Alternative logics coexistence and collaboration: the consumer protection field

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to examine the conditions that allow the co-existence of alternative logics in an institutional field for an extended period.

Design/methodology/approach

This is a case study that examined the complaint-handling processes of phone companies based on documentary research, which provided the information that allowed the development of a script to interview organizational actors in this field.

Findings

The explanation for this behavior that does not attempt to deinstitutionalize other institutions’ practices relates to the actors’ need for the other field participants’ collaboration to improve their activities.

Research limitations/implications

The specific characteristics of the Brazilian context can only suggest that alternative logics may coexist, which therefore opens opportunities for future studies to discuss the possible reproduction of these results in other societies. Similarly, because this research was restricted to the complaint field, other studies conducted in fields where actors are faced with alternative possibilities, such as with the judicial system, should examine and expand on these concepts. This study sought to cover the viewpoints of multiple important actors in the field to cover the whys and hows these logics coexist. However, a more comprehensive availability of respondents might have brought still better insights to the study.

Practical implications

One implication of this study is the fact that firms in Brazil must be aware of the alternative redress channels that are available to consumers. The different procedural norms can cause a great deal of annoyance because firms have to be updated with all of them and eventually build specialized teams to address them. The awareness of the existence of multiple logics in this field should orient the Brazilian telephony industry’s regulator in formulating policies that take this fact into consideration. To do this, the regulator should consider a regular consultation forum in which the main consumer protection organizations and government agencies gather to discuss improvements given that there is already informal collaboration. Public policy should also take into consideration the fact that consumers do not complain most of the time for lack of knowledge or disbelief in supporting organizations.

Originality/value

The main contribution is the alternative logics notion in addressing complaints in this field. This is an issue that has not been practically explored in the literature. The difference between an alternative logic and a competing one lies in the fact that the practices, structures and symbols in the first case represent alternative possibilities for actors to achieve a specific objective, whereas in the second case, the weaker logics tend to disappear due to a stronger one.

Citation

Ryngelblum, A., Vianna, N. and Onusic, L. (2016), "Alternative logics coexistence and collaboration: the consumer protection field", Management Research, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 24-41. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRJIAM-06-2015-0599