Professional competition both within the personal problems jurisdiction and from outside it (e.g., insurance and accounting) continued to shape the availability and quality of mental health care to the present day. Yet the landscape has changed – social stigmas against those seeking mental health care seem to have waned. Yet, the cost and lack of access to care has also led to alternative, mostly non-professional, approaches to dealing with personal problems. Grounded on Abbott’s work, we consider some of these dynamics in a time of technological changes and increasing challenges to professions and their expertise.

In this episode, we return to Andrew Abbott’s The System of Professions: An Essay on the Division of Expert Labor from 1989 to study in depth one of his case studies that may illuminate the present-day mental health crises gripping many nations from the COVID-19 pandemic. “The Construction of the Personal Problems Jurisdiction” chronicles how social changes from the Industrial Revolution led to the maladjustment and isolation felt by many newly industrialized workers who could no longer reach back to the stable social structure from whence they came. As a result, several professions emerged and competed for jurisdiction over the diagnosis and treatment of personal problems.

We return to Andrew Abbott’s System of Professions and examine the third of his case studies that informed his conceptual framework for understanding professional work and jurisdictional claims. “The Construction of the Personal Problems Jurisdiction” chronicled how social changes from the Industrial Revolution led to the maladjustment and isolation felt by many. As a result, several professions emerged and competed for jurisdiction over the diagnosis and treatment of such personal problems—what we currently label mental health problems.

The 1959 book The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life by Erving Goffman became a seminal text for several emergent subfields such as impression management and symbolic interactionism, while also greatly influences studies of organizational behavior. But it was also a product of its time, with its many examples and explanations rooted in societal norms or behaviors that have long since changed or dissipated. How well does the original text truly stand up to today’s post-pandemic environment?

Erving Goffman’s 1959 book The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life was an important attempt at explaining both apparent and hidden human behaviors across social and organizational settings. Through a comprehensive framework employing theater as a metaphor, he describes the roles of people as performers and members of an audience who try to shape the unfolding situation in ways suitable to their aims. Meanwhile, there is a backstage where people return to being themselves and proceed to set conditions for the next performance, and rules and protocols seek to protect such backstage behaviors from unwanted observation or disclosure. The aim for each person is to be seen in the best or most purposeful light.

Our next episode features Erving Goffman’s 1959 book The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life that presents a comprehensive framework for understanding human interactions and impression management. Through numerous examples, he explains how humans in social settings try to read and shape the environment so they can act accordingly within it and generate the desired reactions of others present. This is accomplished through the metaphor of theater and dramaturgical analysis.

In the conclusion of this episode on Meyer and Rowan’s “Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony,” we review some of the studies that followed and how well the author’s arguments have stood the test of time. We explore contemporary examples that show how conformity to institutionalized rules is necessary for organizations to survive, yet, because they can detract from the organization’s purpose, organizations enact rituals to show that it is adhering to the “rules”, yet in practice they try to shield their core work processes from interruption or intervention.

Exploring institutionalized rules and formal structures, the podcast delves into Meyer & Rowan's article on organizational myths. Topics include the institutionalization of the work week, institutional theory in organizational behavior, interplay of values and structures, different perspectives on survival, and balancing agency with institutional expectations.

We explore John Meyer and Brian Rowan’s famous 1977 article “Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony.” Coming at a time when rational theories of organizing faced multiple challengers, Meyer and Rowan proposed that institutionalization of socially accepted (or demanded) norms played a significant role in driving formal structures. The article has led to significant and relevant research in institution theory that continues to this day.

We sit down with Woody Powell and Bob Gibbons who, since 2016, have been organizing the summer institute on Organizations and Their Effectiveness at the Center for Advanced Study in Behavioral Sciences (CASBS) in Stanford, California. We ask them to reflect on the history of CASBS and the summer institute, the value of fostering interdisciplinary conversations on the study of organizations, and the way in which they design and conduct the summer institute to allow young scholars across economics, sociology, management, public policy, political science, information and communication studies, and other fields, to learn from one another.