*This project has enjoyed the funding support of the Australian Department of Community Services and Health, the Australian Research Council, the American Bar Foundation and the Australian National University. The author is indebted to colleagues on the Nursing Home Regulation in Action Project for helpful comments on the manuscript, and to colleagues on the Administration, Compliance and Governability Project, and the Institutional Design Project at the Research School of the Social Sciences, for the useful and provocative discussions that have led to the writing of this paper.
Games of Engagement: Postures Within the Regulatory Community*
Version of Record online: 28 JUN 2008
Law & Policy
Volume 17, Issue 3, pages 225–255, July 1995
How to Cite
BRAITHWAITE, V. (1995), Games of Engagement: Postures Within the Regulatory Community. Law & Policy, 17: 225–255. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9930.1995.tb00149.x
- Issue online: 28 JUN 2008
- Version of Record online: 28 JUN 2008
This paper seeks to advance understanding of compliance through identifying the constituent elements of four empirically derived postures of regulatees: resistance and disengagement (associated with non-compliance), and managerial accommodation and capture (associated with compliance) (V. Braith-waite et al. 1994). The nature of these postures is investigated through two theoretical frameworks, Meidinger's (1987) notion of regulatory culture (and the construct of social bonds) and Merton's (1968) modes of adaptation (and the construct of commitments to institutional goals and means). Social bonds and commitments to goals and means are important for explaining resistance, disengagement and managerial accommodation. In the case of capture of the regulatees, social bonds are more important than commitments to goals and means. The findings counsel regulatory agencies to establish trust and respect in the regulatee-regulator relationship.