Abstract
The aim of the study is to discuss and understand the situation of modern institutions within post-modern conditions. It is claimed that a cognitive response to tensions resulting from such situation should be focused on the study of the institutions in terms of their reflexivity - permanent monitoring and reshaping their social practices in the light of new information about these practices.
The reflexive capacity of institutions is an essential resource for the institutions to be able to expose their (embedded) habitual and normative knowledge to a critical assessment and so, to initiate and facilitate a process of their transformation. The pattern of relevant cognitive themes for the study of reflexive institutional change has been specified in the opening chapter dealing with the problem of innovations.
Indeed, the current state of innovation studies is successful in outlining cognitive approaches and themes, the study of which helps us understand the ways and means of how the tensions between both the push of innovation to institutional change, and the institutional framing of innovative processes have been balanced, and so, the conditions for a growth of an innovation based economy promoted. The cognitive approach of innovation studies has been shaped by productive interaction between theoretical interpretations and empirical support (long term and comparative surveying of national innovation systems) as well as by mutual responsiveness between advances of academic knowledge (on innovation) and the strategical aims of regulatory (innovation) policies.The discussion of innovation activities and innovation systems has cleared up a set of themes which are important for the analysis of institutions and knowledge background of their change, like modes of knowledge production including the processes of distribution, circulation and utilization of knowledge; relatedness of knowledge to forms of organization; in terms of public learning in organizations; and, first of all, the issues of coordination of functionally diversified institutions participating in innovation activities.
Furthermore, cognitive experience of innovation studies has offered an insight into the ways, how (empirically supported and socially responsive) theoretical interpretations deal with the dilemmatic nature of social processes and reflect (and co-construct) shifts in valuation pattern of human action. With reference to analyses of innovation issues the basic claim of the study is formulated as follows: the essential problem of institutional reflexivity rests with understanding of habitual and normative knowledge background of institutions, hence closer study of relatedness of theories with dilemmatic social reality and chosen paradigmatic solutions can well report about fluctuations in valuation patterns and normative shifts relevant to functionally based institutions.So, understanding shifts in valuation patterns can also, to some extent, advance the level of academic researching, and at the point where theoretical concepts refer to paradigmatic notions help identify social reality and its valuable human aspects.The following discussion to the issues of institutional change and its cognitive background focusing on the above mentioned claim, makes use of the suggested thematic pattern and attempts to analyze in a more detailed way knowledge resources and reflexive capacity of current (and selected) institutions in their mutual interconnectedness.
The study of knowledge resources makes use of the sociology and the history of knowledge (second chapter). At first, cognitive issues of science about society and culture are outlined by the evolution of two traditions - positive and phenomenological ones.
The later impact of both cognitive traditions has been followed by the study of selected cases -methodological disputes in social sciences and discussions about two academic cultures practiced at universities. The issue of institutions and their change is covered in the third chapter.
At first, different interpretations of institutions, as they are applied by different social sciences, are presented in order to see what role is played by institutions in human formations and how their change is possible. Next, the concept of institutional cluster of modernity (Giddens) is explained so that it can be applied in a closer study of institutional reflexivity of selected institutions - academic, economic and political ones.
The study of competing theoretical concepts and relevant themes, as they are applied in the selected institutions, has indicated which valuation pattern is used to protect functional aims of these institutions and to "defend" their borders against push of the other institutions, and which valuation pattern justifies experimenting with current borderlines. It is claimed that both knowledge resources - those justifying the existing borderline and those experimenting and searching for their new shape - are important means of institutional reflexivity and its role in democratization and transformations of institutional frameworks of current societies.
The collected knowledge of institutional reflexivity enables me to formulate several conclusions: (i) democratization pull follows different tracks in terms of coordination forms (media of power) of academic, economic and political institutions; in particular the factors of openness, access to the external environment and the capacity to reduce complexity, have been identified as important; (ii) different democratization trends are accompanied by inequalities in terms of the ways how institutions are influencing the public (democratic) sphere and how democratic (public) power can influence transformation of these institutions themselves; political institutions (and their capacity to form consensus and authority) and academic institutions (and their capacity to form truthful knowledge) are losing power to economic and technological institutions and their capacity to coordinate activities (via means of money, market arrangement and technological adaptive responses); (iii) both conclusions have been discussed (and tested) in the last chapter and in view of selected and actual features of post-modern conditions - medialization and globalization of current societies - with their impact on reflexivity of institutions; in this instance the analysis is focusing on the issue and the concept of trust which is crucial in maintaining and supporting the enabling role of institutions. The attained knowledge has not falsified the preceding findings on the democratization trend of current institutions.
On contrary, they call for a more sophisticated concept of institutional reflexivity able to deal with power differential and variety of situated activities and social movements in current societies.