Institutional logics and risk management practices in government entities: evidence from Saudi Arabia

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to understand how institutional logics influence the adoption and implementation of risk management (RM) practices by government entities in a non-western, developing country. Design/methodology/approach This study draws on the institutional logics perspective (ILP) to analyze a case study of a government entity in Saudi Arabia. Data were obtained from semi-structured interviews, observations and documentary evidence. Findings Findings suggest that the adoption and implementation of RM projects by Saudi governmental agencies was rooted in a traditional logic, even though the catalyst of the government for adopting a RM culture across government agencies was framed within a reform program inspired by a modernization logic. In the entity under investigation, the RM project led to an unstable situation where actors were confronted with these two competing logics. Although the project used manifestations of a modernization logic, the actions of individuals within the organization were embedded in a traditional logic. Research limitations/implications The study is based on a single case study in a specific country, limiting the generalizability of the findings. Originality/value This study provides novel evidence of the adoption and implementation of RM in governmental entities in a developing, non-western, country using ILP. Doing so enhances our knowledge about how managers struggle with competing institutional logics in an underexplored setting and enriches current accounts of key drivers and barriers of RM. It also addresses calls for a deeper understanding of the logics and managerial practices interplay in the public sector.