Introduction: Business and the Law

IF 0.8 4区 管理学 Q1 HISTORY Management & Organizational History Pub Date : 2019-10-02 DOI:10.1080/17449359.2019.1718900
Louis Pahlow, Sebastian Teupe
{"title":"Introduction: Business and the Law","authors":"Louis Pahlow, Sebastian Teupe","doi":"10.1080/17449359.2019.1718900","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"What is the relation between businesses and the law? Although few would doubt that firms are acting in tightly regulated legal environments, and have done so for decades, no consensus has emerged on this question. While some scholars have assigned to the law an almost deterministic quality (Pistor 2019; Hodgson 2015; La Porta et al. 1997, 1998, 2008) others have questioned its importance, at least with regards to corporate governance (Cheffins 2001). Business historians in the Chandlerian tradition, too, had been doubtful about the importance of law for explaining structural change (Chandler and Daems 1979; Hannah 1979). They were countered, however, by historians of antitrust (Lamoreaux 1985; Dobbin and Dowd 2000) or incorporation law (Guinnane et al. 2007) who explained firm decisions in light of the regulatory context. A recent wave in business history on rethinking regulation (Balleisen 2017; John and Phillips-Fein 2017; Phillips Sawyer 2018), business crime and scandals (Hollow 2014; Berghoff, Rauh, and Welskopp 2016; Berghoff and Spiekermann 2018; Taylor 2018; van Driel 2019), or organizational dynamics (Fleming 2016; Wadhwani 2018) has highlighted the multiple dimensions at the intersection of law and economics (Dahlén and Larsson 2014; Pahlow 2014). They have helped opening up the field of interdisciplinary research in which this Special Issue positions itself. From this perspective, the meaning of law and its economic effects cannot be fully understood in a reductionist fashion that limits itself to seeing law simply as legislation or jurisdiction. It also calls for moving beyond the historical ramifications of legal doctrines, which have often obscured the view of legal reality (Edelman and Suchman 1997). Rather, the focus here is on an evolutionary understanding of the law, which analyzes the steering power of legal regimes under the conditions of their economic, also socio-economic and political challenges. The historical actors themselves often assessed the significance of legal rules in such a more differentiated way: Karl Geiler, business lawyer and founding Professor at the Mannheim Commercial College (‘Handelshochschule’), pointed out in 1927, that for example company law is being a fluid, non-static regime, of whom the one who knows only the written law would have no idea (Geiler 1927). Certainly, at a time of cartelization these wordsmight not really be surprising. But, what dowe know about lawmaking (and also rulebreaking) inside cartels, company groups or business associations? Moreover, how did conflict regulation in such organizational regimes work outside of state courts? And finally in which way did they influence the legislator or policy-making? Business historians e.g. in Germany have analyzed corporations and their business strategies with a view on specific","PeriodicalId":45724,"journal":{"name":"Management & Organizational History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449359.2019.1718900","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Management & Organizational History","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2019.1718900","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

What is the relation between businesses and the law? Although few would doubt that firms are acting in tightly regulated legal environments, and have done so for decades, no consensus has emerged on this question. While some scholars have assigned to the law an almost deterministic quality (Pistor 2019; Hodgson 2015; La Porta et al. 1997, 1998, 2008) others have questioned its importance, at least with regards to corporate governance (Cheffins 2001). Business historians in the Chandlerian tradition, too, had been doubtful about the importance of law for explaining structural change (Chandler and Daems 1979; Hannah 1979). They were countered, however, by historians of antitrust (Lamoreaux 1985; Dobbin and Dowd 2000) or incorporation law (Guinnane et al. 2007) who explained firm decisions in light of the regulatory context. A recent wave in business history on rethinking regulation (Balleisen 2017; John and Phillips-Fein 2017; Phillips Sawyer 2018), business crime and scandals (Hollow 2014; Berghoff, Rauh, and Welskopp 2016; Berghoff and Spiekermann 2018; Taylor 2018; van Driel 2019), or organizational dynamics (Fleming 2016; Wadhwani 2018) has highlighted the multiple dimensions at the intersection of law and economics (Dahlén and Larsson 2014; Pahlow 2014). They have helped opening up the field of interdisciplinary research in which this Special Issue positions itself. From this perspective, the meaning of law and its economic effects cannot be fully understood in a reductionist fashion that limits itself to seeing law simply as legislation or jurisdiction. It also calls for moving beyond the historical ramifications of legal doctrines, which have often obscured the view of legal reality (Edelman and Suchman 1997). Rather, the focus here is on an evolutionary understanding of the law, which analyzes the steering power of legal regimes under the conditions of their economic, also socio-economic and political challenges. The historical actors themselves often assessed the significance of legal rules in such a more differentiated way: Karl Geiler, business lawyer and founding Professor at the Mannheim Commercial College (‘Handelshochschule’), pointed out in 1927, that for example company law is being a fluid, non-static regime, of whom the one who knows only the written law would have no idea (Geiler 1927). Certainly, at a time of cartelization these wordsmight not really be surprising. But, what dowe know about lawmaking (and also rulebreaking) inside cartels, company groups or business associations? Moreover, how did conflict regulation in such organizational regimes work outside of state courts? And finally in which way did they influence the legislator or policy-making? Business historians e.g. in Germany have analyzed corporations and their business strategies with a view on specific
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
导论:商业与法律
商业和法律之间的关系是什么?虽然很少有人会怀疑公司在严格监管的法律环境中行事,而且几十年来一直如此,但在这个问题上没有达成共识。虽然一些学者认为法律具有几乎确定性的性质(Pistor 2019;霍奇森2015;La Porta et al. 1997,1998,2008)其他人质疑其重要性,至少在公司治理方面(Cheffins 2001)。钱德勒学派的商业历史学家也一直怀疑法律在解释结构变化方面的重要性(Chandler and Daems 1979;汉娜1979)。然而,他们遭到反垄断历史学家的反驳(Lamoreaux 1985;Dobbin and Dowd 2000)或公司法(Guinnane et al. 2007),他们根据监管背景解释了公司决策。商业史上反思监管的最新浪潮(Balleisen 2017;John and Phillips-Fein 2017;菲利普斯索耶2018),商业犯罪和丑闻(空心2014;Berghoff, Rauh, and Welskopp 2016;Berghoff and Spiekermann 2018;泰勒2018年;van Driel 2019)或组织动力学(Fleming 2016;瓦德瓦尼(Wadhwani, 2018)强调了法律和经济学交叉的多维度(dahlsamen and Larsson, 2014;Pahlow 2014)。他们帮助开辟了跨学科研究领域,而这正是本期特刊所处的位置。从这个角度来看,法律的意义及其经济影响不能以一种简化主义的方式得到充分理解,这种简化主义将法律仅仅视为立法或管辖权。它还要求超越法律理论的历史分支,这些分支经常模糊了对法律现实的看法(Edelman and Suchman 1997)。相反,这里的重点是对法律的进化理解,它分析了法律制度在其经济、社会经济和政治挑战的条件下的指导力。历史上的演员们自己经常以这样一种更有区别的方式评估法律规则的意义:商业律师、曼海姆商学院(Handelshochschule)的创始教授卡尔·盖勒(Karl Geiler)在1927年指出,例如公司法是一种流动的、非静态的制度,只知道成文法的人根本不知道(盖勒1927)。当然,在卡特尔化时期,这些话可能并不令人惊讶。但是,我们对卡特尔、公司集团或商业协会内部的立法(以及违规)又了解多少呢?此外,在国家法院之外,这种组织制度中的冲突监管是如何运作的?最后,他们以何种方式影响立法者或政策制定?例如,德国的商业历史学家从具体的角度分析了公司及其商业战略
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
16.70%
发文量
8
期刊介绍: Management & Organizational History (M&OH) is a quarterly, peer-reviewed journal that aims to publish high quality, original, academic research concerning historical approaches to the study of management, organizations and organizing. The journal addresses issues from all areas of management, organization studies, and related fields. The unifying theme of M&OH is its historical orientation. The journal is both empirical and theoretical. It seeks to advance innovative historical methods. It facilitates interdisciplinary dialogue, especially between business and management history and organization theory. The ethos of M&OH is reflective, ethical, imaginative, critical, inter-disciplinary, and international, as well as historical in orientation.
期刊最新文献
Budgetary control and beyond budgeting from a historical perspective - insights from re-visiting the 1922 book by James O. McKinsey Organizing Spanish-British mining companies: the case of “La Española”, 1866-1942 A non-conforming technocratic dream: Howard Scott’s technocracy movement Networks throughout an institutional transition: the case of the former Meliá touristic group (1932-1978) Form and media in management and organizational history how different research programs transform the ‘Past’ into ‘History’
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1