Drawing on the case of business school rankings, we study how institutions are
maintained and remain persistent despite their contested nature. We argue that rankings
as institutions can be maintained through subtle disciplinary practices that freeze power
relations in recipient organizations. Our analysis rests on a Foucauldian understanding
of control emphasizing that rankings discipline (1) by enhancing the visibility of
individuals’ performance, (2) by defining ‘normal’ behavior, and (3) by shaping how
people understand themselves and the world around them. We show that these three
disciplining effects support rankings’ durability, reproducibility, and communicability
enhancing their overall stability and diffusion. Our arguments demonstrate that
rankings’ relevance and impact is not entirely based on the legitimacy they are able to
offer to ranked schools. Rather rankings impel a variety of disciplinary effects within
business schools which help to stabilize and diffuse the institution
