This article argues the position that the symbolic sense of community is a product of action by associations and larger community-based organizations. It draws on a theory from urban sociology called “the community of limited liability.” In the past this theory, first articulated by Morris Janowitz, has mostly been used to argue that residents living in a local neighborhood feel a sense of identification with that area to the extent that the symbolism of that neighborhood has been developed. This article extends Janowitz’s theory to apply to local associations and their efforts to create activities, movements, and products that encourage residents to expand their sense of symbolic attachment to a place. We argue that this organizational method has long been used by local associations but it has not been recognized as an organizational theory. Because associations have used this approach over time, communities have a historical legacy of organizing and symbol creating efforts by many local associations. Over time they have competed, collaborated, and together developed a collective vision of place. They also have created a local interorganizational field and this field of interacting associations and organizations is dense with what we call associational social capital. Not all communities have this history of associational activity and associational social capital. Where it does exist, the field becomes an institutionalized feature of the community. This is what we mean by an institutional theory of community.

Long a fruitful area of scrutiny for students of organizations, the study of institutions is undergoing a renaissance in contemporary social science. This volume offers, for the first time, both often-cited foundation works and the latest writings of scholars associated with the "institutional" approach to organization analysis. In their introduction, the editors discuss points of convergence and disagreement with institutionally oriented research in economics and political science, and locate the "institutional" approach in relation to major developments in contemporary sociological theory. Several chapters consolidate the theoretical advances of the past decade, identify and clarify the paradigm's key ambiguities, and push the theoretical agenda in novel ways by developing sophisticated arguments about the linkage between institutional patterns and forms of social structure. The empirical studies that follow—involving such diverse topics as mental health clinics, art museums, large corporations, civil-service systems, and national polities—illustrate the explanatory power of institutional theory in the analysis of organizational change. Required reading for anyone interested in the sociology of organizations, the volume should appeal to scholars concerned with culture, political institutions, and social change.

Considers how diverse types of communities influence organizations, as well as the associated benefit of developing an accounting for community processes in organizational theory. This title focuses on social proximity and networks that has characterized the work on communities.

Comprehensively collects the essential theoretical ideas of 'sociological neo-institutionalism', one of the leading approaches in social theory.

Local nonprofit organizations are often small, loosely structured, and democratically governed, and therefore do not fit conveniently into traditional theories of organizational behavior that are rooted in administrative science and bureaucratic structure. Treating community organizations as parts of larger systems--organizational fields or ecologies and communities--this collection of papers presents various perspectives on local nonprofit organizations from the standpoint of organizational theory. The essays draw on an array of methods and theoretical approaches taken from population ecology theories of organizations, laying the foundation for the structural analysis of community organizations.

Over the past two decades, Western countries have witnessed changes in the governance of local authorities. During that period, governmental authority and traditional governmental functions have gradually shifted to local authorities at the municipal level. In keeping with this trend, the governments have attempted to diminish their role in the provision of social, human, and communal services and encouraged nongovernmental organizations to penetrate the arena of services previously supplied by the government. In the community domain, neighborhood organizations that encourage citizen involvement and participation in policymaking and decisions concerning their life and well-being have gained increasing influence. In this regard, the emergence of the community council and its development as a unique entity in the municipal arena is particularly noteworthy. The community council reflects an advanced stage in the development of community and voluntary organizations that lacked the organizational and professional infrastructure, know-how, and technologies, as well as the competence to cope with the powerful governmental and municipal establish ment. The community council reflects the developed civic consciousness of the city's residents, who demand responses to their changing and heterogeneous needs. In this context, neighborhood residents have sought to establish a powerful and influential organization that serves them and represents their interests vis-a.-vis the municipal and governmental authorities.

As the emphasis on economic development through community-university engagement intensifies, educators and policy makers must learn to think differently about the engagement process. This is particularly true when a narrowly defined group of leaders sets the engagement agenda, and those who are traditionally underrepresented continue to be marginalized in the conversations about their own futures. Emphasizing the importance of community as a context for engagement and building strong relationships over time, Moore calls on institutional leaders to intentionally facilitate broad participation by all members of a community in discussions about how and in what direction the community will develop. This is the second issue of the 40th volume of the Josse-Bass series ASHE Higher Education Report. Each monograph is the definitive analysis of a tough higher education issue, based on thorough research of pertinent literature and institutional experiences. Topics are identified by a national survey. Noted practitioners and scholars are then commissioned to write the reports, with experts providing criical reviews of each manuscript before publication.