment with the institutional field (Greenwood and Suddaby, 2006). This can be shown with an example of Greenwood and Sudabby (2006). The Big Five accounting firms grew and created new systems and structures to provide transnational services. However, the standards of practices and legislation was not aligned with the Big Five transnational accounting structure. Resulting in changing the institutional context to align the transnational system with standard rules of practices.

Thus, the institutional field is not a deterministic static creation where institutions form the organizational field. But rather an open system where boundaries can be shifted (Lawrence, Suddaby and Leca, 2009) by actors, strategies and systems. Therefore, there is a duality where institutions shape actions, and actions shape institutions. Furthermore, this adds to the theoretical framework that actors, strategies, and system also create a feedstock for institutionalization, instead of only individual sensemaking processes.

Sensemaking

perception and interpretation, which is the “early process of institutionalization” (Weick, 1995, p. 35; Scott, 2001, p.96). This process starts with sensemaking and relates to enactment. Starting with individual sensemaking, referring to the process where actors shape meaning or make sense of unexpected events and phenomena created by chaos through three steps (Jensen et al, 2009; Weick et al, 2005). The first step in this process is noticing the different elements connected in the chaos. Following, is the process of bracketing, where elements are singled out to create a logical sense of the situation. Both noticing and bracketing is guided by mental modes obtained during work, training and life experience (Weick et al., 2005). Lastly, the third step of the process is labelling, where “imposing labels on interdependent events in ways that suggest plausible acts of managing, coordinating, and distribution” (Weick et al., 2005, p. 411) is possible. For example, Weick et al. (2005) describe this process by a nurse who finds a baby in poor health condition (notice). Immediately the nurse brackets possible signs of its condition to see what is happening. And lastly labels the condition to find a solution for the problem. Thus, individuals invent a new meaning through the process of noticing, bracketing and labelling.

According to Weick (1988), the sensemaking process is followed by enactment. Enactment is the social process where actions brings structures and events into existence, which are shaped by preconceptions (Weick, 1988). The result of this enactment is an orderly, material, and social construct that serves as a guidance to new expectations (Weick, 1988). In another paper, Weick et al. (2005) described this process as: enactment, selection and retention. Where enactment is the exchange between actors and the environment when actors notice and bracket incoming information. Secondly, this interaction has to be made meaningful, through the process of selection of retrospect extracted ques. And finally, the new meaning has to be persevered through retention and identity plausibility. Therefore, the sensemaking process relates to the enactment process where previous knowledge is combined with lessons learned to update either a new meaning or action in a certain situation (Weick et al., 2005).

contextual factors and the technology itself. That is, the individual frames for understanding the new technology were formed by the institutional logics, and the enactment with the new technology contributed to a new meaning about actions with the technology.

Similarly, other authors (Maitlis and Sonenshein, 2010; Weick et al., 2005; Jennings and Greenwood, 2003) concluded that collective sensemaking relates to the institutional field. As elaborated by Maitlis and Sonenshein (2010), the process of enactment creates a shared understanding and shapes the daily routines, structures, identities and expectations of the collective practice. Furthermore, enactment leading to adjustment contributes to more commitment, a profound identity, and better expectations (Maitlis and Sonenshein, 2010). In turn, creating a new meaning with sensemaking and enactment about actions, strategies, and systems contribute to the transformation of the institutional field, as explained by Weick (1993). Therefore, it can be stated that sensemaking and enactment relates to the institutional logics within an institutional field.

To conclude, sensemaking is an ongoing process influencing the enactment and is connected to institutional logics. Due to the connection between sensemaking and the organizational field the institutional context can be transformed.

Frames and Frame Appropriation

So far, this research elaborated the influence of the institutional context on sensemaking. In the theoretical framework, Weber and Glynn (2006) only elaborate the connection between frames and actions. However, understanding the notion of how individuals accept new frames and the associated meaning will provide a more profound explanation on how individuals deal with institutional change.

frame guides the manager through the appraisal meeting and is based on the identity, role, and script of that specific situation. Therefore, frames guide the appropriate behaviour of actors within the organizational field in specific situations.

However, frames can change overtime because individual frames relate to organizational and institutional logic (Chreim, 2006; Maitlis and Sonenshein, 2010). Because the institutional context provides cues to be extracted, like values and norms, stipulating the ways frames are interpreted (Benford and Snow, 2000; Hardy and Phillips, 1995). Furthermore, an organizational field is constructed by the shared understanding about rules and practices created by social interactions (Hardy and Phillips, 1995). Schein (1996) argues that when the institutional context changes, there is a misalignment between incoming information cues and the status quo of meaning. As a result, the process of reframing starts, which is the changing of templates for interpretation (Bartunek, 1993). Therefore, reframing occurs due to a misalignment between individual frames and the institutional context, creating a dissatisfaction between established meaning and incoming information cues (Chreim, 2006). The process of reframing leads to frame alignment and results in four possible outcomes. First, frame alignment can be elaborated as the creation and construction of a shared understanding about appropriate actions and behaviours after change (Chreim, 2006). In other words, establishing new meaning that is aligned with the organizational and institutional frame. Furthermore, frame appropriation is the situation where employees successfully adapt to the new managerial, organizational, or institutional frames (Barker, 1993; Tompkins and Cheney, 1985). That is, the successful alignment of frames where new meaning is created and accepted is called frame appropriation (Chreim, 2006). However, frame alignment does not always result in frame appropriation, three other options are that frames can be partially appropriated, edited, and resisted by employees (Chreim, 2006).

Thus, frame alignment is an important aspect of institutional change as frames include the identity, roles, and scripts where a shared understanding is created about appropriate meaning and actions. Consequently, institutional changes create a dissatisfaction with the status quo between meaning and incoming information cues, leading to reframing to align the individual, managerial, and organizational frames.

M

In this section, an overview will be given of the methodology used in this research. To answer the main research question of this research, in-depth case studies were conducted for two reasons. Firstly, according to Miles and Huberman (1994, p. 11) “qualitative data emphasizing people’s lived experience are fundamentally well suited for locating the meanings people place on the events, processes, and structures of their lives”. Also, Manen (1977) argues that qualitative data helps connecting perceptions, assumptions, prejudgment, presuppositions with the meaning of the social world. Secondly, case studies can be a useful technique for “understanding the dynamics present within a single setting” (Eisenhardt, 1989, p. 534). Therefore, in-depth cases studies are the appropriated method for understanding the complex dynamics of this research. Next, an elaboration of the research design, case description, data collection, and data analyses will be given.

Research design

The research design is one of the first steps to be considered before starting a research. This research design is based on Eisenhardt (1989) and her main steps to refine theory from case studies. First, the research question was created to create a narrow focus. Secondly, cases were chosen based on theoretical sampling where theory could be refined or extended. The third step was crafting the instruments and protocols for this research. The next step was entering the field where data collection and data analyses overlapped, this created the opportunity to take advantage of emergent themes and concepts. Followed by, data analyses where both within-case analyses and cross-case analyses were conducted. Lastly, hypotheses were shaped and enfolding literature was used to create a comparison of the findings of this research with the extant literature. All steps of Eisenhardt (1989) were considered in this research in order to refine theory with in-depth case studies.

Another aspect that needed to be taken into consideration within the research design were the quality criteria of controllability, reliability, and validity. Aken, Berends and Bij (2012) argue that researcher should consider all three quality criteria to come to true conclusions. Beginning with controllability, which was increased by taking field notes and memos during the entire process. Furthermore, more specific information about the case, respondents, questions, and circumstances of the research will be given in the next section.

researcher’s reliability, an interview guide was created to ensure interviews were semi-structured (Aken, et al., 2012). Furthermore, all interviews were recorded and transcribed which increased reliability, because analyses can be made more than once. Instrument reliability was increased by triangulation of primary and secondary data. Primary data was important for understanding the social dynamics of the field. While secondary data was more important to get an understanding of the field in general. Thirdly, the respondents’ reliability was assured through selecting from a large group of respondents including all departments, roles, and groups involved in the problem area. This made it easier to increase the number of in-depth interviews or to find new respondents for the research. Lastly, the circumstance reliability was taken into consideration by conducting the interviews at different times of the day. Therefore, all four potential biases were taken into consideration.

Construct validity was assured due to the cooperation and discussions of others. Also, triangulation of data sources (primary and secondary) increased construct validity (Aken et al., 2012). Internal validity was increased by ruling out alternative explanations through rethinking and reanalysing the available data. Furthermore, internal validity was also increased by enfolding other literature (Eisenhardt, 1989). Lastly, external validity was assured through replication logic between cases (Yin, 2003). Thus, all quality criterion were taken into consideration.

Case selection

Three aspects needed to be present in the case to answer the main research question of this research. Firstly, within an institutional context a change must have happened. Furthermore, this institutional change must have had an impact on the organizational field and generate an actual change. Secondly, actors within the organizational field coping with the change should apply sensemaking and enactment processes to deal with the change. Lastly, the change must have led to reframing or frame alignment. In turn, this reframing might either be appropriated, edited, or resisted. Therefore, three aspects needed to be taken into consideration.

This model is called ‘AVE’ (Aanpak ter Voorkoming van Escalatie). The basic idea of the model, is that a clear structure is created beforehand between different organizations, which can help improving the collaboration between organizations. This structure is divided into four levels: (AVE 1) a family has no problems or small problems which can be dealt with within the family and with help of civil society, (AVE 2) a single problem exist within a family which can be easily solved with help of professionals and the social district teams, (AVE 3) there are multiple problems in different domains with one family, resulting in safety concerns for the family where multiple organizations need to help, (AVE 4) the problems within a family have become so complex it harms the environment which endangers other families and creates communal unrest, and needs to be solved by multiple organizations including the police commissioner, the major, and the Public Prosecution Service (OM) (Bouman and Drouven, 2015). Higher levels are paired with more organizations dealing with the complex family problems. In order to create efficient and effective cooperation, one person or organization is appointed at every level to take control and to align the different mind-sets. Furthermore, this structure has been created beforehand by the local government to effectively guide and help organizations to solve problems within a family. Moreover, the structure created differs per local government. Meaning, it is not a blueprint, but a guide for local governments to adapt to local requirements. An example of such structure can be seen in Appendix I. Therefore, the creation and implementation of this model within local governments raised question about: what kind of structure do we appropriate? And how are were going to align every party in order to create consensus about roles, responsibilities, and actions? Thus, with the implementation of the AVE method, as a consequence of the changing institutional field, a sensemaking process occurs to align and appropriate new frames within the local government.

Data collection

In this research, multiple data collection methods were combined namely: (1) interviews, (2) observations, and (3) secondary data. Furthermore, field notes and memos were collected during the entire research period. These techniques and their purpose for this research will be explained next.

respondents had a prominent position in the overall implementation process of AVE within their own local government. Secondly, all respondents were first mailed with an invitation to participate in this research. After acceptance to participate in this research, respondents were asked take part in a telephone questionnaire, lasting 10-15 minutes, to check whether respondents were able to answer the question of the semi-structured interview and to introduce the research. Also, in this questionnaire a snowballing effect was used for finding more respondents. This questionnaire can be found in Appendix II. At the end of the conversation an appointment would be made for a face-to-face interview.

Sample Gender Age Function Interview length in minutes

S1.1 Female 45-50 Manager 79.06

S1.2 Male 41-45 Beleidsmedewerker 56.44

S1.3 Female 46-50 Trouble shooter 56.52

S2.1 Male 41-45 Beleidsmedewerker 58.46

S3.1 Male 31-35 Beleidsmedewerker 77.59

S4.1 Female n.a. Coordinator 50.54

S4.2 Male 25-30 Coordinator 40.42

S4.3 Male 41-45 Teamleider 47.18

S5.1 Female 36-40 Beleidsmedewerker 37.14

S5.2 Female 31-35 Beleidsmedewerker 46.35

Table 1. Overview of respondents

Observation - This thesis also used observation as a data collection method. Observation is the “systemic approach for detecting, recording, describing, analysing and interpretation of the human behaviour” (Saunders, Lewis, Thomhill, 2008). Saunders et al. (2008) also argue that observation can show the important underlying social processes. Therefore, observation was used to get a deeper understanding of the underlying social processes between different parties towards the AVE. The observation was in a meeting where the AVE was introduced to all partners and health care organizations of that particular local government. Beforehand, an observation schema was crafted and filled in during the meeting. Also, additional notes were taken and written down during the meeting. The result can be seen in Appendix IV.

Secondary data - This type of data included newspapers, general publications regarding this research, and internal documents and publication of a consulting firm and local governments. Adding secondary data was valuable for this research for three reasons. First, due to the secondary data the transformation of the institutional context could be captured. Also, analysing the secondary data contributed towards a deeper understanding of the dynamics of the institutional field. Lastly, adding secondary data to this research created the possibility for data triangulation.

Data analyses

in three steps: (1) first reading through all data, field notes, documents and in-depth interviews to sort important information from non-important information, (2) looking for relations and contradictions in the data to identify general themes and categories, (3) reviewing the emergent concepts to develop theory. After data was analysed propositions were created and compared to extant literature to ensure the quality of the findings (Eisenhardt, 1989).

F

As has been indicated, the change processes studied in five cases were concerned with local government reactions to institutional changes in the Dutch care system in general, and more specifically in social care surrounding complex family problems. To begin with, a brief overview of these institutional changes will be presented. Next, for a better understanding of the case processes, the role and function of a regional agency – Het Veiligheidshuis- will briefly be explained, which was institutionalized by the government to increase collaboration between different parties. Lastly, the cases will be elaborated and analysed according to three steps: (1) the perceived changes within society, (2) how and why the AVE method was implemented, followed by (3) the perceived results of the AVE method. Additionally, every case will be checked for frame appropriation.

Institutional context

Recent developments in the Dutch society have led to new structures of local governments in dealing with multi-complex family problems. This process is inherent with the shift towards a society where everybody should take responsibility and participate in his own life (Ferwerda, Kampen & Appelman, 2014; Vereniging Nederlandse Gemeenten, 2013; Verschuren 2014; Andersson Elffers Felix 2013). One of the reasons this shift happened was the financial instability which led to the deconstruction of the welfare state (Verschuren, 2014).

Two reasons are found for the financial instability of the welfare system. First, there was a predominating culture with the belief that the government would solve every problem (Verschuren, 2014). Due to this belief, the people did not feel responsible for their own life and that of others, and unnecessarily approached the expensive professional government organizations (Steyaert and Kwekkeboom, 2012). Secondly, due to the rising life expectancy the demand for health care increased (Wouterse, ten Rale, and Van Vuren, 2016). The CPB (Centraal Planbureau) calculated that a family with an average income would pay 35% (now 25%) of their income to taxes in 2040 when nothing would be done (Wouterse, ten Rale, and Van Vuren, 2016). Therefore, to regain financial stability a shift from consuming behaviour to compensation behaviour was required (Verschuren, 2014; Alders, 2013).

Samson, 2012). Furthermore, local governments are closer to their citizens and therefore have more control over the creation of an effective and efficient system (Ferwerda, Kampen & Appelman, 2014). Therefore, the decentralisation shifted responsibilities from the national government towards the local governments, which fitted with the movement towards a participation society (Verschuren, 2014).

Due to the increased responsibilities of local governments laws and legislations needed to be altered and created. These changes and alternations were focused on the three areas where local governments gained responsibilities: “how to deal with child, health, and work problems” (Ferwerda, Kampen & Appelman, 2014, p.11). Consequently, three new legislations were created: Wet Maatschappelijke Ondersteuning, Wet op Jeugdzorg, and the Participatiewet (Ferwerda, Kampen & Appelman, 2014). The focus of these laws was that local governments became responsible for taking care of children, elderly people, and people who had difficulties finding jobs (Ferwerda, Kampen & Appelman, 2014). Another aspect of these changes was the encouragement of mantelzorg, which increased the support of friends and families instead of the government. Therefore, these changes helped the shift towards a participation society.

The decentralisation and the increase in responsibilities for local governments had five implications. While the main aim was to empower citizens and to “shift from health and service provisions towards letting clients decide and think about solutions (Verschuren, 2014, p3), thus relying on the strength of the citizens. However, other intentions of the decentralization were: (1) focusing on prevention, (2) result focused, (3) more customization, (4) complete social service with the idea of: one family, one plan and one director, and (5) more room for professionals” (Anderson Elffers Felix, 2013, p. 11). Thus, to increase financial stability and shift towards a participation society, local governments gained more responsibilities to create an effective and efficient system.

However, due to the decentralisation and the increase in responsibilities a problem arose along the line of collaboration between parties which doubled the total costs for complex family problems:

there is a lack of collaboration and contradictions of efforts. (Ferwerda, Kampen & Appelman, 2014, p18)

Thus, the decentralization was a response to three movements within the society: (1) instability and financial entrapment of the social sector, (2) the shift towards a participation society, and (3) inefficient collaboration between parties. That is why organizations needed to handle social service from an integral perspective and improve collaboration to “align different mind-sets and day-to-day operations of all the distinct spheres” (Verschuren, 2014, p. 24).

Veiligheidshuis

One institution which fosters collaboration between different organizations from an integral perspective is Het Veiligheidshuis. In the beginning, Het Veiligheidshuis was established and controlled by the national government to increase collaboration between judicial authorities (Ministerie van Veiligheid en Justitie 2013). However, since 2013 Het Veiligheidshuis is managed by representatives of local governments (Vos, 2016). Furthermore, the focus of Het Veiligheidshuis is to increase network cooperation of organizations dealing with the complex social dimensions, and” to create a uniform mission, positioning, and shared objectives within the social field” (Koen, 2016, p. 4). Therefore, Het Veiligheidshuis can help improving collaboration as it aligns the mind-sets of different organizations in the health, social, and judicial sphere.

More specifically, Het Veiligheidshuis Friesland helped guiding the implementation of the AVE method and therefore aligned the mind-sets of local governments. Furthermore, Het Veiligheidshuis guided local governments to adopt the AVE method, as one respondent stated: “it [AVE method] was created in case 1, sent to Het Veiligheidshuis, and given back to local governments as assignment” (S3.1). Another respondent stated: “the model is being implemented in Friesland. … Within Friesland we made a deal [to use the AVE]. … So, we will use the AVE method in Friesland” (S1.2). Therefore, Het Veiligheidshuis had an important role in the region Friesland to implement the AVE method.

Case 1

Figure 2. Sensemaking process of case 1

Perceived changes – Within this local government the perception of changes about society were mainly focused on the changes from the national government and the increased responsibilities for the local government, to regain financial stability: “the welfare state created in the 60s and 70s doesn’t fit with the society nowadays” (S1.1). Therefore “local governments get different laws and less money” (S1.1). Furthermore, was noted that citizens needed to change the way they think: “I believe there is an excessive care consumption. … We are raised with the idea: I have a problem and an institute will help me. Instead of thinking: I have a problem maybe I can fix it myself or ask a family member for help” (S1.1). Therefore, both citizens and local governments need to deal with the decentralization: “I believe the bigger change in Holland is that we need another policy, with different laws and other ways of organizing. … citizens also need to change” (S1.1).

AVE – The perceived changes within society and a case that got out of control led to the creation of the AVE method:

“we created the AVE, because we had a case which escalated… a case where 30/32 aid workers helped one family. We evaluated and analysed why we lost control in that case. … We don’t longer accept there is a lack of collaboration [between different professionals]. And

that is when the AVE was created.” (S1.1).

That means, in a time where local governments gained more responsibilities, it was no longer accepted that organizations had unclear roles and responsibilities, and lacked collaboration. In turn, this started the process where individuals questioned and evaluated existing practices

Perceived changes

• Changes of national government

• Condition of current system • Shift in society

• Changes affecting local governments

AVE influenced by

• Out of control case • Unclear role and

responsiblitiy • Questioning of existing practice • Individual entrepeneurship • Pride • Strong personality • Storytelling Perceived advantages • Financial cutbacks • Advantages for local

governments

about structures, collaboration networks, effectiveness, and the lack of shared responsibilities. As respondents stated:

“This approach starts at why don’t we get any progress in this process” (S1.2) “Every party felt a responsibility, but there was a lack of a shared responsibility. There was

nobody who brought all people together to create one story … Everybody has his own responsibilities, but there is a lack of common interest” (S1.3)

Therefore, within this local government, the perception of changes contributed to the questioning of existing practices in dealing with complex social issues.

Furthermore, the actions of the local government led to the creation of the AVE method and was the result of: the perceived changes, questioning of existing practices, strong personality, and individual entrepreneurship. Perceiving changes within society contributed to the questioning of existing practices, which in turn influenced the actions taken by respondent S1.1. As respondent S1.1 took on the assignment of creating a new method which shows the strong personality of the respondent:

“I believe it begins with me. A process of change starts somewhere because somebody or a group of people starts questioning aspects. For example, is this still normal? Or why do we

do this? Or are we still effective? In this case, I started to ask these questions” (S1.1)

“I have to give all credits to [respondent S1.1]. She had an epiphany, and you only have a few of those in your live. She took on the assignment, and a beautiful product came out”

(S1.2).

Perceived advantages – The perceived advantages were focused on local governments and citizens, creating more collaboration, financial cutbacks, increased communication, and the new working method with the AVE method. As all respondents mentioned the increase in effective and efficient collaboration, and the creation of clear responsibilities with an integral approach to increase communication which helped local governments and citizens.

Moreover, the perceived advantages within the case influenced the frame appropriation. As respondent S1.1 and S1.2 both worked on the creation of the method, they appropriated the AVE: “the story is simple and non-threatening … it’s logical and doesn’t hinder their normal way of working” (S1.2). However, respondent S1.3 who did not work on the creation of the AVE method only partially appropriated the AVE: “I don’t believe I consciously apply the AVE approach. … It’s more like a tool available to use at certain moments. … It’s more a method you can use instead of seeing it as a new approach” (S1.3).

Furthermore, the AVE method was spread by storytelling:

“Because many organizations, including us with the AVE, started with the why-question. Why do we believe in this approach? If you know how to sell your key message, and other people know why you believe in this approach, it becomes more powerful and easier to sell.” (S1.2)

Also, storytelling contributed to spreading the AVE method to other local governments:

“You spread like an oil stain. You capture and hold moments. When you [the respondent] are invited for a discussion [to talk about the project], you should go. You start lobbying and tell

stories about what you did yourself with the project. What were successful actions and mistakes. And at one moment other people will believe you and the approach” (S1.2)

Case 2

Figure 3. Sensemaking process of case 2

Perceived changes •Changes of national

government

•Changes affecting local governments AVE influenced by • Isomorphism • Interanal power structure • Individual frame • Organizational frame Perceived advantages •Financial cutbacks •Advantages for local

governments

Perceived changes – Within this local government the perceived changes were focused on the changes implemented by the national government and the consequences for the local government. As was noted that the decentralization and financial cutbacks increased the financial and general responsibilities of the local government. Furthermore, was noted that these financial cutbacks could help to create a more efficient and effective social care system. “Cutbacks can be a good thing, because then an analyses and evaluation can be made of whether everything is working as it is supposed to work. Isn’t it too big, too cumbersome, or too expensive?” (S2.1).

AVE – Within the local government there was the perception that the decentralization and financial cutbacks were necessary to create an effective and efficient system of social care. But, the implementation was forced by a higher power within the local government: “here the local board decided to join the pilot [the AVE method]” (S2.1). Furthermore, the board respondent to a sort of mimetic isomorphism as the advantages of the approach were seen in case 1: “[the board] thought it was a good plan and wanted to try it as well. … The board decided we need to join that project. But that is because, the board, are amateurs in that area” (S2.1). Additionally, it was the belief in this local government that the board wanted to safeguard itself against responsibilities:

… AVE is created in [case 1]. … And they [case 1] figured it might be a good idea to spread this system across Friesland. That is when the board here decided to implement this project. … In my opinion, this was because of fear. … Because you as a local government gain a lot of

responsibilities. And government officials want to safeguard themselves otherwise you will be taken down. Therefore, in my opinion it is protection of yourself.” (S2,1)

Furthermore, the organizational frame also influenced the way the AVE method was realized. Due to the short lines of communication within the local government it was not necessary to safeguard against all responsibilities by creating new protocols. As the respondent stated: “that has something to do with our company culture. We approach each other easily, we have short lines of communication. A quick discussion is possible, that doesn’t fit with the idea of creating protocols for every situation” (S2.1). The combination of the individual and organizational frame led to the belief “to have some free space for actions” (S2.1) per situation.

Perceived advantages – Within the local government, the respondent perceived a lot of advantages with the AVE method, the most important ones for this local government being: more collaboration, clear responsibilities, and shorter lines of communication. Whereas the perceived changes within society were mainly focused on the changes implemented by the national government and the increased responsibilities, the perceived advantages were focused on financial cutbacks, advantages for the local government and citizens, and increased collaboration and communication by using the new model. Therefore, the perceived advantages were seen at the moment the AVE was created and implemented. For that reason, experiencing the AVE method can increase the perceived advantages of the new model.

However, the respondent was still sceptical towards using the model, as it was not something new: “I must admit, it was not something new. … It is a normal process of a social care organization” (S2.1). Additionally, the respondent partially appropriated the frame as a tool: “I see the AVE method as an overview or tool” (S2.1). Furthermore: “we used the model to create awareness of the escalation risk. For that is a good model” (S2,1).

Case 3

Figure 4. Sensemaking process of case 3

Perceived changes •Changes of national government •Condition of current system •Shift in society •Changes affecting citizens

•Changes affecting local governments

AVE influenced by • External power

structure

• Changing roles and responsability • Personal interest

Perceived advantages •Financial cutbacks •Advantages for local

governments

Perceived changes – Within the local government, the respondents noticed the changes of the national government affecting the citizens and local governments, the shift in society, and the condition of the current system. As was noted that the deconstruction of the welfare state and the importance of the decentralization was necessary to create a more effective and efficient social care system. Furthermore, the respondent also noticed that it all started with the financial instability within the current welfare system due to the rising life expectancy: “cutbacks and an ageing population are connected to each other. … The older people will be, the more care is requested from those people. … Resulting in extra cost on the national budget, therefore something needed to be done” (S3.1). This resulted in the fact that: “we bring it to local governments, they should be able to do it cheaper and with less money than the national government” (S3.1). Therefore, local governments gained “more responsibilities and took control” (S3.1).

Furthermore, within this local government four other changes were perceived. First, the inefficient and ineffective social care system in the national network: “when it was nationally organized, it wasn’t always effective and efficient” (S3.1). Secondly, “people want to stay longer at home, and social district teams can deliver customization and a complete care approach” (S3.1). Thirdly, “due to the decentralization a lot of protocols needed to be changed” (S3.1). And lastly, the development towards a participation society required a transformation of citizens by empowerment of their own strength: “we were a welfare state that took care of people. … When you have a problem, the government will fix it. … Now, with the development from a welfare state towards a participation society, empowerment of citizens becomes important” (S3.1).

AVE – Within this local government, the respondent acknowledged Het Veiligheidshuis as a powerful party for the implementation of the AVE method, as “it was created in case 1, sent to Het Veiligheidshuis, and given back to local governments as assignment” (S3.1). Furthermore, Het Veiligheidshuis had a central position and motive for the implementation of the AVE method in the region:

“Het Veiligheidshuis, in my opinion, safeguarded the AVE method. Also, Het Veiligheidshuis had the responsibility to safeguard its own position and create relations to the social district

teams. … Within Het Veiligheidshuis a discussion took place on how to assure the AVE method in Friesland. … From this perspective, feedback could be given towards a national

Another aspect within this local government was the changing role of the respondent. Because the role and responsibilities changed from a policy officer to a process director. However, due to perceived changes within society the respondent was ready for these changes: “that is the reason why it is so important to already start thinking about it. Because when you do get the new responsibilities you need to be ready” (S3.1). Furthermore, the changing role was also accepted due to an interest in the overall change: “other capabilities are asked from me. … That isn’t easy. My advantage is my interest in the project. And in my opinion when something is interesting you learn on the job” (S3.1). Therefore, a personal interest and perceiving changes within society can help change roles and responsibilities.

Perceived advantages - The perceived advantages were focused on the citizens and local governments, financial cutbacks, increased collaboration, communication, and the new working method in general. More specific, the advantages included: creating clear responsibilities and a shared vision, customization, increased control, and more efficient and effective collaboration. Due to the perceived change and the personal interest of the respondent, more attention was spent towards the implementation of the model, contributing to more perceived advantages. Furthermore, due to the perceived advantages the new model was appropriated within the local government: “I am very satisfied with the AVE method. I believe it is a nice and simple method. It is a book full of tables and a few definitions, that’s it. I definitely see the added value” (S3.1).

Case 4

Figure 5. Sensemaking process of case 4

Perceived changes - Within the local government, respondents noticed the changes by the national government affecting local governments and citizens, the conditions of the current system, and the shift in society. That is: “we are taking apart the entire social care system

Perceived changes • Changes of national government • Condition of current system • Shift in society • Changes affecting local

governments

• Changes affecting citizens

AVE influenced by

• Local project

• External power structure • Organizational frame • Questioning of existing practice • Individual frame • Individual entrepeneurship • Pride • Strong personality Perceived advantages • Financial cutbacks • Advantages for local

governments

and started to rebuild it. We are flattening the system and putting it next to our citizens” (S4.1). This transformation of the social care system was explained as follow:

“The care BV Holland is bankrupt and we need to find new ways. That means other ways of working than we are used to. Thus, no longer, do you have a problem the government will solve it for you. But, what do you think you [as civilian] can do for yourself? … The entire system, including the financial system of social care, didn’t fit any longer. Thus, something

different was needed” (S4.1)

Therefore, it was “originally a financial process … which created more responsibilities for local governments and required a complete approach” (S4.3). Furthermore, was noted that citizens needed to transform as well: “the system is different. But now the citizens need to be taken into the transformation. ... The citizens have problems, and how does a citizen wants to solve it. ... we must transform the ways of thinking in organizations” (S4.1). Thus, perceiving changes within society contribute to the transformation of the social care system in the local government.

AVE – Due to the perceived changes within society the local government started with a local project to create an efficient and effective system. However, this local government also implemented the AVE method to safeguard against newly gained responsibilities and the local project. As one respondent stated: “the VNG told us, you can explore but you should safeguard it for when it goes wrong. That is the reason we kept the project going” (S4.1). Furthermore, the organizational frame of the local government influenced the implementation as well: “the vision comes from an ideology; this is what fits us and we will work with it, this fits with our ideas about how we look at society. … It was a view on the changes in society” (S4.3).

time of change, and Holland was upside-down, and I had a big part in that process” (S4,1). Lastly, the combination of the noticed changes within society, the strong personality, and the questioning of existing practices resulted in individual entrepreneurship where a local system was created: “[respondent S4,1] continue with the development of the system. … This picture fits us and can help us to conform our policy” (S4,1).

However, there was also confusion within this local government towards the AVE method. As there were two structures in place within the local government, the local project and the AVE method. One respondent stated: “we started something new, but we have the old structure as well. … And is everything going alright? No, because we are not doing it the right way. … It’s still connected to the old structure, because that is comfortable” (S4,3). In turn, this created the problem that some individuals still hold on to old structures. While another respondent stated that the lack of experience with the AVE, due to a lack of social crises, created a problem for using the model: “I understand the added value, I only have to use the model. … I know to a certain extent how to use the model, but to consciously think about it. … I have to think more consciously about the AVE” (S4.2). For that reason, “by looking at the model; then education and training would not be a bad idea” (S4.2), to overcome this confusion.

Perceived advantages – The perceived advantages were focused on local governments and citizens, increased collaboration, financial cutbacks, better communication, and the new working method in general. Furthermore, the AVE method was partially appropriated as it was not always used: “I understand the added value, I only have to use it [the AVE method]. I know how it works, but I don’t to use it at specific moments. It is normally a day after, that I am thinking, that is how I should have used the model” (S4.2).

Case 5

Figure 6. Sensemaking process of case 5

Perceived

changes

AVE influenced

by

Perceived

advantages

•Advantages for local governments

•Increased collaboration

Perceived changes – This local government perceived changes conducted by the national government to influence citizens instead of local governments. As was stated: “taking control is the responsibility of the citizens. And the society is created to empower its citizens” (S5.2). Furthermore, the empowerment of citizens is accepted in society, due to: “a sense of shame when there are problems and people don’t ask for help. In that way, the society is shaped that it becomes accepted, and that is when you notice that people take care of themselves” (S5.2). Contributing to the idea that citizens already take more control over their own life: “citizens less frequently ask for help. … The threshold for asking for help is very high. People think: what does the government want from me?” (S5.2). However, not all people are able to take care of their own, as was stated: “people left out in the cold. Those are the people that have nobody else, and who don’t ask for help” (S5.2). Therefore, the noticed changes within society were more focused on the citizens instead of changes affecting the local government.

AVE – The perceived changes contributed to the implementation of the AVE method. When implementing the project, the local government was searching for the right approach, as one respondent stated: “in the beginning we had to find the best way” (S5.1). In general, this approach relates to the national changes in society, because “within the local government there are similarities to what is happening on the national level” (S5.1). However, “it [the AVE method] should be organised at the provincial level” (S5.1). This organizing was guided by the individual frame, where “I [respondent] provided input from my working field” (S5,2). Furthermore, one respondent noted that the social district team was also important for the creation of the AVE method within the local government:

“the social district team is the carrier for innovation. They are the ones who need to look at the complete picture for 1 family, with 1 plan and one approach. They have to link what is

happening in the area and see figure out how to organise it” (S5,1).

long way. However, it makes it clearer and it wasn’t the case that this didn’t exist before the AVE method” (S5.1)

Furthermore, respondent S5.2 also noted that people learned to use the model which created more confidence, in turn contributing to appropriation of the AVE. “They [partners] need to understand the local government is in charge. And everybody needed to adjust to that. But I believe that is a matter of familiarisation. … I believe it is a process of familiarisation before they can work with it” (S5.2). And when the method gets more familiar the people working with it gain more confidence which influences the appropriation of the model, as one respondent stated: “I believed it was good to think about it. Asking questions about where you stand in the process. That experience made it clear for me. … It might sound crazy, but you dare to expand in the model” (S5.2). This was also the case for other partners working with the model: “I noticed that they [partners] get the fuller picture. And they understand their function better” (S5.2). Thus, working with the model and experiencing how the model works in practices contributed to frame appropriation.

Cross-case analyses

By looking at the five cases the process of dealing with institutional change can be described as follows. First, individuals start perceiving changes within the institutional context. These perceived changes can be described as the process of noticing and are divided into the categories: changes of the national governments, conditions of the current system, shift in society, and changes affecting citizens and local governments (details can be seen in Appendix VI). Furthermore, the noticing influences the actions taken by local governments. How respondents interpret and act on those noticed changes can be described as enactment. In turn, the enactment and the way the AVE method is implemented influenced the perceived advantages which is divided into the categories: financial cutbacks, advantages for local governments and citizens, increased collaboration, new working method, and more communication (details can be seen in Appendix VI). This process of perceiving advantages is termed retention. Lastly, the frame appropriation was influenced by the retention of perceived advantages, the noticed changes, and the enactment. Figure 7 illustrates this process.

Institutional

change Noticing Enactment Retention

However, differences can be found between local governments and the process of noticing, enactment, retention, and frame appropriation. By looking at Appendix VII four paths were noted. First, noticing a high amount of changes influences the retention of advantages and contributes to frame appropriation (case 1 and 3). Secondly, noticing a low amount of changes can be balanced by the enactment and contributes to retaining a high amount of advantages where frames are partially appropriated (case 2). Thirdly, noticing a high amount of changes can be hindered by the enactment where a moderate amount of advantages are retained, resulting in partial frame appropriation (case 4). Lastly, noticing a moderate amount of changes contributes to a moderate amount of retained advantages where frames are appropriated (case 5). These four paths will be discussed in detail next.

Path 1 – Within two local governments (case 1 and 3) was found that noticing more changes contribute to more retained advantages where frames are appropriated. That is, both local governments noticed 11/15 changes within society, and are therefore marked as noticing a lot of changes. As in these two local governments the noticing of changes conducted by the national government affecting citizens and local governments, the current system, and the shift in society influenced the actions taken. Because the local government noticed these changes within society it started to question existing practices. In turn, these local governments were more inclined to take actions to overcome these changes by either creating or implementing the AVE method. As was stated by a respondent: “we started to question certain aspects. The obvious aspects are questioned now. Holland is in a phase where we start to ask questions, where no questions have been asked previously” (S1.1). Therefore, noticing changes conducted by the national government which affected citizens and local governments to change the current system influenced the enactment process.