Education is seen as a key to providing pupils with a basis to participate in society, and to ensure jobs. Young people, who do not complete their educations, will have difficulties entering the labour market (Arntzen and Grøgaard, 2012; Bäckman et al, 2015). Over the last 25 years, a range of national policies have been introduced to prevent dropout in upper secondary education. Previous research has shown key characteristics of the students who drop out and several studies have focused on the implementation of national policies. The purpose of the paper is to provide insights into the institutional work at school level to retain students in upper secondary schools. The paper addresses what characterizes the schools and the institutional and strategic work of the actors. The data are collected from six schools which are selected because of low degree of dropouts, which provide an opportunity to pay attention to promising practices. The theory of strategic work constitutes the analytical framework which allows us to delve into the balancing processes of recursiveness and adaptation with a strategy-as-practice approach. Building on Whittington (2006) enables us to explore strategic work from a micro-perspective based on interviews with school leaders and teachers about day-to-day activities, with attention to processes of institutionalized ways of doing things and adaptations that fit the local needs. The analysis explores strategy as situated accomplished activities, what people do rather than what organizations have (Whittington, 2006). Institutional work allows us to investigate actors` purposive actions through creating, maintaining and disrupting institutions (Lawrence & Suddaby, 2006 p. 215). The data have been subject to content analysis. Findings reveal that the schools seem to have an extensive space of maneuver. They have created their own organizational designs for how to retain the students which are complex and involves many actors who collaborate within and across several arenas. The analyses show efforts are made to prevent that the organizations are loosely coupled which is perceived to be a threat to dropout. The principals seem to be central agents in the construction of the designs and involvement of several actors with different professions who contribute to the tasks and responsibilities to strengthening the focus on retaining students. The analyses also reveal processes of recursiveness where the schools keep structures and practices that works, but also processes of adaptations where here-and now praxis and the recurring practices are critically examined and developed.

Coburn, C. E. (2004). Beyond decoupling: Rethinking the relationship between the institutional environment and the classroom. Sociology of Education, 77(3), 211–244. doi:10.1177/003804070407700302 Leithwood, K. & Seashore-Louis, K. (2012). Linking Leadership to Student Learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Lawrence, T. B., & Suddaby, R. (2006). Institutions and Institutional Work. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, T. B. Lawrence, & W. R. Nord (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Organization Studies. Sage. Røvik, K. A. (2016). Knowledge Transfer as Translation: Review and Elements of an InstrumentalTheory. International Journal of Management Reviews, 18, 290-310. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1111/ijmr.12097 Whittington, R. (2006). Completing the practice turn in strategy research. Organization Studies, 27(5), 613–634. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840606064101