Mark C. Suchman

Military Procurement as Rational Myth: Notes on the Social Construction of Weapons Proliferation

This paper outlines four theoretical approaches to the sociology of weapons proliferation: strategic-functional theories, factional theories, geopolitical theories, and institutional theories. Although rarely formulated explicitly, the first three approaches are implicit in the existing literature on proliferation. All three see proliferation as the result of rational decision making, although they differ as to the locus of these decisions, with strategic-functional theories focusing on the nation-state, factional theories on subnational interests, and geopolitical theories on global superpowers. In contrast, the institutional approach disputes the rationality of procurement, arguing instead that weapons purchases are structured and driven by institutionalized normative structures that link advanced weaponry with modernization and sovereignty. The policy implications of this perspective are discussed, and parallels to recent developments in organizational theory are highlighted.

Ritual conformity to the Americans with disabilities act: Coercive and normative isomorphism

This paper examines evidence of “ritual conformity” with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), with a focus upon the employment of individuals with mental disabilities or illnesses. We view the ADA as an important “rational myth” in the institutional environment of American business which enunciates a new set of legal and normative standards for employment of individuals many believe to be unemployable. In conforming to the mandates of the ADA, businesses may display coercive isomorphism; hiring those with mental disabilities because they fear the coercive effects of the law. Evidence of coercive isomorphism is consistent with a more materialist/instrumental view of the relationship between legal mandates and organizations. However, drawing from the law and society tradition, we articulate a culturalist/constructionist alternative which posits that because the law is often ambiguous, contested and symbolic, organizational decision makers are responsive to normative appeals and cognitive framings. Ritual conformity may then take the form of normative isomorphism. Important to either form of institutional isomorphism for compliance) are the beliefs employers hold about the employability of those with mental disabilities. Consequently, we argue that the practical meaning of the ADA depends on the ways in which it is interpreted and enacted by the organizations that it supposedly governs. To capture this enactment process in mid-stream, we report early empirical evidence on the organizational response of a random sample of businesses to the ADA requirements governing the hiring of persons with mental disabilities. Extensive telephone interviews were completed with 117 employers (representing a 61.6% response rate) in one urban SMSA with a low unemployment rate. The majority of the employers surveyed had received information about the ADA, and most had a reasonably good understanding of the law. Over a third of the employers (37.3%) had indeed hired an individual with a mental disability since the ADA went into effect in 1992, and a third (33.3%) made special recruiting efforts to hire individuals with a mental disability. Receiving information about the ADA was significantly related to such proactive policies; larger companies were also more likely to exhibit compliance to the ADA by hiring, or having specific policies for the recruitment of individuals with mental disabilities. In examining the sources of such ritual conformity to the ADA, we found evidence of both coercive and normative isomorphism, and that ritual conformity was also associated with beliefs about the abilities of those with mental illnesses. Employers who were not in compliance with the ADA were more likely to be uncomfortable with potential employees with a previous mental hospitalization or employees taking anti-psychotic medication. Furthermore, we found important differences between those organizations which expressed coercive rationales for compliance and those which expressed normative rationales; specifically employers expressing normative isomorphism were more likely to have hired individuals with mental disabilities prior to the ADA and to exhibit ritual conformity to the ADA. Businesses expressing coercive rationales for compliance were more likely to hold stigmatizing attitudes and less likely to exhibit ritual conformity to the ADA. Our data suggest a potential synthesis between material and cultural models of law whereby early compliers with a new law are more likely to exhibit normative rationales and to respond more directly to the normative messages of the law, or else implement policies they would have otherwise adopted on their own. Over time, normatively driven proaction will foster mimetic isomorphism, and resistant firms (or those holding ideological constructions which run counter to the normative mandates of the law) will move toward a profit-maximizing mixture of compliance and evasion; complying largely because of the coercive threat of the law.

Innovative and Responsible Governance of Converging Technologies

Systematic convergence in knowledge and technology promises to increase the rate of scientific breakthroughs, lead to the establishment of new S&T domains and support growing expectations for human progress, including improved productivity, education, and quality of life. A virtual spiral of creativity and innovation will have a significant effect on innovation, productivity, and commercialization. This chapter outlines societal dimensions and innovative and responsible governance of converging knowledge and technologies and the roles of individuals and public. Several goals for the next ten to advance innovation, economic productivity, human and quality of life are presented. Infrastructure needs and R&D strategies are focused on open-source, long-term planning, anticipatory and participatory governance, as well as harmonizing regulations among emerging technologies and internationally. Several priorities and possibilities are suggested for innovative and responsible governance of emerging and converging technologies, including national R&D centers, regulatory measures, and long-term planning.

Methods to Improve and Expedite Convergence

Whereas the R&D process of convergence of knowledge and technology has been largely reactive or coincidental in the past, there is a growing realization among the world’s scientific communities that to take best advantage of scientific innovation trends and govern them appropriately, there must be a more proactive, focused effort to support convergence, and that investments in innovative technology development must more effectively both engage and benefit society and also take into consideration equity and sustainability concerns. This chapter describes a framework and means to effectively focus societal support for convergence. A “science of convergence” will help to accomplish these goals and promote valuable technological and societal synergies based on higher-level scientific languages, a holistic view of society, updated governance models, and vision-inspired basic research that is geared to societal benefit. Creativity and innovation are enhanced by the circuit of information and ideas between various platforms of the human activity system. As exchanges happen faster and between larger domains within the platforms, the foundation for creativity, innovation, and economic and societal benefit broadens. This is a global phenomenon.

A License to Grow: Ending State, Local, and Some Federal Barriers to Innovation and Growth in Key Sectors of the U.S. Economy

This white paper outlines some of the remaining state barriers and a few federal ones and how they prevent disruptive innovations by entrepreneurs and established firms alike that potentially could bring new and more efficient business models to the market. In the case of the legal sector, the barriers we identify not only adversely affect legal innovation, but also impede innovation in other sectors of the economy. Similarly, in health care, pharmaceuticals, K-12 education, the financing of growth businesses, and many consumer services, legal obstructions hinder innovation and the provision of efficient, affordable, high-quality services and products. We conclude by surveying the main options for reducing or eliminating these impediments, proposing, in effect, ways to provide a “license to grow.” Although most of the ideas we list are relevant only to state and local governments, we do not recommend, however tempting it may be, federal preemption as the means to their abolition. Apart from the political difficulty of gaining consensus on a sensible preemption approach in a time of deep partisanship with the Congress, it is not necessary for citizens to look to Washington to solve all problems. This white paper is an extension of the Startup Act in which the Kauffman Foundation outlined ways the federal government can stimulate new company formation and growth, encouraging economic growth across the economy. In a companion to this report, the Foundation also will publish a separate template for state and local “Startup Acts” - in reality, both executive and legislative measures - that would reinforce and amplify the impact of startup-friendly policies at the federal level. This particular white paper focuses primarily on removing state and local impediments to entrepreneurial growth and thus, we hope, will make an important contribution to the public policy debate in its own right. Many of the ideas outlined here also will be included in a summary fashion in the companion Kauffman report on a broader startup agenda for state and local governments. As prior Kauffman research has made clear, new firm formation and growth are critical to job creation and economic growth in general. The persistently high rates of unemployment since the financial crisis of 2007-2008 and the decline in formation rate of new employer firms in recent years make a startup agenda at all levels of government more urgent than ever. Written by the Kauffman Foundation Task Force on Entrepreneurial Growth.