TSElosophers meeting on 16 March 2026

Participants: Albrecht Becker, Niina Hakala, Annika Hasselblad, Anniina Kinnunen, Kari Lukka, Ari Nieminen, Mia Salo

Reading

Nigam, A., Amis, J. & Logue, D. (2025). People as Institutions or Why Taylor Swift Rules the World, Organization Theory, 6(4), 1–11.

Summary

Nigam et al. (2025) provide an eccentric take on institutional theory by proposing that people as individuals can become institutions that “are constituted by a specific set of roles, role relations and practices, rooted in a set of values and reciprocal interactions that are created by and coalesce around a focal individual” (2025, p. 7). They use Taylor Swift as the example of a person-institution and rely on Ocasio’s (2023) definition of an institution as “a taken-for-granted, organized system of roles and interactions” for illustrating how a person as an institution could offer a blueprint for social life, just as Taylor Swift has offered to her fans, called Swifties. In their paper, Nigam et al. use a three-stage process model of typification, objectivation and sedimentation to theorise and reveal how a person can become an institution. In doing so, they do not go too deeply into existing traditional discussions of institutional theory and the process of institutionalisation (e.g., Berger & Luckmann, 1966) but rather draw on Ocasio’s arguments and his take on this traditional three-stage process. In their paper, Nigam et al. also suggest that not any celebrity or political figure can become a person-institution, but the process has boundary conditions of reciprocity and resonance.

Discussion

TSElosophers found Nigam et al.’s paper quite controversial, and reading it provoked not only thoughts but also emotions among the discussants. Although there were some of us who appreciated the paper’s refreshing and new perspectives as well as the fact that it is well-written, many of us had some worries with the paper’s theorisation and arguments. The presented critique focused on three main points: the use of institutional theory, the structure and logic behind the authors’ reasoning, and whether or not we buy the idea of individuals as institutions.

Albeit Taylor Swift’s music and lyrics may provoke deep feelings and emotions such as joy, sadness, and validation among the Swifties, some of the TSElosophers were feeling irritation (or even stronger negative feelings) rather than joy or validation with Nigam et al.’s paper. This was especially as some of us felt that the authors neglected the traditions of institutional theory literature in their theorisation. On the one hand, we would have expected the authors to acknowledge and discuss the traditions of institutionalisation and clearly state their position among this stream of literature, and not only through Ocasio’s (2023) arguments but also from the origins of this three-stage process of institutionalisation by Berger & Luckmann (1966). We would have hoped to read more elaboration on how Ocasio’s departure from Berger and Luckmann’s viewpoints, by combining individualistic micro-phenomenological perspectives with societal macro-institutional approaches, would give enough backbone to theorise individuals as institutions, especially as traditionally the role of actors has been seen quite differently in institutional theory. Unfortunately, many of us found this paper to be narrow, illogical, somewhat self-contradictory, or loosely structured.

Some of us were not certain whether institutional theory was a suitable theoretical viewpoint for explaining Taylor Swift, or any other individual, in an institution-like position. Some argued that the concept of institution might have been inflated, having become a flat, overused explanation for almost any phenomenon. By binding themselves to institutional theory and thus forcing Taylor Swift into an institution, Nigam et al. were unable to give a further, deeper, and more emic explanation and understanding of what is happening around Taylor Swift, or what the common values are among the Swifties. It was suggested that there might be more potential to study this phenomenon, for instance, through an ecosystem approach where Swifties and other relevant actors have a role in this phenomenon and are co-producing Taylor Swift’s ecosystem, reputation and societal position. Another option we discussed was to study this phenomenon through social meaning-making. These could have enabled a more emic approach to the topic. We were also wondering about the possible inconsistency between Swift’s authenticity and reciprocity with her fans and her deliberate, manufactured, and calculated brand. In addition, despite suggesting certain boundary conditions for an individual becoming an institution, we were still not sure why exactly, for instance, Winfrey Oprah should not be considered an institution, if Taylor Swift can.

If, however, institutional theory was used to theorise an individual’s position in society, we would rather want to see it approached with a wider perspective. Instead of vaguely theorising the individual as an institution, could the individual be at the centre of an institution? In Taylor Swift’s case, we might then consider ‘Swiftivism’ an institution where Taylor Swift would be the heart through which this institution is channelled or transcribed. Thence, one would not, on a contestable basis, challenge conventional ideas of institutional theory but rather understand more profoundly the phenomenon of popularity or cult following of some people, especially how and why an institution emerges, and what the dynamics are in the process when an institution revolves around a person.

Although reading this paper made us, to some extent, the Tortured TSElosophers Department, we would like to see more (perhaps better-argued) studies on the phenomena around certain people, and how, for instance, music, lyrics, a person’s authenticity, and emotions are intertwined in the process of creating communities and even institutions.  

References:

Berger, P., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Doubleday & Company, New York.

Nigam, A., Amis, J., & Logue, D. (2025). People as Institutions or Why Taylor Swift Rules the World. Organization Theory, 6(4), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/26317877251398547

Ocasio, W. (2023). Institutions and Their Social Construction: A Cross-Level Perspective. Organization Theory, 4(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/26317877231194368