The present thesis explores talk in institutional settings, with a particular focus on how institutionality and institutional norms are constructed and reproduced in interaction. A central aim is to enhance our understanding of how institutional agendas are talked into being. In line with the ethno­methodological approach, norms are viewed as accomplished in everyday interaction, whereas institutionality represents dimensions of talk where participants demonstrably orient to particular contextual constraints. Five studies were conducted using Conversation Analysis (CA), focusing on how institutional constraints impact sequential trajectories and shape different opportunities for participants. The data consists of two corpora of video recordings: group tutorials at a Swedish university (UTs), and performance appraisal interviews in an organ­ization (PAIs). The thesis pays particular attention to the interactional management of knowledge, entitlement and stance, and analytic foci include how speakers manage epistemic claims and rights at a certain point in interaction, and how they accomplish social positioning. The UT studies examine the negotiation of rights to speak for others in a group (Study I), and how diver­ging understandings of the institutional activity-at-hand can be negotiated on the basis of students’ advice-seeking questions (Study II). In Study III, orientations to institutional and sociocultural norms are investigated in the PAIs, where managers and employees treat negative stances on stress as problematic. The relationship between theory and institutional practice in the use of question templates in PAIs is also examined, through an analysis of the delivery and receipt of a particular question in different interviews (Study IV). Focusing on different adaptations of a preset item, this analysis shows how the same question sets up for a variety of subsequent actions. Finally, deployment of the verb känna (‘feel’) in managing epistemic access and primacy is examined (Study V). It is argued that ‘feel’ allows for a reduction of accountability when making epistemic claims. The studies highlight the relationship between linguistic formats and social actions and illustrate how institutional agendas have consequences for participant conduct. Attention to the details of actions in institutional interaction can thus shed light on social and linguistic underpinnings of the enactment of institutional norms.

Large institutional actors in the financial arena are moving their capital in a sustainable direction. This implies a change of the institutional norms and rules regarding sustainable investing. One of the problematic aspects of sustainable investing is how investors use different strategies to influence their holdings and what implications this choice might have on a sector level. The purpose of this paper is to empirically examine how the strategies from institutional investors are an expression of the current norms and rules in the field of sustainable investing. It also intends to illustrate how institutional pressures influence the strategies of investors and their holdings. By interviewing respondents from eleven institutional investors, we present data regarding norms and rules for sustainable investing and the consequences of the investor’s strategies. Our findings indicate there has been an immense increase in demand for sustainable products in recent years, resulting in institutional pressures that have influenced both the investors and their holdings. This exposes the field to selection processes which may force organizations to the point of adapt or die. Finally, our conclusion provides practical implications on what role institutional investors have in the quest for sustainable development.

Twenty-three years after the ground-breaking UN Resolution 1325, the goal of worldwide gender equality is still not achieved. This paper investigates how a government's political ideology is related to its Women, Peace and Security (WPS) approach. The research question is addressed by arguing that the political ideology of a government influences the quality of its WPS approaches and implementation attempts differently due to varying inherent institutional norms. The hypothesis and theoretical argument suggest that left-wing governments promote gender-friendly norms and support gender equality approaches, leading to better WPS implementation. To test this hypothesis, an Ordinal Logistic Regression is run for countries worldwide that have developed at least one National Action Plan (NAP) between 2006 and 2021. The empirical findings partially reject the hypothesis' expected direction, showing that leftist governments not only positively impact WPS quality when compared to rightist counterparts. Additionally, the research indicates that institutional norms are not a causal mechanism but another independent effect. The findings further suggest that gender inequality plays a role in WPS implementation, with greater inequality associated with better NAP quality. These contradicting findings call for future research, especially by focusing on finding new ways to measure the WPS implementation efforts.