1. RRI and institutional change: Studying ‘Deep Institutionalisation’ in Non-European cases
Stephanie Daimer, Sally Randles and Valeria Vargas
Presentation to EU-SPRI
Governance and Relevance:Towards a new generation of research and innovation policies, 6-8 June 2018, ESIEE, Paris

2. Fundamentals (1) Origins of the concept
‘Deep Institutionalisation’
brings insights from
Institutionalist Sociology and Organisational Institutionalism
to bear on
Questions of Institutional Change.
How? (processes ‘inside the black box’ of organisations=actors, normativities, instruments, positions, tensions, strategies)
When? (prior/external institutional conditions or ‘Affordances’ for social action)
If ? (strength of prior institutionalisation, presences, absences)
(Do) Organisations
Undergo transformation in line with
(new) Articulated Normative (Values-Driven) goals, or do prior normativities continue to co-exist: adaptation? assimilation?

3. Fundamentals (2) Why bring this to EU-SPRI 2018?
1/ Questions of (new) responsibilities in research and innovation assume a critical standpoint on the status quo & existing social order
2/ That organisations, systems, social orders ‘ought’ to be different
3/ That transformation towards those ‘ought’ positions will produce societal betterment
4/In steps innovation (studies) as an agent of change (and therefore societal betterment)
5/Societal Challenges and Missions are a Gift to Innovation Studies
7/…Organisational change as political & strategic process
6/Remarkable loss of attention to creative-destruction, power and political relations & processes (winners/losers)
8/ … Depends on transparency of the (researchers/subjects) normative stand-point

4. Fundamentals (3) Why does it matter?
Critical entry point :
Despite the (policy & critical academic) call for institutional change in order to systemically embed Responsible (Research) & Innovation into R&I practice, organisational norms and governance, R&I processes and product outcomes; very little account has been taken of the theoretical and empirical literature on how institututional change actually occurs.
Conceptual start point : Before considering the instituting of any particular new policy framework of RRI Eg EC RRI ‚5 dimensions‘; UK AREA framework etc); consider De-facto responsible innovation (or ‚little rri‘):
rri/RRI

5. Origins: RES-AGorA (2013-2016)
WP3 – Portfolio of 26 diverse cases studying Responsibility in Research and Innovation ‘situations’ in order to understand de-facto rri
Hermeneutic Circle
Entry points:
RRI ‘in the Making’
UTwente : Follow the Actors, Practices ,& Governance mechanisms
3 rounds of inductive (learning) deductive case-study work : i) Pilots, ii) Development, iii)‘Critical Organisations’
Critical Organisations:
The ‘Good’ University –ASU (Randles)
Profession: Civil Engineers (Arnaldi)
Multi-Nationals (Loconto)
CSOs – The Stroke Association
UK Research Councils

6. RES-AGorA – 13 Transversal Lessons from triangulation of 26 cases
RES-AGorA – 13 Transversal Lessons from triangulation of 26 cases.... Of which, related to institutionalisation…
Overarching Lesson
1.Responsibilisation and Deep Institutionalisation
This refers to a process of cultural change which internalises social values by embedding them into practices and processes. A holistic concept that brings the remaining twelve lessons together
10. Institutional Change
Creating a responsible research and innovation culture requires both institutionalisation (stabilisation) of new and de-institutionalisation (modification) of current behaviours, structures and procedures
11. Capabilities
Systematically developing the skills and competencies that enable actors at all levels to fully participate in responsible research and innovation transformation processes
12. Capacities
The means and resources to create conditions of responsibilisation and to build a collective capacity for RRI at a societal level to be established.
13. Institutional Leadership and Entrepreneurship
From individual actors as leaders and ‘change agents’, to a broader culture of institutional entrepreneurialism, leadership is necessary to drive a range of normative societal, collective, responsibility objectives.

7. Deep Institutionalisation – Key Insights
‘Deep Institutionalisation’ (pace Karl Polanyi 1958 on Instituted Economic Process & Market Society):
….. the evolution of market society involved the creation of a range of forms of inter-dependent technologies and regulatory tools alongside the emergence of new professions and divisions of labour (the engineer, the factory owner, the factory worker, the financier) and new protocols …. (new standards, such as weights and measures) to facilitate trade and determine property rights. All of these processes, taken together, produced …. entanglements and inter-dependencies that enabled the innovation of market society to become ‘deeply institutionalised: eventually to become invisible, taken for granted, unreflexive, reproductive and expansive’ (Randles et al 2014:31, original italics)
 Inductive working hypothesis (as a result of RES-AGorA cases)
…… under JERRI , i) opportunity to deepen the concept through the institutionalist sociology literature (‘State of the Art ‘primer’ for TNO/Fraunhofer practitioners and provide an analytical typology for DI ‘How do we know it when we see it’ (D1.2) ii) Explicitly ‘Test’ the concept & typology at TNO/Fr (WP2/3) (ASU & CAS) (D9.1)

8. De-facto responsible research and innovation (rri)
What do we see ‘on the ground’?
“Confronting historically layered existing institutionalised understandings of what it is to ‘practice’ innovation responsibly (rri) .. encompassing different normative underpinnings (of ‘good conduct’, virtue) that we call de-facto governance (developing Rip 2010)
de-facto governance (Rip 2010)
“Henry Mintzberg (1994) viewed intentional (and often top-down) strategy in firms and other organisations, noting that the latter’s effects will depend on the interaction with de facto, or in his words ‘pattern’ and ‘emergent’, strategies, that are out there already. While society should not be seen as an organisation writ large, the dual dynamics outlined by Mintzberg occur all the time. And they can add-up to what one could call a societal agenda”.
RRI + rri produces a dual dynamic as new and proposed governance frameworks confront existing practice;……. As top-down meets bottom-up;
SMART-Map is showing rri/RRI as an adaptive process …. The search for common shared ‘standard’ to define ‘right’ ‘good’ ‘quality’…drive to organisational convergence

9. JERRI D1.2 : Theoretical Touchstones of ‘Deep Institutionalisation’ (literature supported)
Start Point: Institutions as unreflexive social norms (are ordering/stabilising mechanisms, whose power lies in the absence of questioning. (Foucault : Discourses of ‘right’; discipline of ‘knowledge’)
Organisations are remarkably homogeneous. Why? Shaped by institutional context (converge).
Scotts 3 pillars –Normative (values orientated) Regulatory (rules orientated), Cognitive (knowledge orientated). Not mutually exclusive, Institutionalisation is deeper (taken for granted) when 3 are mutually supportive. (Scott 1995)
And yet … Lay Normativity asserts that ‘People Care: Cares and Concerns’ (Sayer 2011)
Institutional Logics or ‘orders’ ( system/organising ‘glue’/regularities) (Thornton & Ocasio 2008)
> Co-existing/historical sedimentation. 6 ‘stylised’ Grand Narratives of de-facto rri
(De)Institutionalisation 5 modes (Dacin & Dacin 2008 ) = Change Processes
Legitimacy Perfect : where the ‘rules of the game’ are no longer challenged or questioned.
often (re)opened , questioned, as a result of an external shock, controversy, or crisis creating instability. Counter-movements & challenge…. Antithesis to the status quo, as a rhetorical device by strategic actors.
Legitimacy construction processes involves struggles and enrolment efforts and resources to strategically build legitimacy ‘projects’ . Relevant to normative multi-actor coalitions (Dendler 2016).
Organisations protect themselves from the fall-out by reputation and status building reputations as externally validated ‘Good organisations’. Qualified qualities of ‘virtue’. Relational. Externally judged. (…hence the formation of standards/awards to perform ‘qualities’ valued by outside world)
Institutional Pluralism & Pluralistic Organisations. ‘Muddling through’ despite co-existence of multiple (contradictory) logics . key translation role of mid-level personnel (Kraatz & Block 2008)
Institutional Entrepreneurs are adept at critical reflection. No longer ‘heroic individual’ . More Distributed and Collective (Weik 2010). System intermediaries /boundary-crossers. Visible in all kinds of organisation (academia/govt/business/civil society)
Institutional Entrepreneurialism = institutional pre-condition /affordance

10. A Four-factor Typology of Deep Institutionalisation (1)
1/ Institutional Logics : 6 Grand Narratives : The sedimenting of institutionalised ‘ideal types’ (…. Using Institutional Logics see D1.2)
A/ Science Republic , autonomy and self-governance of science + intentional ‘critical distance from the ‘corruption’ of vested societal interests ‘Humbolt’ model ‘ivory tower’ (Pace Michael Polanyi 1962)
B/ Technological Progress: Weighing risks, harms & benefits of new and emerging technologies : (Constructive) TA, (eg Nano; synbio; AI; autonomous cars)
C/ Participatory Society (engage societal and ‘lay’ actors ‘early on’ in co- construction process)
D/The Citizen Firm (CSR; market ‘qualities’ qualification + standards/awards/ quality ‘marks’ to signal reputation, standing, status to customers/clients, viz a viz other market actors, sustainability and integrate reporting)
E/Moral Globalisation (international development and supply chains)
F/ Research and Innovation with/for Society (societal problems as the focus, processes, products, impacts & relevance for societal groups … holistic ‘ideal’ )

11. A Four-factor Typology of Deep Institutionalisation
2/ A Maturation Process
A. Emergence
B. Maturity
C. Resilience
3/Systemic consolidation & overflowing
A. Ad hoc experiments, demonstrations and creative institutional design
Niche integrated normative frameworks
Pervasive inter-dependent system with overflowing
New taken-for-granted unreflexive institutional logic, no longer reflexively questioned or challenged (co-exists with earlier logics)
4/ Multi-level Alignment
A. Institutional context & external conditioning factors, trends, pressures, challenges (including role of the State and other forms of ‘shadow hierarchy’)
B. Organisational pluralism Intra-organisational translation and ‘getting along’ with multiple institutional logics in units/functions of large organisations
C. Institutional entrepreneurship and/or forms and expressions of leadership and intermediation at different levels of the organisation. The ‘Ambidextrous PI’

12. Research and Technology Organisations (RTOs)
Characteristics: (pluralistic organisations)
Large
Multi-site
Multi-missions/functions
Multi-technology
Multi-disciplinary (Physical/natural & social sci)
Anchor institutions & powerful strategic actors, with actual and potential influence on innovation ecosystem…… influence institutional logic of the system via calls criteria , local civil leadership, procurement and/or ‘shadow-state’ policy implementation role.
Fraunhofer Gesellschaft
Netherlands Organisation for Applied Science Research (TNO)
Arizona State University (ASU)/ Chinese Academy of Science (CAS)

13. Methodology RES-AGorA 2 field visits (2014)
JERRI
Stage 1 (D9.1)
Documentary Analysis +D1.2
16 interviews (IPM, Nat Sci lib; 5 CAS research insts)
Common Q’re (from rri/RRI)
i)Background , ii)rri, iii)RRI (EC) + rri/RRI iv) RRI ‘practices’ v) ‘Issues for instutionalisation (of RRI)
Int Mutual Learning w/shop (15 Dec)
Stage 2 (D9.2) (15-20)
RES-AGorA
2 field visits (2014)
Documentary analysis interviews
JERRI
Stage 1 (D9.1)
Documentary Analysis + D1.2
15 interviews
Common Q’re (from rri/RRI)
i)Background , ii)rri, iii)RRI (EC) + rri/RRI iv) RRI ‘practices’ v) ‘Issues for institutionalisation (of RRI)
Int Mutual Learning w/shop (15 Dec 2016)
Stage 2 (D9.2) (15-20 interviews)

14. Key Findings (1)
Both organisations show ‘Deep Institutionalisation’ process & systemic
‘spill-over’ ; ASU as a localised ‘experiment/demonstrator’ of (new) ‘Social Licence to Operate’ New American University’
Both show that rri resonates (describe responsibilities in own terms) but not RRI (EC) (ethics; gender; science education; public engagement; open access) do not resonate as a coherent or holistic ‘organising prnciples’
Both organisations highlight the role of leadership, and ‘boundary- spanners’ & mid-level ‘Ambidextrous PIs’ who translate and adapt the core values to local context (Agency).

15. Key Findings (2) But they vary according to
(Structuring) institutional & external environment pre-conditions (role of the State; relative autonomy & constitution/mission of the organisation ‘distance’ from the State)
Normative orientation (viz-a-viz the 6 Narratives’) + instrumentation & governance to achieve it.
CAS – ‘Catch-up’, international focus, traditional performance of Excellence (Narrative A – publications, patents, as marker of China’s role in the world) : key marker of international legitimacy & reputation + ‘popularisation of science’ as domestic legitimisation.
ASU – ‘local autonomy’ (main governance body Arizona Board of Regents (ABOR). 15 year intentional organisational design & transformation towards (new) 8 design principles : Leverage our place/Transform society/Value entrepreneurship/Conduct use-inspired research/Enable student success/Fuse intellectual disciplines/Be socially embedded/Engage globally
organisational re-structure to multi-disciplinary schools & research centres/institutes. NB ‘creative destruction’ = ‘lot of pain’. Performance in ‘innovation ranking’; student numbers to 100,000 esp diversity/access to reflect demographics of the State; x4 research income increase

16. Tech Progress: Risk management of emerging techs Participatory Society
Narrative A
Republic of Science
Narrative B
Tech Progress: Risk management of emerging techs
Narrative C
Participatory Society
Narrative D
Citizen Firm
Narrative E
Moral Globalisation
Narrative F
R&I with & for Society
Basis of Mission
Basis of Attention
Community
Global reputation
Soc relevance
& Impact
Basis of Responsibilities
Fundamental
Science.
Source of Legitimacy
Mode1 Knowledge
SOCIAL LICENCE
Source of Authority
Economic System/Business Model
Fed State Grants for
Fund Sci
Inclusive student base
Civic & Local Organs
Strategic collaboration Agts
Student Fees& research grants
Governance Mechanism
Plural Organisation
Key Actors
Ambidext PIs
Global Scholars
Inst Entrep
Mode of Reproduction
Civic Leadership
Student fees
(market)
Key Events
2002 Crow appointed
Structural Overlaps
Civic Governance
Global Societal Challenges

17. Tech Progress: Risk management of emerging techs Participatory Society
Narrative A
Republic of Science
Narrative B
Tech Progress: Risk management of emerging techs
Narrative C
Participatory Society
Narrative D
Citizen Firm
Narrative E
Moral Globalisation
Narrative F
R&I with & for Society
Basis of Mission
Basis of Attention
State
Popularisation of Science
Basis of Responsibilities
Catch-up
Societal Acceptance
Sci Ed
Source of Legitimacy
Shadow State
State power
Source of Authority
Mandate
Economic System/Business Model
Sate Funded
Governance Mechanism
Top-down
Key Actors
Policy Entrep
Mode of Reproduction
State Legitimacy
Key Events
Structural Overlaps

18. Conclusion (1) :
A theory of Institutionalisation & Institutional Change Processes in the context of (new) responsibility demands and (different) normative (values-based) orientations qualified qualities of ‘Excellence’.
As nothing completely erases, rather new normativities co-exist with old= scope for responsibility overload; de-coupling; re-labelling; responsibility wash.
Variety generation explained in terms of positions viz-a-viz:
institutional logics described in terms of holding (multiple/simultaneous) positions along ‘6 Narratives’
Role of institutional entrepreneurs at mid-level in pluralistic organisations (strategic ambidextrous Pis) and
senior leadership articulation of normative Visions & organisational design
Crucially, prior institutional conditions & external environments influence affordances ; adaptive capability & convergence pressures
‘Deep’ Institutionalisation is a Long Term process (beyond political cycles)
rri applies; RRI (5 dimensions : ethics, gender, science communication, open access, public engagement) does not resonate as organising principles in either of the Non-European RTOs

19. I call this model of social action adaptive de-facto rri
Conclusion (2)
4-way Typology of Deep Institutionalisation (how do we evaluate and know it when we see it?)
Validatation (on-going) in European and Non-European contexts
As an analytical and strategic diagnostic framework
+ recent test in ‘Theory into Practice’ impact workshop (March 2018)– do practitioners themselves (at Fraunhofer and TNO) find it helpful as a mutual learning, critical self-reflexive & self-diagnsosis tool, and to help steer the organisation’s holistic and systemic interpretation and implementation of ‘responsibilities’ ‘post-JERRI’
PS – Deep Institutionalisation is not necessarily desirable if it corresponds to a progressive loss of questioning. Rather, it would incentivise, encourage and ‘normalise’ open reflexive institutional entrepreneurialism. Comprised of values-articulated critical questioning; adapted to different and changing contexts; promoting a desire to care about societal problems by formulating alternative framings to facilitate ‘Visioning’ ‘Voicing’ ‘Mobilising’ and ‘Acting’ = ‘Performative Action’…… evaluated real-time through formative (learning) evaluation.
I call this model of social action adaptive de-facto rri