Conflict as institutional work of maintenance: the vicious circle of production and risk in the Soma Mining Disaster

Purpose This study explores how conflict plays a role in the maintenance of institutional practices. It focuses on the conflict between miners and supervisors, and the dominance of production over safety, in the context of the Soma Mining Disaster. Design/methodology/approach The data were collected through in-depth interviews with coal miners in different companies in Soma, Turkey. The analysis was conducted in three stages, including thorough reading, detailed empirical examination and theoretical interpretation. Findings Lack of control over the conflict creates an opportunity for supervisors to disregard rules and avoid solutions. The ongoing disregard for rules and avoidance of solutions risk miners' critical evaluation of production-centered institutional practices and development of collective resistance against those practices. Supervisors thus try to isolate the conflict into individual relations with miners and deemphasize its institutional character. When the conflict is isolated, associated problems seem to be temporary, individual rather than permanent, structural matters; then, there is no need for control over supervisors. A vicious circle emerges while the conflict becomes a relation of institutional maintenance for the production-centered understanding. Originality/value Past studies address conflict implicitly, mentioning its institutionally disruptive and creative aspects while discussing conflict as a threat to institutional practices. In contrast, this study directly explores conflict with its four characteristics and highlights its maintenance aspect as well as deliberate use. Institutional actors can deliberately and strategically reproduce conflict for the maintenance of institutional practices rather than reactively respond to it.