Purpose Conflicting institutional logics are thought to be factors that hinder organizational changes in public institutions. Thus, this study explores the different strategies of public sector organizations to handle tensions from conflicting institutional logics in their day-to-day activities. Design/methodology/approach The authors argue that strategies for handling conflicting logics should not be treated separately. Rather, the authors show that within organizations, different strategies could be interconnected and depend on each other. The empirical insights come from a case study of a large German federal authority, in which management reporting was introduced with the intent to effect change in the organization. Findings The authors show how, over time, organization members confront the practice of management reporting with different approaches to address conflicting institutional demands and to find ways to create management reports that would be accepted by different addressees. Originality/value The study documents three states of responds to conflicting institutional logics: decoupling, compromising and hybridization. The authors highlight the power dynamics between the corresponding actors and the consequences for using management reports in these different states. Accordingly, the authors aim to provide profound insights into the microdynamics in the context of conflicting institutional logics.    «

Purpose Conflicting institutional logics are thought to be factors that hinder organizational changes in public institutions. Thus, this study explores the different strategies of public sector organizations to handle tensions from conflicting institutional logics in their day-to-day activities. Design/methodology/approach The authors argue that strategies for handling conflicting logics should not be treated separately. Rather, the authors show that within organizations, different stra...    »